~~ i disagree to agree to disagree :/

[reenka]

The concept of agreeing to disagree is strange to me, as is the idea that agreement is therefore the goal of debate or dialogue-type discourse to start with.

Thinking about this, it seems like a major fallacy. The continuous process of thinking would seem to rely on the formulation of questions, rather than that of ready rhetoric, thereafter merely used for comparison with others'. If your goal is to consider a topic, the idea of agreeing to disagree implies that your opinion is somehow intrinsically right and moreover unshakeable, and that talking about it is basically a pleasant exercise in wagging your mouth or fingers.

I'm not saying that having an opinion is somehow bad or unhealthy, but I've come across people saying "let's just agree to disagree" often enough so that now it just annoys me, whether it's said to me personally or not. It's like one of those no-no's in conversation from a list of "Nazi Conversation Tactics" I've come across on the internet once (or whatever it was called). It really kills discourse and it's just awful because there's nothing you can say to it by definition.

I suppose I'm an unusual case because I almost never disagree with anyone 100%. Everything is a question of degree, and it's within the degrees of truth that the question of refinement and improvement lies. It becomes apparent that most people who engage in so-called "intelligent conversation" don't really care about thinking (which should really be termed re-thinking, because it's not like one only thinks -once- and that's it, job done). Neither do they care about the search for the "truth", assuming that truth is worth searching for or even exists outside of the minds of some fanatics who think they've touched the mind of god. That, or they're mathematicians. Hee. Kidding.

I've noticed that a significant number of semi-random people friend me, so supposedly they read what I say, and yet the amount of replies I get is significantly lower than that of some people who're "plebes" or don't say much beyond "I had pizza today" or whose fics are questionable quality at best. (Bitter? Meeeee?) The greatest amount of discussion, whether from my own posts or those of others' seems to involve instances when people disagree strenuously, most often for personal reasons, like when I've hit upon a pet-peeve or project of theirs, so somehow I've become immensely relevant all of a sudden. If I'm just talking in general non-offensive terms, I'm not all that relevant, I guess, so discussion's at a standstill. Lasair tells me it's because what I say is either entirely convincing or I'm just confusing, neither of which inspires much commentary. And of course, it's not as if I -want- a bunch of me-too's. If anything, because hive-minds are scary, man.

I find it interesting that agreement means silence. The silence of the majority, I suppose. I also find it interesting that this complete agreement is even possible on a large scale. On the other hand, the very duality of agreement/disagreement (while apparently natural) is what concerns me, of course. I don't want to be the prophet of the righteous and the morally/philosophically correct. I also don't want to be that gibbering madman in the corner. Hopefully, there's a happy medium where I can inspire questions and discover new answers by others' questions to me. It is most often in the re-thinking of my position that I really feel that wonderful buzz of sudden insight. Taken alone, my thought is necessarily constrained by a multitude of assumptions and short-cuts and biases I take for granted. It is only when someone asks why and wonders that I can wonder with them.

I don't know what the point of this is. It's not trying to make anyone agree or disagree, by god. I don't think imploring my readers to question me would do any good, since I believe you would if you wanted to. But I feel better having verbalized it, anyway.

Comments

[ashkitty.livejournal.com]

I think the stuff you say is very thoughtful, whether I agree with it at the time or not. :) But you are very meta and I am so very not-meta, and I don't usually comment on anything unless I actually have something to say, you know?

*hugs*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

*hugs!*
that's perfectly fine, hee. i think i only wonder about the people i don't know~:))

also, i'm only thoughtful when i'm not delirious or out of my mind with the need to write fluffy h/d. ehehehe. which is like, 80% of the time, y'know~:)

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

Rather than working, I'm browsing my fflist and your post struck me for 2 reasons: first of all, it *is* interesting how sometimes more analytical and sophisticated essays get little response, but I think that might go along the lines of feedback for really great and lengthy fics (like, I've been trying to f'back Telanu for several weeks now, but I have so much to say...on the other hand, I can drop a quick comment on a short story in no time); in other words, insightful posts require the same in comments (other than the much-hated-by-me word), and often people feel overwhelmed by that.

But what I really wanted to comment on was the agreeing to disagree. I never really thought about this much before teaching once again argumentative writing with a new book which started off with this (http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/tannend/argsake.htm) essay. In it, the author complains about a culture in which positions always must be taken and rather than trying to find common ground, rather than compromising, it's battle metaphors. You *win* an argument, for example. Now, this is very American as is the particular form of essay writing that lays out your pov and slams the opposition into the ground.

(My example for that would be those debates on newsshows where we have 2 or more different opponents laying out *their* opinion, often without even listening to the other...then they take turns and just jump on the one aspect they can use to yet again show *their* side...and often the entire thing ends in a shouting match at which point the moderator calls Time Out...I really wanna see one of them say just once, "You have a point there" or "Yes, i never considered this." :-)

I'm wondering, however, whether that might be related to your discomfort with "let's agree to disagree," that people know on some level that they cannot veer from their side but yearn to find common ground...even if it is in the negation of such.

[lestrange.livejournal.com]

Hey reenka,

I've recently added you and I almost always I read what you write. I love hearing what you have to say about the fandom in general and HD in specific, but sometimes I don't read everything you write because non-capped sentences and really long paragraphs put me off. (Trying to get over my fear of anything that looks like English essays. :D

To answer your query: I either don't comment because I a) don't have enough time, b) am lazy, or c) have nothing to add your thoughts, because most of the time you expound everything so well, echoing your thoughts would just be like beating a horse twice dead.

And I disagree your 'disagree to agree to disagree.' From what I've gathered, almost all of the time, people agree to disagree because they've been disagreeing for so long it would be it a waste of time to keep stating that you disagree. By then both parties would have already heard enough of each other's views to know that they can't concur with each other no matter what. So then it's good to call a truce. I mean, there's only so much you can say before you end up reiterating yourself. Hence, agreement to disagree = good to me.

*goes back to shrip shaomai*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

people know on some level that they cannot veer from their side but yearn to find common ground...even if it is in the negation of such

Wow, that seems scary, somehow. It's like...a vision of doom. People realize it's hopeless and yet "something" compels them to continue bashing their heads against the wall of their own narrow-mindedness? *laughs* Oh man.

Yeah, it's natural to want to find common ground, of course, no matter if you're reared in the American system of argument or not. On the other hand, people probably feel that they already have common ground with the people that -matter- to them, and the people who disagree -don't- matter so much, and if they're friends, then disagreeing or even arguing would invoke too many uncomfortable possibly bruised feelings, which isn't worth it, maybe?

Like, everyone takes it so personally, so that thinking isn't any sort of remotely pure pursuit of knowledge but rather a sort of networking and an exercise in human relations and group identification?

Sigh. There's usually a problem with group mentality as -well- as individualist stubbornness here. It's like, the people who "just agree" don't think at -all-, and the people who're all, "I've thought this through rigorously and I'm an intelligent free-thinker, therefore I'm god" will never really want to challenge that basic opinion of themselves.

Not many intelligent people who're willing to consider themselves ignorant in all their knowledge, I suppose~:)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Hee. Oh, it's fine, I didn't mean to be like, "YOU! Yes, you there! Why aren't you commenting?!" hee.

And see, you didn't really disagree with me because you merely brought up a point I haven't thought of before, which I can agree with. Sigh. That's what I meant-- the very idea of violent disagreement is a sign of a weak mind which refuses to question itself. Or something. *laughs*

I have in fact noticed that this `agree to disagree' thing happens when people are beating a dead horse into the ground. On the other hand, it's their fault that their communication/discourse skills are so awful that they cannot compromise and really effectively pursue their topic. I mean, I realize it happens but it's just kind of... sad.

Ideally, one should be able to kind of grow within a conversation rather than just stating opinions and trying to hit other people over the head with them like they're blunt objects, as cathexys was saying. I realize that people just "are" like that, but. It sucks.

And see, I'm working on the cap thing. I'm so altruistic it hurts >:D

[thamiris.livejournal.com]

In my experience, people are more likely to respond when their opinion is actively requested, not in a pro forma way, but from a position of active curiosity. I've found this in the classroom as well: responses will come only if I've kept the question open-ended, so that I'm not trying to force them to say what I want, and if I'm very clear that I want to hear what they have to say--and if the question itself is clear. I've tried to extend this to LJ, and I think it has worked with some success. That said, it's also my experience that meta criticism will inspire less of a response in general than non-meta simply because the former requires greater intellectual and perhaps even emotional investment.

For instance, I'm responding to your post because you seemed to be requesting a reply, but you don't actually say that, and people do like a specific question to respond to--I certainly do, because I like to have the perimeters of discussion defined, anal woman that I am.

Silence isn't always agreement, either; I've read some posts (in general) that I didn't agree with, but had neither the time nor the energy to argue my case. On the flip side, I've responded to posts that I didn't agree with only to have the LJ owner become upset, interpreting my comments as an attack and not as part of a dialogue, and I don't want to upset anyone.

[unsubtle.livejournal.com]

I've noticed as well that agreement goes silent and only the disagreement speaks out... it's a sad commentary on the negativity of today's society, really =\

--Random Friender #345902

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I rarely disagree with people 100% either--sometimes I wish I could because it would be easier if I could really believe I was right. I don't think I ever feel totally right. The other person always makes good points.

I was thinking about this a bit because of recent discussion on Aja's journal about the Slytherins. There's a quote from "The War and Modern Memory" that I really love about "the versus effect" that dominates the 20th century that so seems to apply to HP as well as everything else people talk about nowadays. I think I'm always out of step because I never agree with it. The versus effect is where you look at things as:

"one thing opposed to another, not with some Hegelian hope of synthesis involving a dissolution of both extremes (that would suggest 'a negotiated peace,'which is anathema), but with a sense that one of the poles embodies so wicked a deficiency or flaw or perversion that its total submission is called for..."

I've never been in a discussion really where I couldn't see a negotiated peace. The other side never seems so wicked it needs to be totally subdued. I think I'm just either greedy or vain--I want to be *right* not just win the argument. I don't want to lose anything of value in either side. I want it all! I'd always rather be searching for truth rather than debating to prove who argues better.

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

I disagree ENTIRELY.
You should come and talk to me about that. :)

[lestrange.livejournal.com]

Ahahahha, okay, about the caps thing. I hope you didn't get the impression that it ticks me off or something. I'm just unused to seeing it in really long paragraphs, because having everything in lower case just makes the page look like this--blob of letters, y'know. It makes it harder to follow along. (Also, caps appeal to my aesthetic tastes and just makes a person's writing look more organized and, er, sophisticated? sleek?--but that's neither here nor there.)

Anyway, like, with short posts or comments, caps don't really matter. Me, I resort to non-caps when I'm plain lazy. *g* Don't wanna cramp your natural preferences and such--just write how you like.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

heee. as you probably know, you're an example of a person with whom i'm almost always in harmony in terms of most stated opinions-- talking to you is almost like a pleasant balm for my ego, since my seeing you as intelligent or brilliant reflects rather well on myself as well. *laughs* and your very flexibility is one of the things that allows me to agree with you, i think. maybe. *is a bit confused for a moment*

it's mostly that the word "agree" doesn't fit. i don't -agree- so much as look at the same places you do a lot of the time-- it's like a looking-in-tandem, a sort of... synchronicity. i too am always uncertain, but i prize that uncertainty as the sign of a vitality of mind. i also have this desire to kind of possess the good points on all sides and synthesize. i think it's a sort of -bent- to my kind of intelligence-- the synthetizing, i mean. hmm... i think it's a feminine, emotional-intelligence sort of trait, btw.

masculine would be all about identifying and classifying and separating into groups, i would imagine. heh.

and yet, as much as i can accept other's views as partially valid, i always want to be the -most- valid-- greedy, yeah. heh.
it's a weird sort of contradiction, but i think it's all part of wanting a sort of ever-unreachable perfection where everything sort of falls into place and there's balance and harmony everywhere, in your own mind especially, and the birds start singing and harry & draco start snogging and there's much satisfaction for everyone and orgasms for harry & draco.

ahaha i'm interrupting myself from writing more gun-smut, can you tell?!? *laughs*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

<3333333333
*giggles*

your wish is my command >:D

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

*silently agrees* :>

on disagreement and agreement

[lestrange.livejournal.com]

And see, you didn't really disagree with me because you merely brought up a point I haven't thought of before, which I can agree with.

Point conceded.

the very idea of violent disagreement is a sign of a weak mind which refuses to question itself

Ahahahha, for some reason, that reminded me of my feelings for HD. I'm one of those people who refuses to read anything else (unless someone guilt-tripped me into it *g*) no matter how well-wrttien it is, and I understand it's narrow-minded, but do I care? [insert laugh here] well. that was OT.

On the other hand, it's their fault that their communication/discourse skills are so awful that they cannot compromise and really effectively pursue their topic.

I see agreeing to disagree as a compromise.

And what I said earlier about "stating," that was my lazy way of saying "carrying on an intelligent conversation." I didn't mean that people were uncivil. Just that they can only argue up to a certain point, a point where they realize they can't change the other's mind, but it's enough that the both sides acknowledge the other's point of view. That's the best time for a call to 'agree to disagree.'

Hope that makes sense.

--and a nod to what Thamiris said about silence not necessarily indicating agreement. because sometimes it doesn't. it's more of an indication of that people don't have the time or energy to invest in an argument. like me, I'd only voice dissension in LJ posts if I have the time to discuss about it.

[septembergrrl.livejournal.com]

Hi, I got here from metablog.

To me, "let's agree to disagree," basically means, "I'm tired of talking about this, and we clearly aren't persuading each other, so let's move on." It is a conversation killer; on the other hand, it can be the most graceful way to end a conversation that has turned into pointless circling. I don't say it often, but if I did, that would be why.

And I, um, agree that thoughtful disagreement is a better response to recieve than thoughtless agreement.

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

And yet...I think there are times and places where it makes sense to simply table a discussion when argument (as in rational laying out of one's claim and support) is not possible: beliefs and tastes are such things.

Belief, religion, any such things cannot be discussed, simply because they are not governed by logic or rationality but faith. Can we shake someone else's belief system? Should we? What would we gain?

Similarly, taste is nonarguable and thus falls under the agree to disagree rule. Which makes most fanfic and fandom debates so ludicrous. You like H/D and I don't...how could you support your point and I mine? You like smarm and I like bdsm...we'll just have to agree to disagree, right? *g*

Btw, I really like the concept of networking and group identification. I think that's what debate *should* be: the honest pursuit of synthesis, better knowledge, as well as understanding between the interlocutors. Rarely it is, however....and yes, it's bleak!

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Hehehe, I actually wrote a post recently... er, here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/reenka/135994.html), where I was talking about how this specialization within fanfic preferences and inevitable bias against certain pairings/characters doesn't really make sense and could (should?) be avoided simply by realizing that no pairing has to really embody the things one thinks it "always" does, and that any character can be made -human- and thus at least partially sympathetic (and simultaneously unsympathetic) to readers in general.

I'm kind of of two minds about the taste thing. I realize, of course, that you're right, people really won't budge about what they "just like" or "just dislike". And yet, in my one-year-or-so stay in the fandom, I've learned to see the attraction of many things that used to squick and disturb me, and while I don't seek them out, I don't... well... I don't dislike them "on principle" anymore, you know? I've read/written things using pairings I -hated-, that I consider well-done and worthwhile.

So I think while it's not very fruitful in general, really, there is something to be said for challenging people's preferences and beliefs. I (if I were the Ultimate Dictator Of Fearsome Power) would want everyone to -think-, basically, and never -stop- and take things as set in stone. You know, leave yourself open to being surprised. Maybe you -won't- be, 95% of the time, but then there's the other 5%. I sincerely believe that if you value something -other- than most stereotypical ideas behind certain characters, for instance, it would be easy enough to write "your kind" of H/D fic, for instance. Your particular taste in art & fiction would remain, but it would broaden at the same time. Synthesis~:)

Then again, this is because for -me-, H/D fiction isn't about the plebey stereotypes but the nature of love itself, and I would hope that this is what one might term a "universal" theme. I think, as I see them, H/D are universal. I know it's not currently well-accepted in lit-crit to refer to that, but I think that there's a common psychological basis to human beings beside their multiplicitous individuality that art & story can tap into.

As far as smarm & bdsm... okay, but no story should be defined by its kink/orientation. A story that is easily labeled like that and has only that narrow range of appeal is badfic as far as I'm concerned. A good story would appeal to a wide range of emotional needs. But that's just me & my quest for uber!fiction ;)

Still, I do agree that sometimes debate is in practical terms (rather than my idealistic babble) pointless~:)
Although I -would- want to dismantle people's resistance to scientific theory & evolution, etc., simply because the Creationists and -wrong-, man. Muwahahah, etc ^^

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Hi~:)
I guess I was questioning the very -goal- of agreement as the point in the first place. Like, saying "we aren't going to agree" means that's what the discussion -should- be heading towards: people shaking hands and nodding.

But I see how people, in practical terms, would need some way to break out of a loop, of course. I just wish ...well, I don't know, I wish people cared more about thinking new things than about making others concede their point~:)

Re: on disagreement and agreement

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Just that they can only argue up to a certain point, a point where they realize they can't change the other's mind

I suppose it's just... the mode of conversation which uses "changing of mind" as the goal is what bothers me, because I personally see value in all thoughtful things people say, so it's a process of discovery of new things rather than... er... the acquisition of minions. Or something.

But I'm beginning to think that this is just the way -I- think, and is somehow ineffably alien to a lot of others ^^

And um. I don't read much beyond H/D either. I'm a complete H/D-obsessed narrow-minded minion. Not 100%, but close enough. Then again, I'm only -in- the fandom for the H/D, so. On the other hand, I can certainly see the merits of other things, and have written other things, so I'm like... er... sort of flexible but not really :D

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Aha! I keep forgetting that whole idea of questioning people being a "Good Thing", because for some weird reason it's basically unnatural for me to interrogate anyone, friend or stranger. Maybe I'm shy, or ...I dunno, it's just something that doesn't occur to me. But it totally makes sense that people would care more if I phrased my posts in an open-ended way rather than just stating what I've come up with in the hope someone gets inspired by that to ramble back at me. Which is how -I- work, but oh well~:)

And yeah, I do see how silence wouldn't always be agreement. That's way too much of a generalization, anyway. I suppose... it's also partly that I see people who're more "popular" (in the BNF way) get a lot (like, 10-20! if not 30!) comments on their most obscure and intellectual queries, but I guess that's where the query comes in, 'cause I write rambly monologues instead. Hmmmm.....

And wow.
I got metablogged! *blushes*~:)

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

Since I answered fic preferences in your other post, I'll be short...as if *g*

We actually do not disagree that as long as things are written well, I will (and most people ought to) give anything a try; maybe a better example would have been fandoms? I have a great friend in B7 who's been trying to get me to read some of its best fic...she even mailed me zines. And I'd love to, but I just can't get to do it. Similarly, I'm sure there are plenty of fandoms that I could pimp to the high heavens and you'd just look at me (or someone you actually know and trust :-) in disbelief (like...eh...sparkly dancing boys, for example :-)

At that point it's not about the craft or originality but simply whether you have even the slightest bit of interest in the characters and what stories might be told (though again with a good author that I know and love and a show that I might actually watch, I'd sometimes even give those a try...). So at that point, we'd be at an impasse, b/c tastes vary and what I find the hottest thing on earth you just...don't... (though I have this entire theory on how we, the slashers, actually make the characters sexy but that's a completely different topic altogether :-)

A story that is easily labeled like that and has only that narrow range of appeal is badfic as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not sure I agree. I think there's a type of writing (and kaiz really made me understand that) where the kink is the purpose. But often a fic can squick someone with the kink being central to the plot or even just a not too important accessory. For example, if someone totally squicks on blood play, the fic may be wonderful, the blood play integral to the story line, yet the reader will not be able to enjoy it. But maybe we can find common ground...b/c I'd hate to agree to disagree *bg*

[millefiori.livejournal.com]

For what it's worth, I sometimes find it hard to reply to posts that seem too complete - it's as if the writer is totally self-contained and the post is like an egg - it may be delicious and nutritious, but there's just nothing to grab on to (unless one wants to post 'word' or 'me too'). Posts that are more open ended, ask questions of the reader, or bring up topics that engender strong feelings are more likely to get a response, in my experience.

As for agreeing to disagree, that's a point I come to when the divergence of opinion has gone so far that one step further would mean insults and hard feelings, and I only do it when I care too much about the person with whom I'm conversing to take that step. For example, I won't agree to disagree with neo-Nazis, or homophobes, or KKK members. I think they're wrong and I'll fight them to my last breath. But one of my very dearest friends is a fundamentalist Baptist and on some matters of God, faith and religion we have come to a largely unspoken agreement that we just don't go there. To me, that's agreeing to disagree.

[veuki.livejournal.com]

*snuggles* Not to sound plebe-y, but yes. What someone said earlier, I feel weird responding to a post that's so completely well thought-out and defended. Like, I feel like a moron if I just say, OMG U RUL WAT U SAID!!11!1 For what it's worth, I do read what you write. I think you're fucking awesome, Reena. I'm sorry I don't comment as much as I should. (Dammit, is that my cue to get back into the Potter fandom or what? I miss it so!) I really think what you say makes a whole lot of sense, and sometimes I'll go to your journal if I'm away and don't feel like wading through my friends'-view, and read your posts about Harry/Draco or some other ranty thing, and read it and think, Oh... yeah. That does make sense. You've managed to change my views and opinions on things more than once. I think you're a very sweet, very intelligent girl. We must talk more often! *lovebites*

[ex_mrs260625]

That's interesting: I often do agree to disagree with homophobes; I find it easier to debate emotional subjects with friends. I agree to disagree when my opponent's expression of hir point of view upsets or angers me: I can't debate effectively when I'm upset, and trying will eventually drive me to attack my opponent. That makes for a poor conversation no matter what the original goal may have been. :0)

For me, it's not the goal of the conversation, it's the tone.

Re: on disagreement and agreement

[pauraque]

I suppose it's just... the mode of conversation which uses "changing of mind" as the goal is what bothers me, because I personally see value in all thoughtful things people say

Hear hear! I feel the same way. Most people do seem to approach debate as a proselytizing activity -- they are indeed trying to change the other debator's mind, and (perhaps more successfully) the minds of onlookers. A lot of people approach fannish debate the same way they'd approach public political debate, in which the point is not to sway one's opponent (which will never happen), but to define the ideological boundaries for undecided (or sway-able) onlookers.

In political debate, there's a purpose to this. You're hoping the onlookers will vote your way, come election day. Whether they agree with you _matters_. In fannish debate... well, it just doesn't.

Although, actually, I approach political debate the same way I approach fannish debate -- I'm open to being persuaded, and I'm really more interested in enlarging my understanding of the issues than in convincing others that I'm RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT.

Do you happen to know what Myers-Briggs type you are? Because I've come to think of my approach as an INFP thing.

[lexcorp-hope.livejournal.com]

It may seem flippant, but by the time I say something like "We're going to have to agree to disagree," what I really mean is, "I think you are so impossibly stupid that if I continue this conversation, I'll end up insulting your parentage."

I love a good debate, and I can go round and round about the same subjects over and over, until the end of time, unless I find the other position completely ridiculous ("I hate slash because slash writers don't get enough vitamins!") or I feel that the other party isn't actually responding to me. (That happens most online, when you respond to points the other person made, and make your own, then they just continue their monologue as though you'd said nothing.)

Re: on disagreement and agreement

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Yeah... actually, this didn't occur to me at -all-, but I am, in fact, INFP. Heh. I think I sometimes lean into INTP territory, but not so much, really. *laughs*

I think this might have to do with the judging/perceiving duality in the Myers-Briggs system. If people want to -judge- as part of how they -think-, they won't be able to even conceive of the apparent contradiction of agreeing by degrees. Not that I don't strenuously disagree with some things, but even so if I were to talk with someone about something I totally didn't believe in-- say, The Earth Was Created In 7 Days-- I would probably require they be open-minded, because I am unwilling to try and brainwash them or even be aggressive in my arguments, and them repeating the same thing over and over would just give me a headache.

I just don't see the point of talking to start with if you're unwilling to see other people's points. In terms of fanatics of any sort, it's not that they "believe" that about the 7 days-- they -have- to believe it. I don't actively believe something else (ie, noooo, it was the Big Bang because my physics textbook says so!), I just refuse to accept -anything- as the Absolute Truth. Unless my partner in discussion is willing to forego absolutes, I just consider them mentally deficient and leave it at that.

Ahahaha. I'm secretly a scary prejudiced person, hee. The Enemy, in other words ;)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Heeee. That makes sense to me. I think I sort of sense that about the way some people say it (which is just sad, because um... yeah, stupid people are sad, ahahahah). On the other hand, I do see it used between intelligent people who just seem to refuse to reconsider their position, sometimes, too.

I've never actually said it to anyone for any reason, mostly because everyone has as of yet given up on the debate before I have. Hee. Stamina, man. Or, I just confuse them into unconsciousness~:)
But yeah, idiots are like that. I don't really know what to say about them-- the people who don't think because they don't know -how-. I mean. They just... er... maybe they should go back to kindergarten? I really don't know~:)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

heeeeee. *hugs!*
*embarrassed!*
i'm bitter sometimes because secretly i'm insecure & wonder if the meta-people who -do- get like, 20 replies every time are like... smarter/better/cooler than me, but. it makes me all warm-fuzzy to know that i do have an audience of people who i -know- and that's what matters. although i didn't mean this to be an "ack! i'm insecure!" post, still.

*hearts*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

So I suppose what it comes down to is a misuse of the agree-to-disagree concept as put forth by you and a few others here. I can see how the way you use it is healthy and a perfectly valid conversational tactic (ie, when it's in place of possible insults).... Although honestly, if it's a close friend, I wouldn't let them off the hook about religion/faith-related things, not because I'm an atheist proselytizer but because I believe that a thinking faith is the only faith I can respect; and if Thomas Aquinas can do it, so can my friend~:)

Also, I find theological debate interesting in its own right, and I'm theoretically willing to suspend my hyper-awareness of my atheism for the purposes of discussion. On the other hand, both I and my close friends are often given to over-intellectualism in all aspects, so I suppose this doesn't work with the average sort, heh.

As far as a post-as-an-egg.... Yeah, I see what you mean. I guess I have a tendency to try to answer my own questions, simply because I ask them and in my experience no one else is going to answer them as completely and consistently as I will, though I want feedback. In other words, it's a thinking-for-myself sort of thing. Hmmm. But yeah, I see how that would put people off the desire to cut in. Must consider this more ~:)

~reena

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think I'm more like that. With a (close) friend, I feel free to debate anything (emotional territory or not), simply because we trust each other and understand where we're coming from, and it's -fun- to come to the brink of maddening annoyance, and (mostly) always stop short of crossing over into fighting.

But if it's a stranger and I don't respect them or the way they voice their opinions, there's really nothing to be gained from what will inevitably be me yelling at them.

I mean, I'm a rather open-minded person who has partly seen the points of many people I initially would have disagreed with-- but homophobia is one of the things that'll just get me to yell and scream and call you names in public. *laughs*

ANd er... that's just not my style.~:)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I guess this comes down to people being different (I like fantasy, you like hardboiled mysteries-- and okay, I don't mind hardboiled mysteries either, but I really don't like...er... sports books. Yeah. Will not catch me reading a book about a dog racing across the tundra, unless I'm -really- bored. And stuck in an elevator. But I'd still rather read that than play scrabble). Although, um... this sort of thing isn't even a -subject- for debate/discussion to start with, you know?

It's like saying...
"I like blue, but not green."
"But no, green is a worthy color! Love it! Love it! WHY AREN'T YOU LOVING IT YET?!?"
"But I like -blue-, not green."
"GAH. LET ME PAINT THE ROOM GREEN, AND THEN SEE WHAT YOU SAY."

heh.
So yeah, that sort of thing seems... er... not in the realm of thinking inquiry, I guess. It's not like you can -think- about it to start with, so you can't debate it. You don't -think- about why/how you like Harry Potter (for instance) but not Blake's 7 (though I'm sure there are reasons)-- you just -like- one but not the other. So there's really nowhere to -go- with that. It's not a thought process.

So yeah, tastes can be perhaps changed but only with certain people who were just missing out on things they may have liked but didn't give a chance to. Like, er... I really didn't like... that is to say, I -hated- the HP books with a fiery passion (I threw it across the room), when I first tried reading it. Years passed. I still hated the books. I saw the movie-- I still hated the books. It took me months and months of fanfic and a long dunk in the world before I saw them differently, before I loved Harry so much, I just adored reading books that were really -about- him and lo! He's in character! ahahah. Um.

But this isn't common, I realize~:)

Kink-prejudices.... Well. I suppose that's another unthinking gut-level response one shouldn't even discuss (but this sort of thing makes me shudder vs. but this sort of thing makes me so turned on). On more higher-level topics (ideas about personality, society, romantic options, etc should be too broad to be squickable), you can discuss more because these things are acquired and are receptive to inquiry in the first place. So I actually am not disagreeing, I guess I just leave aside certain things as not worth it to even bother with~:)

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

Actually, I think you're not that uncommon (though not necessarily in HP?)...personally, I read HP3-5 *after* reading fanfic...so that I still see hers as just another version at times *g*

But seriously, in media fandom it seems fairly common that folks read the fic and *then* get to enjoy the shows. I think most of the slashdoms I read (other than XF) were slash-to-source text rather than the other way around. (So, you might be a slash fan-in-training rather than a fandom fan :-)

And I've been meaning to pimp crack_van since I brought up the B7 thing...it's the ultimate community to try to pimp your fandom...or learn about one you never even thought about slashing...brandnew and pretty neat if you haven't seen it yet.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I know! I mean, it's almost -expected- that you'd read Gundam Wing fic before seeing the long-ass mecha-ridden series. But in HP, it's like a capital offense! When it "got out" that I hadn't read the books (before I did), it was like, "OFF WITH HER HEAD!!1". Meep.

People are seriously rabid about the canon around here. No one goes around protecting Joss from the infidels, do they? Well, you try and badmouth JKR in some circles. They'll have you for dinner. *laughs*

Well, it helped that I had a reputation as a meta-HP and characterization-nit-picker person, so I was accused of not knowing what I was talking about. Which I did and maybe didn't at the same time. People sure got worked up about it, though. *sigh*

And yeah, I'm already a slash fan. My first fandom was Gundam Wing, heh, and I dabble in Smallville and Highlander and SW:TPM. It's just, HP is the only one I -write- or feedback in, but then, I'm really not a fanfic writer by disposition~:)

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

Well...it'd help to do my research before I talk, wouldn't it :-) (And your flist was way too diverse, I should have guessed :-)

I had no idea I committed capital offenses when criticizing JKR...well, off with my head, then...

This summer I spent my vacation reading the last three books and all the fanfic I allowed myself to bring along, and I really had to force myself to stay with the source text...yes, the fic had men boinking, but it often was much more engaging and (dare I say it) better written...

As for GW...never done that, but I think the number of Sentinel fans, for example, who love the show b/c of the fic is probably higher than the opposite...in my last fandom, I'll bet anything on that...I think I've encountered one person so far who admits to having owned Nsync merchandize before the fics :-)

And I'm not a fan writer, period...I write *about* it, however *g* Ad nauseam...

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

heheheh. I love it when someone's as talkative as I am. Makes me feel less freaky~:)

Actually there are a number of people who do criticize JKR in their own little corner of fandom... it's just... er... in some circles (some of -my- circles), the more well-known fans are more... er... enamoured with the books. *laughs* And I am too, although more with Harry-the-character and Hermione-the-character and Draco-the-character rather than the "books" as a whole (much as I enjoy Hogwarts-the-idea and other such things). The writing is... well... bad. Although it gets better, and in OoTP I had no problems. I think its focus on characterization of Harry really helped, as well as it having a characterization I favor (angry!Harry) as -well- as it being the "uber-fanfic" in that it was new, I didn't know the plot already, and it was basically what we've all been waiting for. Hey, hype is your friend~:)

Strangely enough, I've found that when I -do- love the source material, I rarely get into the fanfic (such is the case with X-Files & Buffy). I mean, it feels a bit like a sullying, and I guess I see where all the canon-freaks come from, there (but Draco is Evil! JKR says so!!), except that if you really love canon so much, why do you bother with anything else?

The whole, "but I was bored without canon" excuse doesn't play for me, since one gets used to these things. There are huge waiting periods for -lots- of multi-volume books & then there are the usual months-long breaks for TV shows, etc. I only came close to liking fanfic where I saw canon first with Queer As Folk.. and that's still fanfic by people I already trust. And I'm not in the -fandom- and have no interest in -being- in that fandom, and I -love- Brian/Justin much more than say, Clex, and I read a lot more Clex fic.

Then again Queer As Folk already -has- everything you want, up to and including your favorite pairing fucking. I mean... what else is there? *laughs*

[carmarthen.livejournal.com]

*random person weighing in*

I use "let's agree to disagree" as code for "I am tired/brain-dead/bored and this debate is going nowhere, so can we talk about something else now, please?" I think that's the sense a lot of people use it in, or at least a lot of people I know.

*random person scurrying away*

[lorannah.livejournal.com]

I'm another random preson who reads your posts, but rarely comments. I guess to start I should say that the resaon I read a lot of your comments, is I want to be challenged intellectually, I guess there are lots of places I could go for this - but another aspect of my personality I suppose, is a desire not to have to choose sides. When I read your posts, I don't feel like you expect me or anyone to agree with you completely (although I often find myself agreeing, perhaps because of this reason and because everything you right is so well thought out). Your posts allow me to look at the point you're making from many angles, I sometimes can spend days on end in an inner debate about the subjects you raise, and I hope that makes me better or more aware in some way. That's what I get out of your livejournal, and I wish I commented more often to let you know that - but I never have enough time do do half the things I want to and once I've been thinking about something so long, I find it impossible to contain all the things I've considered into a logical post, because somehow it seems to lack something. So I guess really I don't comment because I don't know how to say what I want to.

I hope some of that made sense

Lorannah

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Heh. Hi~:)

Yeah, that's the sense I get.... and I guess that makes it better(?)
I have seen it used seriously, but yeah, not nearly as common :>

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Hee--right back atcha with the feeling smart because you're smart!:-)

Also I hadn't thought about it this way but you're totally right about how you love the series affecting your wanting to read fanfic. I remember trying to read X-files fanfic and just never feeling like anybody was in character ever. That was my first taste of fanon versions of people and they were amazing. (Now I'm thinking back at my bewilderment at reading Married!Mulder and Scully and trying to figure out who these people were.)

HP is something I'm into almost *because* of what I want and don't get from it. I was never a big fan of the books, exactly. I didn't hate them but I saw flaws (still do, of course). There are other childrens' series I think are more "perfect" or whatever. It's like I'm more interested in the holes the series gives for people to play in than the real series...and I think that's just part of the books themselves. They're not character drive stories, but JKR has come up with some fabulous plot-points-as-character-things for people to take away and think about.

It's kind of like...I remember reading a review of Felicity when it came on and this guy said his friend was watching the pilot and halfway through said, "You know what this show needs? Some monsters. Couldn't she kill a vampire or something?" The guy realized his friend was right because Felicity was essentially dealing with the same stuff as Buffy only Buffy dealt with them in this wonderfully symbolic way. I think some of the characters in HP are stunning because of how primal they are: Sirius with his family, his bond with James, the bully who's thrown into Azkaban to suffer etc. You really don't want specifics about his character. You want him stark and bare so you can write/read a million fanfic stories about that guy. (Draco, obviously, has as much potential although she seems to want to deny it!)

Um, so where was I? Oh yes--the agree to disagree thing I do sometimes read as, "You're just an idiot" or more likely, "You're tiresome." :-) When it comes at the end of a long discussion that's going in circles it's one thing, but when it seems to come out of nowhere you tend to be suspicious. Like...I didn't even know we were disagreeing yet. How can we be agreeing to disagree...?

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Hee. I think my attraction to Draco & Harry is because of their symbolic and multifarious nature (ahahah I love using the word "multifarious"), and because there are so many -possibilities- for them. Of course, I didn't even -read- canon before fanon, so all this is highly theoretical for me, but I -do- know I wasn't -interested- in canon in any way, shape or form before I got -really- entrenched in fanon (though that's really such a shorthand-- people pretending there is the One True Fanon, as if there -is-. My fanon Draco has never been most people's idea of fanon!Draco).

Still, I -have- noticed some people who see H/D or are interested in Draco -because- of canon, and who want to somehow... I dunno... expand on canon but in a more direct way, maybe? Like, instead of creating what's missing, they want to interpret and re-arrange and er... be inspired by? I mean, there's Maya and Miss Breed and... well, I can't think of a lot, really, but. Sigh.

There are people who defend canon!Draco as being "good enough"-- ie, already a character that's whole enough for canon purposes, and canon purposes are all that matter... of course, they don't write H/D fic, usually (other than Miss Breed, who writes -great- H/D fic, ehehe). Actually, I've resorted to quoting other people's views 'cause otherwise I'd just be nodding along like an idiot ;)

But yeah. Paying too much attention to canon in HP seems to stifle one's range, and yet that's mostly the complaint of the people who don't write Draco or Harry/Draco at -all-. That's definitely not the problem with most H/D writers, who tend to make them both dreadfully OOC even though there are such possibilities for plausible development for them as a pairing. Of course, that's not what bothers me-- most people are just bad writers and the things they change Harry & Draco -into- are just frightening. `Perfect Imperfection', anyone? *laughs*

Not that any of that had a -point-, actually -.-

But yes...er... often enough that phrase does feel like a brush-off. Probably why it annoys me so much, actually~:)

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

Boy did we get off topic there...but it's fun *g*

As for getting everything from shows and not needing fanfic. I'm a bit conflicted about that. Obviously total medifans (as opposed to us slash fans) do like their source...so much so that their viewings of LOTR goes easily into the triple digits and it's still not enough...enter fanfic (and yes, I am thinking of a particular person :-).

And I think in my first fandom (BtVS) I was like that. It also took me a long time to get bored and jump fandoms. But now, I am mostly enjoying fandoms where the source text is lacking in one way or another. I've been thinking a lot about that correlation and whether fanfic simply fills the holes and thereby offers the fans a "better" version (and the big fandoms we can put in this category are legion, of course, from ST, SH, PRO to HL, TS, DS, or most anime, I'd guess).

But then there *are* BtVS and XF and WW...shows that are well written and have a fanbase above and beyond the ficcers...and still produce marvelous fic in huge quantities. Wuold we need to assume that it's the mediafan in us that enjoys that type of fic?

And what needs fixing in the universes???

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Heh. I've never been an obsessed medifan, I guess, 'cause uh... I never rewatch -anything-, if I can help it. I've seen the HP movies several times now (not by design), and um... I think if I see them one more time (right now) I'll like... feel sick or something. And I really -really- like them. I just really really hate repetition o_0

So maybe there are different types of fannishness. Which there seems to be. I'm the "I follow religiously and think slightly about outside of watching", usually. Which is rather laid back. But the other stuff, I don't bother with at -all-. With fic-- I just read a lot of it but generally don't watch the source as much even if I love it (such is the case with Star Trek).

I think there's hole-filling fannishness/fic and obsessive-excess fannishness/fic where there's just a need for moremoremore. I get that, but only er... within a particular mode-- the show itself or the fic itself. I've never wanted more -fic- because I couldn't have more -show- except once... because the show ended badly... and there wasn't a lot of fic to be found in that fandom (since it was all complete except for the end). Woe. But that's just me.

I don't think anything needs fixing in BtVS, exactly..... er. Probably it's just that people get completely ensconced in the universe and sort of... think in those terms and they -naturally- write fic inspired by it. Like, it becomes the universe in their head. I'm at this point with HP now (where I think in HP-language), because of my long immersion in fic. Heh. I suppose this could happen with long immersion in non-fanfic media as well~:)

Although it's never happened to me, actually. I've read/seen -tons- of Star Trek and seem physically -incapable- of writing fic for it. But that's just a question of how good are you at writing fanfic in general. I'm not too good at writing "good fanfic"-- that is, something that is well-tied to a source outside me. I like writing interpretive fic-- like, -based- on some scenario or character... and that, only if I'm particularly emotionally in tune with that character -and- the world is "natural" to me, which so far has only happened in HP. Probably because English boarding schools, teenagers, magic systems, and er... passionate angst are all uber-familiar to me~:)

I'd probably write Buffy (magic, school, teenagers) except, er... it's in Sunnydale, which is a very specific context and I don't feel I know "Californian small town" very well (and naturally I don't know Hogwarts, but -dude-, the -years- I've spent imagining. Horrify even me.)

And then there's... no pairing in Buffy I feel I have something to say about. I love Spuffy but. Er... I have no "connection" to either Buffy or Spike. But some people have much lower standards than me, as the proliferation of badfic everywhere would seem to imply~:)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Awwww. Thank you~:)
That is probably the best I could hope for :D
I'm often mired in the silly impulse to compare myself against others (who do get like, a dozen thoughtful comments each time), and while I don't feel insecure most of the time, when it happens it's bad. But inspiring someone to -think- rather than spew things back at me is a much worthier goal as far as I'm concerned, so thank you~:)

~reena

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

I find it refreshing to see someone admit that they love the fic without the canon source... Mind you... I'm talking about *reading* the fic. I'm a canon whore when it comes to writing...you *better* know the show if you want to write it, but in terms of reading there are many fandoms where I've tried to watch the show but never got into it (cough...TS...cough). I actually wrote something on that here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/virgule/2733.html) (sorry for my repeated self-pimping).

As for watching HP...be glad it's only been a few times. Due to reasons beyond my control, I have seen "potter two" more times than I can count... Though usually I distract myself by reading a steamy sex scene and keep it in the background :-)