~~ comrade slash thoughts
May. 11th, 2004 10:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaMore than half the couples I like together have been friends first, and.... Having read a bit of Kirk/Spock lately, I've realized I'd grown out of my squick, but I still don't like the idea. It's weird, because I love quite a few friends-turned-soulmates matches... but since I loved the friendship alone for so long in this case, it made me realize that by "expanding", it really loses something precious.
I think it's different to me when the pairing is a squabbling duo, I guess-- where they argue and get on each other's nerves and drive each other mad, so there was never that sort of smooth, seamless melding between them. I think a squabbling, ever-uneasy (yet devoted) friendship makes a -great- romantic relationship because they never become a -unit-, quite. They're both quite ridiculously individualistic and need their space, as much as they love each other. It's like they're always going to be coming apart as much as they come together.
The thing that bothers me is the idea that at some point, a really deep friendship is not enough. That... it's just not satisfying somehow. Not deep enough? Not broad enough? Not fulfilling enough. Possibly not extreme enough? Something like that. And I'd be the first to say that 'love is not enough', but it's somewhat offensive when that's "fixed" by the addition of... well... sex.
I find that most people -write- about emotions without actually showing them, and the more extreme the emotion, the more people resort to simplifications. It's like... true platonic love is so rare, people feel the need to return to the things they know, make it fit into the same boundaries most other people's relationships do. After all, the usual stronger bonds are at least somewhat hormonal, I guess-- in families, that is, and between courting couples.
I keep returning to the concept of "comrades". It's one of the most typical targets for slashing, and I definitely see the appeal-- but I still feel like the relationship becomes more shallow that way. For one thing, the power dynamics become more blatantly significant. Sexual insecurities and unrelated intimacy and commitment issues could interfere. Suddenly, there are societal structures pointing the way for the relationship's future development, whereas before the friendship ran entirely under the radar of any sort of tradition. And it's not like merely not being a male/female pair makes you immune to societal couple pressure.
Couples bother me, to some degree. -Being- a couple. Whereas in friendship, you have individuals bound by affection and mutual history, with a couple you have a sort of... inertia of millions of years of sexual pairing practices. So suddenly, things that would have never made sense in a friendship (power games in particular) can be imagined.
People have said that sex makes platonic love "less pure", which I think is utter bullshit. It's not the sex at all-- it's everything that comes with it. Being a -couple- would change these people much more than sex would by itself, and -that's- what gives me pause. Sex alone is-- well-- a good thing, an enjoyable thing. Certainly, it's convenient in a way, allowing two people to share -everything- so that they don't have to go somewhere else for satisfaction. After all, why not keep all your eggs in one basket if you're already keeping 9 out of 10 in that basket, right? That's the argument, and I'm definitely not immune to it.
I think DV!Harry & Draco illustrate the point quite well, actually. While they're seamlessly attuned to each other, they can't be lovers. Their friendship is too all-encompassing, and if they were lovers, they'd lose something of themselves. So they do need distance-- a sort of controlled, pre-emptive loss-- if they were to be able to have the possibility, even.
The problem with Kirk/Spock is that so far, I haven't seen any writer introduce this distance before the sexual pairing happens. And in fact, I'm so attached to them as they are, deeply bonded and linked, that it really doesn't seem worth it. They don't have the problem of needing to settle down with someone else, and it thus being sensible to attain sexual gratification with each other, too. Neither ever settled down anyway, so instead, a sexual union would possibly drive them too close together, taking away the single measure of distance between them-- that single necessary measure of distance.
It's only now that I'm realizing that I think this distance is essential, as much as I love soul-bonding and deep connections between friends. Without some space where the other isn't (whether it's sexual or otherwise), I think the friendship would become suffocating. Completely overwhelming. One's -whole- identity would become tied up in this one person, and every part of one's mental balance and health would depend on them.
It's sad, of course, in a way. I mean, I actually really ship DV!Harry & Draco, and they're like, a textbook example of this sort of way-too-close friendship. They -need- the space between them, that no-touching space where they kiss people other than each other, otherwise I think their individuality and ability to function alone at -all- would seriously suffer, which would affect their mental health in the long term.
But I can't vouch for my analysis, of course. I'm a bad friend, I think, in that I go through periods where I crave space-- a lot of space. Even the deepest bond couldn't keep me in constant contact with someone. *sigh* It all gets to be too much, I guess, and the pulling away from everyone isn't even something I control. I know other people aren't... um... necessarily like this. Wah. But. I should say that "just" friendship... every person I really feel like I -know-... it means everything to me.
I think it's different to me when the pairing is a squabbling duo, I guess-- where they argue and get on each other's nerves and drive each other mad, so there was never that sort of smooth, seamless melding between them. I think a squabbling, ever-uneasy (yet devoted) friendship makes a -great- romantic relationship because they never become a -unit-, quite. They're both quite ridiculously individualistic and need their space, as much as they love each other. It's like they're always going to be coming apart as much as they come together.
The thing that bothers me is the idea that at some point, a really deep friendship is not enough. That... it's just not satisfying somehow. Not deep enough? Not broad enough? Not fulfilling enough. Possibly not extreme enough? Something like that. And I'd be the first to say that 'love is not enough', but it's somewhat offensive when that's "fixed" by the addition of... well... sex.
I find that most people -write- about emotions without actually showing them, and the more extreme the emotion, the more people resort to simplifications. It's like... true platonic love is so rare, people feel the need to return to the things they know, make it fit into the same boundaries most other people's relationships do. After all, the usual stronger bonds are at least somewhat hormonal, I guess-- in families, that is, and between courting couples.
I keep returning to the concept of "comrades". It's one of the most typical targets for slashing, and I definitely see the appeal-- but I still feel like the relationship becomes more shallow that way. For one thing, the power dynamics become more blatantly significant. Sexual insecurities and unrelated intimacy and commitment issues could interfere. Suddenly, there are societal structures pointing the way for the relationship's future development, whereas before the friendship ran entirely under the radar of any sort of tradition. And it's not like merely not being a male/female pair makes you immune to societal couple pressure.
Couples bother me, to some degree. -Being- a couple. Whereas in friendship, you have individuals bound by affection and mutual history, with a couple you have a sort of... inertia of millions of years of sexual pairing practices. So suddenly, things that would have never made sense in a friendship (power games in particular) can be imagined.
People have said that sex makes platonic love "less pure", which I think is utter bullshit. It's not the sex at all-- it's everything that comes with it. Being a -couple- would change these people much more than sex would by itself, and -that's- what gives me pause. Sex alone is-- well-- a good thing, an enjoyable thing. Certainly, it's convenient in a way, allowing two people to share -everything- so that they don't have to go somewhere else for satisfaction. After all, why not keep all your eggs in one basket if you're already keeping 9 out of 10 in that basket, right? That's the argument, and I'm definitely not immune to it.
I think DV!Harry & Draco illustrate the point quite well, actually. While they're seamlessly attuned to each other, they can't be lovers. Their friendship is too all-encompassing, and if they were lovers, they'd lose something of themselves. So they do need distance-- a sort of controlled, pre-emptive loss-- if they were to be able to have the possibility, even.
The problem with Kirk/Spock is that so far, I haven't seen any writer introduce this distance before the sexual pairing happens. And in fact, I'm so attached to them as they are, deeply bonded and linked, that it really doesn't seem worth it. They don't have the problem of needing to settle down with someone else, and it thus being sensible to attain sexual gratification with each other, too. Neither ever settled down anyway, so instead, a sexual union would possibly drive them too close together, taking away the single measure of distance between them-- that single necessary measure of distance.
It's only now that I'm realizing that I think this distance is essential, as much as I love soul-bonding and deep connections between friends. Without some space where the other isn't (whether it's sexual or otherwise), I think the friendship would become suffocating. Completely overwhelming. One's -whole- identity would become tied up in this one person, and every part of one's mental balance and health would depend on them.
It's sad, of course, in a way. I mean, I actually really ship DV!Harry & Draco, and they're like, a textbook example of this sort of way-too-close friendship. They -need- the space between them, that no-touching space where they kiss people other than each other, otherwise I think their individuality and ability to function alone at -all- would seriously suffer, which would affect their mental health in the long term.
But I can't vouch for my analysis, of course. I'm a bad friend, I think, in that I go through periods where I crave space-- a lot of space. Even the deepest bond couldn't keep me in constant contact with someone. *sigh* It all gets to be too much, I guess, and the pulling away from everyone isn't even something I control. I know other people aren't... um... necessarily like this. Wah. But. I should say that "just" friendship... every person I really feel like I -know-... it means everything to me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 12:11 am (UTC)The former have sparkage, the latter just have boring oul' love. :D
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 12:32 am (UTC)Hey, y'know, those lovey-dovey people have spark too... y'know, the kind that makes you finish each other's sentences :> Though this means my DV comparison doesn't work 'cause DV!Harry & Draco always had spark no matter how close they got. DV!Draco was always kinda... uh... Dracoish and aloof. Maybe the aloofness mitigates the lovey-doveyness (er...) but eh... it's just not the same without all-out fighting and angst, is it :D :D
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 04:21 am (UTC)*There's* the hotness. Or at least, that is what I think, but maybe I just want it all.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 01:59 pm (UTC)I want it all too, dude. Well, I did say devoted & uneasy myself, it was Las who separated them :> Hee. But it's usually that way-- even if the people sniping don't think so, generally they care much more about each other than they think. Usually they're just not comfortable with their own emotions 'cause they're such... guys, y'know :>
OMG in that case, having them have sex is almost a pleasant torture, 'cause they'd have to be all gushy and emotional even if they don't -say- anything. Just the touching itself. Muwahahaha!!
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 08:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 01:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 01:55 pm (UTC)nope, most people really are not. and sometimes - sorry for seriousness - i start to wonder how many dutroux are in hp communities *shudder*
but i think you need to have read a number of fanfics and spent some time involved in slash to reach that point. it needs some intelligence and reflection, but you come to the conclusion - again - that sex in slash also becomes an end in itself. and seeing it as the holy grail is just ... sad?
wanted to answer quickly, so i didn´t phrase it too well ;)
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 02:04 pm (UTC)Depends on the motivation behind the slashing & the particular flavor of the friendship involved, I think, in the end.
I'm sure there are -some- friendships that are suited for evolving into BDSM. Probably. Maybe.
Er. There are a lot of people out there ^^;
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 02:16 pm (UTC)which attracted me to slash initially.
thing is, i´m currently thinking qaf, and that is really an issue where gays say that friendship is more important than sex. for a while they think they have to do it, but find that they are closer than anybody else (they fuck) without it.
in d/h or similar, where two snarky opponents are slashed, sex serves as an expression. it´s very handy to show unwilling closeness. ust is nice, sex is climax/happy end etc. blablabla :)
uhm. fun for the family? i forgot, you are from ny, so you probably don´t know who dutroux (http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial3/marcdutroux/) is?
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 02:52 pm (UTC)Hehehe. Well, uh, I meant that anybody could enjoy it (well, over the age of 12-13 or so, I guess), not that families should enjoy it with each other, ahahah. And no, I've not heard of him before, but I've certainly heard of enough pedophile murderers on the news in the last 10 years. *sigh* It's a cultural obsession here, always talking about rape & murder, especially sexual murder where they're combined. Scare-tactic journalism, all that. *sigh*
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 03:17 pm (UTC)yes. casual. male sex. cut out the pesky female and you can get right to it. love might not include sex at all then.
the thing about dutroux was not just the usual rape+murder. i sent you the only english article i found. the horror was that it exposed how many high ranking men were involved. not new either. and how many people never said a word. he tortured the children for a long time, and neighbours never said anything. it´s not scare tactic journalism in this case, it was about the exposure of paedophile rings in high circles, and society´s acceptance of this. that´s what i meant when i said people like dutroux will be in our community.
better stop now. stop making sense :)
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 02:10 pm (UTC)Actually, this is why I'm always amazed at people who claim that Harry/Ron is just so sweet--eh? To me that relationship would be far more sad an destructive than H/D. H/D at least know they hate each otehr. They always have that space. With Harry/Ron I feel like Ron would just be accepting the role of little woman forever. Instead of confronting or getting over all of his demons, he'd marry them, have sex with them and eventually choke on them.
And friends, as you say, can be FASCINATING! Especially guy friends, imo. (*thinks about upcoming post on her recent discovery that she can't write girls...*) The friends couples I tend to ship I think work because they already have formal roles with each other that would be bigger than their sex life. Already they have, like, a formal commitment to each other. Then beyond that they form a personal friendship which is great but also can be dodgy because it must exist within this formal commitment. Take Mulder and Scully, for instance. Their primary relationship should be to The X-files. They are partners. Then they are friends. Then, if you ship them, that should occupy another space within that. Unfortunately people often want it to just take over and that's when you get the mush. Or like in LOTR when people were furious about Frodo sending Sam away because HE WOULD NEVER DO THAT! As if the point of the story was that Frodo and Sam were lovey dovey and always fulfilled each other's personal needs, rather than the two of them being first a master and servant involved in a quest, then friends, then, if you slash them, lovers.
So yeah, that's weird, because I really think most pairings I've slashed have sort of been like that. There always has to be something more important than the relationship. With H/D maybe it's slightly different because it's, like, understood that they don't put each other's needs first because they hate each other. The selfishness sort of does the work that the higher calling does in other places.
Fight the Mush!
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 03:48 pm (UTC)I mean, I don't mind that or anything-- I'd expect him to do that, I guess. Most likely, Mulder would do that for Scully and vice versa (and probably did, though I don't know the series by heart well enough). But it's like-- the act is different, if it's done for a lover instead of just for a friend, somehow. It's not that there's some appearance of compartmentalization as much as.... well, for me, it would be less interesting. It would almost be a foregone conclusion, even. Everything becomes straightforward and simple, conflit of interest eliminated. Though that's a storytelling rather than a psychological concern :>
Actually, the whole too-close scenario explains my issues with Harry/Hermione as well as Harry/Ron-- while Harry/Hermione wouldn't choke on each other that way, I still think it's unhealthy because the boundaries would completely erode and (just as important, to me), all these new sexual paradigms would be introduced. I guess, if it was just -mushy-, I'd just be not attracted to it. The things that bothers me is that it's... destructive, in a way, in some friendships.
Suddenly, things that could have been ignored before begin to chafe (like with Harry/Ron). And worse, the compartmentalization... it's a tenuous thing. It doesn't help that most stories focus on the romance and "forget" to show the rest of their lives. Maybe that's the problem. -I- start to feel stifled by that, feeling like that romance is "taking over". Hmm, maybe that's really why I'm uncomfortable, then~:)
no subject
Date: 2004-05-12 04:30 pm (UTC)Or maybe the ones I like I like because there's something fundamentally keeping them apart. Yes, that could be it. Because I totally agree, for instance, that it's more interesting for Kirk or Mulder to throw everything away to save their friend and far less important if it's a boyfriend. That's a big reason why I continue to believe there is no canonical slash in Tolkien. It's not that it makes the F/S relationship dirty or anything, it just changes the whole dynamic if you add that possessive quality to it. So I guess in order for a friendship slash to work for me, I have to be assured that if it came down to it they would sacrifice the other person. Whereas, if it's not slashed it can be more interesting for them to chuck everything for the other person, maybe. Or at least I have to really believe they'd *consider* it, so it's not a done deal.
That's more what it can be with friendship maybe. Because friends really have no reason, necessarily, to care about each other. It's a completely free connection between two people. They're not getting sex out of it, society doesn't tell them how they're supposed to interact with this other person. That's why, imo, it's far more intense and interesting to write a betrayal story that involves a friend than a lover as well. I mean, think about if Peter had been sleeping with James. To me his betryal then becomes less interesting, just a jealous lover's quarrel or whatever. But when you think of them being friends it seems like a much bigger deal. Maybe that's also why slash can work better when it's "forbidden." Like, it's interesting to think that along with all the other feelings Draco has for Harry he also wants to love him.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-13 12:37 am (UTC)Heheh, of course, all this sacrifice stuff only works for epic dramas, y'know :> Like, I dunno how it'd apply to "real life" or whatever. Unless it's a question of throwing yourself in front of a speeding train for the other person (heh).
Yeah, I'm like... all about friendship stories, really, much as I seem to have a reputation for being a porn-meister... it's just that my friendship (H/D) fics never get finished 'cause I can never get it quite right and I also suck at plot. Sigh. But yes, that freedom, that's what I love, that sense of... no rules, no boundaries. It's like they say slash redefines relationships, but then, you could avoid it all by being "platonic", eheheh. Though I'd miss the sex, so.... ^^; Dammit! No celibate fic utopia for me :>
I'd always said that I love H/D partly 'cause they have nowhere to go but up, heh. Nothing to lose, all that. I think our issues with friend-slash are somewhat like the issues the friends themselves would have, angstying about whether it's "worth it" to possibly contaminate the friendship somehow or whatever. Isn't that cute? :>
no subject
Date: 2004-05-14 07:45 am (UTC)And friends, as you say, can be FASCINATING! Especially guy friends, imo.
Omg, yes. Teenagers punching each other on the shoulder and puffing their chest about the girls they nailed, it's so my bulletproof kink. I could watch them bonding for hours. Like James and Sirius! Eeeeh, and when they feed each other's ego about sex and sports and... ahaha, they're such dorks.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-14 04:48 pm (UTC)I agree. Apparently the way the term "shipper" originated was when somebody came to axtf and asked why people thought there was UST when she didn't see it. So it broke down into Shippers (who saw UST) and NoRomos (who didn't). Later it also came to include people who wanted to see UST or didn't. But it's important that the point was this was something there from the beginning--if you were a shipper it was always there. It wasn't this platonic relationship with no sexual tension that suddenly blossomed into it.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-14 07:51 am (UTC)(Sorry for spamming all over your lj, Reenka!)
agrees but ships K/S anyhoo
Date: 2004-05-12 11:40 pm (UTC)But I think that's more a problem with how people view and write couples/romantic relationships than the problem of adding sex and romantic love to the friendship mix. Writing a story that focuses on "the relationship" "the coupledom" so often reduces each player to one half of the whole, an actor to fill the role so the author can get to her payoff of emotion-porn, "he completes me" and whatnot.
You mention the need for space between people--I'm thinking that that's what delineates them as individuals--each capable and complete in their own right.
What I really want to see (and what makes a good marriage work) are 2 complete individuals who adore and respect each other, but who don't need each other like oxygen. And I am silly, so I see Kirk and Spock on screen as very married sometimes... A marriage at the 25 year mark: not about the passionate rush of emotion or the hot sex or even needing to be around the other all the time.
Um, maybe what i'm trying to say is that there is more plain old friendship and comrade-ness in a real long-term relationship than I usually ever see in a slash fic or romance novel (it's hard to write--you'll need some actual events--and the emotional payoff is more subtle). The platonic friendship and long-term romance relationship aren't worlds apart. And my favorite friendship-to-slash fics read almost exactly like gen friendship fics... with just that extra scene stuck in, that especially intimate sentence.
Of course enemy-slash pushes all sorts of different buttons. ;) But I think it's harder to make it into a believable long-term thing without it changing into friendslash. And you usually don't get happy endings with enemy slash (just hot, hot porn). And I like happy endings as I am weak and in need of reassurance.
It's funny that you mention DV! Harry and Draco along with K/S... those wacky mental bonds, eh?
But I think that both "couples" are a great example of a creator presenting something so... *almost* there that a viewer can feel a vacuum of some sort that they have to fill. And that's what makes for an active fanbase and fanon perhaps. The almost and the withholding. And often, when we try to fulfill that desire... it falls on its face, it's not as good.
Cuz you know... "having a thing is not so pleasing as wanting: it is not logical, but it is often true."
*geeks on*
You know, what I really wanted to do was hit you up for some K/S recs... (hm. although our tastes might be too different...) I also wanted to point you to one of my favorite meta-slash thingys ever, the rude person challenge that brancher wrote: "Unpacking Pon Farr". It's linked att the bottom of this page
:D
Re: agrees but ships K/S anyhoo
Date: 2004-05-13 12:03 am (UTC)Then again, the fics where they -are- actually married (and have married sex) aren't the thing either, for me, 'cause now they're in the "married couple" box, -literally-, y'know. Ugh.
I definitely see your point, though, and totally agree. What I often come up against is a feeling of inadequacy of writers' vision, a sense that they don't -understand- what they're talking about, and that really frustrates me and makes me want to rant and rave. Heh. I guess it's that whole "most things could be done well if the person doing them is competent" thing :>
Though, honestly, I think (canonically) Jim -does- need spock "like air" and can't go on without him-- though instead of like, wasting away, he'd go all gung-ho and assertive and be liked, "I'LL save you!!" Heh. Gotta love the third movie. Though not as much as the fourth :>
Anyway, I know exactly what you mean about that one-extra-scene bit, -exactly-, YES YES YES!! WHY GOD WHY DON'T THEY WRITE THEM LIKE THAT THOUGH, WHYYYYYYYYYyyyyyy?!?! *coughs* JatSapphire wrote it somewhat like that, but still. Hmph. Everyone wants to skip straight to the good parts (hey, I'm guilty too, man, ahahahah).
See, see, that's why I love the fics where Harry&Draco are friends, even if there's no slash-- 'cause I do just want them to be happy. I hate the idea that they'll never be able to just -be- with each other, forget the snark & the sex & the whoa-baby adrenaline rush. That's just... sad, really. I want them to -relax-, too. Everyone deserves to relax :> Sometimes, anyway. Heh.
I know exactly what you mean about the fulfillment falling on its face, man. That's how I feel about H/D all the bloody time, with almost every fic I've ever read!!1!11 It's almost always somehow... unsatisfying. Not fully -right-. Grargh!!1 Though obviously I still ship 'em, so I know how that goes~:)
Weeeeelll.... Yeah, okay, I give, I ship them too (shhhhh!!!!) but... er... I'm just -waaaay- more picky with them than with most other pairings, so I refuse to read the sloppily characterized (if well-written) romanti-porn, y'know. All the stuff I'd read so far was here (http://www.kardasi.com/REC/slash_recommendations.htm#STAR TREK - The Original Series). The BDSM fic (one of the recced fics, `Intread me not to leave thee') was the one that really got to me. I reeeeally can't see dominant/submissive games between them. i just. Can't. Can't. Can't!
But I -really- liked Jane St. Clair's stuff, and also JatSapphire's stuff (prolly hers the most, 'cause it was the most canon-seeming).
Oh, and if you want another GW rec (eheheheh!!) um... read `Drums of Heaven (http://www.sweetlysour.net/sol/drums01.htm)', by Sol. Wah. Plot! Porn! Characterization goodness & tough!Duo!! Heeeeeeeee!! *coughs* I actually liked the Trowa in this, too. Whoa. Made me like... more okay with 1x3. Slightly. Do you really think our tastes are so different? Heh. Well, maybe :>
ps
Date: 2004-05-13 12:15 am (UTC)Re: ps
Date: 2004-05-13 01:36 am (UTC)IT WORKS ON SO MANY LEVELS!!!
(the other ones might be fun to look at too. they are all variations on a theme that gradually emerged from the 1st fake post. I also recommend Another New Person Introduces Herself by Judith Gran)
Re: ps
Date: 2004-05-13 01:51 am (UTC)But seeing these (http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/details.html) episode & movie commentaries made me go all "awwww" gooey, 'cause yeah. The canon is kinda there, y'know :>
It's also weird 'cause I had "those" kinda feelings when I saw the slashy scenes originally. I remember having weird WTF?!-type feelings, like I knew something was "weird". Amok Time, most definitely, man. Most definitely. And Naked Time. And the 1-4 movies were mucho slashy. Like that moment in the first one when Spock came in and Jim -looked- at him and I was like, DUDE. Except I never completed that thought at the time. So yes.
And then there's this (http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/simplefeeling.html). Damn :>
Re: ps
Date: 2004-05-13 03:04 am (UTC)I made fun, but I looked at all the pages too. :D
Really, I think TOS is the slashiest show *ever.* I don't think they'll ever make anything with a relationship like it again anytime soon because people nowadays are more attuned to notice homosexuality as an option. Some exec would say "our heroes are acting too gay!" (I think the only reason LoTR got through with so much (platonic) male-male love was because it was a Tolkien fan in charge. He wasn't about to change things just because some people would think that the hobbits were gaying it up)
Really what more can be said than that the show was so slashy that women in the 60s and 70s had to invent slash to slash it? The show *led* to slash organically.
And Kirk and Spock love each other (in a manly way):100% canon. Knocking boots... eh, that's almost beside the point.
Ok. Bed now before I start talking about how dreamy Spock is and how that lame-o Archer is just a bloodless, wannabe Kirk...
Re: agrees but ships K/S anyhoo
Date: 2004-05-13 01:31 am (UTC)Dude. Exactly! But what makes for a real portrayal of love that includes the boring stuff and the stuff that has nothing to do with your lover/friend/whatever is all the build up. You can't skip all the foreplay and get right to the climax or it doesn't mean as much. Sad but true.
Hee! And the relaxing. yes. Often in some of the longer H/D fics I can't help thinking that it all sounds like a lot of bother and stress and really just makes them unhappy all in all. ;_;
oooh a new gw rec... shiny
no subject
Date: 2004-05-14 06:52 am (UTC)My take on this whole buddyshipping thing is here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/malafede/75640.html). It got to long and I went off on a couple of tangents so I put it in my lj. There's also a couple of refererences to the points you raised in our recent conversation, but actually, I think I'm going to address them specifically later.