~~ maybe we all miss the screaming :>
Dec. 2nd, 2003 02:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaLasair just linked to ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
isiscolo's post saying she's reading a Snape/Hermione & enjoying it. Well, this doesn't even come close to describing -my- pain, man. I had a Harry/Snape dream. I was Harry, and then I became a girl because I couldn't really -do- male/male sex and I panicked. Not to worry, I woke up before I could be actually traumatized, there. I mean. Do I get H/D dreams? Noooo. I have to be like, "omg, dream!Snape is so hotttt". Embarrassing. ('Course, the truth is, I'd go for Snape before Draco, ahahahah, um. Change subject!)
~~
I think what it comes down to is, there are some things I don't -want- to understand. So there are questions I return to, simply because the questions are easier to handle than any answer. I think people in general are well-known for avoiding certain aspects of reality and for not wanting to understand those aspects. Something about me makes me keep poking, though.
Getting off on others' or your own pain, for instance. On some level, I just don't -want- to get it. I can see that pain and pleasure can have a blurry physiological boundary in one's brain at some point-- but this doesn't apply to psychological pain, to another person's pain or tellingly, to fictional pain.
I understand that some people have drastically different mental landscapes and needs than I, and that on some level I will just never understand what it's really like to live a life made of choices that are truly alien to me. I'm not sure whether I should just make peace with that or whether I should keep trying to find that hidden point of contact. I do understand enjoying violence-- tied as that is with anger in my mind. I understand rage and the fear that can fuel it. Anger can be such a release, such a burst of endorphins and a heady feeling that one's invincible. There's a near-universal attraction to that, I think.
What I'm actually thinking about is-- people who want to hurt characters they love in their fiction, and this whole connection of love with the infliction of torture, mental or physical.
Now-- hurt/comfort, I can understand much more easily. There's a balance to it, a sort of nurturing instinct gone amok, perhaps. But I can't help but question the mental health of a writer who honestly takes pleasure in fictional character-torture. I realize that fiction is not reality. I still think that our fantasies reveal as much or more about us than our actions. Call me embarrassingly Freudian if you want, but I think most psychologists would agree that dreams and fantasies are important reflections of one's psyche, even if they'd place different amounts of emphasis on them. So all this talk of "it's just fiction" doesn't quite cut it for me.
Mind you, I'm not condemning-- just trying to work out my own issues here.
I wonder if Shakespeare got off on killing Romeo and Juliet and driving Ophelia insane. If Dickens really really liked keeping Pip from finding happiness. If Hugo had fun making Quasimodo's life hell, and so on. I mean, the idea seems almost laughable to me. When one has created a good character, they take on a life of their own. I would imagine that to hurt them would take something out of the writer-- and in fact, the writer would likely prefer not to, except that the story winds up demanding certain events. I know that it takes a deep toll on -me-, writing painful scenes. I simply -can't- enjoy being on the verge of a spontaneous depression-- but perhaps it's a matter of a widely divergent writing process. Perhaps if you enjoy putting your characters through hell, you don't really identify with them. Or you don't want anyone to be happy, really.
And that last idea, I must admit, somewhat concerns me. It's not that I have some issue with tragedy or character angst-- I write it, I read it, I admire it, etc. The issue is the writer's emotional relationship with the work. It seems like the idea of depicting suffering is to cause a sympathetic reaction in the reader (and most probably in the writer). The ancient Greeks apparently thought that tragedy was edifying-- that the response of pity and tears was the sign of creative success. One cries and learns something-- or laughs and learns something. Seeing human suffering and feeling pleasure-- and moreover, being meant to do so-- seems new in the history of the arts. But perhaps I am naive. I suppose the audiences to war epics were usually supposed to feel entertained rather than sickened-- but then, war was being shown as glorious, whereas mental agony is difficult to make glorious.
Even so, the phenomenon of "I love to see my darlings in pain" seems a whole different kettle of fish.
I just don't know. I think I'd need to actually do research for this. Thoughts?
isiscolo's post saying she's reading a Snape/Hermione & enjoying it. Well, this doesn't even come close to describing -my- pain, man. I had a Harry/Snape dream. I was Harry, and then I became a girl because I couldn't really -do- male/male sex and I panicked. Not to worry, I woke up before I could be actually traumatized, there. I mean. Do I get H/D dreams? Noooo. I have to be like, "omg, dream!Snape is so hotttt". Embarrassing. ('Course, the truth is, I'd go for Snape before Draco, ahahahah, um. Change subject!)~~
I think what it comes down to is, there are some things I don't -want- to understand. So there are questions I return to, simply because the questions are easier to handle than any answer. I think people in general are well-known for avoiding certain aspects of reality and for not wanting to understand those aspects. Something about me makes me keep poking, though.
Getting off on others' or your own pain, for instance. On some level, I just don't -want- to get it. I can see that pain and pleasure can have a blurry physiological boundary in one's brain at some point-- but this doesn't apply to psychological pain, to another person's pain or tellingly, to fictional pain.
I understand that some people have drastically different mental landscapes and needs than I, and that on some level I will just never understand what it's really like to live a life made of choices that are truly alien to me. I'm not sure whether I should just make peace with that or whether I should keep trying to find that hidden point of contact. I do understand enjoying violence-- tied as that is with anger in my mind. I understand rage and the fear that can fuel it. Anger can be such a release, such a burst of endorphins and a heady feeling that one's invincible. There's a near-universal attraction to that, I think.
What I'm actually thinking about is-- people who want to hurt characters they love in their fiction, and this whole connection of love with the infliction of torture, mental or physical.
Now-- hurt/comfort, I can understand much more easily. There's a balance to it, a sort of nurturing instinct gone amok, perhaps. But I can't help but question the mental health of a writer who honestly takes pleasure in fictional character-torture. I realize that fiction is not reality. I still think that our fantasies reveal as much or more about us than our actions. Call me embarrassingly Freudian if you want, but I think most psychologists would agree that dreams and fantasies are important reflections of one's psyche, even if they'd place different amounts of emphasis on them. So all this talk of "it's just fiction" doesn't quite cut it for me.
Mind you, I'm not condemning-- just trying to work out my own issues here.
I wonder if Shakespeare got off on killing Romeo and Juliet and driving Ophelia insane. If Dickens really really liked keeping Pip from finding happiness. If Hugo had fun making Quasimodo's life hell, and so on. I mean, the idea seems almost laughable to me. When one has created a good character, they take on a life of their own. I would imagine that to hurt them would take something out of the writer-- and in fact, the writer would likely prefer not to, except that the story winds up demanding certain events. I know that it takes a deep toll on -me-, writing painful scenes. I simply -can't- enjoy being on the verge of a spontaneous depression-- but perhaps it's a matter of a widely divergent writing process. Perhaps if you enjoy putting your characters through hell, you don't really identify with them. Or you don't want anyone to be happy, really.
And that last idea, I must admit, somewhat concerns me. It's not that I have some issue with tragedy or character angst-- I write it, I read it, I admire it, etc. The issue is the writer's emotional relationship with the work. It seems like the idea of depicting suffering is to cause a sympathetic reaction in the reader (and most probably in the writer). The ancient Greeks apparently thought that tragedy was edifying-- that the response of pity and tears was the sign of creative success. One cries and learns something-- or laughs and learns something. Seeing human suffering and feeling pleasure-- and moreover, being meant to do so-- seems new in the history of the arts. But perhaps I am naive. I suppose the audiences to war epics were usually supposed to feel entertained rather than sickened-- but then, war was being shown as glorious, whereas mental agony is difficult to make glorious.
Even so, the phenomenon of "I love to see my darlings in pain" seems a whole different kettle of fish.
I just don't know. I think I'd need to actually do research for this. Thoughts?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 12:00 pm (UTC)There's some interesting stuff at The Symposium (http://www.trickster.org/symposium/) about this phenomenon. Hmm. I think, for starters, it's generally only temporary pain... temporary physical, anyway. The nature of psychological pain is temporary, or at least, it decreases over time after a traumatic event. Hence the immense popularity of Methostorture (he'll heal) and rapefics in general.
Oh, and torturing someone else's characters, even if they are characters you write yourself and feel invested in, is a whole different kettle of fish to torturing your own characters. It would never hurt Maya anywhere near as much to kill Draco as it would to kill Roth, for example.
Another problem with the parallels you've drawn is that there aren't juicy, sensual descriptions of the pain inflicted upon the characters you mention. (Well, I don't know anything about Quasimodo, so maybe there.) It's not premature deaths or the simple lack of a happy ending that we get off on, it's the pain and the striving and the pretty blood and the coming through it eventually and almost invariably, the sexual aspect. I've read very few torturefics that weren't rapefics.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 03:02 pm (UTC)I was wondering if I worded things weirdly but that was after I posted and ran out of the door to class. *siiiigh*
Well... hmm. I was thinking of specifically people who say if they like a character a lot, that means they wanna see them -suffer-. I don't know if that suffering always includes "suffer and get better". I don't know-- does all this love for suffering include the need for a happy ending? Though I guess I can see how it changes because of the sexual aspect. I was mostly thinking of "torture" being keeping the favored character from happiness by having them be a bad luck magnet-- everything that can go wrong, does go wrong.
I mean, it's hard to have sensual descriptions of being dumped by one's SO, for example. I wasn't seeing a qualification of the pleasure (ie, people liking a certain kind of torture more than other kinds-- rape but not disembowelment for instance-- this is partly why I thought I'd need to ask questions).
A lot of the angstfic I read doesn't have a happy ending. Maybe that's a more recent trend or maybe it's just my bad luck. I'm a sucker for angst with a happy ending, 'cause it's almost like it's hurt/comfort of the -reader- rather than the characters. Generally, if I write angst it's unhappy-ending angst (I tend to get carried away). When I add a happy ending to an angstfic, it just feels weird and forced, even when I -know- that the plot was always going there. Like... with IP, the ending felt weird partly 'cause it was almost obscene to end on Harry's smiling.
But that's just neither here nor there. And yeah, I've seen a lot of the Fanfic Symposium's hurt/comfort columns and that was really my initial intro to the concept~:)
i like hurt/hurt
Date: 2003-12-02 06:29 pm (UTC)A poem as lovely as Draco all blood-y
Re: i like hurt/hurt
Date: 2003-12-02 06:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 06:26 pm (UTC)*loves*
*beats on Draco some more*
*and more*
*and more*
Reena, I hurt them because I love them. :D
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 06:36 pm (UTC)*is a broken record*
But like. um. *looks shifty*
I seriously -don't- want to know why or anything else if it upsets you, y'know? *meeps again*
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 07:06 pm (UTC)I think people have a natural tendency to pathologize other people's kinks, but that doesn't mean I have to give into that and start providing "explanations."
I mean, my god. Human beings love to watch other human beings suffer. What do you think they came to see in the Roman colosseums? There would be no murder, or rape, or torture, or ANY of the horrible things that happen in this world if there wasn't someone somewhere who wanted to do them. I don't understand how you can profess yourself to be surprised at the fact that sadism and voyeurism are part of the human experience.
And I don't want to do these things. I would *never* advocate harm against another human being. But I can understand what motivates other people to want to, and I can find it interesting and titillating to explore these issues in a fictional context where no one is actually getting hurt.
I don't think anyone should have to apologize or justify their fantasy life. What's more, I think that choosing to acknowledge and explore these questions in a fictional context can often be a more moral and authentic response to fact that suffering exists in this world, than creating a fluffy-bunny fantasy land where no one suffers gratuitiously and every story has a happy ending.
In any event, I know exactly why I get off on certain things, and I know exactly how justified I am in being concerned with certain issues, and so I don't feel as if I should have to give any reason to anybody for writing about what I want to. I've spent a lot of time thinking about the ethics and aesthetics of representing trauma, suffering, and violence, and the fanfic I write is just one small part of this. And crappy as my fics may be, I think that they are as valid a response as any to the fact that life is complicated and people suffer and you cannot legislate what does and does not get people off. If what I write can turn somebody on but also makes them uncomfortable about doing so, because of the way I wrote the fic and the questions it forces the reader to confront, then I consider it a job well-done. I don't see that as something to be embarrassed about or apologize for. I'm proud of the fact that I made the reader aware of his/her own complicity with the text. And that I didn't gloss over and fetishize the nasty details. That I made them not know whether they should be titillated or appalled. Because those reactions aren't as far from each other as you're suggesting.
AND I LIKE HURTING MY CHARACTERS. There are actually some fairly transparent explanations for why people would like to hurt their characters, so I'm not going to insult you by filling in the obvious blanks.
Last thing: Just for the record, when I hear words like "hope" or "redemption," I reach for my gun.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 07:29 pm (UTC)I'd also want to separate suffering-for-kink vs. just-suffering. I've heard plenty of people say they like writing torturefic which just involves one kiss and then a grisly death, y'know. Or unfulfilled longing with no sexual content whatsoever. I was careful not to talk about getting off and just talking about enjoyment, because once you introduce sexuality into it it just seems to morph into something that plays by different rules.
Sadism is most definitely a part of the human experience, yes. But does it have a place in writing (forgoing porn for a second)? I dunno, I'm sure it does-- just as any other emotional state has a place in writing. Even so, it seems to be contrary to my admittely arbitrary ideal of having stories tell themselves through the writer-- which are a part of the writer but not exactly products of the writer's "issues". I mean... it's surprising how all these manic-depressive wife-beating psychos such as the history of literature's peppered with produced such sensitive, moving works, isn't it. I think that when one writes fiction, one moves past oneself somewhat-- or at least, accesses some deeper, more universally human aspect of oneself. Or maybe that's just a certain -sort- of writer (as I was saying, maybe my process is not other people's process).
As far as voyeurism, I dunno if that applies, as that seems to be overtly sexual. I myself dig on fics featuring this, and have written several, but it doesn't seem to have a solid relationship to angst and pain that I can immediately see :>
And, you know, sometimes I'm rather dense (especially when it comes to not seeing things under my nose 'cause I've gone off on a tangent), so feel free to tell me, I won't be offended~:)
Heheheh. Yeah, people overuse and abuse the whole hope-and-redemption shtick just as they overuse the torture-and-angst shtick. I like to think this is due to bad writing more than there being something intrinsically wrong with either set of concepts ^^;
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 07:47 pm (UTC)Examples:
It's one thing to enjoy the mental/physical suffering of some nameless slave. It's another to enjoy it in a character you care about and possibly identify with, it seems to me. Like, it's a different question. Okay, to you it is, to a lot of people it isn't.
I was careful not to talk about getting off and just talking about enjoyment, because once you introduce sexuality into it it just seems to morph into something that plays by different rules LOL, d00d, how on earth can you distinguish between sexual enjoyment and other kinds of enjoyment ... there is so much overlap, especially when we're talking about our libidinal investments in particular characters ...
Sadism is most definitely a part of the human experience, yes. But does it have a place in writing (forgoing porn for a second)? ... it seems to be contrary to my admittely arbitrary ideal of having stories tell themselves through the writer-- which are a part of the writer but not exactly products of the writer's "issues". Here you just lose me entirely. What makes sadism an "issue" and another thing not? Why do you insist on assuming that because you view certain things as qualitatively different from others, then everyone else does too? Why makes sadism something that needs to be transcended in order to produce art? What makes it *not* another "deep, universally human aspect" of experience? I mean, I don't care about defending sadism in particular here ... I'm just trying to point out how your logic is operating.
As far as voyeurism, I dunno if that applies, as that seems to be overtly sexual. I myself dig on fics featuring this, and have written several, but it doesn't seem to have a solid relationship to angst and pain that I can immediately see :>
Okay, and that's fine. But
Do you see what's going on here? I mean, I don't know how to deal with what you're arguing ... I just don't conceptualize things the way you do, and I'm not sure why I should have to justify myself according to *your* admittedly personal categories? Do you see what I'm saying? I don't speak your "language" ... I can listen to it and respect it and try to understand it, but I don't see how I can use it to convince or explain something to you that your very vocabulary and conceptual framework prohibits.
ok, that's enough use of my brain for one day. *sleeps*
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 08:56 pm (UTC)You're right, I've totally been having waaay the wrong mental framework, but! That's why I made this post-- 'cause while I do conceptualize in limited ways, I still want to break free and breathe the sweet air of enlightenment. Or at least confusion. 'Cause confusion's better than delusion. Or something -.-
I wasn't meaning for -you- to justify yourself, y'know... that makes it sound like an attack or me being self-righteous somehow... and okay, I realize I sometimes come off that way (I guess) but that's never ever my intention, y'know? It'd be against my principles ><
That's why I started off this post saying, "maybe there are some things I don't -want- to understand"-- because when I think about it for any length of time, I realize that there -are- mental blocks at work here, and I -am- aware of them. So I kind of want to chip away at them (which is why mostly I did say these were -my- issues I was going after).
I don't mean to apply some sort of ethics to the way people behave creatively, but maybe it's inevitable to some extent. It's hard to accept when one doesn't quite understand what exactly one's accepting, though. As far as what makes sadism an issue..... mostly it's just that I wanted to be sure that's what was happening. That the writers really were using those pathways, there. I always sort of suspected it, but wondered if there was just something I was missing, simply 'cause I didn't want to deal with it. You realize, most (angst or what have you) writers are much less conscious of their process & the whys and hows of their preferences than you are, too. Maybe there -is- no deeper reason than "it feels good", and it's just that our conceptions of pleasure are so different than I feel the need to dig deeper where I wouldn't with a fic about... I dunno... angry snogging or something ^^;
Creating issues where there are none, that's me :>
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 09:11 pm (UTC)Anyway, I'm not trying to convert you (okay, yes, I am, because everyone needs to be pervy with me, ...), but I'm glad I was able to frame this in a way that made sense for you.
I don't feel comfortable talking about sadism, simply because for me Sadism=Huge Body Of Theory I Haven't Read Yet. "Sadistic impulses," maybe. But I haven't delved all that deeply into the psychology of sadism ... maybe just 'cos people have so much to say about the politics and philosophy and blah blah blah of the sex in de Sade that they don't actually talk all that much about physical pleasure of the sex itself. more about the cultural implications and the freudian family drama and what not.
so basically all i can is yeah, sadism. it's out there. i have no insight into it deeper than that!
oh god, i'm not even making sense to myself anymore and i'm eating dinner as i type this ... i should probably go to bed soon ... :)
<333
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 10:11 pm (UTC)You know why I think I see it as an issue? Because while you distinctly separate "real" and "fiction"-- that is, behavior acceptable in regards to fiction vs. in regards to reality-- I don't, not in the same way. I see enjoyment of pain to be problematic in the same way with a relationship to fictional characters as real ones-- just not to the same degree. I wouldn't actually claim this terms of any foregone conclusion-- that's just my gut reaction. Mostly because I think in a lot of ways fiction has always been my reality. Sure, it's an escape from reality, but I've always paid more attention to it, was more constantly invested in it. Others' relationships with (their own and others') fiction (and also fanfiction) are different, and I don't always remember that. If anything, it's hard to remember when I don't know what those other relationships -are-, 'cause they're rarely discussed.
Is sadism indicative of... something? My instict would be to say that in real life, the psychology of consistent sadism is probably related to violence and is thus hinting of a sort of emotional empathic disconnect which implies intimacy issues & perhaps sociopathic tendencies. This is a very uneducated guess, heh. I do think that there are several levels to it-- the surface physical addiction and the immediate psychological pay-off and the deeper historical social aspects of the why. It's such a huge subject and one can easily wander away from the relatively narrow question of why do some people say they enjoy hurting their favorite characters. I mean, this is far, far away from actual sadism, heh. Oh man, it makes my head hurt ^^;
That's okay, we can not make sense together. Or something >:D
<3333!!
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 10:39 pm (UTC)It's just that certain things (like a pessimistic worldview) are pathologized, and others (like the need for a happy ending) aren't.
So real vs. fiction -- or serious engagement vs. escapism -- are categories that don't quite cover the issue for me.
I also have a problem with the language of sadism because I think that the pleasures of this kind of violent material are far more ambivalent than a term like "sadism" (as popularly understood) really covers. I mean, you could also make the argument that people were masochistic: they fall in love with characters because they identify with them, and hence use the characters to hurt themselves by proxy.
I mean, that's a pretty dumb argument, but I'm just trying to point out the inadequacy of these dichotomies to encompass all the different ways a reader (or writer) can relate to a text.
Anyway, I think we just perceive the world, and the self, and the role of art in mediating that relationship, really differently. I think being an adult means acknowledging that there is a lot of sad, dark, scary stuff out there in the world. And inside yourself, as well. And finding ways to deal with all this. To accept it and make a choice not to give into it (as much as that's even possible), basically.
I don't think it means denying that negative and destructive things exist at all -- whether in the world or inside ourselves. Or saying that they *shouldn't* exist. Or we shouldn't investigate them and try to understand the appeal they can have for some of us.
All this is just part of life, you know? You can't pretend it's not around just because you *wish* it weren't around.
(I think that JKR argues the very same thing in the books, actually. Although I don't imagine her coming out in favor of Snape/Harry noncon.)
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 11:09 pm (UTC)I was never meaning to minimize the role of darkness in the world or within the self, you know. I mean, it's not like I just write happy-bunny fluff all the time-- clearly I can feel the attraction. This has never spread onto a conscious motivation to hurt some character I love. I mean, to me-- writing about pain is an exorcism or a journey or a process of investigation and an attempt at acceptance, yes. Simple enjoyment seems-- I dunno. Shallow, I guess? Something I associate with a squeeing sort of glee. I mean, setting out to write a fic going... "yeay, Draco's going to be dying from cancer, -fun-!!" seems... strange to me.
So it's not that I feel it's more "healthy" to avoid the darker things-- far from it. I guess some part of me just... isn't sure where to place an ambiguously positive relationship with mental pain (even your own) on the spectrum of human behavior. I mean, what to make of it? Why would people act this way? As far as I can tell, while it's semi-common among angstfic writers, this is a select group that seems at odds with the general populace. Do people in general enjoy seeing their favorites hurt? Yes, but they generally want them made "all better", too. This is all so complex, and especially if speaking about such diverse and large segments of the population, cross-culturally... it's a mess.
I mean... from that cackle of glee before writing a fanfic where Methos gets his nose & heart broken vs. the general kick viewers get out of the horrible things soap-opera stars go through (rape one week, being hit by a train the next). Maybe we just all deal with our fears and desire in different ways, eh? Some by sublimating them and some by fighting them and some by exploring them-- and maybe it's just that this fear/lust for death/pain/abandonment/etc is just always a factor, whatever one's response is. Sort of like sex, maybe? One can love it, crave it, hate it, be ashamed of it, be disgusted with it, etc, but one -deals- with it, one way or another. I mean, I would say being disgusted with it hints of "issues", but that's just me and my Western psychobabble background, too.
Anyway, I know you have a thing about people pretending that stuff doesn't exist, but I was really never wanting to go there-- I, for one, think that's silly. *scrabbles mutely at her mental box* :>
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 06:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 09:56 pm (UTC)Oh man. Well, I've written a lot of angst (well... maybe not a -lot- lot... *coughs*... a "fair bit", how's that), but what I was thinking of was when the writer really -enjoys- writing it. -If- they do. And like, why would they. I mean, sadism is one answer (and er... not that I have anything against that), and then there's... I dunno. Masochism? If you really identify with the character, I guess.
But yeay, I love it when you comment. Lets me know you're still kickin' >:D
no subject
Date: 2003-12-02 06:41 pm (UTC)I guess with people it's different. Then again, maybe not. I'm just assuming, so I'll just write what I know. JKR said she cried for a half an hour when she killed off Sirius, so it must be hard for her too. She didn't like causing Sirius (or Harry, or any other main character for that matter) pain.
In the movie Shakespeare In Love, William wrote Romeo and Juliet out of anger and pain, since he wasn't allowed to be with the one he loved. So if he couldn't be happy, his characters couldn't be happy either. Of course, we don't know why the real Shakespeare wrote R&J, so one can only guess.
As for me, when I write an angsty fic, I don't really get too depressed. I think it might be because I already know the hurt is coming, since I have to have the plot all planned out or it bugs me. But since I didn't create these characters, I figure it's different than having made them yourself. The offspring of your mind is being hurt - how does it really feel?
Research on this sounds like a very interesting trip.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-03 04:18 am (UTC)I don't read much torture for the sake of torture. I always feel as if the author is spiralling out of control when doing a torture-fic. It's one thing to create obstacles (often painfull ones, emotionally or physical) for the characters, it's another one to have nothing but obstacles and no gain. I want to learn something when reading stories. Obstacles with no way out, nothing but pointless misery and pain will not let me learn anything. I want the characters to at least have a chance to fight back. Getting run over by the bus repeatedly and then dying isn't very entertaining.
I can read stories where characters die at the end, after a hard journey (Frodo's journey in LotR comes to mind, but he doesn't exactly die). But I want the juicy bits in between : how they struggle out of it, how they see rays of light, how they try to deal with it, how they continue living. At least, I get to know the person and feel for him.
I can see how an author will spin out of control in a depressing story. They create an obstacle and don't know how to get the character up again, so they just create more obstacles and more obstacles and finally just have to kill the character because they see no way out. That's just my opinion, don't anybody shoot me for it. ;-) It also explains why I don't really feel for the character in torture stories. If the author didn't get inside the head of the character and see what this resourceful human can do, how can I as a reader? It's a human survival trick to find a way around obstacles and keep on going even though things go bad. But it's up to the writer to find the ways for the character to rebel. Torture-fic just seems very detached(sp?) to me. I feel detached as a reader and cannot emotionally invest in the story. I've noticed it in several violent non-con stories and 'Voldemort tortures Harry' stories. I might get slightly aroused by the imagery, but I will never be emotionally into the story. And being into a story is a big thing for me, as I literally 'walk' in stories and worlds from books. I can walk in a world for weeks if I find a very interesting book. I've never walked in a world where character get tortured all the time and eventually die.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-03 08:44 am (UTC)I suppose it depends whether one -wants- to be true to the most likely progression of a character's life-- and well, considering how weird life gets, what's "most likely"? But naturally, I too would much prefer seeing a balance-- allows me to bond with the character properly, yes. Then again, I don't have a pain-and-angst kink ><;
no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 01:04 am (UTC)I didn't say darkfics were "more realistic" ... my point was that the negative aspects of human experience are just as valid a topic as anything else. So as for something "missing" or emotional overload ... that's not a moral question, but just a question of good writing.
But again, your definition of "balance" may not jive with another person's.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 09:31 am (UTC)Generally, we actually are in complete agreement when it comes to the importance and validity of exploring darker themes and all that. The difference is probably just levels of personal tolerance for amount before it's "too much". Reading actual public fiction, I've never once thought it was "too dark" for me. I read fantasy, a lot of YA fantasy, and historical novels, as well as romance of various sorts. I used to read sci-fi. So I guess I'm not reading the "right things" or something.
I -have- read a lot of dark fantasy, but not mot of the vampire/etc stuff which uses it in a fetishistic way-- I tend to just read depressing/horrific/dystopic things which don't particularly seem suited to anything but making the reader cry. Like you said though, what makes me upset would make another person upset-yet-buzzed-- or something. I'm not sure. I'd be very interested to know actual specific responses to dark works across the board.
For instance, how would you think of like, Dune or 1984 or Sturgeon's stuff (which maybe you're unfamiliar with)? They paint these dismal visions of the future, right. The characters are oppressed and depressed and they do what they can but there's not much hope. Should I differentiate between darkfic which has fetishistic elements or does all darkfic have them? Is there such a thing as fic that'd just make you sad? What sort of thing would a fic that'd make a reader sad-but-buzzed possess? Does it have to be something like over-the-top torture of some sort, something extravagant and immediate rather than some grinding specter of Destiny? I mean, Harry's destiny, for instance-- this tortures him, right. Could someone get off on Harry's pain at the end of OoTP in a fetishistic way while still appreciating the book on any sort of intended?
Someone said Joan D. Vinge's Cat series was a good example. But like... it's not really very depressing. It's an adventure story, and she doesn't really torture Cat so much as set up all these obstacles and losses for him. He doesn't angst that much 'cause he's not too much of an introspective character. He's more powerful than a lot of people he comes in contact with, being psionic. But! I do see how he keeps getting into these scrapes where he has to watch someone he loves be lost or gets disillusioned or whatever. It's a soap-opera, I guess. I dunno, now I'm just rambling and confusing myself :>
And even though I understand what you're saying about the relativism, I cling to the idea that there is some sort of universal balance in storytelling one can achieve-- like in fairy tales, for instance. But I'm just obsessed with mythic arcs to the point of the ridiculous ^^;
no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 02:51 pm (UTC)*
friendbookmarkyou*no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 03:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 03:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 03:15 pm (UTC)Though really, I usually know what I like & what I don't-- it's just when it seems I can't accept something I somehow feel maybe I -should- that there's a problem >
no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 03:22 pm (UTC)i know what i like. always. and why i like it. i can always explain in depth. but i want to know why other people like certain things, and i would like other people to know themselves why they do. other people mostly don´t want to do that. i know they get aggressive because of a defense mechanism, but that does not make it any better. and like an itch, i can´t stop scratching until they make me bleed. ;)
what was this thread about, mainly the male pregnancies? for me, this falls into the one category (of about 4 basic types) of slash that relies heavily on heterosexual norms. i keep thinking what the local slashers would say about my heteric statement, but they don´t read my lj anyway, so i could go on *ggg*
i confess i never came across one and keep wondering about the intestines of the pregnant male in question. but mpreg falls into the wider category of females-disguised-as-males stories, which i don´t find particularly exciting.
and on that indecisive, vague and blah note, i will leave now. bed. work tomorrow. bye!
no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 03:37 pm (UTC)Um. I guess you'll be reading this tomorrow, then ~:)
I still feel bad 'cause I -was- kind of aggressive in my "what the fuck" rhetoric in the "why mpreg, why God why" post on the veelainc list. I mean, it's not-so-good to put people on the spot and act like they're freaks of nature. I wouldn't have been so forceful if the mpreg fic that the list keeps being spammed with wasn't so horribly awfully written, too. But like the true lady I am, I didn't mention that :D :D
I mean,
I mean... I can accept that, on a certain level, you know? Like... why do I like Harry slamming Draco against the wall and kissing him roughly more than them holding hands and looking into each other's eyes and softly kissing as their hearts swelled? I mean... that's a kink. I don't think I can explain it beyond "I like it rough and passionate". I can then go on about how I like passion and intensity-- but as to -why- I like passion and intensity, that'd be harder to explain, y'know? So I'm of two minds about it. I can say what appeals to me about it, but that's not the same as that being -why- I enjoy it. It's just -what- I enjoy about it.
The people writing to me about mpreg explained, saying that to them, it's all about the bonding aspect of the two boys suddenly thrown together by this sudden life-changing event that affects them both. It's like the usual potions accident where the boys are now empathic/telepathic, in that way. Initially, I too thought it was a Mary Sue thing, and probably for some people it is (and here
i think i am still not on topic *g*
Date: 2003-12-05 12:41 pm (UTC)and i also think that mpreg is relevant as a bonding aspect, as spare_change seems to have explained to you --- as it is indeed with het couples, if used as a device in a love-story (note: not rl either).
i am too wrung out today to go into this in depth and apologize for first letting you wait and then letting you down *g* but for me the question would be this:
if you like mpreg, do you want to have children of your own? have you already been pregnant? would you like to bear a child yourself or rather have your partner bear it? do you feel a relationship is not complete until it has produced new life? and so on ...
i would treat it like a "normal" het-couple´s child-wish in that case, but as with your preference for passion-and-intensity instead of flowery language, it can be explained. i even think kinks like shotaken can be explained and need not remain a mystery along the lines of "i would never do this in rl but ...". similar questions can always be asked: what is your family status, are you in a relationship with an older or younger member of the same or opposite sex, are you happy with it, do you have children, do you want to have children --- those are rather boring and obvious, but then you have to go on to more detailed questions. or do a quizilla test! ;P
i am convinced that basically all of us are able to state why they like certain things. and many should be perceptive and intelligent enough to look those reasons in the eye. *g*