(no subject)
Jan. 15th, 2003 08:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
petroniaThis is for ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
metempsychosis; somehow the comment refuses to post.
I think my sense that boybandslash is in general better might be because I have a very definite, and large, group of preferred writers in SDBfic, and barely ever need to throw myself on the mercy of recs, which are so very subjective.
Know how that works. I'm cheerfully convinced at this point that HP produces uniformly superlative writing, and if you point me toward ffnet I'll stick my fingers in my ears and sing Lothlorien Rhapsody loudly. *g*
I still hold that 2-D was quite blatantly Damon Albarn (he even looked like him, dammit), and the whole concept of slashing /him/ made me punctuate, merely because if you were going to, wouldn't you choose Graham Coxon?
...True. Very true.
Somehow, though, "embarrassing pimply-teen fantasies" seem worse when they use real people rather than fictional characters.
This is... It *is*, and it's not a double standard, but I have to think before I pin it down. ^^; Possibly it's because wishing one could meet Julius Caesar or Madame Bovary falls entirely into the realm of abstract speculation, whereas wishing one could meet Tom Cruise is the more pathetic because strictly speaking it is possible. "Yeah, you and me both. Now go picket his next L.A. premiere and stop bothering me with your lack of a life."
Possibly it's because people are just people, famous or not, and fictional characters optimally are bigger than just people. They're archetypes, or metaphors, or representatives or placeholders. Oversharing your reaction to a Jungian archetype is less cringe-inducing than oversharing your reaction to a celeb you hallucinate is a Jungian archetype.
what's more, a characterisation that author doesn't tend to use in their own RPS. I think that's what confused me so much: it was this person's fic, and this particular fandom, but somehow also a different set of writers' RPS portrayal of [celebrity].
Perhaps on some level they thought, "Well, [set of traits] makes for an interesting character, albeit not in line with the way I think of [celebrity], so let's graft them onto someone else"?
...Oscar Wilde hobnobbing with Holmes? Now that is just wrong.
It was at one of Dr. Von Helsing's lectures. I kid not, sahib; I never kid.
metempsychosis; somehow the comment refuses to post.I think my sense that boybandslash is in general better might be because I have a very definite, and large, group of preferred writers in SDBfic, and barely ever need to throw myself on the mercy of recs, which are so very subjective.
Know how that works. I'm cheerfully convinced at this point that HP produces uniformly superlative writing, and if you point me toward ffnet I'll stick my fingers in my ears and sing Lothlorien Rhapsody loudly. *g*
I still hold that 2-D was quite blatantly Damon Albarn (he even looked like him, dammit), and the whole concept of slashing /him/ made me punctuate, merely because if you were going to, wouldn't you choose Graham Coxon?
...True. Very true.
Somehow, though, "embarrassing pimply-teen fantasies" seem worse when they use real people rather than fictional characters.
This is... It *is*, and it's not a double standard, but I have to think before I pin it down. ^^; Possibly it's because wishing one could meet Julius Caesar or Madame Bovary falls entirely into the realm of abstract speculation, whereas wishing one could meet Tom Cruise is the more pathetic because strictly speaking it is possible. "Yeah, you and me both. Now go picket his next L.A. premiere and stop bothering me with your lack of a life."
Possibly it's because people are just people, famous or not, and fictional characters optimally are bigger than just people. They're archetypes, or metaphors, or representatives or placeholders. Oversharing your reaction to a Jungian archetype is less cringe-inducing than oversharing your reaction to a celeb you hallucinate is a Jungian archetype.
what's more, a characterisation that author doesn't tend to use in their own RPS. I think that's what confused me so much: it was this person's fic, and this particular fandom, but somehow also a different set of writers' RPS portrayal of [celebrity].
Perhaps on some level they thought, "Well, [set of traits] makes for an interesting character, albeit not in line with the way I think of [celebrity], so let's graft them onto someone else"?
...Oscar Wilde hobnobbing with Holmes? Now that is just wrong.
It was at one of Dr. Von Helsing's lectures. I kid not, sahib; I never kid.
