User blog:Mckeller/MGM does not like dealing with relationships in it's literature

I learn from a blog post by Jo Graham, that MGM doesn't like to deal with relationships in it's literature. I think that it is sad. The interpersonal parts were a big part of what made Stargate great. The following is part of the comments from that blog. The floowing is from     http://jo-graham.livejournal.com/303974.html

rodneyfan  Jul. 17th, 2015 05:07 pm (UTC)I really enjoyed the series and feel that The third path really brings the series to a somewhat satisfactory close. The only thing I wish was expanded upon more was the relationship between rodney and jennifer I feel there is still more to that story and the ending between them didn't feel satisfying.Link | Reply | Thread jo_graham Jul. 19th, 2015 09:17 pm (UTC)I'm glad you've enjoyed the series! Re: Jennifer and Rodney -- MGM doesn't like shipping. We've run into this with every couple, canon or not. We aren't really allowed to explore any relationship very much, and with Jennifer and Rodney we pushed it about as far as we could. I think there is more to be said, certainly, but as a writer I can't see any way to say it that MGM will approve. I'm sorry! :)

asugar Jul. 18th, 2015 11:45 pm (UTC)I really enjoyed it. It was incredibly well written with the attention to details of culture, competency and character that I always expect of you and this series.

There was one part that kept me from rating it a favorite. It bummed me out that there were no real meaty John and Teyla scenes until the very end and none that acknowledged their relationship. I kept thinking the change in their relationship would come up in filling Elizabeth in on everyone at the very least. What happened? Did I miss something? Were they no longer together in this book? The gaps in the publishing schedule do leave me a bit fuzzy as to the details of each prior book without a reread.

I also wondered at the last question Teyla asks John! I didn't think that John's answer to that question was ever in doubt for anyone who even marginally knew him and it felt odd and out-of-character for intuitive Teyla to ask it. I'm curious rather than critical of the authorial choice, just to clarify, and hoped you'd be willing to explain.Link | Reply | Thread [https://jo-graham.livejournal.com/profile ] J    Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it. No, you didn't miss anything. MGM would not put up with shippiness. We definitely meant that they were together, but we could not actually say so. So I tried to show in their scenes together the kind of relying on each other and being partners that I hoped conveyed it. I couldn't do anymore because MGM wouldn't allow it. In fact, there was a line in Inheritors about their future children that was cut at the last second.

I put that line in because I wanted it to be clear that John was staying and this was his commitment, and I couldn't do it any more clearly. I wanted it to be clear to the reader that John wasn't going back to Earth to stay -- now or ever. It's very difficult and frustrating to deal with MGM balking on actually progressing the characters forward, but this is a thing every tie-in writer deals with and it's kind of the rules of the game. But it's also one reason this is probably the last Legacy book. We can't keep going without actually progressing, and if we can't progress none of the three of us can see a way to write more books that make sense. We've had an amazing ride being able to move the characters forward this far, and we should stop while we're in a good place. Does that explain it?