~~ it's a meme's paradise....
Jul. 1st, 2004 03:34 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaThis is kind of in slight reference to a comment in ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
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
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
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-07-02 09:21 am (UTC)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.