~~ world peace anyone?
Feb. 18th, 2004 10:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaI want to write the way I want to live: mindfully, honestly, fearlessly-- with full intent. I want to write what I believe. I want to -live- what I believe. What else is there to want out of life?
If I write humor or sex or angst, I want it to be because that is how life is, to me. If I wrote angst without humor, I'd be lying. If I wrote love without sex, I'd be lying. If I wrote darkness without light or vice versa, I'd be committing some sort of sin I can't even articulate. That is the ultimate lie. So if I write a character as in love or in lust or in anything with another character, I want it to be because that is how I see them-- that is what they tell me they are. The honesty I'm talking about is the only real possible honesty-- the 'to thine own self be true' kind. I want my characters to be true to themselves the way I want to be myself, even if I constantly fail, even though I constantly make a fool of myself. Even when I think life is one big joke-- and the joke's on me-- I want to never stop trying.
The reason I think about pairings so much is because I believe that who we love (and hate, and need) defines us, shapes us on a basic level. If a person cannot be expected to always gravitate to the same people, no matter how specific events in their lives may theoretically change (with every story), then either they are living a lie or they're not the same person they had been to start with. That is to say, either their life is a lie or -they're- a lie. Or both.
This is interesting 'cause I insist on writing about two characters who will never gravitate to each other in their "real" story. I would not write it if I didn't believe, as far as my own personal truths go, that any story where they (Harry & Draco) aren't at least -potentially- on the road to love is a lie. Therefore, yes, canon will always be untrue to me on some level, as far as personal reality goes.
It's nothing to do with "fate" or destiny and everything to do with identity. I think of characters as sets of ideas, as -meaning- something unique and pretty static even as elastic as identity is throughout one's life. Every character I feel I have an understanding of -means- something to me. Their lives have a self-defining purpose, just as all of us have a purpose we create as we live, also. And as we create -it-, it creates -us-. Our own stories, which we tell to ourselves, which we -live-. The characters may not know that purpose-- and as a writer, I may not, either-- but the process of writing parallels the process of living in that way. As the writer, I want to discover the truth about the being I chronicle. And of course, anyone's purpose in life is intimately tied with who they love and therefore share it with.
Someone said once that writing is the process of discovering what you believe, and I think that's very true for me. In this way, I think that separating writing fanfiction and writing "original fiction" is counterproductive. It creates a barrier, this assumption. It implies that this particular writing is "different", less important, has lower standards of this need for discovery, perhaps.
Writing is writing because the process always remains the same. So if there's a pre-existing source, so what? There's always -some- pre-existing source, some inspiration-- whether it be real life or some piece of history or something someone told you or a gorgeous view. I realize some people have some issues with the idea that what they're doing is "for real"-- anxiety issues-- and I understand that. I have anxiety all the time. I -still- don't finish my original fic most of the time, and I can't seem to finish more than half my fanfic, either. It's all tied up with fear.
We say "it's only fanfic" because we're afraid. We're afraid of ourselves and of our true faces, we're afraid we have no talent and we're afraid what actually possessing said talent would mean, if we -did-. People either shout themselves hoarse begging for feedback or they hide their works away, hoarding it all like their lives depend on not being heard. If we're still like mice, maybe life will pass us by and we can get on with pretending.
This has nothing to do with "reality" and yet everything to do with it. In "reality", no one outside the community would acknowledge one's writing if it's fanfic. So? The point isn't what happens -after-, it's what happens -during- that's important. And I don't mean whether one writes for oneself or for others-- that's a different issue. What I mean is... -everyone- writes for themselves and -everyone- writes for others, to some extent. It's all about owning what you say, believing what you say, not being ashamed of what you say. There is such a thing as "good quality" vs. "bad quality", in writing just as in nearly everything else, but there's nothing that says "quality" is the -point- of the -process- of writing itself. The process has no quality except as far as it expresses the truth of what the writer willed.
Thus, any shame or downgrading of one's writing seems akin to the downgrading of one's soul. And this is only in respect to one's own relationship to it, like I said. Because other people will always judge-- you can't get away from it. They will have their own relationship with your work, and you as the writer will have nothing to do with it. You-as-author will be but a vague idea in the readers' minds. You will have nothing to do with -their- process, as readers, just as you-as-reader have always had your own relationship with others' writing. But the central writer's self-judgement is really simple-- is this the truth? And if it's the truth as you see it, then it's pure writer's gold. It's the real thing, baby.
I feel I should say that this is my ideal-- I definitely don't actually always write that way -or- live that way, and I suffer for it. I really do. I beat my head against the wall, hating the way I trap myself within paradigms I don't believe in. It hurts, which is why I feel there should be another way, actually.
My point was basically A) fanfiction is the same as any fiction because the process stays constant; B) writing characters without a semi-constant guiding principle in mind doesn't make sense, to me, as being good writing. I don't think I've actually defended those points very well, but then, I don't actually think point B can be defended. It's just a personal truth, really, nothing I can get away with projecting onto others. Just because I'm so truth-conscious and I see truth as being tied with this-or-that, doesn't really imply anything about other writers' beliefs, naturally. I'm just a freak.
Point B is one I keep coming back to partly whenever I see someone who seems to write many different pairings for the same character, but mostly when I see someone who goes against an established pattern in their own writing and writes the character as totally different. Not just as a one-shot experiment, but as a serious work where they establish a whole new set of "truths" for that character. It just messes with my mind, even though I -know- other people don't work the same way I do, no need to tell me that. *sigh*
I actually understand why people don't have consistent pairings or OTPs or whatever, in their own writing (or reading, though it'd be interesting to see if there's separation there). Not everyone sees love the same way-- to make a huge understatement. Hell, some people don't even recognize other people's idea of love as "love". It's such a funny thing, too, 'cause people do agree so much more about all the other emotions-- it's just love that gets mangled every which way. So really, it only bothers me when I see the writer as having a sort of OTP they don't acknowledge-- and I don't know how I can even tell that, but it sticks out like a sore thumb to me. Know what you believe, and then own it. That's all I want to see.
Yeah, it'd be nice if there was world peace, too, I know, I know. *grumbles*
~~
Oh, and btw. I really dunno how much of an HP-centric journal this is anymore. Or -what- the hell I'm doing, frankly. So if you're here looking for more H/D rants or whatever... er... well.... What can I say. I'll always be "meta", but my actual primary "fandom" has always probably been Story itself.
If I write humor or sex or angst, I want it to be because that is how life is, to me. If I wrote angst without humor, I'd be lying. If I wrote love without sex, I'd be lying. If I wrote darkness without light or vice versa, I'd be committing some sort of sin I can't even articulate. That is the ultimate lie. So if I write a character as in love or in lust or in anything with another character, I want it to be because that is how I see them-- that is what they tell me they are. The honesty I'm talking about is the only real possible honesty-- the 'to thine own self be true' kind. I want my characters to be true to themselves the way I want to be myself, even if I constantly fail, even though I constantly make a fool of myself. Even when I think life is one big joke-- and the joke's on me-- I want to never stop trying.
The reason I think about pairings so much is because I believe that who we love (and hate, and need) defines us, shapes us on a basic level. If a person cannot be expected to always gravitate to the same people, no matter how specific events in their lives may theoretically change (with every story), then either they are living a lie or they're not the same person they had been to start with. That is to say, either their life is a lie or -they're- a lie. Or both.
This is interesting 'cause I insist on writing about two characters who will never gravitate to each other in their "real" story. I would not write it if I didn't believe, as far as my own personal truths go, that any story where they (Harry & Draco) aren't at least -potentially- on the road to love is a lie. Therefore, yes, canon will always be untrue to me on some level, as far as personal reality goes.
It's nothing to do with "fate" or destiny and everything to do with identity. I think of characters as sets of ideas, as -meaning- something unique and pretty static even as elastic as identity is throughout one's life. Every character I feel I have an understanding of -means- something to me. Their lives have a self-defining purpose, just as all of us have a purpose we create as we live, also. And as we create -it-, it creates -us-. Our own stories, which we tell to ourselves, which we -live-. The characters may not know that purpose-- and as a writer, I may not, either-- but the process of writing parallels the process of living in that way. As the writer, I want to discover the truth about the being I chronicle. And of course, anyone's purpose in life is intimately tied with who they love and therefore share it with.
Someone said once that writing is the process of discovering what you believe, and I think that's very true for me. In this way, I think that separating writing fanfiction and writing "original fiction" is counterproductive. It creates a barrier, this assumption. It implies that this particular writing is "different", less important, has lower standards of this need for discovery, perhaps.
Writing is writing because the process always remains the same. So if there's a pre-existing source, so what? There's always -some- pre-existing source, some inspiration-- whether it be real life or some piece of history or something someone told you or a gorgeous view. I realize some people have some issues with the idea that what they're doing is "for real"-- anxiety issues-- and I understand that. I have anxiety all the time. I -still- don't finish my original fic most of the time, and I can't seem to finish more than half my fanfic, either. It's all tied up with fear.
We say "it's only fanfic" because we're afraid. We're afraid of ourselves and of our true faces, we're afraid we have no talent and we're afraid what actually possessing said talent would mean, if we -did-. People either shout themselves hoarse begging for feedback or they hide their works away, hoarding it all like their lives depend on not being heard. If we're still like mice, maybe life will pass us by and we can get on with pretending.
This has nothing to do with "reality" and yet everything to do with it. In "reality", no one outside the community would acknowledge one's writing if it's fanfic. So? The point isn't what happens -after-, it's what happens -during- that's important. And I don't mean whether one writes for oneself or for others-- that's a different issue. What I mean is... -everyone- writes for themselves and -everyone- writes for others, to some extent. It's all about owning what you say, believing what you say, not being ashamed of what you say. There is such a thing as "good quality" vs. "bad quality", in writing just as in nearly everything else, but there's nothing that says "quality" is the -point- of the -process- of writing itself. The process has no quality except as far as it expresses the truth of what the writer willed.
Thus, any shame or downgrading of one's writing seems akin to the downgrading of one's soul. And this is only in respect to one's own relationship to it, like I said. Because other people will always judge-- you can't get away from it. They will have their own relationship with your work, and you as the writer will have nothing to do with it. You-as-author will be but a vague idea in the readers' minds. You will have nothing to do with -their- process, as readers, just as you-as-reader have always had your own relationship with others' writing. But the central writer's self-judgement is really simple-- is this the truth? And if it's the truth as you see it, then it's pure writer's gold. It's the real thing, baby.
I feel I should say that this is my ideal-- I definitely don't actually always write that way -or- live that way, and I suffer for it. I really do. I beat my head against the wall, hating the way I trap myself within paradigms I don't believe in. It hurts, which is why I feel there should be another way, actually.
My point was basically A) fanfiction is the same as any fiction because the process stays constant; B) writing characters without a semi-constant guiding principle in mind doesn't make sense, to me, as being good writing. I don't think I've actually defended those points very well, but then, I don't actually think point B can be defended. It's just a personal truth, really, nothing I can get away with projecting onto others. Just because I'm so truth-conscious and I see truth as being tied with this-or-that, doesn't really imply anything about other writers' beliefs, naturally. I'm just a freak.
Point B is one I keep coming back to partly whenever I see someone who seems to write many different pairings for the same character, but mostly when I see someone who goes against an established pattern in their own writing and writes the character as totally different. Not just as a one-shot experiment, but as a serious work where they establish a whole new set of "truths" for that character. It just messes with my mind, even though I -know- other people don't work the same way I do, no need to tell me that. *sigh*
I actually understand why people don't have consistent pairings or OTPs or whatever, in their own writing (or reading, though it'd be interesting to see if there's separation there). Not everyone sees love the same way-- to make a huge understatement. Hell, some people don't even recognize other people's idea of love as "love". It's such a funny thing, too, 'cause people do agree so much more about all the other emotions-- it's just love that gets mangled every which way. So really, it only bothers me when I see the writer as having a sort of OTP they don't acknowledge-- and I don't know how I can even tell that, but it sticks out like a sore thumb to me. Know what you believe, and then own it. That's all I want to see.
Yeah, it'd be nice if there was world peace, too, I know, I know. *grumbles*
~~
Oh, and btw. I really dunno how much of an HP-centric journal this is anymore. Or -what- the hell I'm doing, frankly. So if you're here looking for more H/D rants or whatever... er... well.... What can I say. I'll always be "meta", but my actual primary "fandom" has always probably been Story itself.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
rambly rambly rambly
Date: 2004-02-18 10:29 pm (UTC)Because personality isn't static. And nor is "love" for that matter. Love is not a constant! People grow and change and get bored to tears with each other. People can fall in love more than once! People are attracted to different people for different reasons, and because they each bring out different sides of the other. So I can imagine a number of different trajectories for each character. That doesn't mean not being true to my vision of them, but acknowledging that the person I see them as can go in several different directions without ever being untrue to him/herself. (Note: Leather pants and Redemption!Draco don't really come into this, though.)
To take this a step further, I also think that canon allows us to form several different versions of the same character, all equally plausible but nonetheless incompatible. And I think that an author can believe in more than one without being a hypocrite. Why not? (Note: None of these versions are called "Sev," however.)
For me, good writing is flexibility. I have to admit that I tend to sit here very quietly and be very judgmental of people who rest on their laurels and don't ever challenge themselves to try anything new. (You are not one of them, btw.) I think that as soon as you feel comfortable with something, you should try something else. That you should always be working as hard as you can to expand your toolbox as a writer. To be able to write different genres, lengths, styles, etc. ... *not* because a writer "ought" to be able to do everything, but because you want to be able to tell your own stories, the stories that come to you to tell, with the right tools for them. Every story can't be told the same way; the only people who do this are the people who don't have the skills to tell them otherwise.
I see the same thing with pairings ... I don't want to stay in an emotional rut with my work because then I won't learn the skills to be able to tell different kinds of stories. And since I have ideas for all sorts of different kinds of stories, I want to be able to write them.
(This is why I never post anything any more, because every time I start a new fic it tends to be really different in terms of ambition (style, length, genre, pairing, etc.) compared to what I wrote before, which means that usually it also tends to suck, the learning curve being what it is. So I have all these stories now on my HD, each of which taught me something very useful, but none of which I feel like showing anybody else because I can see their flaws way too clearly, as well.)
(cont.)
Re: rambly rambly rambly
Date: 2004-02-18 10:29 pm (UTC)And you are defining a writer's investment in fanfic as their investment in a particular pairing, in a particular notion of love. And this just makes me scratch my head, because there are so many interesting things to say about the world, and romantic smutty love between two pretty boys is just one of them. Only one. I don't know what makes these other topics less real or vital or at the center of things, you know?
I guess, also, you see fiction as a site to work out your ideals. To articulate your vision of how the world ought to be, emotionally. (Not in a didactic way, of course.) And I appreciate that, but ... not everybody conceives of writing this way. I certainly don't. I just see characters, as v. flawed, confused people who manage to fuck themselves over royally 99.9% of the time, and I come up with some sort of situation for them, and then I follow along because I just want to see what happens. I don't have any larger point to prove or message to get across or concept about life the universe and everything to explore. I just find them interesting, on their own ... I get abstract because the particularities of their characters and their situations is what interests me.
I don't think life has a purpose. I think we just muddle along. I think the muddling is the purpose, frankly. I think that folding laundry is as good a path to Enlightenment as any other.
And I don't see writing as figuring out what I believe. But just writing what I know. About people, about how they act towards each other, etc. "Figuring out," inasmuch as it takes place, is just the process of surprise and discovery as I figure out the character. It's a process that spirals inward, into the character, rather than outward, into the realm of abstract belief. If that makes any sense at all.
Re: rambly rambly rambly
Date: 2004-02-18 10:36 pm (UTC):X
Re: rambly rambly rambly
Date: 2004-02-19 12:27 am (UTC)Heheh I feel pretty guilty about the romantic-love-between-boys thing. Dude. I know. *insert guilt here*
*more guilt*
.....
*guilt*
Yeah, so like I was saying, intellectual masturbation? That's me all over :D :D
To me, H/D aren't just stuck in that box, but fuck if I can write them that way. Eh. *growls at self* To me, what they represent is much more complex & contradictory & raw. I was thinking, earlier, that it would be nice to write mother-love or sibling love or sheer friendship fic more. I'm bad at relationships, actually. Before fanfic, I didn't really do well at relationship-centric fics-- I mean, they always degenerated into scenario-driven things and style-driven things. I'm kind of obsessed with them as a reader, because it's mind-candy and I'm an addict, but writing people realistically is pretty difficult for me even as it's instinctive.
Part of the problem seems to be that I associate writing with -pleasure-, so I write -about- pleasure (and pain, and other strong emotions), and in a way I'm just dreadfully immature, I guess.
As far as whether life has a purpose...
Again, I'm stuck in the middle, contradicting myself.
I did say self-creating purpose... which contradicts "purpose", since that implies intent. I kind of believe in "intent without intent". Sort of like evolution, y'know-- a good fascimile of consciousness without any actual plan before it happened. We are conscious-- there is structure-- and thus there is purpose. A tree's purpose is to grow and reproduce and to release oxygen, right. But it didn't -mean- that in any way. And yet, that is what it -is-. It's... complicated. Er.
Maybe it's just that I always forget what I know. I -think- I know... but then I change my mind. Writing clears my mind, reminds me of who I am, who I -knew- I was, what I -knew- the universe was like... but it came and went. I'm sporadic in my knowledge of the most basic things. I don't know what it is, but... you've probably noticed, right? Heh. For me, "Enlightenment" is a process, not a destination. I always start over again, having promptly unlearned everything I've learned. And now it sounds like I have some mental dysfunction. Heh.
That's why talking to you is so helpful. You so often remind me of all the things I knew, but forgot I knew. There are so many facets to everything, I can hardly keep track of them all. Also, I don't think nearly hard enough. Gah. Thanks though~:)
Re: rambly rambly rambly
Date: 2004-02-19 12:09 am (UTC)In this case, I thought it was ironic in particular 'cause I have this Epic Post on Draco I've meant to type up since this past summer that completely contradicts this one. I thought of that before you commented and smirked, kinda. Like, "heh, there I go again". 'Cause in that post, I talked about how central that idea that Draco could -change- is to my view of him. How I -need- him to change. How it's all tied up to my vision of identity as fluid, as containing huge amounts of potential most people never begin to touch upon. It's a transcendental idea to me (again, ironically), because if we -are- static, as human beings, we are doomed, to some extent, to always repeat our mistakes, y'know?
And yet, I want to think that there's a -center- to us... that something remains, something that's hard to put into words... and yet it is that Something Beyond Words that -loves- other people. It's not the sum of all identity at all... it's like... one's heart. It's hard to speak of it without resorting to metaphor. One's emotional make-up, how's that. I think there's a balance there, between nature and nurture. Both are pretty vital, but one's history can only really affect the parts of oneself that -respond- to nurture. Some things remain nature. I don't know -what- those things are. I think love... can be a product of either. Even sexual orientation can be a product of either. But. I think... once you're past a certain age... like, age 12 maybe... and you have that as a given... then you're going to have a core of constancy, of staticness. Y'know? I dunno. Far be it from me to think I know the truth about identity, 'cause that's what I've been obsessed with understanding since I started thinking seriously.
I'm all for different-but-equal versions of a character... but this ties into 'personality' rather than... uh... (this is embarrassing)... soul. Okay, better-- ego vs. id. I certainly don't write any character all that constantly (my Ginny, for instance, is a good example of someone I've written up, down & sideways). But in another way, she's always been -Ginny- to me. It's weird. It's sort of like... recognizing someone even in an AU fanfic. -Something- about them is just always -them-. And that "them"... to me, that "them" will always love that -other- "them"-- even if in that particular story (that I myself have written!!) they -don't-. Does that make -any- sense? *cringes* It's like... I don't even have to -shwo- it. It's always there, for me. I'm a freak, like I said, and point B is not defensible. I did say that. Covering my ass, man.
I'm all for flexibility & different kinds of stories. I mean, a characterization doesn't necessitate any particular -scenario-, to me. Anything can still happen, pretty much, given any one characterizatio. It's all up for grabs, really, as long as I feel the person was being honest to life-as-they-saw-it with the story in question. I always come off as more judgemental than I am. It's a curse. A curse, I tell you! ^^; hee.
But in general... I hate the idea (and practice) of being stuck in a rut-- even -though- I'm obsessively romantic & stuck on H/D. So yeah. OTPness is unimportant-- I really wasn't trying to imply it was-- in fact, I went to pains to say I understand lacking it totally. Um. Just. I believe in being true to whatever fluid truth you perceive. Which I don't always actually -do-.
Re: rambly rambly rambly
Date: 2004-02-19 07:18 am (UTC)I think plot can be just as compelling too. There's plenty of good stories that pair a character with a situation, for instance. And sometimes pairings that seem odd on the surface can be written in ways that are true to canon. That's what's so neat about these characters in a way, that I think we all sometimes see aspects of them that other people don't. Or see them in different ways. So there's times when you can be reading something you consider your OTP and not understand what the writer is doing at all. For instance, if there are two people who see L/D as canon, but one of them sees their relationship as Draco dominating Lucius. I don't see how this could really reflect canon but, uh, I don't know, maybe that's a bad example.
Here's a better one, I think: H/D. I was thinking how I think it's more in character for Draco to be, for lack of a better word, the bottom. I think that's what he does in canon. He taunts and teases until Harry pounds him into the ground and he likes it on some level--it's attention, it makes him feel like he's gotten him, I think it's logical given the relationship he has with Lucius and how he feels about himself to get into that. I have a harder time with Fanon Draco who is in control over Harry. My first reaction is that this is just OOC, turning Draco and Harry into people they aren't. But then I thought...maybe somebody is just expressing a different part of the relationship through the slash. I mean, Harry *does* usually end up being the one to lose control, so maybe some people want to see that aspect blown up. Perhaps when they read H/D they're more in Harry's head and playing out the times he feels that way, where he just wants to get his hands on Malfoy anyway he can. So it is coming from canon. I see Draco as desperate in the scenes when he's taunting Harry, but Harry just sees him as annoying.
So yeah, you can't ever assume that somebody is doing something for non-passionate reasons just because they seem that way, though I'd agree with Reenka that sure, there are people who are capable of writing something OOC well and who might do it just to see if they can.