[faux-nonfiction = fiction = truth? lies? videotape?]

[reenka]

Reading through these links about the 'real identity' of a bad-slashfic-cliche-type 'queer' writer, JT LeRoy, I ask myself questions about what's an 'authentic voice' (and how does it relate to saying 'genuine' things) and what's 'metaphorical truth' and what's a 'useful conversation about gender & identity'.
    I cannot decide on any answers; I just know what makes me uncomfortable, and I also know that people who use a 'changing identity' to run away from consistency and openness most likely have something wrong with them, something that's not working. In my experience, either people are who they are or they're fucked up, basically. Not that I don't like fucked up, because I do, but I also like to call things by name, and that's what the name is when you compulsively lie about yourself, no matter what the justification, whether or not you believe the lie or someone else does.

As a writer, I'm fully aware what I write about are metaphorical truths mixed in with lies mixed in with self-invention. When I was younger especially, what I wrote was almost entirely self-invention, stories about myself-but-not-myself. I think in many ways, though, all good fiction is 'real' even if it's not true, so it's disingenuous to talk about 'giving people a voice' through faux-nonfictional fiction. In a way, that's kind of insulting to fiction.

Bottom line, if people 'need a voice' enough, as per this interview with The Guardian, they -make- it. You don't need to give it to them, because they have it, and all they ever need to do is use it. Having a hard life or having an easy life isn't as important as the sheer innate -will- to know ourselves, to prove ourselves, that's pretty inborn. So I feel pretty annoyed whenever people try to play it like their inner voices are being stifled by -outer- voices (of like, society) to the point where they'd need help to just, uh, exist. Because like, do you really exist if you don't have an inner voice? And doesn't a strong inner voice = a strong outer voice?

Besides that, you don't need to be heard to have a voice, and especially not heard by the greatest and the biggest number of people; that's different, that's feeding your ego and creating a social bond, but it's not giving you an identity. People who are -extraverted- naturally want to 'be heard' and associate that with the nature of existence, but that's their personality biases talking. I would exist just great with no one to hear me too, because I hear myself-- I exist and don't need to prove anything to anyone. So on -those- kind of meta grounds, Laura/JT LeRoy or whoever piss me off.

There keeps being that quote from JT's book, Sarah, in these articles:
    She slowly rolled her head to me, flopped an arm over the back of my neck, and pulled me closer as if she were pulling in won poker chips. 'Everybody needs someone to know who they really are,' she laughed, and guided my head down to lie next to hers.
    I do think this relates to our need to be loved, and loved by someone who knows us truly-- but even so, I still believe that the task of knowing the entire truth of oneself can only be left to oneself alone, and if this cannot be accomplished, that's when the lies are no longer metaphorical.

And I guess it's also important for me to say that in my mind, identity is never 'irrelevant', though when we're talking about fiction, the -author's- identity isn't the point, in any case-- the character's is. Unless you like the author; in that case it's helpful to know for tracking purposes.
~~

EDIT - OMG, this is the most hilarious (and spot-on) Draco comic I've seen in ages!! HEEE! I can totally see Draco eyeing both Harry & Marcus & Krum, for sure, and Ginny singing the 'gay' song. Hell, if I were Ginny, -I'd- sing the gay song to Draco, oh yes I would ♥♥♥
    Also, holy snickers, Batman, this pic by kasche (Lady Belial at DeviantArt, the one who drew my favorite James) has got to be the hottest S/R fanart I've seen in yonks. YONKS. (And also, these bunch of Marauder 'polaroids' are way hot too.)

Comments

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Heh, I'm probably guilty of taking people I trust for granted, but that's because I trust them. Um. It makes sense at the time! Like, of course you couldn't count on 'people' in general, but if those people are really your friends, of course they care. I myself have a hard time really believing my friends are actually-- my friends, and care what I think/feel/etc, but then I get reminded they -are-, and it's like the best feeling in the world. And then I get all mushy and send them late Christmas cards :> I always thought the things that people valued in others (uh, looks and aggressiveness and degree of 'glitter' like clothes & make-up & accessories) were just lost on me, also. I do dismiss people a lot, I guess, so anyone who really does best you (or me) through hair-styling isn't worth worrying about. Though I guess those people would say I'm 'just jelluz' -.-

Like, in my experience, people are interesting for their personalities, y'know? Intelligence counts a lot, and cuteness also, but I've known too many empty-headed cute people and too many horrid, nails-across-a-blackboard smart people, so fie, I say. Possibly all this is because I just don't -want- to worry about impressing people and all that, even though I should if I want to 'get ahead' in life... butbutbut WAH PEOPLE ARE SO BORING WHY :( :( It's probably just too difficult for me to feel bested by most people 'cause I'd immediately dismiss any apparent superiority if I didn't feel it was bone-deep, genuine excellence as a human being or something. Uh. And how often does -that- happen? :>

It -is- pretty terrifying, the idea that someone would really be open with -me- to that abrupt and intense of a degree-- which is why I'm much more of a voyeur and read/write books instead, ahahaha. I'm not sure if this makes me a hypocrite or rather repressed myself :X

You do realize this whole 'boys are like' generalization stuff only applies to -most-, and therefore most -uninteresting- boys, right? :)) I've known a lot of geeks in my day, what can I say :> It's okay not to like chick flicks, of course, but if they're intelligent they should be able to appreciate any good movie (this is coming from someone who -frequently- inflicts slash-talk on her best male friend, and has gotten him to the point of speculating on the possible gayness of male mannequins). The whole 'men are from Mars, women are from Venus' thing has -some- validity 'cause the sexes do have differences, but like, um, communication can bridge those differences if you apply some actual intelligence, etc :>

Y'know, I don't think I've ever written a 'convincing' romance where I really showed why two people fell in love. Huh. Except maybe twice, once in an unpublished H/D novella-- so it might be my infatuation with all my unpublished writing talking-- and once in my long Ginny/Pansy fic. The trick is sort of to create a chemistry between the characters, methinks-- like, you don't need to explain why, but show how (with banter, omgsmex, sexual innuendo, etcetc). I think when writers try to show 'key traits' one way or the other, they've already failed, because it's not about traits but about people's reactions to them :>