VVC!!! and thinkyness

[permetaform]

DUDE, there's much to do, much to pack, and vividcon! OMG YAY! YAAAAAAAAY!

And so of course my brain starts working on OTHER things. pah.

Like, I've been thinking about the various ship_manifesto's that I've been reading and thinking about pairings and scanning over the HP pairing debates (and omg did you know that there's a post on F_W that lists links to allll the HP wank that has been posted to F_W and that post is LONGER THAN MOST OF MY FICS WTF.) and..

::blinks:: okay, it's perhaps a really simple thing but it never registered so hard as it did when I peeked at the HP 'shipper debates that so much of the 'ship debates are happening from opposing sides with utterly different ideas of 'love' and of a 'relationship'.

See, from what I've gleaned from the HP debates (providing that I haven't read the book myself yet) it's a matter of the friends-that-become-more versus teeny-relationship deal. It's sorta not even about what might be most logical according to the world (ie. JKR needing a relationship that's fundamentally transient) but most logical according to what people *think* is needed for the character.

And okay, I'm going to stop talking about HP because it's getting too spoiler-iffic.

On a more generalized level, what I'm getting at here is that I wouldn't be surprised that most fans highly value the long-term relationship. The till-death-do-us-part, the I'll-meet-you-in-the-afterlife, the I'm-you're-best-friend-and-lover-and-Everything; 'cause frankly that hits my buttons like WHOA.

And as much as that twiggs me out because on one level it's such a girly thing to think, on another level I can't see what is possibly wrong with loyalty even if it might be called 'commitment'. And god, if there's any other word so negatively loaded as 'commitment'...::rolls eyes::

And...well, that's my background in this, sorta kinda, and by 'this' I mean that frequently it seems to me that the more heated pairing debates revolve (at it's core) a great deal around the idea of what a "Relationship" should look like. Specifically, a non-platonic relationship; and isn't that a can of worms 'cause then the debate boils down to an argument between two people with fundamentally different concepts of a relationship and how that relates to the also heated question of what is 'love'.

Specifically, what I'm flailing at here is that it seems less like:

Random Fan, "Character X can't be with Character Y!!"

...but rather that Random Fan is not willing to like the form of the relationship (which might be short-term or hate-filled or really really bad for the emotional stability of the characters) that Character X and Y might have with each other.

Like for instance, I could see how Harry/Snape might work, just like I could see Harry/Sirius, just like I could see Harry/Ron or Harry/Draco. It's just that the Harry/fanon!Draco dynamic interests me most of all.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this. Your thoughts?

Comments

[nightengale.livejournal.com]

*flail* Why do you always post these brainmunchy yums when I have NO TIME TO RE THEM?? T__T

But. I think (briefly) it's the difference between *pairing* a couple and *shipping* a couple; the difference between writing 35 stress relief sex fic and 35 sex fic. The mitigating factors and surrounding conditions of the relationship are as important as the players themselves, but because notation for certain mitigating circumstances hasn't been worked into pairing notation (that is: 3x5 vs 3x5U (using)) to differentiate between ships and pairings, they all get grouped together as long as they have the same numbers/letters in the same order. And so the Harry/Snape *shippers* run into problems talking to the Harry/Snape *ficcers* when the shippers say 'love' and the ficcers say 'need'.

/unproofread babble

[permetaform]

*flail* Why do you always post these brainmunchy yums when I have NO TIME TO RE THEM?? T__T

::glomps:: oopsie?

As for the rest, what I'm more trying to get at is that I think the pairing debates/wars seem to be arguments between two people with fundamentally different ideas of what a relationship and/or pairing should be or should look like.

For instance, a 35 relationship would fundamentally look different than a 39 one or a 58 one. And especially with subtext it's not that any particular pairing is more or less valid in the long view, because there will never be definitive proof, but that one pairing will seem more apparent than others because of one's inherent views on relationships.

[coloredink.livejournal.com]

. . . what is this "35" and this "58" you speak of?

[permetaform]

::points at guys in icon:: the one with the red hair is Gojyo, in Japanese a part of his name is tonally similar to their word for 5; accordingly, the one with the monacle's name is Hakkai, literally "8 times".

Thus 58 is Gojyo/Hakkai. It's sorta like Snarry or Snapledore or Clex, but with a further layer of having pun on the name. =)

[flemmings.livejournal.com]

(*Has* to be a pedant here, *has* to.)

Hakkai is written, literally, 'eight renunciations/ admonishments'. It only sounds the same as hakkai, 'eight times'. And was it Minekura or the anime who made that pun first?

[permetaform]

ahhh, pardons then ::wry grin:: I'm fairly sure that the pun was Minekura created tho.

for lack of a headdesking icon, a fennish one

[nightengale.livejournal.com]

arguments between two people with fundamentally different ideas of what a relationship and/or pairing should be or should look like.

Er. That would be what I was saying with ship vs pairing. What they want to see out of the relationship. Though. I was limiting that want-to-see to that particular pairing, whereas you may be talking about "relationship" as a general concept. In which case, I missed your boat by 1 foot. ^^;;

but that one pairing will seem more apparent than others because of one's inherent views on relationships.

...so you're saying, what the watcher/reader *sees* is different - tinted glasses - OH. And so nobody is (when you take this to the extreme) ever really watching the same show as their neighbor, because their prior expectations taint canon even before you get it into the realm of fandom where it can be tangled up some more.

OH. *headdesk* Marvelous. I get it, and have even less faith for the pacifying of any particular fandom at large now. (Here, I'd been hoping they'd all mellow with age - like wine - though I should have realized that GW is the only example I need to prove that won't necessarily happen.)

Re: for lack of a headdesking icon, a fennish one

[permetaform]

...so you're saying, what the watcher/reader *sees* is different - tinted glasses - OH. And so nobody is (when you take this to the extreme) ever really watching the same show as their neighbor, because their prior expectations taint canon even before you get it into the realm of fandom where it can be tangled up some more.

::nods::


OH. *headdesk* Marvelous. I get it, and have even less faith for the pacifying of any particular fandom at large now.

Well, actually I think that depending on the fandom you'd have a sort of range for wank, with the larger the fandom having the potential for louder and louder wanks. Some fandoms tend to attract people who slightly less wanky, I think, such as POTC which (the type of people that are deeply moved by a storyline that emphasizes freedom) respects individual boundaries. Nonetheless, POTC does have it's own wanks, it's just tons more quiet about it and it looks a lot different from HP wanks.

Re: for lack of a headdesking icon, a fennish one

[nightengale.livejournal.com]

Nonetheless, POTC does have it's own wanks, it's just tons more quiet about it and it looks a lot different

I find it really funny that everyone uses HP as an example of "Teh Worst Wank, Yo." Though. Funny in the oh-but-it's-true way.

As for size of fandom...I dunno. As an outsider to this particular fandom, I *still* manage to stumble over one wank for every good SGA nexus I find; I don't know that size is what matters. Probably the nature of the show, more like.

And do you wanna know how much you MADE MY NIGHT by RE'ing this thing? XD So old that it's a compliment to continue the conversation.

Re: for lack of a headdesking icon, a fennish one

[permetaform]

...but SGA is HUUUUUGE. Like it's the Fandom That Ate EVERYTHING.

_{even me, woe.}

Heh, and yay for being sick and forced to confront emails that should really be replied to?

Re: for lack of a headdesking icon, a fennish one

[nightengale.livejournal.com]

...it IS?? *blinks* Learn something new every day i guess

hee. yesssss, my inbox was down to 19!! Yay, alltime low (except when i started it, XD) But now it's at thirty and climbing quickly. ^_^;;;

Re: for lack of a headdesking icon, a fennish one

[permetaform]

::nodnodnod:: that's why it has SO MUCH good!fic

if you need recs, lierdumoa's recced some good LJ writers of SGA here

[franzeska]

What I've mainly noticed about shipping debates is that people bring far too much of their own lives into them. You may be right about fundamentally different ideas of relationships, but the interpretations of the characters also seem rather different.

A lot of fans seem to see Hermione as far more intellectual and far less girly than I think she is. I don't see a problem with her getting together with a relatively "normal" character. Some Hermione/Snape shippers say that smart women cannot be happy with men who can't keep up with them, and I agree that I feel that way. However, while Hermione is smart, she doesn't strike me as the kind of career academic type who would only be happy with another nerd.

I have similar differences of opinion with other fans about a lot of the characters in the series.

[permetaform]

What I've mainly noticed about shipping debates is that people bring far too much of their own lives into them.

ahhh, true true. ::remembers getting burned on that once, represses it::

[ninepointfivemm.livejournal.com]

Harry/Hermione debates = Just f'ing batshit. That's all there is to it. People are making it all about them and less about the characters. Harry's not into Hermione, and it's been pretty blatant about that for a while, and the people that think of themselves as Hermione are taking it way too far.

And the Remus/Sirius stuff is just messed up. I like that ship a lot better than Remus/Tonks, but I refuse to go around calling Tonks a bitch. I'd rather her with Harry than Remus. ;P

[permetaform]

eh, HP and it wankages...I think someone posted a one line summary of all the HP wank post on f_w and I had to scroll down further than I need to on most of my fics...

[ranalore.livejournal.com]

To address your question generally, this is exactly the point that gets lost and rediscovered on a regular basis in pairing debates. There are different types of relationships, and your preference for a particular dynamic is going to inform how invested you are in a particular pairing, is going to inform how you view the characters, is going to inform how you view other people's interpretations of the characters.

It's further complicated by the fact that many of us, especially polyfans, have more than one dynamic that really does it for us, and various factors in a given fandom are going to determine which relationship archetype takes precendence in that fandom. This had led to some trouble, in my experience, because people who ship the same pairing in one fandom will ship different pairings in a different fandom, and there might be a sense of betrayal when someone you expected to share your ship...just doesn't.

This does not even touch on the differences between those who are invested in a certain type of relationship dynamic first versus those who are invested in a certain character first versus those who are in it for a certain plot development versus those who...well, you get the picture. So let's say the pairings are ice cream, and the debate is chocolate or vanilla, but some of those debating like chocolate in several forms and some of those debating just love ice cream and you can't even be sure the debate you're having is the same one the person you're talking to is having.

Which is why, in the end, I'll ship as I please and you ship as you please and as long as you don't try to tell me my ship won't sail (for whatever value of "sail" you wish), I'll drink a toast to your ship and we'll know ourselves friends when next we spot each other's colors. It's only when you try to tell me that my ship won't sail that I'll have to keelhaul you.

very belated ::grovels::

[permetaform]

This does not even touch on the differences between those who are invested in a certain type of relationship dynamic first versus those who are invested in a certain character first versus those who are in it for a certain plot development versus those who...well, you get the picture.

ohhhh, good point ::brain swirly::


Which is why, in the end, I'll ship as I please and you ship as you please and as long as you don't try to tell me my ship won't sail

::nods:: although drama comes when you ship different pairings than your immediate friends...and from there comes woe. ::wry grin::

[oboros.livejournal.com]

Have fun @ vividcon!

Random Fan, "Character X can't be with Character Y!!"

Never say never! while I stay away from alll~most everything not Harry/fanon!Draco I won't gripe about other's likes. To Each His Own, I say.

sorry for the much belated reply...

[permetaform]

Hee! yeah, Once Upon a Time In Mexico fandom is pretty much based around two characters who had 5 min of screen time together. After that, when people whine about lack of canon now I can't help but think, "You have NO clue..."

[(Anonymous)]

Hey - I called the hotel and you're all set to check in under your real name :)

Will send you email l8r

--Jen

[permetaform]

cool! thank you! =)

[melata.livejournal.com]

I do prefer the friendship-relationship bckground to the lust/smut. Then again, I also love the ones where they're clearly unhealthy for each other, because I do like angst if done well.

But... yes. The rabid shippers seem to be saying that the characters are going to have a long, fulfilled love, and they can't see the other ship going very well. Even if it happens to be canon.

[permetaform]

The rabid shippers seem to be saying that the characters are going to have a long, fulfilled love, and they can't see the other ship going very well. Even if it happens to be canon.

::nods:: or even, that people have very specific ideas of what a relationship would look like. For instance, some would say that Opposites Attract (ie. HG/RW); others would say that people who are similar would have more stable relationships (ie. HP/HG). Based on which side you lean towards, I think, the more likely it is to see a 'canon' relationship.

[melata-fic.livejournal.com]

*nods* That makes sense, too.

But really, the only "canon" relationships are those actually in the canon. The rest is just one possible ship out of a ton of them.