Fandom...one of those things the internet has allowed to blossom. Once upon a time you could only bond with those who shared crazy and insane interests at something like a cosplay party, and obviously there were certain fandoms not conducive to dressing up thwacking each other with lightsabers and blasters. I'm not knocking cosplay, but it is a very specialized activity, and even now continues to be taken extremely seriously. You just don't go to a cosplay party without a dang awesome costume.
But now let's talk about that for a minute. Is that healthy? I'm not just talking cosplay, I'm talking becoming so completely involved in your fandom it's all you do. I'm a fandom type of person, and sure, I can get carried away, but...I think there is a point when you realize there is a line you can cross from getting carried away and going too far.
As an example, I'm going to introduce you to the diverse community that is the superhero fandom, and more specifically Superman. Now, if you're a Superman fan, you are probably a Batman, Trinity, and Justice League fan—at least slightly—just by default. You also probably have at least a little liking for Marvel, whether you admit it or not. Within the Superman fandom you probably have a favorite incarnation: comic books (and your favorite era of the comic books), the serials, the original TV show, Chris Reeve movies (sometimes including III and IV, sometimes now), Lois & Clark (sometimes all four seasons, sometimes only the first two), Superman Returns, the cartoon show/movies, and Smallville. You could keep adding to that list, but these are the big ones. There are a lot of ways to focus your love of Superman, and also a lot of ways you gripe and bash on another incarnation. But we'll come back to that.
First, we need to talk about the most brutal thing in fandom: ships. Ships is a term for the couples you like within your fandom. I personally stay pretty canon and don't want people who don't get together to be together. In the Harry Potter fandom, I do not, nor have I ever, shipped Harry/Hermione, aka "Harmony." If you like to explore the idea of the "What if"s that is totally cool, but as far as pairings go, it's not my thing. In fact, let's go with that for a second. What's canon? Ron/Hermione, Harry/Ginny, Lupin/Tonks, James/Lily, Snape/Lily (sorry if you haven't read DH yet and were planning to), and a few others. Now, speculating with the outlying characters is fine, whatever. But the fandom has stretched to include any number of slash pairs and couples that would never become couples. Did you really have nothing better to do than contemplate what Draco and Hermione's sex life would be like? If the answer's no, don't worry. I suppose that's better than wasting 10 hours on quiz sites taking games written by someone who never bothered to learn grammar.
Back to Superman, though, and now let's talk Supes ships. Quick: what's the number one biggest ship in the Superman world? What ship should you just think by default if you mention Superman?
You've got it, right? Of course! Lois and Clark! Lois and Clark, Lois and Superman, Lois and Kal-el...I don't care how you say it, it is canon it will always be canon, it is THE PAIR. They aren't the only ones, though: Lois/Bruce, Lois/Oliver, Lois/Lex, Clark/Lana, Clark/Diana...L&C are not exclusive, but in the end, they are it, right? Right.
Smallville is a brutal place to be part of fandom. There are those us who just desperately want Clark to put on the suit and have the true Lois/Clark/Superman love triangle, but may not ever get our wish. There are those who still cling to Clark being with Lana (yes, even now). There are those who cling to Clark being with Chloe, because she is a better Lois than Lois. There are the Lois haters, who have been know to make death threats against Erica Durance just for being Lois Lane. There are the Lois/Clark lovers who have become completely nasty to the other older ships the series played with in earlier seasons. It's a brutal world out there, and the different sides of the Smallville fandom do not get along, and people get hurt. The Chlarkers bash the Cloisers who both bash the Clanas, and is that really the best way to, you know, enjoy your TV show?
Why get so brutal, mean, and cruel, about a television show that everyone of the above groups love (or hate but can't stop watching anyway)? It's stupid! Fandom is fun, and it can be a blast if you stick with your group and enjoy yourself without making fun or poking fun at everyone else. I tend to just get frustrated with characters, not different ships (although some ships do frustrate me in the Harry Potter world, I will admit). How hard is it to just step back and say, "Well, you have a different opinion than mine, but we're all allowed to think the way we want to, so I'll deal with that." Is it really that hard? It shouldn't be, and yet online communities and forums just bash and create more hell than any lightsaber in your bedroom.
Lesson to be learned: cosplay with awesome costumes, and if you decide to fandom ride on the net, play nicer than you would in person.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
I Know Nothing About Writing - Writers are Liars
This is part one because I just know I'm coming back to it. I can just feel it.
So, I'm in an MFA program right now, and I'm learning very quickly that my style of writing is not considered art. This should offend me, but it doesn't. I mean, we've all seen what can be considered art, and we've all seen things that struck us as beautiful that were called a disgrace to the artistic community. Art is subjective, and writing is no exception to that rule.
All the way through school, you have classes that are designed to teach you how to write. First it's the creative story and you seem to get a better grade the more adjectives you use. Heck, I wrote a story once about a rock with a name that was two lines long; don't diss it, that story was awesome. But now what? You're in college, you're writing the story that you know is perfect for publication and what happens? You have too many adjectives. Wait, what?
Then you want to tell a story. It's just a story that popped into your head one day and you love it and think it'll be worth more love on paper. But then you're told you can only write things you are deeply moved by, otherwise you shouldn't bother because it'll be crap. But...but you're story is awesome, you just aren't moved by it yet.
Obviously, I'm painting an egotistical writer here, and most writers who have had even a little experience know that these thoughts fizzle away and disappear. My point is everyone feels differently about how writing works, and you can't trust them. Writers, I mean. Writers are liars, especially of the fiction-writing variety. If we weren't liars, how could we do what we do?
Rule Number One about learning how to write: Never trust what a fellow writer or writing professor tells you. Every word of advice is to be taken with a grain of salt.
Have you got that? Remember it. You'll need it. No one is going to tell you the same thing someone else did. You have got to find your own way.
Here I am going to insert a definition of art. This is from my computer dictionary, just so you don't think I made this up: "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination...producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."
That sounds gorgeous, doesn't it? Now, who dictates that? Is it that one workshop professor? Is it that one critic who is cynical about everything? Is it you?
Here's what I say, but I'm a writer so don't trust me or believe a word I say. Write your piece, proofread, then forget about it for a week. Don't think about it, don't stew about it, just leave it. Then go back and read it and try and forget you were the author. Do you like the way it sounds? Would it sound better with this and this and this? Did that not work? Can you fix it?
It becomes about you. Art is a personal experience. You know what you like to read, and you know what you're trying to accomplish should look and sound like. If you can step back and see the art, then you have accomplished what you set out to do. If you don't see art yet, edit it and let it sit again. Eventually you find the art, be it flawed or not. Maybe it's not publishable, but it's what you set out to do, so why should that matter anyway?
So, I'm in an MFA program right now, and I'm learning very quickly that my style of writing is not considered art. This should offend me, but it doesn't. I mean, we've all seen what can be considered art, and we've all seen things that struck us as beautiful that were called a disgrace to the artistic community. Art is subjective, and writing is no exception to that rule.
All the way through school, you have classes that are designed to teach you how to write. First it's the creative story and you seem to get a better grade the more adjectives you use. Heck, I wrote a story once about a rock with a name that was two lines long; don't diss it, that story was awesome. But now what? You're in college, you're writing the story that you know is perfect for publication and what happens? You have too many adjectives. Wait, what?
Then you want to tell a story. It's just a story that popped into your head one day and you love it and think it'll be worth more love on paper. But then you're told you can only write things you are deeply moved by, otherwise you shouldn't bother because it'll be crap. But...but you're story is awesome, you just aren't moved by it yet.
Obviously, I'm painting an egotistical writer here, and most writers who have had even a little experience know that these thoughts fizzle away and disappear. My point is everyone feels differently about how writing works, and you can't trust them. Writers, I mean. Writers are liars, especially of the fiction-writing variety. If we weren't liars, how could we do what we do?
Rule Number One about learning how to write: Never trust what a fellow writer or writing professor tells you. Every word of advice is to be taken with a grain of salt.
Have you got that? Remember it. You'll need it. No one is going to tell you the same thing someone else did. You have got to find your own way.
Here I am going to insert a definition of art. This is from my computer dictionary, just so you don't think I made this up: "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination...producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."
That sounds gorgeous, doesn't it? Now, who dictates that? Is it that one workshop professor? Is it that one critic who is cynical about everything? Is it you?
Here's what I say, but I'm a writer so don't trust me or believe a word I say. Write your piece, proofread, then forget about it for a week. Don't think about it, don't stew about it, just leave it. Then go back and read it and try and forget you were the author. Do you like the way it sounds? Would it sound better with this and this and this? Did that not work? Can you fix it?
It becomes about you. Art is a personal experience. You know what you like to read, and you know what you're trying to accomplish should look and sound like. If you can step back and see the art, then you have accomplished what you set out to do. If you don't see art yet, edit it and let it sit again. Eventually you find the art, be it flawed or not. Maybe it's not publishable, but it's what you set out to do, so why should that matter anyway?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
