[fic ramble #20983409]
Dec. 6th, 2005 01:17 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaI think this post by ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-syndicated.gif)
worldserpent verbalizes my confused feelings about the two approaches to literature (quality vs. entertainment, or 'status' vs. 'contract'), and why one has so much more dominance in fandom. More specifically why the search for 'quality' and 'ICness' in fanfic is basically futile, like,
people adopting extreme Status attitudes (oh noes, why do people ignore this great work even if it's in a genre/pairing they have no interest in; fanfiction is insufficiently citius altius fortius (faster higher stronger); writers are not sufficiently into busting the dominant paradigms! Also all of the meta which seems to have a subtext of "eat your peas."
Also, so correctly: a broken Contract induces rage. Exhibit A, crazed Harmonians.
I'm sufficiently humbled: I'm very sorry if I've ever seemed to imply people should eat their peas (as I fear I have). Honestly, I hate peas. I just want my favorite cake, but realize I should bloody well make it myself. Well, I tried, though in the end it was just kind of glum having a party of one.
Anyway, the point was that this quite natural focus on 'contract' drove her in particular to stop reading fanfic-- and I think that's what it's done to me too. I -love- fanfic for the way it approaches writing (communal, multi-layered, nonlinear), but I can't stand wading through the dreck and having my own personal 'contract' broken so repeatedly. In the end, I'm no better than a 'crazed Harmonian' with all my ranty rage about fanon!Draco, people not writing 'serious' H/D and so on and so forth. I mean, sane people just stop reading fic, and I guess that's what I did in the end-- but at first it really feels like such a -betrayal- that no one's writing what -I- want to read; it's ridiculous, and a clear sign I'm reading for 'contract' (my own entertainment) moreso than quality, and should really try harder not to confuse the two, even if it's true I read for quality first (I thought).
Actually, I don't think I do; I'm mainly a (fantasy/romance) genre reader, and I have no great interest in reading 'great' works of literature just because they're great. It's always been that way. With my family being old-school intellectuals, I'll probably never get over the guilt with that, but fact remains I've always read for pleasure first and I basically don't care how 'good' the book is if it's boring. On the other hand, I'm incredibly picky about the things I like, and become extremely focused and narrow in what my 'contract' is. Even so, I don't think I'll ever narrow so far as to read for 'status', because that's just joyless, and to me reading is joy.
Actually, I read for quality in the -beginning- of fandom much more-- just a different sort of quality, perhaps. I used to be nearly 100% style-centric, and now I'm probably something like 85% content-centric, which is ridiculously high & hard to meet. It's all rather contradictory but such is (my) life.
~~
Also, I reread this old post on how all women love a fascist (ie, an 'Alpha Bastard' and/or Byronic Hero) and it struck me in relation to my recent post on Tsukasa from Hana Yori Dango, who's pretty classic in that respect. There was a comment on that saying that they prefer 'the witty, dangerous, heart-on-his/her-sleeve rogue'.
It made me think that this too is a very old literary/romance type, though usually not the one who Gets the Girl (when he does, like in the shoujo manga `Mars' or, well, in Robin Hood), I think I'm somewhat surprised, but usually this is also explained by there being a lack of the brooding Dark Knight. The girl -always- picks the Dark Knight in traditional romance, at least.
I was also thinking that my attraction to the Dark Knight is very different from liking them because they're such fascist bastards, even though I like to keep harping on their angsty bastard qualities with a sort of glee. I certainly like people's dark sides, but I suspect this is why more reasonable people than I dislike them or even hate them. And often enough, the girls who like this 'bad boy' character will say they'll dump them if they turn 'good' or 'gooey' or vulnerable (like the William bits in Spike), whereas my approach is totally different. I think the 'wounded boy' parts in this archetype are the most vital and interesting parts, and without them you wouldn't have a real person. At the same time, I'm not in favor of the girl 'taming' or totally (unrealistically) changing them but rather them finding some measure of self-acceptance or peace through loving & being loved, which isn't all that far-fetched.
Basically, I think inside every 'fascist Alpha Bastard' Byronic type there's a wounded, rather pathetic little boy who needs love. Believe me, I'm saying this with a total straight face, too. I'm not saying they're cuddly bunnies on the inside, I'm saying they're wounded, damaged people, usually messed up sometime in their childhood. I don't think a properly empathetic lover would be delusional to think they can help. Though I have to admit most romances written about this are highly unrealistic in execution.
Also, this made me think of a color classification system of sorts for the dominant male romance archetypes, where the Brooding Byronic Bastard would be the 'black' type (ie, Snape & Harry), the Dashing Dangerous Wit would be 'red' (ie, Sirius and James, probably Draco) and then there's 'silver' for the Brilliant but Shy Gentleman (ie, Remus). (Alpha/beta/theta??) There are probably others I can't think of at the moment. :>
And I feel I should mention that these types are rather fluid and often cross over in terms of actual characters. For instance, you can't say that 'violent temper' is a property of the 'red' type alone (I think the brooding 'black' type is just more likely to uh, hold on to grudges, perhaps). Similarly, brilliance can be a characteristic of any type of personality, it's just that it defines the 'silver' type's behavior most heavily, in the sense that they tend to be more passive or non-emotional in a different way that the 'black' type would be-- meaning they're not cold (and repressing their red-hotness, mmm) but rather -cool-, if that makes sense. Though the cool 'silver' type is just repressing things differently a lot of times, etcetc :D
EDIT - Anyway, because I felt I did need to elaborate on the types beyond just a few examples, here:
Black = the 'bitter', neurotic, angsty type. Given to outbursts of anger/rage/violence if pushed but generally controlled and/or distant. Possibly bored or disillusioned with either most people or life in general. Usually v. intelligent but not quite intellectual per se. Very dominant to the point of being near-sociopathic in interactions with others, though capable of putting on a good show; it's more natural to just intimidate people, though. Has very few (to none) good close friends; is generally overly close/attached to some childhood female figure and/or has a complex. Is not talkative and represses quite a lot of emotion. May be sexually promiscuous but in a desultory way-- generally avoids too much contact. Without 'help' or intervention, can become psychotic and totally separated from humanity-- sadism kicks in. With help or someone to lean on/let off steam with/talk with, can gradually soften and become more of a leader, someone who actually wants to take care of/protect people. One might say that overall, this type is just repressing the fact that he's 'red' on the inside, so to speak, but that's what gives him that somewhat mysterious quality.
To be quite disgustingly meta, you could say he would be a manifestation of Ego; of Will. His willfulness and stubbornness define him.
Red = the witty, charming yet often violent playboy type. Tends to hide his emotions a lot better while also wearing his heart on his sleeve in a more obvious fashion-- meaning, you can see his moods pretty well, but you can't get really close very easily either, and he has a ferocious temper that's pretty easily triggered. Does tend to have a group of close friends and a whole slew of acquaintances, and treats women very well as a rule and likes to be treated well in return. Tends to have a style of 'no commitments & no attachments' & yet is so charming and funny he gets away with it. Likes to affect a happy-go-lucky attitude that hides a darker side which is slow-moving and intense, which even he may not be aware of. Is very hard to catch off-guard and will swear that being loyal and devoted is completely out of his nature, but it is actually his true nature, it's just that he's more multi-focused and genuinely interested in people than the 'black' type. Pretty addicted to danger & excitement of all sorts, and tends to have a very good way with words.
Is definitely representative of Id on a very meta level; I like to associate this archetype with Mars lately. The god of War.
Silver = harder to define, as it is a rarer and more elusive type of character. Tends to be quiet and keeps to himself, generally observing and not causing a scene. Is the 'calm one' whom many dismiss and don't treat as a danger (wrongly). Can be rather manipulative and casual about it, but is generally dedicated to whatever ideal/ethical system he follows. Won't let himself be seen or understood very easily, but doesn't bluster or bluff with coldness or violence. Is polite to a fault & can smile insincerely in many different ways; is a master of insulting you so subtly you don't know you've been insulted.
Rather manipulative and generally emotionally weak, but thinks he's more mature than everyone around him. Tends to fall for fiery, emotional types that drive him insane, but also get him to open up and be more spontaneous and genuine. Another characteristic is a tendency to give things up easily and forgive too easily while really keeping a score on some level at the same time. Is a gentleman on principle rather than any sort of desire to impress or be liked by everybody-- he often wants to be liked by those he finds worthy, and the rest just to fall into place and not bother him. Has the ability to get along with anyone and makes few enemies, but when he does, it's forever.
Might be seen as a manifestation of the superego in some ways. Sort of.
~~
I just read this blog entry which gave me an interesting bit of perspective, being a tribute to all the 'nice' girls out there and the guys who complain that all the girls want mean guys & not them, whereas really they don't give the nice girls the time of day either. And I always feel chagrined when I remember this basic reality of existence, and how I always pair the nice ones with the mean ones and don't blink twice, and how that's just perpetuating the cycle of misunderstanding & misery in real life, because people have these sorts of unrealistic expectations of their actual love-lives.
And all I can say is that I -know-, of course I know (being a nice girl myself, mostly) that it's not just the mean and tortured ones that need love, and of course I don't think being closed-off and emotionally immature should mean you can get away with anything (ie, emotional abuse). Life isn't fiction, as they say.
worldserpent verbalizes my confused feelings about the two approaches to literature (quality vs. entertainment, or 'status' vs. 'contract'), and why one has so much more dominance in fandom. More specifically why the search for 'quality' and 'ICness' in fanfic is basically futile, like, people adopting extreme Status attitudes (oh noes, why do people ignore this great work even if it's in a genre/pairing they have no interest in; fanfiction is insufficiently citius altius fortius (faster higher stronger); writers are not sufficiently into busting the dominant paradigms! Also all of the meta which seems to have a subtext of "eat your peas."
Also, so correctly: a broken Contract induces rage. Exhibit A, crazed Harmonians.
I'm sufficiently humbled: I'm very sorry if I've ever seemed to imply people should eat their peas (as I fear I have). Honestly, I hate peas. I just want my favorite cake, but realize I should bloody well make it myself. Well, I tried, though in the end it was just kind of glum having a party of one.
Anyway, the point was that this quite natural focus on 'contract' drove her in particular to stop reading fanfic-- and I think that's what it's done to me too. I -love- fanfic for the way it approaches writing (communal, multi-layered, nonlinear), but I can't stand wading through the dreck and having my own personal 'contract' broken so repeatedly. In the end, I'm no better than a 'crazed Harmonian' with all my ranty rage about fanon!Draco, people not writing 'serious' H/D and so on and so forth. I mean, sane people just stop reading fic, and I guess that's what I did in the end-- but at first it really feels like such a -betrayal- that no one's writing what -I- want to read; it's ridiculous, and a clear sign I'm reading for 'contract' (my own entertainment) moreso than quality, and should really try harder not to confuse the two, even if it's true I read for quality first (I thought).
Actually, I don't think I do; I'm mainly a (fantasy/romance) genre reader, and I have no great interest in reading 'great' works of literature just because they're great. It's always been that way. With my family being old-school intellectuals, I'll probably never get over the guilt with that, but fact remains I've always read for pleasure first and I basically don't care how 'good' the book is if it's boring. On the other hand, I'm incredibly picky about the things I like, and become extremely focused and narrow in what my 'contract' is. Even so, I don't think I'll ever narrow so far as to read for 'status', because that's just joyless, and to me reading is joy.
Actually, I read for quality in the -beginning- of fandom much more-- just a different sort of quality, perhaps. I used to be nearly 100% style-centric, and now I'm probably something like 85% content-centric, which is ridiculously high & hard to meet. It's all rather contradictory but such is (my) life.
~~
Also, I reread this old post on how all women love a fascist (ie, an 'Alpha Bastard' and/or Byronic Hero) and it struck me in relation to my recent post on Tsukasa from Hana Yori Dango, who's pretty classic in that respect. There was a comment on that saying that they prefer 'the witty, dangerous, heart-on-his/her-sleeve rogue'.
It made me think that this too is a very old literary/romance type, though usually not the one who Gets the Girl (when he does, like in the shoujo manga `Mars' or, well, in Robin Hood), I think I'm somewhat surprised, but usually this is also explained by there being a lack of the brooding Dark Knight. The girl -always- picks the Dark Knight in traditional romance, at least.
I was also thinking that my attraction to the Dark Knight is very different from liking them because they're such fascist bastards, even though I like to keep harping on their angsty bastard qualities with a sort of glee. I certainly like people's dark sides, but I suspect this is why more reasonable people than I dislike them or even hate them. And often enough, the girls who like this 'bad boy' character will say they'll dump them if they turn 'good' or 'gooey' or vulnerable (like the William bits in Spike), whereas my approach is totally different. I think the 'wounded boy' parts in this archetype are the most vital and interesting parts, and without them you wouldn't have a real person. At the same time, I'm not in favor of the girl 'taming' or totally (unrealistically) changing them but rather them finding some measure of self-acceptance or peace through loving & being loved, which isn't all that far-fetched.
Basically, I think inside every 'fascist Alpha Bastard' Byronic type there's a wounded, rather pathetic little boy who needs love. Believe me, I'm saying this with a total straight face, too. I'm not saying they're cuddly bunnies on the inside, I'm saying they're wounded, damaged people, usually messed up sometime in their childhood. I don't think a properly empathetic lover would be delusional to think they can help. Though I have to admit most romances written about this are highly unrealistic in execution.
Also, this made me think of a color classification system of sorts for the dominant male romance archetypes, where the Brooding Byronic Bastard would be the 'black' type (ie, Snape & Harry), the Dashing Dangerous Wit would be 'red' (ie, Sirius and James, probably Draco) and then there's 'silver' for the Brilliant but Shy Gentleman (ie, Remus). (Alpha/beta/theta??) There are probably others I can't think of at the moment. :>
And I feel I should mention that these types are rather fluid and often cross over in terms of actual characters. For instance, you can't say that 'violent temper' is a property of the 'red' type alone (I think the brooding 'black' type is just more likely to uh, hold on to grudges, perhaps). Similarly, brilliance can be a characteristic of any type of personality, it's just that it defines the 'silver' type's behavior most heavily, in the sense that they tend to be more passive or non-emotional in a different way that the 'black' type would be-- meaning they're not cold (and repressing their red-hotness, mmm) but rather -cool-, if that makes sense. Though the cool 'silver' type is just repressing things differently a lot of times, etcetc :D
EDIT - Anyway, because I felt I did need to elaborate on the types beyond just a few examples, here:
Black = the 'bitter', neurotic, angsty type. Given to outbursts of anger/rage/violence if pushed but generally controlled and/or distant. Possibly bored or disillusioned with either most people or life in general. Usually v. intelligent but not quite intellectual per se. Very dominant to the point of being near-sociopathic in interactions with others, though capable of putting on a good show; it's more natural to just intimidate people, though. Has very few (to none) good close friends; is generally overly close/attached to some childhood female figure and/or has a complex. Is not talkative and represses quite a lot of emotion. May be sexually promiscuous but in a desultory way-- generally avoids too much contact. Without 'help' or intervention, can become psychotic and totally separated from humanity-- sadism kicks in. With help or someone to lean on/let off steam with/talk with, can gradually soften and become more of a leader, someone who actually wants to take care of/protect people. One might say that overall, this type is just repressing the fact that he's 'red' on the inside, so to speak, but that's what gives him that somewhat mysterious quality.
To be quite disgustingly meta, you could say he would be a manifestation of Ego; of Will. His willfulness and stubbornness define him.
Red = the witty, charming yet often violent playboy type. Tends to hide his emotions a lot better while also wearing his heart on his sleeve in a more obvious fashion-- meaning, you can see his moods pretty well, but you can't get really close very easily either, and he has a ferocious temper that's pretty easily triggered. Does tend to have a group of close friends and a whole slew of acquaintances, and treats women very well as a rule and likes to be treated well in return. Tends to have a style of 'no commitments & no attachments' & yet is so charming and funny he gets away with it. Likes to affect a happy-go-lucky attitude that hides a darker side which is slow-moving and intense, which even he may not be aware of. Is very hard to catch off-guard and will swear that being loyal and devoted is completely out of his nature, but it is actually his true nature, it's just that he's more multi-focused and genuinely interested in people than the 'black' type. Pretty addicted to danger & excitement of all sorts, and tends to have a very good way with words.
Is definitely representative of Id on a very meta level; I like to associate this archetype with Mars lately. The god of War.
Silver = harder to define, as it is a rarer and more elusive type of character. Tends to be quiet and keeps to himself, generally observing and not causing a scene. Is the 'calm one' whom many dismiss and don't treat as a danger (wrongly). Can be rather manipulative and casual about it, but is generally dedicated to whatever ideal/ethical system he follows. Won't let himself be seen or understood very easily, but doesn't bluster or bluff with coldness or violence. Is polite to a fault & can smile insincerely in many different ways; is a master of insulting you so subtly you don't know you've been insulted.
Rather manipulative and generally emotionally weak, but thinks he's more mature than everyone around him. Tends to fall for fiery, emotional types that drive him insane, but also get him to open up and be more spontaneous and genuine. Another characteristic is a tendency to give things up easily and forgive too easily while really keeping a score on some level at the same time. Is a gentleman on principle rather than any sort of desire to impress or be liked by everybody-- he often wants to be liked by those he finds worthy, and the rest just to fall into place and not bother him. Has the ability to get along with anyone and makes few enemies, but when he does, it's forever.
Might be seen as a manifestation of the superego in some ways. Sort of.
~~
I just read this blog entry which gave me an interesting bit of perspective, being a tribute to all the 'nice' girls out there and the guys who complain that all the girls want mean guys & not them, whereas really they don't give the nice girls the time of day either. And I always feel chagrined when I remember this basic reality of existence, and how I always pair the nice ones with the mean ones and don't blink twice, and how that's just perpetuating the cycle of misunderstanding & misery in real life, because people have these sorts of unrealistic expectations of their actual love-lives.
And all I can say is that I -know-, of course I know (being a nice girl myself, mostly) that it's not just the mean and tortured ones that need love, and of course I don't think being closed-off and emotionally immature should mean you can get away with anything (ie, emotional abuse). Life isn't fiction, as they say.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
blah blah blah (amazing how I didn't mention Batman despite the "dark knight" mentions)
Date: 2005-12-06 09:34 am (UTC)I've also been thinking about the attraction towards the dark and fascist and bad boy in general. Even though they come in flavors/colors as you've separated, one can put a kind of umbrella over 'em as "dangerous men." Been reading Death Note, and man. It's very funny my fluctuating feelings toward Light, not to mention that when I lent a friend the 1st vol, she basically thought he was completely evil and hot. So this has led me to some thoughts about how even intelligent woman seem to have this draw towards fascists and baddies (if they're smart and/or handsome and/or strong ie v. few Wormtail fangirls). Even when our brains tell us we know better (or, hey, even when not... and one starts writing to guys in prison).
And I think for the bad boys it really *is* about the "taming." Even just the "human connection" is a kind of taming if the person is certain amount messed. The whole difficulty and coolness of a person's success is lost if the tamee isn't dangerous and strong, evensofar as to think he's the tamer. But what I kinda love about this ideal is that-- it actually isn't as mushily romantic as it seems, even in the case of a the 14 year girl dreaming of Spike. At heart, it's about power. Internal power to break the horse to bridle, even (especially) it it remains half wild, and the gained power of the dangerous ally/servant. Of course this is the cold, dirty, primal heart of the romance genre, and more sophisticated stories can bypass it or just incorporate bits of it for zing.
Man, I wish I could write these thoughts out better. fah.
Your quality vs entertainment part reminded me of koimistress' great entry (which you might find interesting) about what she calls "the glow." Her glow is specifically about m/m, but with this post I'm thinking that the bad boy/romance thing also have the "glow" effect. Maybe it all has to do with the reptile parts of our brains oe somesuch. Post is here.
(random aside: I never got the idea that Remus was particularly brilliant. It's James and Sirius who don't have to study. And being prefect... well Ron made prefect.)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-06 10:17 am (UTC)Oooh, oooh, I love your point about the dynamic not being fluffy & rather being about power-- men's fantasies are probably just a lot less relationshippy/emotional and more 'me Ug! me want! me drag!! woman come with! or DIE!' or something~:)) (It's really really REALLY SAD some part of me finds that attractive... maybe I'll just blame it on my reptile brain again and be done with it, though I suspect the monkey brain is also at fault.) You're right, though, any amount of softening is really taming (*sigh*... I just don't like the servile connotations, I guess), -especially- if he remains half-wild, yes! It's totally all about the 'dangerous ally' (I don't go for the servant thing, really, though SOB IT CAN BE HOT SOB SOB SOB). No seriously, I hate that part of me that melts when a guy would just do -anything- for the girl he's in love with even if he's this demonic mostrous entity or whatever. I KNOW it shouldn't get to me but I CAN'T STOP IT OMG. It's that same part of me that would probably let that guy impregnate me 10 times if he wanted just in sheer gratitude for him giving me this strength/ability/power. It really sucks realizing I haven't really 'matured' from the Bronze age women who showed their butts at the biggest baddest warrior. :/ *wallows*
I really am curious what about Tsukasa was different for you from say, um, Shion/Rin or what's-his-name, Arima(?? from Kare Kano) or whatever. Possibly he's just more obviously a doofus (I mean, he really is-- I'm watching the live action series and just cringe because OMG SO LAME but I still love him). But then, I see the lameness in all of them. You can't really -be- this type if you're -not- a lame pathetic loser who overcompensates a lot; with some it's more obvious than with others :>
...I'm starting to think I should read Death Note. But I'm slightly afraid to venture out of my close-knit shoujo world for fear I'll never return. I've already broken the manga, the shoujo, the manhwa -and- the J-drama barrier. I'm only holding out on shounen; though to tell the truth largely it's that I know it's not my thing. It's really kind of scary -.-;;
I think Remus is the closest thing to 'silver' I could come up with, but he's not a very good match. I was really thinking of Rui & Starwise, like that, ahahah. Though I can't quite call Rui 'brilliant', necessarily, the point is that they seem 'silver' to me :))
and now let's talk about boys
Date: 2005-12-07 09:05 am (UTC)The stair thing... it wasn't that rape exactly is a kink of mine, but, uh "ravishment" is. Epiphany: ravishment is actually the emotional power dynamics of rape reversed, but the physical ones still in play. Basically, he wants her (not just her body/any chick) so badly, he's in thrall. He can't figure out any way to *get* her though (and can barely admit to himself he wants her at all, big stumbling block). Even though he's forcing her down, he's the one whose submitting--emotionally he's the confused begger. And ravishment differs from rape because the attacker wants connection and something emotional from attacked. (And duh, this is not really not something that translates in any way into RL, but as a fictional element, I am so so gone for it.)
So, one point in his favor: he loves/wants her crazybad. I mean, so much it messes him up and he waits in the rain and gets sick etc etc. And we even have how inconsiderate he often is to the unchosen to illustrate how special Makino must be and much he must be gone for her that such a meanie will be so nice. (btw, the time when he left her to the mercy of the mob almost swung me into dislike... I'm not wired at all to like the guy's bastardness or amy attempted taming of the girl that the girl can't overcome) Hm, Rin-Shion and Arima both have the obsessive love thing going as well, which I do like, but not enough for me fangirl 'em...
(nb: I have not finished HYD all the way yet, so anything after/during Domyoji gets amnesia I do not know of... and please don't spoil)
Hm, your doofus point is probably what pushed me over the edge with him. I actually tend to have a big soft spot for the slightly dumb, but really earnest guys in anime. And yeah, you can say that But then, I see the lameness in all of them. You can't really -be- this type if you're -not- a lame pathetic loser who overcompensates a lot; with some it's more obvious than with others :>, but *really*. The guys like Rin-Shion and Arima and *gestures at CLAMP chars and various semes and assorted shoujo asshole heroes* they're not really very obviously lame. They give off coded cool vibes. You have to analyze their behavior and look at it objectively and then "aha, according to evidence, he's lame." But it's not a visceral feeling the characters tend to give you (well, maybe you, but let's say most other fannish-type chicks).
Then again, I don't find Snape all awesome, and he's certainly lame. I think I need many main positives (Domyoji: rich, strong, alpha), so the slight denseness is adorable rather than pitiable. Pity is death for me in the primal romance game (not to be confused with feeling sorry for someone with all the horrible things they go through). Pitiable people are marked for mother-love, people who mostly just need to be taken care of and saved. Which does feed into the Florence Nightingale thing, but if they don't have enough "positives" to offer, they're not mate material, but charity cases (and whoa, just figured out why Harry and Sirius are hot and Draco and Snape are not for me).
(more Remus aside: if I cared more I'd go into how Remus is the most fanonized character of JRK's and nocturne_alley, though fun, didn't help. But since he's such a wet piece of toast in the books any fanonization is probably a good thing...)
...and their...toys sounds better than neuroses
Date: 2005-12-07 12:45 pm (UTC)I'm totally there with you on the difference between sympathy & pity, seen through the whole Snape & Draco vs. Harry & Sirius thing. Though I think that's if you -give- sympathy to characters like Harry, which people who like characters like Snape or Draco often don't, 'cause you know, they're 'the Man' and have too much power/influence which they misuse or because they're too mean to the underdog or etcetc metameta, ahahah. I think most people either like Draco in a nurturing/motherly way or they identify or they fanonize him out of his patheticness. There is only me, the lone ranger of actually not pitying Draco and still trying to like him and diss him only sometimes. He-- and pathetic characters in general-- seem to really polarize reader response, somehow.
I think you're right that Shion gives off a coded 'cool' vibe in a different way than Tsukasa, who can never -quite- pull it off, though-- allowing Tsukushi more real power than Mokuren, for all the emotional submission you have with both of them, and I admit I like these sorts of cases better even though they're rarer. That is, the girl is more -obviously- emotionally dominant, I guess, like with Buffy&Spike...? Or at least she's given the opportunity early on. Though... when someone who's normally prideful and dominant is obsessively in love with you, if you -realize- it and accept it, anyone would have the power, ahahah -.-;; Though not Mokuren/Alice, perhaps-- she's too nurturing and accepting, though I love PSME partly because I identify with her so much. *sigh*
Usually, though, I love stories most where the girl is spunky and strong-willed herself, and doesn't take any of the guy's shit, so that allows me not to dislike him too much when he acts like a total asshole like with Tsukasa allowing her to be harassed that time. It's also really great like in Basara, where he's mean to her and persecutes her and stuff, but thinks it's her twin brother, ahahaha. -.- Anyway, I suspect this emotional strength of the other character gives it the 'ravishment vs rape' effect in that it -looks- abusive but is actually just really rough courtship. Maybe :>
Remus really is a wet piece of toast, though. That's why I like him with Sirius, partly-- these guys need someone so outrageous as to drive them insane enough to snap. Because I do think the toast thing is something of an act-- not that he's secretly cool somehow, but he showed by his increased demandingness in OoTP that he'd been toning himself down for the Marauders, still.... Though most fangirls... er, yeah.... All they see is the gentlemanly thing, the wild-wild-beast thing and possibly the chocolate obsession, I dunno :>
Re: ...and their...toys sounds better than neuroses
Date: 2005-12-08 05:51 am (UTC)See, I don't even really see it as courtship, but as chasing/begging. He just, uh, managed to halfway "catch" the object of their affections as they chase. But, of course, it's only a physical catch, so really, the physical control/interaction only shoves it more blatently to the forefront that they are still so far behind their goal and utterly unrequited.
Though... when someone who's normally prideful and dominant is obsessively in love with you, if you -realize- it and accept it, anyone would have the power, ahahah -.-;; As soon as the chick realizes/accepts the dymanic is different. Because she's somehow reciprocating now. She's joined the dance. It's become courtship (of whatever type). Rough courtship is fun, but not quite the same zing for me as ravishment. Of course I like best when the story segues from one to another. Ending, naturally, with him wrapped firmly around her little finger, but not so firmly so he's still grr male and a handy guy to have around (and worth having wrapped around one's little finger).
Remus; can I just say he sucks and leave it at that? I mean, I could have a deep discussion citing from the books and all. But. Remus. bleh. >.
Re: ...and their...toys sounds better than neuroses
Date: 2005-12-08 07:52 am (UTC)But yeah, um, I should've realized that the 'realization' is a major stage in an of itself-- like with all that stuff Aja likes to say about how Harry has to 'see' Draco-- it's similar, perhaps. Perhaps this is the problem-- what with top!Harry, it'd be difficult to get him to ravish Draco before he 'saw' him. Ahh so... needlessly complicated, somehow. Y'know, when I think about that stuff with the little finger & the wrapping-- I never thought I was the kind of girl who was into that (I'm all about equality! and partnership! and liberation! I thought!) but looking back, I totally do go for it, though I go for struggle/balance-among-equals as well. What I really -hate- is when both the physical & emotional power goes to the same party. I just start twitching and wanting someone (in the fic) to
diepay :>Ahahah, I've never particularly liked Remus, but... sometimes certain authors do write him both sympathetically & in character. Usually somehow it helps me that he's hopelessly in love with Sirius & can't do a thing about it. But that's just me :>