Mafin: “It's a Telenovela” is a Tired Excuse
Telenovelas are not immune to criticism because they are “telenovelas.” Are they laborious to create, write, and act? Yes. Do they necessitate lengthy dramatic arcs? Yes. Are they filled to bursting with angsty romance? Yes. However, none of these characteristics excuses the poor production and writing of Suenos de Libertad, especially in the second half of season two. More episodes mean more opportunities for storytelling, character growth, and conflict resolution. Unfortunately, the second half of season two recycles dramatic arcs and scenes because characters don’t grow as a result of their experiences and are, therefore, required to learn the same lessons repeatedly. The telenovela operates under a logical fallacy – that growth strips characters of flaws and thus drama, causing the audience to lose interest.
Before I get started, I’d like to make one thing very clear. I am not suggesting you should hate SDL or stop watching it because it is flawed. I am asking you to consider that SDL could be better. Addressing the issues I've outlined above and below does not make the show worse for you, whereas asking myself (or others) to ignore its issues is making the show worse for us all. People will quit watching SDL if it does not change. Then there will be no show to watch because the only people left to support it will be those who excuse its shortcomings with, “It’s a telenovela!” Genres communicate an expectation to the audience. For example, a “horror” movie intends to scare us. There are good and bad horror movies, because quality is a scale and not a genre. The same is true for the telenovela.
With that out of the way, let’s examine some of the common claims used in defense of SDL:
Claim: The telenovela is an established format with inherently flawed characteristics. You should accept the genre's flaws and not ask for or expect more.
Comedy is an established format with inherent flaws. Yet, comedies have evolved from Shakespeare’s plays to the Three Stooges, to modern sitcoms, and to mockumentaries. Genre is not an acceptable excuse for telenovelas to maintain the status quo because they are reflections of the time period they’re written in. Even classic historical literature, like Jane Austen’s novel “Persuasion,” is written, directed, and shot differently in 2022 than it was in 2007 and 1995. This is because fiction must take into account the audience’s current intelligence, familiarity with the format and source material, and cultural, spiritual, and ethical beliefs. Fiction that ignores the audience struggles to find an audience.
SDL’s popularity is a result of its modernization of the telenovela. The show has an above-average cast of actors and actresses (with some exceptions) who authentically embody their roles. As a result, the on-screen drama feels dire and suffocating. Up until the second half of season two, SDL also portrayed one of the few one-true-love romantic lesbian relationships. It was full of ups and downs, difficult lessons, and growth. In season one, Marta grew from someone who believed she was incapable of deep love into someone who couldn’t breathe without it. Mafin defied all telenovela conventions by making drama swirl around both characters without separating them – something that has always been possible but (to my knowledge) never explored in television. Drama included sexual harassment, assault, prison, blackmail, “outing”, etc. The stakes remain high because the society and time period the show is set in demand it.
I am asking for more and expecting more because this is where SDL set the bar. To see it fall back on tired, contrived, empty tropes, like the love triangle, instead of following the standard it set for itself, is an insult to the viewers it courted and entertained. Hopeless romantics and intellectuals don’t watch telenovelas without a very good reason. For the first time in years, lesbians flocked to a program because it fulfilled their desire to see two women loving and risking it all for each other. The characters became each other’s safe space, and by proxy, our safe space. So, for SDL to compromise their relationship for someone as vapid as Cloe feels like a slap in the face. SDL promised a one-true-love story, but inserted doubt about whether their love for each other is true when there shouldn’t be any doubt at all. Miscommunication is the worst of all potential conflicts.
I’ve witnessed plenty of hand-waving regarding the retconning of these characters. “But it’s a telenovela.” “But there was always going to be another woman.” “But.” “But.” “But.” Those are rationalizations. That is not the story that was being told. It is perfectly acceptable for fans to enjoy and continue watching a show that has retconned half of its characters, but to dismiss claims that the writers are butchering their story and characterizations is objectively false. At no point has Marta de la Reina ever expressed that she values the qualities present in Cloe. Marta is a mid-forties introvert who views relationships as emotional rather than sexual necessities. In fact, the reason she married Jaime is that he was a dear friend and someone she felt like she could talk to about anything. He was her diary for years before Andres gave her one to write in. It was only when she realized she couldn’t talk to him about Fina that she knew things must change. So, why on Earth would she burn her diary to jump into bed with someone who only sees her as a sexual object?
Please, don’t @me with a theory. If anyone wants to engage in an intellectual debate, give me an example, written into the show, that explains how Marta has consciously decided that it’s good and appropriate to give herself sexually to a sexual harasser after her ex was sexually assaulted in jail. It’s impossible. Any evidence anyone could provide for this would be a fiction they created in their own mind, and not the story being told. Cloe is the biggest narrative red flag plot hole I’ve ever seen a “ship” fandom willfully ignore or outright support. Supporting bad writing for bad drama that undermines the ship that is the primary reason you watch the show is mind-boggling to witness. I’m not going to pretend to have amnesia to watch a show just because it has a lesbian relationship in it.
Claim: “Growth strips characters of flaws and thus drama, causing the audience to lose interest.”
Incorrect. Human growth is gradual and inconsistent. Most people do not resolve to fix parts of their personality and successfully achieve it overnight. According to developmental psychologists, it takes twice as long to unlearn a behavior as it does to learn it. This means that change is a conscious choice we make, requiring us to think about our actions before committing to them. We will make mistakes as we change because we’re not yet programmed for that change.
For example, a person might say, “I promise I will clean the dishes next time.” They clean the dishes once, and then forget to clean them again. Someone notices and reminds them of their promise. They accept their error, clean the dishes three times in a row, and then forget to clean them again. This time, they find a method to remind themselves to clean the dishes. They accept their mistake and repeat the process. Each time, they get better at remembering to clean the dishes. Experience is foundational to human growth. Small steps of action demonstrate to ourselves and others that we are committed to a path of betterment. SDL fails to do this.
I, like some, make excuses for things I enjoy. I believe The Wheel of Time is the best fantasy show of the last decade, but seasons one and two failed to demonstrate character growth. By the time the show addressed its poor characterization in season three, it was too late. The audience had vanished, and it was subsequently canceled. I forgive the show runners for one simple reason – they were restricted to an eight-episode format of a sprawling book series. They didn’t have time to linger in moments that endear characters to the audience without completely rewriting the plot.
However, SDL has all the time in the world. They have so much time that they waste opportunities for character growth to write filler episodes that go nowhere and teach nothing. How many times has Fina lamented Marta’s work schedule? Or communicated that she wished they could enjoy simple moments together? Or wanted to spend the night with Marta, only to be told something else is a priority? And how many times has Marta attempted to address Fina’s criticisms? Marta can live in Toledo, let her family control 99.9% of her life, and occasionally take steps to address Fina’s needs. Again, growth is gradual, but the audience must see it just as someone must see their partner keeping a promise to clean the dishes. It proves that you care about and respect your audience.
Furthermore, humans and, therefore, characters have multiple flaws or characteristics they must navigate around people who do not hold the same values. Life is a constant push and pull between what we want for ourselves and what we want to give to others. Slowly addressing Marta’s time with Fina does not suddenly make her great at establishing boundaries with her family. Nor does it make her someone eager to discuss her private life with others. The list goes on and on. Stagnating character growth is only successful at keeping characters locked into a narrative cycle while disappointing your audience. Conflict will always live in the values we hold as individuals. The writers know this because creative writing teaches the writer about internal and external character motivations. They’re counting on the audience not knowing this.
Claim: The large number of episodes required for a weekday telenovela prohibits better storytelling.
Incorrect. To think the telenovela is limited because it has nearly unlimited time to tell a story is illogical. More episodes mean more time to right all of the wrongs of the now-frustratingly common 8-episode season. The only limit is imagination. Not so long ago, most series consisted of a 24-episode season. Episodes were split between progressing the overarching plot, characterization, world-building/exposition, and fun. By “fun,” I mean the musical episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer or the “Cops” episode of The X-Files. Writers' rooms knew how to pad out long seasons well before 2025. Where did writers learn these tricks from? Soap operas and telenovelas. Before that? Serialized radio broadcasts. Long-format storytelling has existed for as long as people have been telling stories.
When people, like myself, complain about the writing of SDL, it is because the show has so much opportunity for meaningful filler episodes, but chooses meaningless filler episodes instead. It’s the equivalent of Botox drama. Why, when the crutch of conflict resolution exists, and it’s an obvious solution to padding out episodes that the writer’s room does not know how to pad out, does SDL opt for emptiness? Do you know how much harder it is to pretend to write interesting drama rather than to write interesting drama? Each dramatic arc has its own mini-crises wherein characters confront obstacles that prevent them from reaching their goal. So, when I say “conflict resolution,” that isn’t shorthand for “Let’s skip all of Marta’s obstacles and necessary character growth to reunite her with Fina.” No. I mean, SDL should be showing how Marta is evolving in baby steps that ultimately result in meaningful growth. And if there is any format suited to baby-step growth, it is the telenovela.
In season one, drama was countered by growth that pulled characters between reverting to old habits or creating new ones. No character embodied this struggle more than the villain, Jesus. He was frequently torn between his business ambitions and his desire to be loved. If Damian had been a better father, Jesus might have believed love was the correct path for growth. Unfortunately, at the time, Damian’s love and priority was his business – not his children. Damian’s disappointment in Jesus’ decision-making at the perfumery starts a negative feedback loop of self-loathing. Jesus’ actions become more desperate, cruel, and selfish. He wrongly believes that being as ambitious as Damian will win his approval and love. The more ambitious he becomes, the less everyone loves him. The less they love him, the more ambitious he becomes.
All of this is to say that season one of SDL offered something few telenovelas do – believable nuance, stagnation, and growth. It honored characters' strengths and weaknesses, and set the stage for meaningful conflict – even if that conflict was stretched out over hundreds of episodes. In season two, SDL neglected well-established characterization and internal conflicts to prioritize new characters and external conflicts. The problem is that series regulars, like Marta, should have deeply rooted internal conflicts with new characters, like Cloe, because she does not align with her values. Yet, none of this is shown in the days leading up to the finale. What’s worse is that SDL released several filler episodes the week prior, but devoted zero time to addressing flaws in Marta's characterization. You cannot expect me to believe, after spending a month in agony over Marta’s loss of Fina, that no one in the writer’s room understands how to make Marta’s thoughts known to the audience through voice-over.
Claim: If you don’t like how SDL is being written, then it’s because you don’t like telenovelas.
First and foremost, if we weren't capable of liking a telenovela, we wouldn't have enjoyed season one of SDL. The problem isn’t the format; it’s the difference in quality between season one and season two, and the writer's inability to adapt to actors’/actresses' schedules. It’s the lack of continuity after edits are made to the script. For example, it was obvious when characters kept pivoting from “It’s been two months since insert event,” to “It’s been four months since insert the same event,” that a time jump was incoming. I suspect this is the same reason Marta’s sudden feelings for Cloe don’t make sense. They probably intended for Cloe to be a red herring relationship, and wrote Marta as a reluctant participant. Then, at the last possible moment, production decided to keep Antea Rodriguez for the third season. So, they rewrote the finale as a moment for Marta to confess her feelings without doing any of the necessary build-up to the confession. Thus, Marta now appears to be in “like” with a sexual predator.
Secondly, suggesting we don’t like telenovelas because of one show's bad writing is like saying, “If you don't like shrimp, then you don't like seafood.” To write off the telenovela genre forever, because of one or two bad experiences, is illogical. Not all telenovelas are created equal. Besides, good writers know that the best characterization lies in contradictions. This is because people are inherently contradictory. We make blanket statements like, “I hate superhero movies,” then find ourselves enjoying Venom and Venom II. (Something I actually did.) I revisit foods, music, and genres I dislike regularly because I know that my tastes evolve with age. When I was a child, I wouldn't eat anything with nuts in it. As an adult, pistachio almond is my favorite flavor of ice cream. I’ve known people who hate history but will sit and watch an entire Ken Burns documentary series.
My point is this – there are exceptions to categorical dislikes because people enjoy what speaks to them on a personal level. SDL earned Mafin fans by cultivating an audience of lesbians who want to see true love triumph against obstacles because that was the story they were telling. To suggest that we’re stupid because we don’t understand the inherent pitfalls of the telenovela is ridiculous. Of course we do. Many of us saw Begona willingly throw herself back into the arms of her abuser. But there’s a vast difference between Begona and Marta. Begona has been written as someone who gaslights herself into believing in the good nature of her abusers. Marta has been written as someone who values deep connection. Begona’s relationship with Gabriel, sad as it is, makes sense because victims of abuse often struggle to leave or find relationships with people who aren’t abusive. Marta’s relationship with Cloe makes no sense because she has never prioritized or valued sex. The problem is NOT the telenovela genre. The problem is that the writers have not honored Marta’s characterization.
Claim: You dislike the show because you need the show to cater to your specific wants and interests.
This is only correct insofar as SDL made a promise to its audience with the story it was telling and broke it. Again, all I want is for the writers to honor their writing. Outside of this? I have never needed a story to reflect me. Internet discourse convinces people that unless something is perfect, it’s not worthy of love. This is because people perceive criticism of a thing as an attack on their identity.
As an example, I love the final season of Stranger Things despite the overwhelming number of negative reviews it has received. I think the first two episodes are slow. I think Will’s admission to his friends and family is comically bad. I think it needed to be longer than eight episodes. Yet, it honors every season that comes before it by being a nostalgic journey. It depicts how friends grow up and apart and take different paths. The ending is bittersweet. Two things can be true. I can believe that Stranger Things is flawed and people are right to criticize it, and I can love it. The show is not a reflection of my identity. A work of fiction can't be exactly what I want unless I write it myself. I wish the Mafin community could understand that we can criticize SDL, want for it to be better, not need it to cater to us individually, and still love the show.
Claim: You think I am a horrible person because I love SDL.
No, I don’t. Read the paragraph above. What I find problematic is attempting to silence constructive criticism because it’s not YOUR criticism. If you don’t like conflicting views being a part of the criticism machine, then you, yourself, should stop writing criticism. It’s a hypocritical take that indirectly asserts that only your criticism is valid. You’re being negative without taking responsibility for your negativity. I genuinely marvel at how some have spun the darkest, most negative theories about upcoming episodes into a win for the writers. I’ve seen people say, “I don’t like it,” and then advocate for things they don’t like. It’s baffling, much like watching people root against the ship that brought them to #mafin.
Claim: You said you would stop writing about the show after you finished this post. Is that true?
I’ll probably stick around to ensure that conflicting views remain a part of Mafin discourse. Democracy is important.
