2007-09-16 10:29 am (UTC)
I actually don't characterize most of those people as "rational." Why does disappointed=rational? Most of the reasons people get disappointed with HP strike me as emotional ones, IMHO. If they were really "rational" why would they get disappointed in it?
So what are you actually talking about, if not the actual things that these words usually refer to? IMHO I don't find either to be an "approach to a text," I find the so called rationality to be simply how someone explains themselves. Ultimately, you have an emotional response. You can explain it any way you want to. You can rationally explain the squee categories, but they are just not going to make sense unless you inherently get it, therefore you can't communicate.
But I think you can rationally say that you do not value plot holes, and prefer style, and this is not necessarily "emotional." I value plot when I read, but I don't think it is because I am irrational/rational/whatever. I just value plot because I love plot. There, I have an emotional reason, and I think all people in fandom feel X about some things or at times think that X is going on when Y should be going on. To think that strikes me as actually a rational analysis, that the author is screwing up and not effectively portraying Y. I think what it is is that, in post-modernism ultimately everything is (vast oversimplification) subjective in a way, especially in art and language. In other words, see the post on robots not being AU.
Thread from start
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
You can comment on this post while signed in with an account from many other sites, once you have confirmed your email address.
Sign in using OpenID
If you don't have an account you can
create one now
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
Check spelling during preview
This account is set to log the IP addresses of everyone who comments.
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 24th, 2017 05:48 am
Top of page