~~ it's a meme's paradise....

[reenka]

This is kind of in slight reference to a comment in sistermagpie's post about the supposed book 6 title and secondarily, the idea that criticizing the books/JKR would imply that that particular fan is saying they're somehow 'superior' & thus not a fan.

I think this seems relevant to me 'cause I do criticize things (more fanfics than canon, since I'm more in constant contact with fanfics and they seem more relevant) all the time, in terms as large and sweeping as some of the critiques of JKR's canon treatment of Slytherins, for example, and yet it's interesting 'cause I certainly remain a 'fan' of fanfic. There are complexities there, in terms of what makes one a fan & what enjoying the reading experience means for different people. It may seem contradictory that I don't feel like I'm a fan of JKR's writing at all, yet I enjoy some aspects of the HP books very much. I feel like I can enjoy some aspects of a work just as I can criticize and even feel upset with some others, at the same time.

Another interesting aspect is this idea of superiority. Do I imply my own superiority by criticizing others' fiction?

It's fascinating partly because what I'm criticizing is the work of other fans-- therefore we're supposed to be equal, right; and of course we are in the way that everyone's ideas/works are equally valid for scrutiny. Yet we, as a group of fan writers, are not very comfortable, overall, critiquing each other's methods. It gets too personal, right? Criticizing fanfic is a risky venture. Whereas criticizing JKR is impersonal, because-- well-- she's significantly separate from us fans. However, some authors would say having a group of people call themselves fans implies they are theirs: that somehow, the fans' behavior or beliefs are the author's province.

I think some fans feel free to talk back because she's simply not a part of a community: of -our- community. The fan's Author is the shadowy presence behind the books-- a construct-- an appropriation; they're almost a 'super-ego' aspect of oneself as Reader. They're quite different from an actual -person-, I think, with actual feelings & opinions. Thus there are a lot more people who talk about canon than fanon (though I myself talk about fanon, mostly). Our community has rules, of a sort, and JKR seems to think she heads it; that's more of a claim that may or may not have supporters rather than an established 'rule'.

JKR clearly believes she's superior to her readers. I myself think there can be no superiority attached to anyone's lit-crit ideas in terms of either canon or fanon-- simply because there's no such thing, really, as 'objective'. The ideas just are, and they can exist or die on their own merits. It's all about the memetics, man. The memes! The books! They are alive! Woo! We are the carriers-- JKR... JKR is the meta-carrier, but still a carrier.

I'm not so post-modern as to say 'The Author' is a fallacy-- I'd just say... The Author is an incomplete meme without The Reader there to interpret them. It is true that The Author can be their own Reader, but the receptivity is muddled (by foreknowledge and conscious intent which may or may not have been successfully translated)-- which is why it's so helpful to read one's works a long time later, when one -forgets- a lot of what one's written. The Creator alone, in other words, is not 'god'; any reality-- fictional or not-- is going to be co-created by anyone who perceives it.


Apparently, though, there are people who think that criticizing/questioning JKR (especially her moral stances in regards to good & evil) is blasphemous, somehow. One of those people who dislikes this large-scale questioning is JKR, from her comments about people being wrong for going against her authorial intent and liking Slytherins.

To me, the idea of any level of criticism implying I'm not a fan is antithetical-- simply because I criticize because I think; I constantly question. Are texts (and fanfic is a text, same as canon) made to be questioned, or just enjoyed as is or not at all? How does the question itself (no matter how controversial or fundamentally 'against' the supposed core of a work) somehow become a superiority issue? It does seem to happen, at least in the minds of the people who are on JKR's 'side', saying it's wanky and stupid to go against authorial intent.

This is a philosophy that makes sense only to people who have a narrow, very specialized circle of reading interests: if you don't like it, don't read it. Therefore, if you read it (this philosophy goes), you're condoning it-- approving of it, even. And how scary is -that-?
    JKR, by her anti-Slytherin comments, seems to imply that by reading (and being 'fans of', i.e., clearly enjoying every aspect of) her work, we're buying into some sort of... philosophical system. So, I'm curious. All of you, who may like my fanfics. Hey. Do you buy into their 'philosophical system'? Do you even know what it is? Would you care if I -told- you? Would you feel the need to accept it as your own within the boundaries of the fic? Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it.

I myself could care less about any writer's philosophical system, whether or not I agree with it, really. The need to agree actually doesn't even arise. The only thing that matters to me is that I feel I -understand- the work and that I enjoy the text and/or subtext as I see them. Usually I won't enjoy a story without feeling an affinity for the ideas contained within it-- of whatever sort-- but sometimes a story does come along which appeals to me on one level but not others; at least, I find I -notice- the levels at which it doesn't appeal. I think generally I'd just -overlook- the things that don't appeal to me in a story. Sometimes though, because I really like some aspects of a story, my attention widens to scrutinize the story more and thus I also focus on some unappealing things.

It should go without saying that I hate the idea of liking something without being able to see-- and name-- its ugly sides, especially if it's something I love. The more I love it, the more I want to enumerate everything I notice about it, good or bad-- like I said, it's just a question of me having focus, as a fan. So I'm a fan of H/D fanfic, say, so I criticize it to hell and back :D I don't criticize -everything- I'm a fan of simply because some things (Mozart's music) are unqualifiably appealing, whereas some things (H/D fanfic in general, JKR's books, fantasy lit in general, New York City) have almost as much good as bad in my mind. How much of either really seems to depend on my mood.

Eh. I'm just a different sort of reader, I think, than JKR is. It's interesting, though, imagining her as an author who's just a part of this community (as she seems to be a bit closer to becoming, what with all the interviews). Imagining her as one of us; seems almost blasphemous ('the Creator' among us!), but I don't think it is, from my own viewpoint as someone who generally critiques the fanfic of her peers in fundamental terms. Peer-meta-review, man. It's not exactly scientific (being much more about the reviewer's own philosophies and beliefs than any 'facts', often enough), but it's just as communal & important as peer-meta-fangirling, I think.

Basically? Yeay for subjectivity. :> And for the idea that instead of coming at the expense of The Real Truth, it can co-create it. Man. I love contradictions :D They make my brain tickle. Non-linear thinkers, scatter!!1

Comments

[malsperanza.livejournal.com]

Ah, a post on my favorite topic, the Great Author-Reader War, w00t.

The fan's Author is the shadowy presence behind the books-- a construct-- an appropriation; they're almost a 'super-ego' aspect of oneself as Reader. They're quite different from an actual -person-, I think, with actual feelings & opinions. Thus there are a lot more people who talk about canon than fanon (and I think I myself talk about fanon, mostly). Our community has rules, of a sort, and JKR seems to think she heads it; that's more of a claim that may or may not have supporters rather than an established 'rule'.

In fairness, the author--JKR or any other--has some claim to being in a more powerful or superior position than the readers (not to mention the characters). At least until the book is done, after which the author has resigned all rights and turned her little fiefdom free. Until then, though, the world of the book is not a democracy, but a monarchy. Well, maybe one of those constitutional monarchies, like Holland.

That's why, for me, the relationship of readers to author during the course of a serial book such as HP (or LOTR, or some of the Victorians) is of particular interest. The author is still free to exercise her superior strength and clout--to change things, to thwart or please the reader as she chooses. It isn't all set in stone yet. And the advent of the Internet has made it possible for authors to be more consciously and directly responsive (or unresponsive) to readers. Which is interesting--and very parallel to what goes on in the world of fanfic writing, beta-ing, and reviewing.

Though really, when you think about it, nothing could have been more overwhelming than the letters Dickens received from readers begging him not to kill Little Nell, or Conan Doyle, when he temporarily killed Sherlock Holmes, only to (reluctantly) restore the poor sod to life in response to reader passions.

JKR clearly believes she's superior to her readers. I myself think there can be no superiority attached to anyone's lit-crit ideas in terms of either canon or fanon-- simply because there's no such thing, really, as 'objective'. The ideas just are, and they can exist or die on their own merits. It's all about the memetics, man. The memes! The books! They are alive! Woo!

This I agree with wholeheartedly, and am always astonished when I find readers who feel obliged to accept an author's extratextual comments as canonical. Well, she wrote the books, so she must know whether Lucius really loves his son or not. Why? If it's not et forth in the text, then her opinions on the matter are no more authoritative than anyone else's. And this is where your distinction is important between The Author and the person who writes the books and cashes the royalty checks and raises her kids and runs a website and eats dinner.

We are the carriers-- JKR... JKR is the meta-carrier, but still a carrier.

I agree! Although I have no idea what a meta-carrier is. But it sounds good, so I'll buy it.

I'm not so post-modern as to say 'The Author' is a fallacy-- I'd just say... The Author is an incomplete meme without The Reader there to interpret them.

All Power to the Reader! Of course, the Reader isn't nearly as in control as it may appear. But that's another question for another day.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

That aspect of 'until the book is done' was actually something that was bothering me in terms of sensing a hole in my reasoning & yet not quite being able to put my finger on it, so thanks :D :D! Definitely, I feel JKR has more 'power' than usual for writers of finished works (and that's a big part of the reason I felt the parallels between her & fanfic writers were so interesting). So yes... she has the 'power of the future' backing her up-- because well, she could pretty much change almost anything at this point (nevermind good writing-- that didn't stop her with Ginny's characterization, did it, ahahahahah).

So yeah. While in progress, a book is incomplete and thus the writer has a lot more power. It's weird, though, to think of it in terms of how in this case, these incomplete parts of it are probably just as alive as the whole seven books will (probably) be-- just as the incomplete works of Conan Doyle had already reached 'critical capacity' of some sort, and, er... we had lift off. *cringes at bad metaphor*

I mean, a number of fans don't really even -care- about the future canon if it seriously contradicts their beloved little vision at this point, y'know? I think that's actually really amusing. In that case, I tend to be a bit on the author's 'side', in as far as I myself don't really care what happens in canon (as long as Harry's alive), so it's easy for me to laugh at the idea of judging the text for being not what one wanted. I mean, you can -critique- it of course, just like everything else, but it's kind of ridiculous to expect a "co-ownership" of the text in this sense. Although clearly, yeah, these things do get fuzzy, don't they?

I mean, to me, my 'appropriation' that I referred to is basically only in effect in terms of my own fanfic and my ideas of what actually -is- already text. It doesn't extent to -me- (instead of the Author!) trying to now control the text. Ahahaha, that sort of power-struggle actually really amuses me, 'cause it seems so... I dunno, almost parent/child-like, y'know? In my mind, the reader/book relationship is more like lovers than like parent/child, and the whiny why-didn't-this-go-my-way reader is just like a child in the same way JKR slapping someone's hand and saying 'no no! you're -wrong-, children!' is... well... yeah :>

I think the thing is that The Author as seen through their text is more than the sum of their conscious parts. Some things are always unintentional, some are unconscious, some are just plain errors, some are miscommunications, etcetc. Ahhh, language is a tricksy bitch :>

I don't know what a meta-carrier is either-- but I don't actually know the memetics lingo necessary, so I just... made up a word. I meant something that wasn't 'meme originator' (because I don't think a book -starts with- The Author, precisely), and didn't sound clunky like uber-carrier, ahahah :>

[malafede.livejournal.com]

This post meant a lot to me, Reena. I am tired and cranky right now so I'm not sure I'll be able to make any intelligent commentary, but thanks. Not only you made my own jumbled thoughts make sense, but also I really got a kick at reading you express so eloquently the conter-argument to the canon police (or author police, let's say).

I'll quote some love back at you...

However, some authors would say having a group of people call themselves fans implies they are theirs: that somehow, the fans' behavior or beliefs are the author's province.

Sums up all of my issues with what I perceive as JKR's invasion of my territory. I personally couldn't care less about her moral views, about her thoughts on the characters, about her thoughts on the fans of the characters... if they weren't continuosly thrown in my face in an attempt to remind me I am not reading her text correctly. Because for me, the one defence of a text is a text. If I am reading it differently from how she intended, then too bad. I find it dishonest that she attempts to straighten the failures of her text at conveying itself (which she must subconsiously think she has otherwise wouldn't be insecure to the point when she has to clarify canon in her site) by using her position of power in places where it should apply.

Our community has rules, of a sort, and JKR seems to think she heads it; that's more of a claim that may or may not have supporters rather than an established 'rule'.

She's wrong; or I wish she were. The commenter above me said she is still the Queen of the Text - this is true for actual content of her books, which she controls, but not true for the reader's response to that content. She doesn't seem to realise that:

And for the idea that instead of coming at the expense of The Real Truth, it can co-create it. Man. I love contradictions

(reader/book slash? who was had that icon?)

Her books wouldn't exist - apart from materially - without her readers. It's a synergy between intent and reception, I think. Someone said in sistermagpie's lj that the issues of miscommunication cannot be excluded from literature; we talk to other people and they understand a distorted meaning through projection, but that's what counts for them as individuals. That's their truth. And I am honestly not so convinced it would be possible to have it any other way. So truth - reality - is a conjoined effort.

To me, the idea of any level of criticism implying I'm not a fan is antithetical-- simply because I criticize because I think; I constantly question. [...] It does seem to happen, at least in the minds of the people who are on JKR's 'side', saying it's wanky and stupid to go against authorial intent.

Oh, I thought people were brought together in fandom by the desire to talk about their common interest? So doesn't that imply that they're brought together by a desire of analysis - of bringing their own input - we're not passive parasites who don't think back. So fandom is, in a way, exactly the expression of that desire of (shared and debated) criticism.

I find it funny that people who call wankers the critics think we feel superior... aren't we at the same time the ones who are considered inferior for not following canon blindly?

This doesn't make sense to me, btw, so I'd be glad if somebody could explain me the equation between criticism = superiority trip ("I could write it better!") I never even thought about this as a possible reaction to criticism until someone pointed it out to me... without backing it up with any sort of logical explanation, of course.

The me who writes and the me who reads are very different identities, with different skills and - have I ever told you I hate reading the kind of fics I write?

[malafede.livejournal.com]

Oh ack ack, I forgot... but I have to ask you something about this Christmas but since I am not comfortable begging in public... well, you probably know what I am going to ask. If I don't catch you on aim, I'll write an email.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Hee <3
The funny thing is, I actually am curious about a writer's mental process and personality in most cases, and I like -writers- almost as often as I like their -writing-. But of course I don't tend to -know- most writers I like, so this isn't generally tested. Even so, I -am- curious (so I made friends with a lot of my favorite fanfic writers because I could, y'know). Also, I adore writer biographies and reading trivia about their writing process-- I feel like I can learn things from it and so on, and also it makes me feel like I'm part of a community.

However, this affinity for trivia doesn't extend to a tolerance for being lectured. Just because, y'know-- I hate being lectured unless I agree with the lecturer or respect them as an intelligent individual, ahahaha. *coughs* (Am I sounding superior & elitist? Oops.) Anyway, not saying I even disrespect JKR-- I mean, I don't feel one way or the other about her-- she's vaguely interesting as all writers are to me, I suppose. I tend to find it funny rather than offensive that JKR tries to police/correct the fandom, 'cause I think she means well, and just doesn't have a clue, really -- what actually bothers me is the fandom -accepting- said correcting. Y'know what I mean?

It's actually funny, because in order to write this, I had to concentrate on my feelings about H/D fanfic rather than the canon issues you & SM tend to talk about-- since I genuinely care more about fanfic I think. *cringes* So really, I mean, I don't care if she doesn't like Slytherins and that she will never write them better and that they're 'misrepresented' or whatever-- you know this, right? 'Cause I like Dumbledore & Harry & all of Gryffindor probably more than I'll ever like Slytherin-- I'm totally reading for what I see as the author's intent, as I-- and say, Alice-- usually do (in fact, I can't stand Slytherin on principle, and I've written about this, remember). But that's not the point, see! I may or may not agree, but I just hate the idea of -having- to :D (That's my Gryffindor side, man, AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA).

conversant was the one with the reader/book icon, and that all started with a particular post... and this is all related to anthropomor_fic, though I'm not sure ^^; But this erotic relationship to texts is something I'm... uh... always interested in :D

Some people are just in fandom for the squee, dude. Not everyone's a geek, alas. WOE :((

(Also... um... well... I think people who aren't literary critics by nature or training treat it as every other sort of criticism-- like saying 'you're so messy, man, jeez'-- which implies you are not messy yourself. Or something. Ahahah.)

And while the person who reads & the person who writes are different in me, I always strive to write the sort of fic I want to read, whether or not I fail :>

[go-back-chief.livejournal.com]

I think the attitude "well, if you find things to criticize about, you can't be a real fan" to be... bizarre to say the least. The way I see it, if I am a fan of something, then of course I care about it enough to pick out the aspects that I think could be improved. No work of fiction is perfect. I don't have to see anything as "perfect" to really, really like it, to the extent that I'd call myself a "fan". And I enjoy to not only pick out which aspects I like and dislike in a story, but more importantly analyse why I like and dislike it. It's what I do. I see it as a training in my own writing. It's not saying that I'm superior to the writer whose text I pick apart and try to figure out whoch aspects I don't like and how they could be done in a way that worked, because obviously, just because you can say it, doesn't automatically mean you can do it. But I do think that if you can put it into words, you're more likely to be able avoid the traps in question, than you are if you're not even aware of them. Does that make sense?

However, some authors would say having a group of people call themselves fans implies they are theirs: that somehow, the fans' behavior or beliefs are the author's province.

Would they really? That's ridiculous. Any author who articulated such a belief would automatically lose me as a fan, that's all I'm saying.;-) Why anyone would want unquestioning worship from anyone else is beyond me... Honestly, I'm getting a bit curious as to which writers would think that? Because I'm inclined to believe that a really good writer would be more open and accepting of the reader's own opinions... And, of course I'm not talking about that the author him/herself would have to listen to the opinions, just that they'd let their fans make the interpretations they'd like without trying to correct them.

I'm not so post-modern as to say 'The Author' is a fallacy-- I'd just say... The Author is an incomplete meme without The Reader there to interpret them.

Yes. Without the readers any book, no matter how great, is just a pile of papers. And I guess that's another reason why I get annoyed at the "Author is God" opinion I quite frequently see expressed in this fandom. I mean, I don't know how many times I've seen someone say that readers who complain about certain developments not having occured in the books, and about how they think certain fanfics are better than Canon, are "ungrateful, because without JKR there wouldn't be any fanfic!" I always want to respond: "True, there wouldn't be, but without the readers/fans JKR wouldn't have her millions", so it's really a co-dependence-relationship going on here, and if JKR doesn't write in a way that her readers like, they have the full right to complain (and it's ridiculous to think otherwise; she's a grown woman and a published author, if she can't take it, it's certainly about time she learned!) Likewise, if JKR make statements that disrespects a group of her fans, they have a right to say negative things about her.

This is a philosophy that makes sense only to people who have a narrow, very specialized circle of reading interests: if you don't like it, don't read it. Therefore, if you read it (this philosophy goes), you're condoning it-- approving of it, even. And how scary is -that-?

Bwaha! Yeah, really, how scary is that, considering none of us can possibly know what we read and are approving of before we've read it?

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I definitely think awareness as a writer -and- a reader (since hopefully, all writers are readers) help one avoid some writing pitfalls. There are some writers who sneer at readers and readership and all the obsessions thereof, and admittedly they're separate processes, but... as an obsessive reader -and- writer.... And someone who's both analytical and creative... the whole antagonism of these kind of really bothers me :T

I think JKR has been getting more into the policing business, at least with the telling people that Slytherins suck & Draco/Hermione will never happen & so on, though she -has- been pretty careful, too (in terms of R/Hr vs. H/Hr, for instance, because she 'loves the arguments' or whatever). I think JKR just doesn't like the pointless & stupid arguments, or something? I dunno. But she's not what I'd call an analytical reader herself, from what I can see, so yeah. Ahahaha.

I'm not really in the business of full-on personal interaction with the writer unless I like them & want to know them better, but that's just how I am with people. If someone's opinions don't please me I a) get upset & rant or b) ignore them. Neither includes directly confronting the person, so I'm kinda like, 'well, whatever'. It probably also helps that I don't particularly feel invested in how she treats the Slytherins ('cause I never expected she'd someday 'redeem' them and it was always obvious they were a cliche), or in Draco/Hermione (....let's just say I'm OTP-militant, and clearly she'll prolly faint before making-- an entirely predictable-- comment on H/D, ahahahah).

People who don't think will say the darndest things, man :>

[go-back-chief.livejournal.com]

I think JKR just doesn't like the pointless & stupid arguments, or something? I dunno.

Well, have you ever read the great H/Hr vs R/Hr-debate? Because it can certainly be filled with a lot of stupid and pointless arguments as well (from both sides), and not all D/Hr-arguments are stupid and pointless, IMO; as a matter of fact, I used to think that D/Hr had more chance of happening (but admittedly not much) than H/Hr, because a) I see so much foreshadowing of another H-ship (which I hate and shall thus remain unnamed;-)), and b) I've never, in my entire life, read a story about a hero with two side-kicks, one girl and one boy, gets together with one of them (side-kicks getting together must be te most common here). On the other hand I have occasionally read stories where a racist or otherwise prejudiced person falls in love with just the kind of person he/she is prejudiced against, not to mention the cliche of the lovers who hate each other first, is quite common.

I'm not really in the business of full-on personal interaction with the writer unless I like them & want to know them better, but that's just how I am with people.

Hmm. Well, the fanfiction culture is pretty new in the respect that it's quite common to actually form some sort of personal relationship between writer and reader, isn't it? And it's quite a bit fascinating in that respect. I can search out the journals of fanfic-writers I like, because it's a good way to keep updated on their fics, and also out of assumtion that if they write in a way I like, they might have interesting things to say in their journals too (but that's not always true, I've found. But sometimes it is :D). Anyway, it's quite a new thing for me, because when it comes to published work, I often prefer to know as little about the writer as possible, at least before I've read the books, because I don't want my exterior knowledge of them to influence my reading experience.