HIGHLA-L Digest - 23 Sep 2002 to 24 Sep 2002 - Special issue
Automatic digest processor (LISTSERV@lists.psu.edu)
Tue, 24 Sep 2002 16:19:20 -0400
There are 17 messages totalling 847 lines in this issue.
Topics in this special issue:
1. Well & truly a slash thing now but hopefully not for much
longer (2)
2. Well & truly a slash thing now (14)
3. Well & truly a slash thing now but hopefully not for much longer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 23:46:27 -1000
From: MacWestie <mac.westie@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now but hopefully not for much
longer
Liser--
> I think there is a...quality that slash fans look for in a given
> scene. I'm not sure what that quality *is*--how to name it--and
> there are certainly more than one, total. But I think those
> qualities are somewhat universal in slashdom.
I think it runs from sheer implausibility to the totally outrageous. The
LESS 2 male characters seem sexually interested in each other & the MORE
hetero proof is placed onscreen, the more likely they are to be slashed.
For the shock value (because nothing makes a messier splash in fandom than
slash), to make the slash author feel like she's applied her own stamp to
the fictional universe, or (to put the best face on it) for the simple
challenge of it (as Marina mentioned).
> I think the important factor in this is that hundreds of SLASH fans
> will interpret it as sashy. The rest of us don't.
Exactly.
Nina
mac.westie@verizon.net
Save Farscape http://farscape.wdsection.com/index.php
Frell Sci Fi, just on principle.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 23:52:32 -1000
From: MacWestie <mac.westie@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
Marina--
>>>I'm sure
someone has the transcript of whichever con it was where he made
the comment about how, if Duncan had painted some woman's nose,
then the audience would have known exactly what it meant.>>>
Yep. But, that's BECAUSE DM likes/loves/lusts after WOMEN. Had he painted
the nose of a toddler or a puppy, it wouldn't have been sexual, & it wasn't
w/ Methos, either. (PW talks a GREAT game; he would do well in politics.)
> Okay, you caught me. Actually, I don't think you're wrong. Notice
> that stuff like Queer As Folk don't have that much slash, compared
> to stuff like HL, Sentinel, etc.
I appreciate your agreeing there.
> Yes. That's the challenge, if you like, of slash - to see if you
> can make it believable.
Doesn't that pretty much concede that there is NO "homoerotic subtext" (or
whatever it's called this week) onscreen on HL:TS? Because if there WERE,
then slash writers wouldn't have much of a challenge, would they?
> There are lots of slash pairings that I
> can't see and never will, because I've never read any stuff that
> makes a slash pairing believable.
If "believable" is what the writers are going for, then there are a LOT of
failures out there in slashland, because I've never found a story anything
other than laughable that portrayed DM, Methos or Richie as other than100%
hetero.
me before--
>Say someone saw your play & was so enamored of the characters & fictional
>world you created that she wrote her own stories based thereon,
>She fan-ficed you, royally. How do you feel about that?
Marina--
>I think I'd be flattered.
Then you are a saint. Or you are not being serious or completely candid.
And, you probably aren't earning a living w/ what was taken from you on a
lark.
Nina
mac.westie@verizon.net
Save Farscape http://farscape.wdsection.com/index.php
Frell Sci Fi, just on principle.
Nina
mac.westie@verizon.net
Save Farscape http://farscape.wdsection.com/index.php
Frell Sci Fi, just on principle.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 23:38:13 -1000
From: MacWestie <mac.westie@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
Lizzy--
> OK, I'm gonna jump in the middle of this and hopefully avoid getting
punched
> by all parties.
You'll heal. Eventually.
> Some interpretations may be vastly different
> from your own, but that doesn't make them invalid.
But other factors may, & frequently do.
> The same is true for watching a movie, TV show or music video. There are
> things that are not part of the major plot that you may find your mind
> filling in.
A good case could be made that DM's sexual proclivity IS a major plot point
in HL:TS. It's hard to imagine the show WITHOUT his love of Tessa & Amanda
& his passionate frolics w/ the dozens of others--ALL female. There's
precious little need or basis for "filling in" any HL:TS eps w/ DM lusting
after men.
And, again--what your _mind_ does isn't the point. Widely distributed
fanfic is the point, & that requires fingers to type & either a computer or
a copy machine to distribute--& an intention to use HL for one's own
purposes w/o permission or consent.
> When it comes to HL, the characters like DM are hundreds of years old, and
> from very different cultures. What is 'moral' now was not necessarily
> 'moral' in all the places they traveled thru.
What does "moral" have to do w/ it? That part of the topic is slash & how
it relates to HL characters.
> A character as old as Methos
> would almost certainly be bisexual especially if he was anywhere near
Greece
> during the classic era, or for that matter anywhere in Europe before the
13th
> century.
Balls. As in--sorry, but I don't buy that cliche. I am sure people were as
varied then as now, & Methos does tend to be unpredictable in all things.
We were never shown or told anything except that he loved & lusted after
women--Alexa, Charlotte, & the 67 or so wives he mentioned. ALL females.
> Most fan fiction authors are aware that they are working with characters
not
> their own.
"Most"? Well, the other poor souls are truly delusional, aren't they?
> Many of them use fan fiction as a practice board for their
> original writing.
Doesn't excuse intelletual theft. If anything, aspiring writers should be
more cognizant & careful of the rights of other writers & creative types.
> Several well known authors, including Lois McMasters
> Bujold, started out in fan fiction.
Who?
> Arguing subtext is like trying to make someone else see what you do in a
> Pollock painting.
Here's a tip--Highlander: The Series is OVER. Discussing the _text_ of it
is a piece of cake; we did that here backwards & forwards ages ago. Subtext
is about all we have left (other than perverse list culture & fun HL alum
sightings on the myriad lesser shows filming in Vancouver).
> If slash bothers you, don't read it. If you are on a board where you
don't
> like the topic, find another one, or bring up a topic YOU want to discuss.
EXCUSE me? Putting aside the "who the hell are you?" that keeps popping
into my mind while reading your (1st ever?) post, this IS obviously a topic
I'd like to discuss, w/ anyone willing to hold up the other side.
> In an attempt to change the subject,
Ah--I guess YOU aren't willing. I have to wonder why you are so eager to
squelch this particular discussion; you even changed the topic header
to--"Well & truly a slash thing now but hopefully not for much longer." (I
changed it back.)
Nina
mac.westie@verizon.net
Save Farscape http://farscape.wdsection.com/index.php
Frell Sci Fi, just on principle.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 07:04:33 -0400
From: SenseiRob@aol.com
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
zeeK wrote:
> >At what point does the insistence by the slash school of
> >thought that HL is populated by Canadians go from stubbornly
> >denying what TBTB intended, and turn into a branch of
> >interpretation of a work, even if the writers are still alive and
> >kicking?
Marina:
> Which was my point to begin with. And I'm not just focusing on
> slash here - at what point does *any* interpretation of a
> work go from "not what the writers intended" to a valid point
> of view?
>
> My argument is that any and all interpretations are valid.
Eeeeek! That's so not true. I can intentionally come up with dozens of interpretations that really are not valid - and even include better "supporting evidence" than I've seen given for porn, er, slash. Some people, unintentionally it seems, regularly come up with interpretations that are utter drek.
I know it's nice and politically correct to say so, Marina, but you really can't think every interpretation is valid, can you? Any yahoo with access to the Internet and rudimentary typing skills can post spurious information about anything they dang well please. There's no way I will simply accept everything I read at face value and assign them equal validity. Sure, everyone has a right to their own personal interpretations, but other people should be obliged to discriminate for themselves and toss out those that really *aren't* valid. I toss a lot, especially where slash is involved. (zeeK, I need more cookies!).
Liser:
> I just don't happen to
> be of the school of thought that equates any expression of deep
> emotion between two men with slash.
I just wanted to quote and agree with Liser for once. <vbg>
And I absolutely reserve the right to make fun of the spurious, ridiculous and horribly "forced" interpretations of scenes imagined simply to provide fuel for the slashers out there.
-Rob (If I said I opposed "invalid interpretations", someone out there would inevitably think I'm discriminating against the views of the physically handicapped) (insert smiley here)
SenseiRob@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 08:59:56 -0400
From: Ace!Miracle <ke731458@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
Marina:
> > My argument is that any and all interpretations are valid.
SenseiRob:
> Eeeeek! That's so not true. I can intentionally come up with dozens of
> interpretations that really are not valid
I would agree with this, and add that just because you can argue something
doesn't mean it's right. I could make the case that _Moby Dick_ is really
about the British occupation of Ireland. I could do this with just the
text itself.
> and even include better "supporting evidence" than I've seen given for
> porn, er, slash.
Using scenes X, Y, and Z as "evidence" and completing ignoring everything
else is what I have problems with. People will latch on to something in
isolation, then use that part to represent the whole.
That, and I honestly think some slashers will slash anyone. I personally
don't mind slash, although most pairings make me say "Uh, no." (comet and
I had "fun" at lunch one day thinking of the squickiest pairs we could.
Then we shared our pain with Liser.)
> Some people, unintentionally it seems, regularly come up with
> interpretations that are utter drek.
See previous statement about Moby Dick.
> And I absolutely reserve the right to make fun of the spurious,
> ridiculous and horribly "forced" interpretations of scenes imagined
> simply to provide fuel for the slashers out there.
I thought you had already claimed the right to make fun of anyone about
anything. <g>
--Miracle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"What a show. The Barry Williams show. It's my show. Dysfunctional excess
is all it took for my success. And when the punches start to fly, the
ratings always reach so high."
--Peter Gabriel, "The Barry Williams Show"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minor Major Miracle: Time Lady, Jedi Knight, Occasional Grad Student
NOW IN STORES: PETER GABRIEL'S "UP"!
See the video for "The Barry Williams Show" at petergabriel.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:20:19 EDT
From: Dotiran@aol.com
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
In a message dated 9/24/2002 6:54:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
mac.westie@verizon.net writes:
> . If you are on a board where you
> don't
> > like the topic, find another one, or bring up a topic YOU want to
> discuss.
>
Nina says:
> EXCUSE me?
>
Sometimes when I see things like that first sentence up there I think what is
meant is -don't -respond- to- this- topic -unless -you -agree -with- me, and
-if -you -disagree- with- me- or- the -subject - keep -out. -
That of course would be unlistlike. :)
So for what it is worth, though I have had my share of tussles with Nina over
other issues, on this one I agree with her fully. Prescinding from the whole
fanfic issue in general, slash [especially with DM] is, and ever shall be
character rape.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:29:55 -0400
From: jjswbt@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now but hopefully not for much longer
I said:
>> >What I object to is the claim that some (and only some) fanfic writers
>> >make - that there is evidence on screen to support a Joe/Methos pairing.
>>>Everyone's imagination is free to run wild ... claiming it is *not* all
>> >in your imagination is what ticks me off.
Marina:
>>But how do you explain the fact
>>that hundreds of fans will all think the *same* scene is slashy?
>>(I know - we're all depraved? More likely the HL slash community
>>isn't that big and we all influence each other?)
I think that certain "types" of scenes shout "slash" to those who are so inclined. It's always (almost always) the same "type of scene..so it's no wonder that hundreds of fans see the same thing at the same time. Even I can recognize many of those scenes because I know what to look for...even though I *don't* see them as slashy.
Lisa agrees with me (or I with her):
>I think there is a...quality that slash fans look for in a given
>scene. I'm not sure what that quality *is*--how to name it--and
>there are certainly more than one, total. But I think those
>qualities are somewhat universal in slashdom.
Exactly. It's rather like pornography..hard to describe but you know it when you see it. (Oh..wait.)(Slash often *is* pornographic, isn't it?)(Hmmmmmmm) Let two men be partners and let one get injured and the other come to his aid...and *slash*. Let one man pour out his heart about some woman who did him wrong while his friend sits quietly and listens...and *slash*. Let two men play football and tackle each other and ...*slash*. Let an older man offer to mentor a younger man and...*slash*. And , of course, my favorite... let two men be in the same scene and never speak to each other but have them both be cute and ....*slash*.
>One of the most famous "evidence of slashy subtext" scenes in HL is
>the nose-painting in Chivalry. People who are inclined toward slash
>interpret it as couched in sexuality. People who are
>not...well...don't. So, perhaps that quality that I mentioned above
>is really more of a mind-set?
Perhaps. The first time I saw that scene, I was taken by the playful quality of Methos. I thought it was kinda cool that the old guy was still "kid" enough to paint someone's nose - using that silliness to break the otherwise serious mood of the moment. I didn't see any sexual attraction at all. Now I can watch it and say "yes, I see where someone might see that as slashy" but it still doesn't "feel" slashy to me. I still see two buddies goofing around. But then I am still naive ::cough cough:::: enough to believe that two men *can* goof around with each other and not have any homoerotic urges.
Liser again:
>I am not a fan of the Qui-Gon/Obi-Wan
>pairing, but I watched that death scene in TPM and just KNEW people
>were going to slash the hell out of it. :-)
As I knew that Boromir's death scene was going to be slashed over and over and over again. It appears that a man may not express regret at the death of his friend without finding himself mercilessly "slashed." (Actually, the whole concept of LOTR slash makes me more than a bit crazy.)(You just *can't* take my favorite book since I was about 11 and do *that* to my favorite characters!)
>I'd be curious to know whether or not someone like me--a non-slash
>fan--has ever watched a show and decided independent of outside
>(fandom) influence that any two given characters must be homosexually
>interested in one another, despite the fact that it's never displayed
>as such on the show.
I can't swear that the thought never crossed my mind but I can not for the life of me cite an example. Ok...yes I can. "Alias Smith and Jones". I was...young ....the whole concept of homosexuality was (finally) clear to me..and here were two guys cruising the Old West together. But then they started dating saloon girls and I dropped the idea. Even back then, I was frighteningly literal (Some might say I lack imagination)(They would be wrong).
I suppose I simply don't have any "need" (psychologically, creatively, etc) to imagine that a proportion of the male TV Character universe is buggering any other proportion of the male TV character universe when the cameras stop rolling.
Wendy(Slash is wrong!)(Wrong, I tell you!!!)
Fairy Killer
jjswbt@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~jjswbt/index.html
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:29:19 EDT
From: Dotiran@aol.com
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
> > My argument is that any and all interpretations are valid.
>
> Eeeeek! That's so not true. ......
> I know it's nice and politically correct to say so, Marina, but you really
> can't think every interpretation is valid, can you?
Subjectivism is so widespread in our age that I wouldn't doubt many more here
believe all interpretations are valid. A favorite expression these days is
"there's your truth and there's my truth." Hogwash. While perceptions may
vary, truth is, well, truth. Finding it. Recognizing that there are many
paths to it. Now that is the hard part. But as a wise sage once said "Just
because the blind man cannot see it, does not mean that the sun does not
shine."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 11:42:51 -0500
From: beccaelizabeth <beccaelizabeth@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
>(Actually, the whole concept of LOTR slash makes me >more than a bit crazy.)(You just *can't* take my >favorite book since I was about 11 and do *that* to my >favorite characters!)
but even from the book, it sooo easy...
no girls anywhere, all the important relationships being pairs of men, I
mean I've been reading it since I was eight so it didnt occur to me
until the movie but really...
> I'd be curious to know whether or not someone like
> me--a non-slash fan--has ever watched a show and
>decided independent of outside (fandom) influence
>that any two given characters must be homosexually
> interested in one another, despite the fact that
> it's never displayed as such on the show.
Well my mom saw Frodo/Sam from the first time she saw FotR. But that
hardly counts because (a) its hardly subtle and (b) she been hanging
around with me way too much.
>>Which makes me think that Peter Wingfield is inclined
>> toward slash too, or at least not bothered
>> by the idea.
>Personally, it makes me inclined to think that Peter >knows how to work a room. :-)
nodnodnodnodnod happy grin
soooo playing with the audience.
but then theres also his comments in the watcher thingy. I think he's
just happily twisted too. :-)
I actually ended up in a discussion of slash on a totally unrelated list
(devoted to forteana, weird phenomena. weirdness covers a whole lot of
topics and it a real community there with regular posters telling just
about their lives.) Its weird how the meme spreads. you will be
assimilated...
while we're doing the fanfic discussion, I'm of the no money no harm
school of thought. culture has always been a communal thing, not just
handed down from above. why stop now? there is a line though- I dont
write fanfic about books and I dont make film of TV shows. seems like a
bit too much cheek either way. Tho I seen some rather neat star wars
fan films, so even then I guess I would see a distinction between
playing with the characters and playing with the world. Larry Niven had
this whole essay about how its cool when fans play in the universes he
builds, I got it around here somewhere. Not all writers mind fanfic.
some people take it too far though, or end up getting sulky because some
writer takes their official world in the same direction as some fanfic
world they odds are havent heard of. I do write fanfic, and I do play
with canon characters, mostly because they seem to have thrown my
favourite away already, so why not rescue him out their trash can. But
as long as people acknowledge they only borrowing and dont try to make
money out of it I dont see the bad, really.
later
beccaelizabeth
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/4212
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 18:56:22 +0200
From: Marina Bailey <tmar@sifl.iid.co.za>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
Nina wrote:
>Doesn't that pretty much concede that there is NO "homoerotic subtext" (or
>whatever it's called this week) onscreen on HL:TS? Because if there WERE,
>then slash writers wouldn't have much of a challenge, would they?
Yes. But then I never said there was. Certain scenes can be
interpreted as slashy if a person likes slash, but I know
very well they weren't meant that way. Like I said, I don't
watch the show for the slash; that's what fanfic is for. (Whoops,
I've done it now.)
>If "believable" is what the writers are going for, then there are a LOT of
>failures out there in slashland, because I've never found a story anything
>other than laughable that portrayed DM, Methos or Richie as other than100%
>hetero.
You haven't, but I have. I've read quite a lot of slash stories about
the various characters that I thought were believable. Then again,
I find it hard to read slash about Richie. Which makes me think (I
do not intend this in a disparaging way) that there is a connection
between how one feels about a character personally and whether one
feels they might do something "like that". I'm not calling anyone
homophobic - I feel that way about Richie myself - it might be
something worth exploring.
On another (Due South) list, someone wrote that it wouldn't bother
her if either of the Rays were gay, just if Fraser was. Because she
liked Fraser and saw him as the "moral centre" of the show. Huh? So
gay people can't be moral? Or if he were gay, he would no longer be
moral? I don't get it. But then, I find it hard to slash Richie, so
there you go.
>>I think I'd be flattered.
>Then you are a saint.
You saw it here first, folks. :)
>Or you are not being serious or completely candid.
I'm totally serious; I think it's that I'd be thrilled to know
someone noticed and liked my stuff enough to mess with my universe.
- Marina.
\\ "You've heard it said that living well is ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// the best revenge? Au contraire - living || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ forever is the best revenge." - Lacroix ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
//=====Marina Bailey====tmar@sifl.iid.co.za====|| \\
\\=============Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie============//
"There is a Daniel Jackson-shaped hole in that show." - My brother,
about the sixth season of Stargate SG-1.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:50:22 -0400
From: Ace!Miracle <ke731458@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
Wendy:
> (Actually, the whole concept of LOTR slash makes me more than a bit
> crazy.)(You just *can't* take my >favorite book since I was about 11 and
> do *that* to my >favorite characters!)
becca:
> no girls anywhere, all the important relationships being pairs of men, I
> mean I've been reading it since I was eight so it didnt occur to me
> until the movie but really...
For an interesting history of homosocial relationships in English
literature, see Eve Sedgewick's _Between Men_. I'd like to see her take on
LotR. (It's not a light read, but it's not too heavy.) I think Tolkien is
continuing this tradition.
> while we're doing the fanfic discussion, I'm of the no money no harm
> school of thought. culture has always been a communal thing, not just
> handed down from above. why stop now? there is a line though- I dont
> write fanfic about books and I dont make film of TV shows. seems like a
> bit too much cheek either way.
Why? I'm just curious. Aren't they all cut from the same mold?
--Miracle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"i sing through the land, the land sings through me, sky blue. reaching
into the deepest shade of, sky blue." --Peter Gabriel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minor Major Miracle: Time Lady, Jedi Knight, Occasional Grad Student
IN STORES NOW: PETER GABRIEL'S "UP"!
See the video for "The Barry Williams Show" at petergabriel.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 14:23:44 -0400
From: KLZ <kzimmerman3@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
Marina Bailey wrote:
>
> On another (Due South) list, someone wrote that it wouldn't bother
> her if either of the Rays were gay, just if Fraser was.
You're talking about a guy who pins his wallet to his underwear.
;-) I think Fraser would be the same way about the issue as
Duncan. If it wasn't part of his upbringing or he was raised to
believe it was wrong, then he wouldn't go that way, even though his
compassion wouldn't allow him to judge others who did.
> >>I think I'd be flattered.
> >Then you are a saint.
>
> You saw it here first, folks. :)
>
:::: choking ::::
> >Or you are not being serious or completely candid.
>
> I'm totally serious; I think it's that I'd be thrilled to know
> someone noticed and liked my stuff enough to mess with my universe.
>
Well, let's turn it around. Let's say that you've created a
wonderful, sympathetic, brave character who is 100% gay. You've
created a believable universe for him to live in, with a partner
that he adores.
Now, let's say that I come along, take your character, write a
story that puts him in a "homosexual recovery" program, and ends up
with him standing on a platform holding hands with <insert name of
televangelist here> and Anita Bryant and singing "It's a Small
World After All". I put this f*nf*c up on the Internet and it's
widely distributed all over the world. The story becomes so widely
known that eventually, people are arguing that they can see, from
the first episode, that the character was really straight all
along.
Wouldn't your halo tip a bit?
ZK
kzimmerman3@co.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:58:43 -0500
From: beccaelizabeth <beccaelizabeth@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
>A favorite expression these days is
> "there's your truth and there's my truth."
what was the B5 quote...
understanding is a three edged sword
my side, your side and the truth
cant even remember the episode now. been way to long since I watched.
Anyways.
I just started studying Art History at college (second lesson today) and
there was a thing about what is art history, and methods of looking at a
picture. First teacher explained four different methods, formalism,
iconographic, something I forgot the name of already that boils down to
its all about the money, and feminist. Then all into groups and had to
describe the same picture by each of these methods. four wildly
different descriptions followed. Kinda fun.
So you can do the same thing looking at Highlander- lots of different
ways to look at it. Feminist interpretation, what does the show tell us
about the perception of women these days and how we perceive they were
perceived in the different ages of Highlander past. Or slash
interpretation, are there homoerotic themes, can certain scenes be
interpreted as homoerotic. Probably the writers didnt think much about
either way. so what you get is subconscious, unintentional, or just a
funky mirror for opinion?
interpretations are valid as long as they are phrased as 'I hear' not
'this is saying'. On account of no one else being in your head with you
so if you say you hear/see/whatever that likely true.
and *interesting*
what TPTB thought they were saying with Highlander is just half the
conversation, yes? All us bring ideas to it too. what people see in
art can be as interesting as the art itself.
beccaelizabeth
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/4212
Fans are viewers who speak back to the networks and the producers, who
assert their right to make judgments and to express opinions about the
development of favorite programs.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 19:51:32 +0100
From: Jette Goldie <jette@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
> > Several well known authors, including Lois McMasters
> > Bujold, started out in fan fiction.
>
> Who?
<shakes head> She's only one of the biggest names
in SF these days. You'd have to be living in a cave to
miss her - even the non-SF fans have heard of her
in my experience.
Jette
(aka Vinyaduriel)
"Work for Peace and remain fiercely loving" - Jim Byrnes
jette@blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://bosslady.tripod.com/fanfic.html
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 19:57:22 +0100
From: Jette Goldie <jette@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now but hopefully not for much
longer
>(Actually, the whole concept of LOTR slash makes me more than a bit
>crazy.)(You just *can't* take my favorite book since I was about 11 and >do
*that* to my favorite characters!)
Can I join you on that bench, Wendy? :-)
Jette
(aka Vinyaduriel)
"Work for Peace and remain fiercely loving" - Jim Byrnes
jette@blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://bosslady.tripod.com/fanfic.html
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 21:42:01 +0200
From: Marina Bailey <tmar@sifl.iid.co.za>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
ZK wrote:
>Now, let's say that I come along, take your character, write a
>story that puts him in a "homosexual recovery" program, [snip]
>The story becomes so widely
>known that eventually, people are arguing that they can see, from
>the first episode, that the character was really straight all
>along.
>Wouldn't your halo tip a bit?
Um, no? It's fiction; what do I care? I know that people read
things into stuff that isn't there.
(Speaking of such, I was reading some recaps of "Smallville" and
the person doing the recaps - a guy, I think - keeps on making
slashy comments about Clark and Lex. He certainly acts as though
it's obvious that there is a slashy subtext.) (The recaps are
hilarious, BTW. He keeps calling Clark "Superstalker" and
"Supermope" and referring to Clark's father as some character
he played in a show I've never seen.) (There are lots of snarky
comments etc.)
- Marina.
\\ "You've heard it said that living well is ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// the best revenge? Au contraire - living || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ forever is the best revenge." - Lacroix ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
//=====Marina Bailey====tmar@sifl.iid.co.za====|| \\
\\=============Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie============//
"There is a Daniel Jackson-shaped hole in that show." - My brother,
about the sixth season of Stargate SG-1.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 21:15:36 +0100
From: beccaelizabeth <r.day@netcom.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Well & truly a slash thing now
>> there is a line though- I dont write fanfic
>>about books and I dont make film of TV shows.
>> seems like a bit too much cheek either way.
>
> Why? I'm just curious.
> Aren't they all cut from the same mold?
probably yes. that is where I personally put a line. There are some
stories or methods of storytelling that work well in one medium but not
another. There are things about Highlander that are a pain to write but
easier to film- fights on paper are difficult. You also dont get to
hear characters thoughts on tv (in Highlander style stories anyways) and
that means written stuff gives you new angles. I guess it feels more
like bringing something new to the creation if you change media.
Mind you theres fun to be had with borrowing bits of film of same actor
different character, or different shows with the same locations, and mix
and matching them. That can get very creative.
Thinking about it I dont mean that I think other people writing fanfic
after books or filming bits of TV shows is too much cheek, IF they dont
try and steal credit from the original work. I thought up the rule for
me after I came across some fanfic based on a TV series which was in
turn based on a series of books one of my friends was rather passionate
about, and the fanfic authors did not seem aware of the original work at
all. They knew which actors were involved, but not who created the
world in the first place. which annoyed me. so when trying to figure
why I sort of decided that fanfic after books was a bit cheeky. If I
try and be logical about it then the rule doesnt work, specially since
some of the best stuff I've read recently has been shared universe
stuff, where one famous author invites others to play in their
playground. (yes I know the key word there is invites.) that Niven
essay, cant find it is in the boxes (waist high all round the edge of
the room). He said something like he creates the playground and then
when others go have fun there then thats proper use of playground
equipment. So fanfic writing in a book universe can be cool too. I
dont do it because... well I guess in large part because I can imagine
the authors who inspire me looking at my little bit of a
story and laughing. the bad way. if they even bothered to do that.
has been a while since I thought about this and it turning out to be not
so much a rule as a phobia. oops.
beccaelizabeth
engage brain, *then* type. gotta remember that.
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 23 Sep 2002 to 24 Sep 2002 - Special issue (#2002-154)
*******************************************************************************