The Ramble Queen_of_Snapes asked for
Sep. 20th, 2012 07:42 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
therealsnapeIn the 24-question meme, ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
queen_of_snapes chose: just ramble on on something related to fandom - go, go, go. I asked for a bit of time to sort out my thoughts, and she must have despaired of ever getting an answer.
But here I turn up, like a bad Knut, with a not so little ramble. But then, she knows I'm a waffler.
One of the things in fandom that sometimes manage to annoy me a little is the focus on pairings and sex-scenes. There are a great many fandoms in which there might be excellent stories, if only one wouldn't want to come up with a pairing.
I should begin by explaining my ideas of a good fanfiction story. These ideas are strictly my personal opinion; many excellent writers will disagree completely, of course. It's just about what I like to write and read - a personal opinion, nothing more.
I love canon-compliantness - to a degree. I'm not a fan of the kind of stories that JKR once so aptly described as tales beginning with, "Hi, I'm Lily Evans, and you all thought I was dead - but I'm not!" On the other hand, I can live with ignoring the epilogue, since that's so clearly not a part of the 7-year story, but an attempt to rule from beyond the Veil. As to Pottermore and interview canon, I'm firmly of the If you think it's important, write another book school of thought.
But other than that, I like my stories to be possible and believable within the framework of the original story. Which is why I love the Potter-fandom so much: there's this whole set of fascinating older characters, and since the books are told strictly from Harry's point of view, we know little or nothing about their private lives and private interactions. There are a few, small glimpses: Molly and Tonks having a woman-to-woman talk; Minerva who has known Augusta at school; Griselda who is such a great friend of Augusta.
For the others, we are free to make up their relationships as we see fit. But in quite a few other fandoms, in my opinion, the need for pairings leads to 'we must have a pairing; so we'll bed the main characters, regardless of the personal inclination of the character or the intention of the writer'.
And when I say 'intention of the writer' I don't mean: did the writer plan a sex-life for their characters. JKR mostly didn't where her older characters are concerned. It doesn't stop me from writing those relationships, based on what I mentioned above. What I do mean is: given the way the relationship is described in the books, is there any likelyhood that these two might fall in love? This is why I will never write Sybill/Minerva. The books make it perfectly clear that Minerva doesn't even like her - I can't see these two fall in love based on what we know from canon.
Severus/Minerva? Yes. Harry sees the bickering - that may well be UST. Or RST. He just doesn't realise it. What we know from canon doesn't completely preclude the relationship in my eyes.
When it comes to this stress on pairings I mentioned, Downton Abbey, for me, is a case in point. Quite often the discussion isn't 'which stories are worth telling', but 'whom can we pair the character with'. And the downside of Downton as a fandom is that it's rather hard to find pairings other than the canon ones. There's the three daughters of the house, who are at an age in which people usually look for life partners, and sure enough they find one. But those stories are told on screen, and while one may fill in missing moments, and write excellent stories with those moments, one can't change much about the course of things. At least, I, since I prefer to write canon-compliant, couldn't.
And then there's the Downton singletons, but it's not easy to find someone with whom one might pair them realistically.
Carson/Mrs Hughes, yes. I can see how that might work very well.
But O'Brien? Mrs Hughes, possibly, in terms of age and opportunity. Especially since Mrs is a job-related courtesy title - you don't have to explain away a heterosexual backstory and she does refuse the man who proposes. But the downside is, never in the series do I get the impression that Mrs Hughes even likes O'Brien, leave alone that she might fall for her. And on quite a few occasions there seems to be active dislike on Hughes's side.
Or Isobel/Violet? Well, that would take some doing on both sides. Mind, a good author might write a convincing story. But what I'd be really interested in is their back stories. As gen fic. And O'Brien's inner life. Notably how she deals with what she did to Cora, and how it changes her. Or a fic exploring the friendship between O'Brien and Thomas; they are introduced as firm allies from the start, but what makes them so?
Mind, I don't mean to say none of the Downton characters should have a sex-life. But it might have to involve OC's. And for those who don't like to write OC's, there might be very interesting stories if one lets go of the idea of pairing the characters up.
The same goes for the Inspector Lewis series. There's a strong tendency to pair him with Hathaway. But while a good writer could convince me that Hathaway might be in love with (or have a crush on) Lewis, I can't see it the other way around, because we know too much about Lewis's inclinations. Everything we've ever learned about him, both in this series and in Morse, points to the fact that he's heterosexual and self-identifies as such. Pairing him with Hathaway would make him OOC to me.
There are countless other examples. Wooster/Jeeves stories. P.G. Wodehouse wrote countless Wooster & Jeeves stories, but I very much doubt that either of these two characters would truly prefer the other over all other men (and, in Wooster's case, all other women). Of course, if a writer wants to write m/m within the Jeeves stories, theirs are the first two names that spring to mind. (Although I'd find Jeeves/Roderick Glossop much more likely, and doable within canon.) But Jeeves/Wooster feels to me as a 'we must have a pairing; so we'll bed the main characters' case.
So, yes, this tendency to run an online dating agency is one thing I regret. The other thing is the strong focus on the explicit sex scene. Mind, it can be beautifully done; it can be a vital scene in a story; there are all sorts of excellent reasons for writing sex scenes.
But occasionally the reason seems to be 'must have sex scene'. To the point where people almost apologise if their sign up contains a request for maximum PG-13. Or they very carefully hint that 'it would be perfectly all right to fade out at the sex scene'.
In fact, quite a few sex-scenes in my stories were added because the fest had a mandatory rating (my stories for femmeslash day, Yule Balls, and femmefest notably). I didn't enjoy writing those scenes, and I don't think they add all that much to the stories. These days I carefully limit myself to fests where I can do as I see fit. Sometimes that's explicit sex, when the story asks for it, and sometimes it's not. And when the story asks for it, I suddenly find it the greatest possible fun to write.
Well, that was my not so little ramble.
queen_of_snapes chose: just ramble on on something related to fandom - go, go, go. I asked for a bit of time to sort out my thoughts, and she must have despaired of ever getting an answer. But here I turn up, like a bad Knut, with a not so little ramble. But then, she knows I'm a waffler.
One of the things in fandom that sometimes manage to annoy me a little is the focus on pairings and sex-scenes. There are a great many fandoms in which there might be excellent stories, if only one wouldn't want to come up with a pairing.
I should begin by explaining my ideas of a good fanfiction story. These ideas are strictly my personal opinion; many excellent writers will disagree completely, of course. It's just about what I like to write and read - a personal opinion, nothing more.
I love canon-compliantness - to a degree. I'm not a fan of the kind of stories that JKR once so aptly described as tales beginning with, "Hi, I'm Lily Evans, and you all thought I was dead - but I'm not!" On the other hand, I can live with ignoring the epilogue, since that's so clearly not a part of the 7-year story, but an attempt to rule from beyond the Veil. As to Pottermore and interview canon, I'm firmly of the If you think it's important, write another book school of thought.
But other than that, I like my stories to be possible and believable within the framework of the original story. Which is why I love the Potter-fandom so much: there's this whole set of fascinating older characters, and since the books are told strictly from Harry's point of view, we know little or nothing about their private lives and private interactions. There are a few, small glimpses: Molly and Tonks having a woman-to-woman talk; Minerva who has known Augusta at school; Griselda who is such a great friend of Augusta.
For the others, we are free to make up their relationships as we see fit. But in quite a few other fandoms, in my opinion, the need for pairings leads to 'we must have a pairing; so we'll bed the main characters, regardless of the personal inclination of the character or the intention of the writer'.
And when I say 'intention of the writer' I don't mean: did the writer plan a sex-life for their characters. JKR mostly didn't where her older characters are concerned. It doesn't stop me from writing those relationships, based on what I mentioned above. What I do mean is: given the way the relationship is described in the books, is there any likelyhood that these two might fall in love? This is why I will never write Sybill/Minerva. The books make it perfectly clear that Minerva doesn't even like her - I can't see these two fall in love based on what we know from canon.
Severus/Minerva? Yes. Harry sees the bickering - that may well be UST. Or RST. He just doesn't realise it. What we know from canon doesn't completely preclude the relationship in my eyes.
When it comes to this stress on pairings I mentioned, Downton Abbey, for me, is a case in point. Quite often the discussion isn't 'which stories are worth telling', but 'whom can we pair the character with'. And the downside of Downton as a fandom is that it's rather hard to find pairings other than the canon ones. There's the three daughters of the house, who are at an age in which people usually look for life partners, and sure enough they find one. But those stories are told on screen, and while one may fill in missing moments, and write excellent stories with those moments, one can't change much about the course of things. At least, I, since I prefer to write canon-compliant, couldn't.
And then there's the Downton singletons, but it's not easy to find someone with whom one might pair them realistically.
Carson/Mrs Hughes, yes. I can see how that might work very well.
But O'Brien? Mrs Hughes, possibly, in terms of age and opportunity. Especially since Mrs is a job-related courtesy title - you don't have to explain away a heterosexual backstory and she does refuse the man who proposes. But the downside is, never in the series do I get the impression that Mrs Hughes even likes O'Brien, leave alone that she might fall for her. And on quite a few occasions there seems to be active dislike on Hughes's side.
Or Isobel/Violet? Well, that would take some doing on both sides. Mind, a good author might write a convincing story. But what I'd be really interested in is their back stories. As gen fic. And O'Brien's inner life. Notably how she deals with what she did to Cora, and how it changes her. Or a fic exploring the friendship between O'Brien and Thomas; they are introduced as firm allies from the start, but what makes them so?
Mind, I don't mean to say none of the Downton characters should have a sex-life. But it might have to involve OC's. And for those who don't like to write OC's, there might be very interesting stories if one lets go of the idea of pairing the characters up.
The same goes for the Inspector Lewis series. There's a strong tendency to pair him with Hathaway. But while a good writer could convince me that Hathaway might be in love with (or have a crush on) Lewis, I can't see it the other way around, because we know too much about Lewis's inclinations. Everything we've ever learned about him, both in this series and in Morse, points to the fact that he's heterosexual and self-identifies as such. Pairing him with Hathaway would make him OOC to me.
There are countless other examples. Wooster/Jeeves stories. P.G. Wodehouse wrote countless Wooster & Jeeves stories, but I very much doubt that either of these two characters would truly prefer the other over all other men (and, in Wooster's case, all other women). Of course, if a writer wants to write m/m within the Jeeves stories, theirs are the first two names that spring to mind. (Although I'd find Jeeves/Roderick Glossop much more likely, and doable within canon.) But Jeeves/Wooster feels to me as a 'we must have a pairing; so we'll bed the main characters' case.
So, yes, this tendency to run an online dating agency is one thing I regret. The other thing is the strong focus on the explicit sex scene. Mind, it can be beautifully done; it can be a vital scene in a story; there are all sorts of excellent reasons for writing sex scenes.
But occasionally the reason seems to be 'must have sex scene'. To the point where people almost apologise if their sign up contains a request for maximum PG-13. Or they very carefully hint that 'it would be perfectly all right to fade out at the sex scene'.
In fact, quite a few sex-scenes in my stories were added because the fest had a mandatory rating (my stories for femmeslash day, Yule Balls, and femmefest notably). I didn't enjoy writing those scenes, and I don't think they add all that much to the stories. These days I carefully limit myself to fests where I can do as I see fit. Sometimes that's explicit sex, when the story asks for it, and sometimes it's not. And when the story asks for it, I suddenly find it the greatest possible fun to write.
Well, that was my not so little ramble.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-09-21 12:18 pm (UTC)I'm completely with you here! Though if you don't mind me jumping here with a little train of thought I've been having on just those two, I think that this is perhaps where "femslash" would be too anachronistic a category for those two -- if we consider stories as "femslash" where there is a romantic, sexual, or erotic attachment between women that is understandable to us 21st-century westerners as "lesbian" (rather than, I believe, what has been termed -- not quite fortunately, I think -- "lesbian-like", or otherwise non-heterosexual/queer).
But here we have an opinionated, conservative, aristocratic dowager and an opinionated, value-conservative and otherwise probably liberal-bourgeois upper-middle-class philanthropist, who don't even like each other (but may be drawn to each other in other ways, say, as sparrings partners.) In the hands of a good writer, I can imagine their banter turning towards some unspoken, subtle erotic tension that lies more in the game and the exercise of brains and wits than in physical attraction, but taking it too far could easily make the story implausible. There exists a piece of writing by a bourgeois feminist who lived with a woman (and whose attitudes I'd mine if I were to write Isobel getting a kick out of being with women), and in it she says that she considers it in her interest to establish women not as sexual beings but as persons with brains. She therefore advised sexual ascetisism to unmarried feminists, which however would not mean renouncing to (a) eroticism because that could be had in intellectual contact with other women, and (b) motherhood because that could be had through social work. I'm sure there were English women who thought like that, given that the Germans had those ideas from English and American feminists in the first place.
So no, like you, I can't see how Violet and Isobel could have an "affair" that people today would recognise as one. Physical elation, unspoken and perhaps even unacknowledged attraction, though? I think that could work. But I'm not sure it could be called "femslash"...
(no subject)
Date: 2012-09-21 12:28 pm (UTC)The Dowager, I don't think so.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-09-21 06:41 pm (UTC)It's about time you wrote another fic.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-09-22 05:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-09-22 05:11 pm (UTC)Yes, definitely! It could be a relationship with a strong erotic charge, but I think very, very unlikely that it would be in the sense of a sexual partnership or that they would see themselves as a "couple" or even as having an "affair" in the commonly-understood sense of the term. (That is, I'm not sure I could see Violet/Isobel as having this sort of erotically-charged friendship, but I think either could have one with someone else.)
Your bourgeois feminist sounds similar to things I've read by 19th and early 20th century American women, too -- they recognize a whole world of intense emotional and erotic possibilities (often very consciously politically-defined) that doesn't depend on either genital contact or on "couplehood." Not that the writers state this view as explicitly and directly as I did here -- they would usually put it in mainstream het terms, using "marriage" both as itself and as a sort of shorthand/euphemism for sex in general. But in some ways, they had a wider (or at least different) understanding of "sex" and of the erotic than many people do in the 21stC, who so often see things in genital terms with orgasm as the goal/purpose.
You know that's why so many historical women that the 21st-century wants to call (in hindsight) "lesbian" -- women in Boston marriages, for instance -- quite honestly (and sometimes indignantly) repudiated that category when it was offered to them. They really didn't see themselves as woman-loving in that sense. I've seen current writers just dismiss these responses as either flat-out lies or as sad and pitiable self-hatred or denial, but while this assessment may be true for some, it ignores the possibility that women of the past were really working with a different paradigm than the one we're trying to impose on them.
I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but I can so easily see the Downton women (Isobel especially, and maybe Mrs Hughes) fitting so well into the pre-sexologist way of looking.