Sunday morning ramblings...
Oct. 3rd, 2004 10:36 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
swatkatI just discovered this comment by ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
jaybee65 from this thread in her LJ, which I had saved in a word file. Which makes me come to the conclusion that I must've really wanted to chat about it, and therefore had it saved, and then promptly forgot all about it. And since I still want to chat about it, I'll just post it here. Ignore it, if you wish. *g*
I found the other tangent -- the one about sex -- pretty interesting, too, especially when someone brought up the issue of how many people have no problems with certain scenarios in slash (noncon, etc.) that they can't deal with in het: that is, that many readers automatically identify with the female character, and thus are too uncomfortable with what is being done to her, but *can* objectify and thus distance themselves from the same acts performed on male characters, therefore enabling them to explore some kinks in a "safer" setting, emotionally. (Sheesh, that's a hideous sentence. Sorry.) Not that I think all or even most slash fans are motivated by this, but I can see that some might find slash useful for that purpose
I think that's very, very logical, and I'm pretty sure that's the reason behind why many women enjoy slash more than they enjoy het or femmeslash (note: I'm not trying to make gross generalisations – heck, that's not the reason why I read slash, although I don't necessarily enjoy it more than het or femmeslash). I'd seen a discussion in someone's journal once, where the owner had asked,"Why do you like slash?" (I can't find the link anymore, so I'll just quote from memory). Many people had responded, with the usual reasons like men having sex = hot, male characters are more interesting than the female characters, etc. But there were also many posters who had responded that they tended to prefer reading slash (in any form) *because* they didn't have to identify with the characters the way they would do with female characters. And that made me think about the different perspectives people have when they read fanfic: we talk of having OTCs (One True Character), the character you identify with the most and whose perspective you generally tend to view the universe of the show/book/movie from. Even when we talk about our favourite characters (who is not necessary the OTC), we talk about how we 'identify' with them, for some inexplicable, obscure reason, even if we have nothing in common with the character. And yet, there are people who prefer to read stories where they *don't* identify with the characters. So, what do we mean when we say that we identify with character X? And why do some people prefer *not* to identify with characters?
Does the above even make any sense? Ah, nevermind.
ETA:In case you're bored and want to read (I was):
Do people use condoms in NC-17 fics? - Amusing overview of different fandoms
Genslash? Can't we have genhet too?' aka People trying to figure out the various definitions of slash, het, and gen
jaybee65 from this thread in her LJ, which I had saved in a word file. Which makes me come to the conclusion that I must've really wanted to chat about it, and therefore had it saved, and then promptly forgot all about it. And since I still want to chat about it, I'll just post it here. Ignore it, if you wish. *g*I found the other tangent -- the one about sex -- pretty interesting, too, especially when someone brought up the issue of how many people have no problems with certain scenarios in slash (noncon, etc.) that they can't deal with in het: that is, that many readers automatically identify with the female character, and thus are too uncomfortable with what is being done to her, but *can* objectify and thus distance themselves from the same acts performed on male characters, therefore enabling them to explore some kinks in a "safer" setting, emotionally. (Sheesh, that's a hideous sentence. Sorry.) Not that I think all or even most slash fans are motivated by this, but I can see that some might find slash useful for that purpose
I think that's very, very logical, and I'm pretty sure that's the reason behind why many women enjoy slash more than they enjoy het or femmeslash (note: I'm not trying to make gross generalisations – heck, that's not the reason why I read slash, although I don't necessarily enjoy it more than het or femmeslash). I'd seen a discussion in someone's journal once, where the owner had asked,"Why do you like slash?" (I can't find the link anymore, so I'll just quote from memory). Many people had responded, with the usual reasons like men having sex = hot, male characters are more interesting than the female characters, etc. But there were also many posters who had responded that they tended to prefer reading slash (in any form) *because* they didn't have to identify with the characters the way they would do with female characters. And that made me think about the different perspectives people have when they read fanfic: we talk of having OTCs (One True Character), the character you identify with the most and whose perspective you generally tend to view the universe of the show/book/movie from. Even when we talk about our favourite characters (who is not necessary the OTC), we talk about how we 'identify' with them, for some inexplicable, obscure reason, even if we have nothing in common with the character. And yet, there are people who prefer to read stories where they *don't* identify with the characters. So, what do we mean when we say that we identify with character X? And why do some people prefer *not* to identify with characters?
Does the above even make any sense? Ah, nevermind.
ETA:In case you're bored and want to read (I was):
Do people use condoms in NC-17 fics? - Amusing overview of different fandoms
Genslash? Can't we have genhet too?' aka People trying to figure out the various definitions of slash, het, and gen
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-10-03 10:29 am (UTC)*goes to read*
Okay, I enjoyed them both, but I can't actually think of anything to add to either of them. But I will say that condoms are an unavoidable reality when it comes to sex, and I like it when an author works that bit of reality into their story. Mind you, I'm sure that Wizards don't have to worry about those silly Muggle diseases, right? *g*
Hmm
Date: 2004-10-03 03:21 pm (UTC)Swatkat
Re: Hmm
Date: 2004-10-03 07:46 pm (UTC)pitiful humansregular Muggles.no subject
Date: 2004-10-04 12:20 pm (UTC)I'm just saying. *g*
Hee
Date: 2004-10-04 02:32 pm (UTC)dyingsuffering from lycanthropy. (sp?)Swatkat
Giving this a try now
Date: 2004-10-04 06:53 am (UTC)The idea of "identifying" with characters is actually critically important to my reading -- without at least one such character, I have a hard time working up interest in reading at all. (There are exceptions, but they have to be phenomenally well written, or deal with some theme or issue I'm particularly keen on.)
Let me explain what I mean by "identification," though. As you point out, it doesn't necessarily mean finding a character that I think is like me. Rather, it's more a type of "life experience tourism" -- in reading fiction, I get to vicariously experience someone else's life for a little while. Ideally, they would be different enough from me to make it interesting, but would have at least one (preferably more) key characteristic I could relate to on some level.
Thus, when I read a story, I'm *always* looking for a character to "lock onto" in that way. It doesn't have to be my "OTC", as you put it (I love that term) -- although if my OTC appears in a story, I *will* always identify with that person above and beyond any of the other characters. But it doesn't have to be limited to one character per story -- in fact, I often identify with more than one in this way. It doesn't have to be a female character, either -- although to be honest, that makes it much easier. Sometimes it's the character whose POV the author writes from, and sometimes it isn't. But if I can't find *anyone* who interests me enough that I want to see things with their eyes for the length of the story, then it's not a story I want to read.
Yeah
Date: 2004-10-04 02:49 pm (UTC)But if I can't find *anyone* who interests me enough that I want to see things with their eyes for the length of the story, then it's not a story I want to read.
And so, do people chose *not* to identify reading with characters on purpose? Or is this identification slightly different with our identification.
Swatkat
Re: Yeah
Date: 2004-10-04 05:33 pm (UTC)I don't know! I'd love to ask someone, if it ever comes up on a thread somewhere again. (And that's assuming they'll answer.)