HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2001 - Special issue (#2001-201)
Automatic digest processor (LISTSERV@LISTS.PSU.EDU)
Sun, 15 Jul 2001 15:42:36 -0400
There are 16 messages totalling 825 lines in this issue.
Topics in this special issue:
1. Morality (3)
2. Source Material (3)
3. K/S, sociology and other stuff (Was: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers) (5)
4. K/S, sociology and other stuff (Was: ATTN: All Fan Fic
writers) (2)
5. If you don't like it... (2)
6. ATTN: All Fan Fic writers--bootleg tapes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:29:07 +0100
From: "John Mosby (B)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Morality
I've often found it's not so much the religion but the convinient ways of
interpretting a religion's message/ideals to suit a particular argument or
fashionable cause that leads to the most trouble.
John
----- Original Message -----
From: <Ashton7@aol.com>
To: <HIGHLA-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: [HL] Morality
> In a message dated 7/15/01 9:04:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> a.j.mosby@btinternet.com writes:
>
> << I'm sure that people who kept slaves didn't feel
> they were acting immorally at the time, (though I'd agree that I find it
> hard to think of God-fearing Christians finding justification). >>
>
> They found their justification in the *Bible*, which says that slavery is
> okay. Which points out the fallacy of assuming that a religion (any
religion)
> is a reliable source of universal morality.
>
> Annie CWPack
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:34:16 +0100
From: "John Mosby (B)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Source Material
Don't think it's got anywhere near a casting stage at the moment - not even
a first draft script.
However Adrian said he would only play Duncan again (in a movie) if he had
more creative control and Christopher Lambert made it perfectly clear that
Endgame was his swangsong.
Either situation could be reversed if someone waved a big enough incentive
under noses, but without either actor, I'm wondering if a Highlander movie
is such a wise move (a tv series, with 22hrs to develop new characters is
another matter)
John
----- Original Message -----
From: "List Kathy Avery" <Lynxf19@aol.com>
To: <HIGHLA-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: [HL] Source Material
> My opinion for a new Highlander is not decided, but who's supposed to star
in
> the new movie?
> I have always been a loyal fan of Highlander and will always be.
> Kathy
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 09:33:36 -0700
From: K Swanson <swanson@telus.net>
Subject: Re: Source Material
At 11:16 AM 15/07/01 -0500, you wrote:
>John wrote:
> >
> > Highlander: The Source
I suspect it's a typo, and the actual title is "Highlander: The Sauce".
It'll be a low key movie, with a bunch of immies having a get-together and
debating Bar-B-Que recipes through the ages.
Karyn
swanson@telus.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:43:33 EDT
From: Ashton7@aol.com
Subject: Re: Morality
In a message dated 7/15/01 12:28:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
a.j.mosby@btinternet.com writes:
<< I've often found it's not so much the religion but the convinient ways of
interpretting a religion's message/ideals to suit a particular argument or
fashionable cause that leads to the most trouble. >>
Really? I've read many passages in the Christian Bible, both the Old and the
New Testament, which don't seem to be open to interpretation at all.
Certainly, slavery was considered a "normal" thing until fairly modern times.
Here's a site that discusses the matter (one of only many, I'm sure):
http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl.htm
Annie CWPack
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:45:38 +0100
From: Jette Goldie <jette@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Source Material
Karyn says:
>John wrote:
> > Highlander: The Source
>
>
> I suspect it's a typo, and the actual title is "Highlander: The Sauce".
> It'll be a low key movie, with a bunch of immies having a get-together and
> debating Bar-B-Que recipes through the ages.
That would be a good movie - and should have a good part in
it for Joe. You can bet he has some good BBQ recipes <g>
Jette
Glory may be fleeting, but obscurity is forever!
bosslady@scotlandmail.com
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fanfic.html
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:49:11 +0200
From: Marina Bailey <fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za>
Subject: Re: K/S, sociology and other stuff (Was: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers)
Liser wrote:
>When I first started writing and reading HL fic, it was overwhelmingly
>predominantly het. I blame Methos for the infusion of so much slash.
><g>
The Old Guy gets it every time. <g> The blame! He gets the *blame*!!
I wonder if that's all it is - that lots of people saw "Chivalry" and
started madly slashing away? It seems that there is just more slash
*in general* than there used to be. (So I'm a happy camper!) At one
point someone on a fiction list (I *think* it was HLFIC-L, but it
might not have been) complained that the slash fans were "taking over"
all the adult lists. And, of course, someone replied that, if there
was a lack of het stories, it wasn't the fault of the slash fans but
of the het fans for not writing enough.
Slash, in fandom, is more acceptable than it used to be. Oh, slash
fans are still accused of being perverts (until Nina I had never
been accused of being a criminal before) but there are just so many
*more* of us that we can join lists where slash is the norm, not
the deviation, and have happy little slashy conversations to our
hearts' content. And slash fans (as you have probably noticed) don't
take abuse and insults from non-fans anymore.
>See...and this is where my "problem" with slash begins. It *doesn't*
>make sense with what I saw on the screen.
Aha! What *you* saw on the screen! I saw something that definitely
supported the possibility. But all that tells us is that we have
different perceptions, and so what? We can have them. Just as long
as you don't tell me mine is less relevant than yours. (Even *Wendy*
said there was a "look" in "Chivalry". Wendy!!)
>I can buy Methos as
>bi-sexual (though I don't see any canonical evidence for
>it--everything is to the contrary...). But, I'm sorry, I just don't
>believe that Duncan is.
Well, if we go by canon, then immortals don't go to the toilet
either. (I'm sorry. I couldn't help it.)
>And forget about Richie. He's about as
>red-blooded heterosexual as they come.
Yeah, Richie is hard to slash. The Richie who lives in me doesn't like it.
(I tried to slash him, and had a very hard time! <g>)
>Maybe in a thousand years his
>horizons would have expanded--but I didn't see that happening in the
>5 seasons of HL that showed on *my* tv. :-)
I did in the 5 that were on mine. (Of course, in the HL on mine Richie
is still alive because the SABC never showed the AAA arc. We never saw
it! It never happened!!)
>I think you're probably more discerning than the "average" slash fan--
>if there is such a thing.
Trust me, there isn't. But unlike Carmel, I do like porn. <g> And I
like to think that I am discerning. I do not equate slash with porn
either - both have their 'place' (for want of a better word). Porn,
as Carmel said, only concerns itself with body parts. Slash, however,
concerns itself with people and emotions. That is the most important
distinction. To accuse slash fans of writing porn (not that anyone
did) is to do us a great disservice.
The 'challenge' of slash is to put characters together who might *not*
necessarily have had homosexual thoughts before. Slash writers do not
simply assume that the characters are gay or bi. In fact, a large
percentage of stories concern themselves with a character (or both
characters) coming to terms with the idea that they have fallen in
love with a person of the same gender. And characters do have
heterosexual freak-outs and sudden attacks of 'what the hell am I
doing?' and everything that a person might reasonably expect from
a male character who never wanted another man before. And in the
best HL slash stories, you do get Duncan having his own freak-out
and having to come to terms with new feelings, and so on. Which is
as it should be.
And expanding on the idea of slash being a 'challenge' - has anyone
noticed that movies and TV series that actually have gay characters
in them are seldom slashed? Yes, one can find slash for, say, "Queer
as Folk", but for every QaF story out there, there are about *500*
Sentinel slash stories. To use a semi-HL example - I think Eric
McCormack is a babe. But I wouldn't want to slash his character
from Will & Grace. Why bother? It's been done for me, by TPTB of
that TV show. However, if I really had an urge to slash a
character who looked like him (NOT him - a CHARACTER), then I
might write about Matthew McCormick and Carl Robinson doing it
on the plantation. There would be all sorts of issues to explore
- slave vs. owner, Immortal vs. Immortal, etc. What would there
be to explore from Will & Grace? Gay NY attorneys??
Writing a slash story with characters that have previously been
portrayed on TV as being heterosexual, and doing a convincing job
of it, is a unique writing challenge. Consequently, most slash
stories are very well written. (Even PWPs, although I don't like
those that much.) And I like to read stuff that is well-written.
I do not want to wade through Mary Sue stories disguised as
adventures, or read the thousandth fan's idea of where Immortals
come from. I want to read about characters and emotions. And
slash is chock-full of character moments and emotion.
>Very true. I've read some really awful het PwP that loses track of
>body parts left and right. If you tried to act out the scene as
>written, you'd need extra hands, arms, legs, nipples...you name it.
>:-)
Or as someone on another list said, zombie body parts (that seem to
detach and wander around on their own).
>And--on screen-we don't see Duncan
>lusting after Methos or vise-verse. We see two men who are friends
>and have a pretty intense relationship. Looking beyond that to
>subtext is fine if that's how you want to play the game, but it's not
>canon. It could be--in another time, another place, another
>movie/series/novel....but it's not within the context of the six
>seasons we watched.
Back to that. I am agreed with you, actually. And I remember Sandy
mentioning this the last time we had this discussion. Slash is not
*in* the show. We know that. We extrapolate slash *from* the show,
and really go off into our own little alternate universe. And that's
fine.
>With all due respect, Carmel, I *hate* this argument. :-) It's the
>most common one people use to justify slashing Methos
>and...well...sure...it MIGHT be the case.
Well, my argument would be that since Methos' goal is to survive,
that he'll do anything. And doesn't seem to have any code of
behaviour the way Duncan does. This is a man who was Death. He
killed ten thousand - and enjoyed it. (And he has female fans
who *like* him that way!) And we're worried whether he might have
boinked men somewhere along the line??! (The implication being, of
course, that to some people it's better for Methos to go around
murdering people than to be bisexual or homosexual.)
>For all we know, Methos wasn't anywhere NEAR the places in the world
>where homosexuality and orgies were common when that was the norm in
>society.
Um, "We ate, we drank, we vomited"?? That time and place were
right for orgies...
>Or, he could have been smack in the middle of ancient Greece selling
>shoes to the men who took boys as lovers and sleeping with their
>wives behind their backs. :-)
Wouldn't put it past him. Wouldn't put ANYTHING past him! <g> (In
case this is not clear, I really like Methos. Doesn't mean I can't
see his faults, though.)
>Even so. Even if Duncan was titillated by these stories....that
>doesn't mean he and Methos would wind up in bed together.
Maybe not... but in a slash story he'd be having a lot more fun. :)
>What we're talking about here is Carmel-canon....not series canon.
And that's fine. We know it isn't series canon. And (I hate to put
it this way, BUT) we don't care. We're off into slashy territory,
and that isn't canon. We're agreed!
>I can't speak for the Weasel, but, for me, it's always helpful to my
>level of understanding when someone takes the time to explain it
>instead of getting indignant in the face of a question. ;-)
It's a lot easier not to get indignant when people don't accuse one
of being childish, or insinuating that one should be locked up.
>I don't know. If nothing else, I think BP is a savvy business man.
>I think he recognizes the potential damage to his franchise that
>coming down on fic would cause. He may consider it the lesser of two
>evils.
Exactly. Why alienate a loyal fan base?
I think I'm done. Off to watch "Touched by an Angel" now.
- Marina.
\\ "But then, we saw that Obi-Wan doth look upon ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// Qui-Gon with lust, and that Mr. Lucas was not || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ likely to include that in the next movie, so we ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// said screw it and wrote it ourselves." - Warning || \\
\\ page of the 'Master & Apprentice' slash site || //
//==fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za=Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie==\\
I want to go back to my home planet - if someone would please tell
me where it is! - Tarryn
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:49:10 +0200
From: Marina Bailey <fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za>
Subject: Re: K/S, sociology and other stuff (Was: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers)
Can I post this? I might have exceeded my posts for one day, but
I'm not sure. I did, South African time, but not U.S. time. I'm
posting, and Debbie can always get out her whip. :)
Leah wrote:
>At least one did. I understand that one of the main actors from DUE SOUTH
>spoke on the subject in a magazine interview, some while back. He was
>sympathetic and bemused on the topic. Don't have the details, but it even
>stunned the fans. (Someone have more detailed info?)
Do you mean Paul Gross? Yes, he knows all about slash. He deliberately
put slashy stuff into the third season of Due South... well, because he
could. And there are lots of slashy moments ("Buddy Breathing" - hi,
Wendy <g>) and slashy comments ("You cannot stop the car!" "Not with
you holding onto my leg I can't!") in the third season. (There are
articles on the Net about this, and there was one in a Canadian newspaper
I think, but I'm not going to look for them.)
But it fell flat for me because those two characters (IMNSHO) had no
chemistry. And it felt like he was trying to force everyone to like
the new Ray because Fraser did. Barf.
I do remember reading a transciption of an article (or it might have
been an online chat - hey, it was a long time ago) in which the
interviewer asked them about slash. David Marciano (Ray Vecchio) didn't
like the idea. He didn't say it was disgusting, just that Fraser and
Ray were heterosexual.
Guess how much impact it made on Due South slash fans? None.
- Marina. (Hey, my best slash stories are Due South.)
\\ "But then, we saw that Obi-Wan doth look upon ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// Qui-Gon with lust, and that Mr. Lucas was not || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ likely to include that in the next movie, so we ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// said screw it and wrote it ourselves." - Warning || \\
\\ page of the 'Master & Apprentice' slash site || //
//==fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za=Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie==\\
I want to go back to my home planet - if someone would please tell
me where it is! - Tarryn
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:52:12 +0100
From: "John Mosby (B)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Morality
Ooooookay, I'll rephrase:
Given that the Bible is a collection of books, rather than one, I've found
that it's often possible to find a line/verse/chapter that will back up
ALMOST any argument. I'm sure it's possible to look elsewhere in the Bible
(and for equal opportunists, other Holy scriptures) for alternative phrases
to back up alternative thoughts.
And I always bear in mind when reading ANY book, to remind myself of when it
was written and not necessarilly apply 2001 traditions with 0001
traditions - which would be silly really. Context is everything. I look at
meaning, rather than wording.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Ashton7@aol.com>
To: <HIGHLA-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: [HL] Morality
> In a message dated 7/15/01 12:28:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> a.j.mosby@btinternet.com writes:
>
> << I've often found it's not so much the religion but the convinient ways
of
> interpretting a religion's message/ideals to suit a particular argument
or
> fashionable cause that leads to the most trouble. >>
>
> Really? I've read many passages in the Christian Bible, both the Old and
the
> New Testament, which don't seem to be open to interpretation at all.
> Certainly, slavery was considered a "normal" thing until fairly modern
times.
> Here's a site that discusses the matter (one of only many, I'm sure):
>
> http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl.htm
>
> Annie CWPack
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:06:40 +0100
From: "John Mosby (B)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: K/S,
sociology and other stuff (Was: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers)
> Aha! What *you* saw on the screen! I saw something that definitely
> supported the possibility. But all that tells us is that we have
> different perceptions, and so what? We can have them. Just as long
> as you don't tell me mine is less relevant than yours. (Even *Wendy*
> said there was a "look" in "Chivalry". Wendy!!)
I'd say you have every right to slash as many characters as you feel like.
It depends how you define 'relevant'. If the person behind the concept, the
writer and the actor say that the character isn't gay/bi...he's not. Simple
as that. The wonderful thing about the imagination is that you can create
universes where their sexuality is different and as long as it is not put in
a position where it challenges the official version and those behind the
original creation, go for it. Doesn't float my boat, but whatever.
> And expanding on the idea of slash being a 'challenge' - has anyone
> noticed that movies and TV series that actually have gay characters
> in them are seldom slashed? Yes, one can find slash for, say, "Queer
> as Folk", but for every QaF story out there, there are about *500*
> Sentinel slash stories.
Just a question here, but on the subject of creating a new sexuality for a
character has anyone ever taken a show like QaF and had a Fanfic situation
where a gay character discovered he was hetrosexual? If so, how was it
perceived?
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:13:21 +0200
From: Marina Bailey <fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za>
Subject: Re: If you don't like it...
Wendy wrote:
>I wasn't really thinking just about books, fanfic, TV etc. What I meant
>was..there are activities which I 1) don't want to participate in and 2)
>don't feel anyone else should be participating in, either. That doesn't
>translate one-for-one into a belief that the activity (whatever it may be)
>should be banned. OTOH, if I can in some small way make it harder for
that >activity to continue..I might be moved to act.
Okay, I see what you mean. But, see, Wendy, if I agree with you (that
some stuff is disgusting and it should be hard for people to
participate in it), then someone is going to say, "But Marina,
I think slash is disgusting and you shouldn't be able to participate
in it either."
Hard place..................rock
^me^
It's difficult. I think the "standard" which we can all agree on is
really the issue of consent (and I'm not talking about fanfic; we've
argued that to death). In Western society we've basically decided that
children cannot consent. People who aren't fully grown don't have
the fully developed cognitive ability yet to comprehend all the issues
involved in consenting.
If two consenting adults want to paint themselves blue and try to
climb the Empire State Building, I say let them. If two consenting
adults of the same gender want to boink, I say let them. In that
case, it doesn't hurt anybody and they are adults. Other stuff...
I don't know.
>An unwavering belief in free speech runs head long into the cesspool
>that is life. <eg>
Exactly.
>Hey..I'm right with you on the Chuck issue<g>
*Snerk*
>I think labels and warning and disclaimers are all very nice. But you can
>slap a warning label on a video of some guy torturing a woman to death
>while raping her..and I still won't 100% agree that it needs to exist.
Well, I'm a woman so I wouldn't agree either. But as long as it's not
film of a real incident... I don't know. It makes me think of that
episode of Designing Women in which there was a BDSM advert on a stand
near Julia Sugarbaker's house, and she kept driving into it with her
car. She agreed it could exist, but when it got in her face, she
stopped it.
>I'm not sure that a society is better off by saying that everything is
>allowable and everyone (over 18) has a right to create and distribute and
>view any bit of violent depravity they can imagine. OTOH, I certainly
>don't want to return to the days when movies had to show married people
>sleeping in separate beds <g>.
That's just the thing - once we start saying, "This shouldn't be allowed,"
we're in trouble. Because that kind of thing never stops there. If we
stop, say, extreme BDSM, then someone will decide that gay porn
shouldn't be allowed (and that's, y'know, my favourite <g>), then
any porn, then movies with NC-17 ratings will be banned... who knows
where it could end.
I don't want to live in Pleasantville.
As long as no one gets hurt and everyone consents, I say, allow it.
Look away if you don't like it. What other option is there if we
want to live in a free society? (Or in our case, free societies?)
- Marina.
\\ "But then, we saw that Obi-Wan doth look upon ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// Qui-Gon with lust, and that Mr. Lucas was not || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ likely to include that in the next movie, so we ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// said screw it and wrote it ourselves." - Warning || \\
\\ page of the 'Master & Apprentice' slash site || //
//==fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za=Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie==\\
I want to go back to my home planet - if someone would please tell
me where it is! - Tarryn
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:32:01 +0200
From: Marina Bailey <fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za>
Subject: Re: K/S, sociology and other stuff (Was: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers)
John wrote:
>I'd say you have every right to slash as many characters as you feel like.
>It depends how you define 'relevant'. If the person behind the concept, the
>writer and the actor say that the character isn't gay/bi...he's not. Simple
>as that.
Actually, I don't think it is as simple as that. Most people who
watch a show do not have access to the statements of the actors
or the writers. And if someone watches a show and gets something
out of it that contradicts what TPTB or the actor said, I don't
think we can tell them that they have no right to get that out
of it.
I mean, most of us have read Shakespeare. I'm willing to bet that
there are loads of modern interpretations of his plays (and poems,
for that matter) that he never intended, either. It doesn't stop
people from getting these varying interpretations out of his
work, though.
Interpretation is a tricky thing. I never read spoilers, I don't
read articles about movies before they come out... I like to go
into stuff "cold" and form my own ideas and opinions. You might
read everything TPTB say, check out every article on a film, and
get a different idea. But I will keep saying that mine is as
valid as yours. Because a work, whether it be a work of
literature or celluloid, should be able to stand on its own.
I do not need to know what Charlotte Bronte intended in order to
form my own opinions about _Jane Eyre_. And I would say that I
do not need to know what TPTB of HL intended in order to form
my own opinions about HL.
>Just a question here, but on the subject of creating a new sexuality for a
>character has anyone ever taken a show like QaF and had a Fanfic situation
>where a gay character discovered he was hetrosexual? If so, how was it
>perceived?
Changing tack, of course you realise that, were someone to do this,
the slash fans would accuse them of trying to 'heterosexualize' the
character in order to "redeem" him, because they were homophobic.
But I didn't say it would be me. (That REALLY would be the pot calling
the kettle... yadda yadda.)
- Marina, on her last allowable post for today.
\\ "But then, we saw that Obi-Wan doth look upon ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// Qui-Gon with lust, and that Mr. Lucas was not || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ likely to include that in the next movie, so we ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// said screw it and wrote it ourselves." - Warning || \\
\\ page of the 'Master & Apprentice' slash site || //
//==fdd-tmar@netactive.co.za=Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie==\\
I want to go back to my home planet - if someone would please tell
me where it is! - Tarryn
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:32:27 +0100
From: Jette Goldie <jette@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Re: If you don't like it...
Marina:
> If two consenting adults want to paint themselves blue and try to
> climb the Empire State Building, I say let them. If two consenting
> adults of the same gender want to boink, I say let them. In that
> case, it doesn't hurt anybody and they are adults.
and if they don't, you can always write the fanfic in which
they do.
;-)
Jette
Glory may be fleeting, but obscurity is forever!
bosslady@scotlandmail.com
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fanfic.html
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 15:04:42 -0400
From: Trilby <trilby23@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: K/S, sociology and other stuff (Was: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers)
John:
> >I'd say you have every right to slash as many characters as you feel like.
> >It depends how you define 'relevant'. If the person behind the concept, the
> >writer and the actor say that the character isn't gay/bi...he's not. Simple
> >as that.
Marina:
> Actually, I don't think it is as simple as that. Most people who
> watch a show do not have access to the statements of the actors
> or the writers. And if someone watches a show and gets something
> out of it that contradicts what TPTB or the actor said, I don't
> think we can tell them that they have no right to get that out
> of it.
OK, now I have to bring up one of my favourite incidents in movie
trivia.
A basic premise of the movie "Ben-Hur" was that Judah Ben-Hur
(Charlton Heston) and the Roman, Messala (Stephen Boyd), had
been very close friends as boys and younger men, but became
enemies. During the making of the movie, the director (William
Wyler) took Boyd aside and told him what subtext to play: Judah
and Messala had been lovers, and Messala wanted to resume their
relationship, but Judah rejected him. So Boyd was to play
Messala as a proud, angry rejected lover. Boyd thought it was
great, but neither he nor Wyler told the very conservative Charlton
Heston about this subtext. In the words of Wyler, "Chuck would
never go for it."
So in all the scenes between Boyd and Heston, one actor's truth
was that the two characters had had a homosexual relationship.
The other actor's truth didn't include that in their background. The
director intended the subtext. I have no idea what the
screenwriters or the original author (Lew Wallace) intended.
The movie came out in 1959. I saw it on television many times,
starting when I was a child, and for years I never "saw" the slash
subtext. It went right over my head (and since I was probably
around 10, no wonder). After I heard this story, I watched Stephen
Boyd the next time I saw the movie, the subject couldn't be clearer.
It ain't what the actors say. It ain't what the writers say. It's what
the viewer "sees".
-------------------- Trilby
"Her life was okay. Sometimes she wished she were
sleeping with the right man instead of with her dog, but
she never felt she was sleeping with the wrong dog."
- "Change of Life" by Judith Collas
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 09:18:12 -1000
From: Geiger <geiger@maui.net>
Subject: Re: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers--bootleg tapes
Pat--
> Is making, copying, or lending video tapes of broadcast episodes or movies
> a violation of copyright? We're talking about distribution of the
> material. If so, why aren't those who decry fanfic also vocal about this
> common practice?
Yes, distributing such tapes is illegal. Even EBAY says so; they make the
additional point that it's also illegal to give homemade tapes away for free
(while charging for some token that's included). Still, of course, it's
done.
People who deal in bootleg tapes (either end of the transaction) are
breaking the law. The fact it's done a lot doesn't change anything.
Nina
geiger@maui.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:21:59 +0100
From: "John Mosby (B)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: K/S,
sociology and other stuff (Was: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers)
> It ain't what the actors say. It ain't what the writers say. It's what
> the viewer "sees".
Nope. If I write and perform a play in which a character I have created is
portrayed as hetrosexual, you have every right to go away and write private
material in which you create a variation on the character that is gay. If I
create a gay character, you could go away and create a other-universe
version where he/she is straight. However...*officially* he will always be
the of the original sexual preference I made him for that reason alone.
What the viewer sees is unique to them and what the character means to them
is just as unique. That can be celebrated. But you can't say that a
character's profile changes because of what the viewer sees, it's how he was
created.There is no harm done in seeing something there which was not
intended to be and writing about that and having fun, but it isn't accurate
to say that your writing would change any original 'truth'.
( and note: I'd make that point for anyone trying to make a gay character
fit a straight stereotype as well!)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 15:42:03 -0400
From: Jill <selkie@MailAndNews.com>
Subject: Re: K/S, sociology and other stuff (Was: ATTN: All Fan Fic writers)
> But I wouldn't want to slash his character
>from Will & Grace. Why bother? It's been done for me, by TPTB of
>that TV show.
I guess you'd say it depends on the show, and how the characters are
presented. Tom Fontana is a master at torturing characters, and there's
enough on screen angst in his shows that a decent number of fans go
back and fill in the off screen blanks. While it doesn't approach Sentinel
numbers, there is a good deal of Tim Bayliss (Homicide: Life on the
Street) and Beecher/Keller (Oz) slash fic out there. And you get Timmy
written as a bisexual during the last two seasons of H:LOTS, and the
onscreen journey of Beecher as he goes from using sex to survive in Oz to
admitting he loves Keller.
It could just be there's less sitcom fic out there in general (where gay
characters seem more likely to occur in US television), and you just get
less shash about gay teevee characters because you're getting a subset
of a smaller set. (Is it time for Venn diagrams, or would Zk not like the
math aspects?)
Wouldn't be surprised if there were a bunch of people out there who are
watching Six Feet Under, and plotting out the story of how David and his
black cop first got together. David is definitely an angst boy once you get
past the 'sympathetic funeral director' mask he has to put on for the world.
Jill
selkie@mailandnews.com
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. " -Albert Einstein
**********************************************************
CAT: I hope that Schrodinger guy put litter in here...
------------------------------------------------------------
Get your FREE web-based e-mail and newsgroup access at:
http://MailAndNews.com
Create a new mailbox, or access your existing IMAP4 or
POP3 mailbox from anywhere with just a web browser.
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 15 Jul 2001 - Special issue (#2001-201)
****************************************************************