~~ on slashing the obvious
Dec. 28th, 2004 05:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaI think since I'm nearly writing it right now, I've been rethinking some of my old ideas about the definition of 'original slash'.
Initially, I saw a heterosexual romance developing between my female narrator and the main male character, but somehow that was unsatisfactory-- too obvious, perhaps. So I invented a male foil to the (male) hero-- and one of his secondary or 'shadow' functions was definitely to become a romantic/sexual draw to my male protagonist.
In terms of me writing any romance in this story at all, I wanted to use these two characters, though at the back of my mind, the heroic protagonist and the antagonist were hardly going to expect this, and I still felt the girl somehow 'should' be with the guy in some alternate universe where I was unaware of other ways of thinking.
So perhaps the reason this potential protagonist/antagonist relationship is 'slash' (or just 'slashy'?) is that I'm twisting the 'real' (or original) narrative in my head, making there be two layers working with each other. The expected story i first envisioned and the second story I found more compelling 'cause it was possible too, but really because it fit my kinks better. I saw slashy possibilities because that's what I wanted to see, and I think no matter how much you talk about slashy subtext really being there, a lot of slashers perceive what they want to be there. It's just that me creating the character for that purpose was taking this one step further and playing with my own expectations.
It could be more simple, of course. I immediately knew that this relationship was going to be more central & intense than the relatively tame friendship between the girl and the guy-- these two men are at opposing sides of a huge conflict and their whole lives revolve around each other whether or not they're fully aware of it. And because there's this huge importance there, I felt any sort of romance would only be taking the existing chemistry from their respective roles to the next level. As soon as I conceived of these two characters, the intense narrative connection between them became obvious-- it was only sexualizing it that felt... iffy.
I feel as though writing them as attracted to one another would be subverting (or at least working aside from) some idea of a 'cultural canon' or perhaps simply the cultural norm as far as I'm aware of it as the writer. That's why it seems important that a definition of slash, whether or not it's 'original', should state that one's not writing about self-identified (or culturally identified) queerness. It's central that neither of my characters see themselves as gay at least with regards to each other-- whatever -that- means.
At base, I think one function of slashing is writing romance or sexual tension between two culturally straight men or boys. If one of them 'out' as the story begins, I still accept it but find it OOC or AU, depending on how well it's written. This reminds me of post-Hogwarts fics where Draco's flamingly gay-- while I can see that future, I still have to make an effort to pretend this is 'really' Draco or whatever, just because I didn't see the transformation within the text.
This relates to the concept of what it means to be 'culturally' straight vs. 'culturally' queer; I suppose it touches upon stories about 'gay behavior' in contexts where it's read differently than it is in present-day America or England, for instance, like the life and 'homosexuality' of say, Alexander the Great. I mean, how we see ourselves & how the society at large classifies our behavior seems rather important in terms of defining our identity. And I think to me, slash plays with that self and other-constructed identity by introducing contradictory or anomalous (subtextual?) behavior patterns. It plays with the expected gendertypal behavior, playing up the subtle queerness of various kinds of homosocial bonds.
So I don't see writing about a romance between two accepted, 'out' gay characters as 'original slash' but rather queer literature. And that's not to say that slash has to subvert the original's (heterosexual) norms-- it just runs as a parallel narrative, playing with whatever won't quite fit into the expected(?) canon.
Perhaps a narrative can also become a commentary on itself when its author is aware of the plot or characterization threads that challenge the expected flow. Then they're writing the 'potential' or 'shadow' story as if it was the main, with the 'obvious' heteronormative narrative itself becoming a kind of shadow presence in the background, informing how the story is read (or written).
Or maybe it's just that the act of slashing is a question of intent and audience (since the writer can also become an audience) as well as substance. The 'substance' seems to revolve around some form of turn-around-- where there's some form of canon that's being commented upon and altered, though this 'canon' can take many forms and doesn't have to be completely whole (as with RPS) or obvious to the reader (as with my original fic). I mean, I fully realize that it would probably come across as more like Mercedes Lackey's Vanyel novels than a Harry/Draco fic, say. It's just that the (nearly invisible) writing process is closer to the latter than the former, I believe.
In this sense, I feel that my current unwritten plans for two original characters are 'slashy', whereas writing about the characters of Queer As Folk, say, wouldn't really feel like that to me. I think the form of the story and the 'genre conventions' involved that people refer to with slashfic are too easily avoided. I mean, if you mean 'genre cliches' by conventions, they're a function of writing quality and being in fandom as much as anything. So I don't even know if my story's plot or approach to characterization is 'slashy' (that is, I've always written men as being too sensitive, I guess, just because I was always a girl).
It feels slashy basically because they have The Big Gay Love, and you know... they shouldn't. Except they so should.
Initially, I saw a heterosexual romance developing between my female narrator and the main male character, but somehow that was unsatisfactory-- too obvious, perhaps. So I invented a male foil to the (male) hero-- and one of his secondary or 'shadow' functions was definitely to become a romantic/sexual draw to my male protagonist.
In terms of me writing any romance in this story at all, I wanted to use these two characters, though at the back of my mind, the heroic protagonist and the antagonist were hardly going to expect this, and I still felt the girl somehow 'should' be with the guy in some alternate universe where I was unaware of other ways of thinking.
So perhaps the reason this potential protagonist/antagonist relationship is 'slash' (or just 'slashy'?) is that I'm twisting the 'real' (or original) narrative in my head, making there be two layers working with each other. The expected story i first envisioned and the second story I found more compelling 'cause it was possible too, but really because it fit my kinks better. I saw slashy possibilities because that's what I wanted to see, and I think no matter how much you talk about slashy subtext really being there, a lot of slashers perceive what they want to be there. It's just that me creating the character for that purpose was taking this one step further and playing with my own expectations.
It could be more simple, of course. I immediately knew that this relationship was going to be more central & intense than the relatively tame friendship between the girl and the guy-- these two men are at opposing sides of a huge conflict and their whole lives revolve around each other whether or not they're fully aware of it. And because there's this huge importance there, I felt any sort of romance would only be taking the existing chemistry from their respective roles to the next level. As soon as I conceived of these two characters, the intense narrative connection between them became obvious-- it was only sexualizing it that felt... iffy.
I feel as though writing them as attracted to one another would be subverting (or at least working aside from) some idea of a 'cultural canon' or perhaps simply the cultural norm as far as I'm aware of it as the writer. That's why it seems important that a definition of slash, whether or not it's 'original', should state that one's not writing about self-identified (or culturally identified) queerness. It's central that neither of my characters see themselves as gay at least with regards to each other-- whatever -that- means.
At base, I think one function of slashing is writing romance or sexual tension between two culturally straight men or boys. If one of them 'out' as the story begins, I still accept it but find it OOC or AU, depending on how well it's written. This reminds me of post-Hogwarts fics where Draco's flamingly gay-- while I can see that future, I still have to make an effort to pretend this is 'really' Draco or whatever, just because I didn't see the transformation within the text.
This relates to the concept of what it means to be 'culturally' straight vs. 'culturally' queer; I suppose it touches upon stories about 'gay behavior' in contexts where it's read differently than it is in present-day America or England, for instance, like the life and 'homosexuality' of say, Alexander the Great. I mean, how we see ourselves & how the society at large classifies our behavior seems rather important in terms of defining our identity. And I think to me, slash plays with that self and other-constructed identity by introducing contradictory or anomalous (subtextual?) behavior patterns. It plays with the expected gendertypal behavior, playing up the subtle queerness of various kinds of homosocial bonds.
So I don't see writing about a romance between two accepted, 'out' gay characters as 'original slash' but rather queer literature. And that's not to say that slash has to subvert the original's (heterosexual) norms-- it just runs as a parallel narrative, playing with whatever won't quite fit into the expected(?) canon.
Perhaps a narrative can also become a commentary on itself when its author is aware of the plot or characterization threads that challenge the expected flow. Then they're writing the 'potential' or 'shadow' story as if it was the main, with the 'obvious' heteronormative narrative itself becoming a kind of shadow presence in the background, informing how the story is read (or written).
Or maybe it's just that the act of slashing is a question of intent and audience (since the writer can also become an audience) as well as substance. The 'substance' seems to revolve around some form of turn-around-- where there's some form of canon that's being commented upon and altered, though this 'canon' can take many forms and doesn't have to be completely whole (as with RPS) or obvious to the reader (as with my original fic). I mean, I fully realize that it would probably come across as more like Mercedes Lackey's Vanyel novels than a Harry/Draco fic, say. It's just that the (nearly invisible) writing process is closer to the latter than the former, I believe.
In this sense, I feel that my current unwritten plans for two original characters are 'slashy', whereas writing about the characters of Queer As Folk, say, wouldn't really feel like that to me. I think the form of the story and the 'genre conventions' involved that people refer to with slashfic are too easily avoided. I mean, if you mean 'genre cliches' by conventions, they're a function of writing quality and being in fandom as much as anything. So I don't even know if my story's plot or approach to characterization is 'slashy' (that is, I've always written men as being too sensitive, I guess, just because I was always a girl).
It feels slashy basically because they have The Big Gay Love, and you know... they shouldn't. Except they so should.
