Feb. 9th, 2007

reenka: (this is my life -.-)
You knew this had to happen... -I- knew this had to happen-- and finally, it's happened: My Thoughts On Yaoi :D :D :D

Uh. Well, I was reading this post about power dynamics & sex in slash, and how unrealistic/masturbatory on the part of the author it generally is to make the characters uber-bottoms or uber-tops (in the sense that one means getting it and the other means giving it), and the usual tie to how strong women still get penetrated, etc. Well, we've heard it all before... but then it's tied to the op's Issue With Yaoi & the seme/uke thing, and okay.... Okay, there's a big difference between Character X in fanfic who would never be super!uke, or who would never really get off on a particular situation 'cause it just doesn't make sense... and an original character in an original yaoi manga.

I'm so totally on board with being squicked by fics where it's obvious the sexual roles & behaviors are purely masturbatory either for the author's sake or as performance for the fangirl audience. I was talking about this earlier in response to Sister M's post on interpretation issues in fanon & somewhat the role of fantasy in making some things plausible or not. I definitely have issues with writing where characters aren't paid attention to, and I think that's why I'm so militant about ICness insofar as what -I- mean when I say that. To me, it means 'in character' rather than 'in author'. If the characters are doing what the characters would do in your head, fine-- but sometimes it's just waaaaaay too obvious that the characters are doing what they are because they 'should' to fit the plot. And that? That is by default, not something I could ever find 'in character', even if at the surface their behavior seems to fit (until you think about their motivations).

The interaction between 'in characterness' and sexual roles and kinks is obviously tricky, though, 'cause it's not like we generally know what the characters' kinks are in canon, and besides, with slash, we're already consciously twisting canon sexuality to some degree. So pretty much you can definitely write pure top/bottom if you can sell it & don't write just for the kink-- the same as with any other questionable characterization. Defaulting to it isn't kosher because defaulting to -any- characterization cliche isn't good writing. If you're writing your character as 'the top', you might as well be writing him as 'the jock' or 'the slut' or 'the repressed bookworm'-- and on that level, saying 'real gay men' aren't like that seems entirely beside the point, no? The issue isn't with the characterization -or- the kink, but always with sloppy writing. Always.

    Anyway... right. Yaoi. I feel a bit guilty 'cause obviously I'm addicted to yaoi and it's not like I believe in rigid sexual roles or 'ukes = must be penetrated = must be submissive = must cry'.
    riiiight... )


reenka: (Default)

October 2007

 12 3456
1415161718 19 20

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 21st, 2017 02:12 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios