swatkat

I'd like to take a crack at a few of those questions.

Question Number Two: Why femslash?

Well, the answer to that depends on how you ask it: why femslash as opposed to het? As opposed to m/m slash? As opposed to gen? And are you asking why read it, or why write it? Depending on the context, I could answer this question at length.

I guess my response to the question, without it being put into a narrower context, is simply: why not femslash? Why would you even ask the question in the first place? The question almost seems to presume some reason against it, and I'd like to see it articulated.

I'll move on to questions three and four.

The issue of "identifying with" characters is quite an interesting one. I think there are two ways that I "identify". The first is by seeing characteristics in a character that I recognize as being similar to my own somehow, and that therefore enable me to use that character as my "eyes" in that fictional world. The second form of identification takes place when I see a character who possesses characteristics that I admire or wish I had -- this character is who I would aspire to be like were I thrown into that universe.

The characters who *really* resonate with me are those who combine both types of identification -- who are "like me" in some key ways, but also "what I would like to be" in others. And yes, they tend to be of a similar type from fandom to fandom, to the point where I'm sure that people who "know" my taste in one fandom would be able to predict who my favorite characters would be in another fandom.

I prefer to talk about the characters who "resonate with me" as opposed to using your terminology of "fall in love with" -- I tend to obsess over characters in more of an "identification with" kind of way than in an "object of love" kind of way. But based on the kind of fanfic I come across most often, I think I am in the minority in this. Or am I? I don't know. I certainly don't think most LFN writers are writing about Michael because they identify with him, for example, but maybe I'm getting their motivation wrong.

From:

No, no, it wasn't a question - I'm such an idiot. *smacks self on the forehead* This discussion would consist of explaining why I, a heterosexual female, often find femslash way more interesting that m/m slash (because all the m/m slash discussions I've seen so far seems almost hell-bent on proving that straight woman = loves men = loves maleslash, QED). I should've said that in the first place.

I think there are two ways that I "identify". The first is by seeing characteristics in a character that I recognize as being similar to my own somehow, and that therefore enable me to use that character as my "eyes" in that fictional world. The second form of identification takes place when I see a character who possesses characteristics that I admire or wish I had -- this character is who I would aspire to be like were I thrown into that universe.

That's a good way to distinguish, and I'd like to think more about this. The characters I like say a lot about me, in a way, and yet I've always thought I've nothing in common with them. And now I'm wondering: what do I have in common with Nikita? Or Faith? Or Remus? Or Hermione? What it is about them that *gets* me so much? How can I make sense of them so easily? Or is it, as you said - what I aspire to be? I'll definitely have to think more.

I prefer to talk about the characters who "resonate with me" as opposed to using your terminology of "fall in love with" -- I tend to obsess over characters in more of an "identification with" kind of way than in an "object of love" kind of way.

No, my favourite characters do resonate with me, but I also certainly do love them, very much. I love them and I understand them, which is the reason I can forgive them even when they're at their worst, while I can dislike another character for doing something similar.

And yes, they tend to be of a similar type from fandom to fandom, to the point where I'm sure that people who "know" my taste in one fandom would be able to predict who my favorite characters would be in another fandom.

This I agree with, and now I'm trying to figure out what my 'types' are. *g*

Swatkat

From:

I get what you mean now.

This discussion would consist of explaining why I, a heterosexual female, often find femslash way more interesting that m/m slash (because all the m/m slash discussions I've seen so far seems almost hell-bent on proving that straight woman = loves men = loves maleslash, QED).

I'd like to see you grapple with explaining your answer to that, to see how well it matches (or doesn't, as the case may be) my own feelings. I do definitely prefer femmeslash to m/m slash, on average, and I've been trying to articulate (in my own mind) why that is, but I'm curious about how others might answer the same question.

The characters I like say a lot about me, in a way, and yet I've always thought I've nothing in common with them. And now I'm wondering: what do I have in common with Nikita? Or Faith? Or Remus? Or Hermione? What it is about them that *gets* me so much? How can I make sense of them so easily? Or is it, as you said - what I aspire to be? I'll definitely have to think more.

I often like characters who are very different from me, and yet I still think I'm "identifying with" them for various reasons -- sometimes because they have "positive" characteristics I admire and wish I possessed myself, but also sometimes because they embody *negative* traits that I don't feel free to express. In the latter case, it's actually rather satisfying to "root for" a selfish or "evil" character who freely indulges in those "bad" aspects of human nature that I have to keep under control.

My favorite characters of all, however, combine all these things in a complex and fascinating way: some characteristics that I share, some characteristics I admire but don't think I share, and some characteristics that maybe I do or don't share but in any event don't dare express because they're bad or destructive. If a character is all three of these things, he or she (almost always she, because I find it hard to identify with male characters) will become my primary focus in that fandom.

Does that make any sense?

From:

I do definitely prefer femmeslash to m/m slash, on average

Same here, same here. One reason I've grown to love the Buffyverse so much that there is so much of it - or just even plain woman-bonding - and that most authors ackowledge that they just can't cut out the women, period.

I've been trying to articulate this for ages, and it's one more reason I need to figure out my 'types' and the identification issues, because I believe it has a lot to do with that. When I do post it, I'll also add why I like m/m slash when I do, because when I hear others speak about it, I'm mostly all "But...but...where does that leave *me*?"

My favorite characters of all, however, combine all these things in a complex and fascinating way: some characteristics that I share, some characteristics I admire but don't think I share, and some characteristics that maybe I do or don't share but in any event don't dare express because they're bad or destructive. If a character is all three of these things, he or she (almost always she, because I find it hard to identify with male characters) will become my primary focus in that fandom.

Does that make any sense?

Oh, a lot! And kudos to you for being able to express that in words, lol! I need to do a lot more character analysis (including my own).

Swatkat

From:

I'd like to see you grapple with explaining your answer to that, to see how well it matches (or doesn't, as the case may be) my own feelings. I do definitely prefer femmeslash to m/m slash, on average, and I've been trying to articulate (in my own mind) why that is, but I'm curious about how others might answer the same question.

Me too, for the same reason. The best I've come up with so far is that I like reading about women, to the point that a story without significant male presence doesn't even really register as missing an element, whereas a story without women - especially in an enviroment where there *are* important female characters always seems to be missing the elment I'm most interested in.

I know why I prefer het of course - because I'm interested above all in the struggle/desire/work of women and men to be together - not that other sorts of relationships don't require this, but .... well - inarticulateness has struck again.

From:

Me too, for the same reason. The best I've come up with so far is that I like reading about women, to the point that a story without significant male presence doesn't even really register as missing an element, whereas a story without women - especially in an enviroment where there *are* important female characters always seems to be missing the elment I'm most interested in.

That's definitely a consideration for me, too.

From:

The best I've come up with so far is that I like reading about women, to the point that a story without significant male presence doesn't even really register as missing an element, whereas a story without women - especially in an enviroment where there *are* important female characters always seems to be missing the elment I'm most interested in.

Buffy. Leave out all those interesting women, and the atmosphere suddenly becomes immensely claustrophobic. Same with LFN, or even HP, though some would argue otherwise.

I know why I prefer het of course - because I'm interested above all in the struggle/desire/work of women and men to be together - not that other sorts of relationships don't require this, but .... well - inarticulateness has struck again.

I know what you mean - it used to be the same with me. These days I've reached a point where it doesn't seem to matter anymore. I'm not sure if it's a good thing or a bad thing.

Swatkat

From:

No, my favourite characters do resonate with me, but I also certainly do love them, very much. I love them and I understand them, which is the reason I can forgive them even when they're at their worst, while I can dislike another character for doing something similar.

In *that* sense of love, yes, I agree. I thought you meant more in the sense of having a romantic fantasy-attachment toward.

This I agree with, and now I'm trying to figure out what my 'types' are. *g*

My "types" are all too obvious to me -- and probably to everyone else, too. ;-)

From:

In *that* sense of love, yes, I agree. I thought you meant more in the sense of having a romantic fantasy-attachment toward.

Meh, no! In RL I'd be more tempted to beat Michael on the head with a stick - fascinating as he is, Nikita can have him, thankyouverymuch. *g*

My "types" are all too obvious to me -- and probably to everyone else, too. ;-)

You should definitely give Lilah a try. *g*

Swatkat

From:

You should definitely give Lilah a try. *g*

Based on your recommendation I am planning on renting the DVDs of Angel to check her out. But having read a few descriptions of her, I think she fits my classic pattern:

Strong and intelligent female who is too morally challenged to qualify as a heroine? Check.

Obsessive or otherwise psychologically unhealthy? Check.

Comes to a bad end, but does so with style? Check.

She's probably perfect. *g*

From:

Add to that snarky and enjoys tormenting the somewhat dim hero. And the fact that it's love that brings her downfall. *g*

Swatkat

From:

Oooh. This sounds brilliant. I can't believe I missed this show when it was on!

From:

It's a good show - darker, more stylish than Buffy, and fatalistic where Buffy is optimistic. And it grows darker with every season (the Lilah arc is in S4, as I mentioned). Good character developments all round (you will not *believe* what Wesley was, and what he became). Clever use of Buffy characters and canon. Continuity! You may or may not be able to get into it, but it's definitely worth a try (or ten). *g*

Swatkat

From:

Dark and fatalistic are good qualities.

Should I jump right to S4 to start with, or do I need to start at the beginning?

From:

Seeing that I myself started with S3, and saw S1 and S2 afterwards, I may not be the right person to say this. I'll ask

msgenevieve and

mommysusan, since they're the original BtVS fans.

Swatkat

From:

delle.livejournal.com

4.Is there a certain pattern about the characters we fall in love with in different fandoms?

::cough::

it's been an eye-opening experience, as I slowly branch into other fannish obsessions, to see I have a tendency to be attracted to a certain *type* of character. oh, yea, am discovering my own 'kink buttons', if you will, about what characters interest me.

and the fact that, apparently, I'm quite predicatable to my friends. *sheepish grin*

From:

it's been an eye-opening experience, as I slowly branch into other fannish obsessions, to see I have a tendency to be attracted to a certain *type* of character. oh, yea, am discovering my own 'kink buttons', if you will, about what characters interest me.

Multi-fandom has its benefits, isn't it? *g*

So, what type *is* your Sayid? Does he have anything in common with Michael? And Will?

Swatkat

From:

delle.livejournal.com

I've been percolating on this (in between the recent homefront issues) and have come up with a short list of similarities:

1. Looks. I've never been attracted to blond men and that seems to hold true in my fannish preferences too. Michael, Aragorn, Will, Sayid... even Sully from Dr. Quinn are all dark-haired men.

2. Beards. My darling husband, who cannot grow a decent beard to save his life, goes without shaving for me when we go camping. Because I adore beards. And the scruffy look goes a long way with me. So, again: Michael, Aragorn, Will, Sayid, Sully.... yeah, they all have beards or at least the scruffy/unshaved for a few days look.

3. Long hair. *This* one surprised myself, actually. It wasn't until I started looking a trends in my favorite characters that I picked this up.

4. Height. Being 5'7" (and considered short in my very tall family), I'm attracted to tall men. So Dominic Monaghan, who's very good and very cute as Charlie, does NOTHING for me at all in the sexiness factor. He's blond, his hair's too short and he's way too short.

5. An accent; perferably English. Why? Who the hell knows? The only exception to this would be Sully and since Dr. Quinn is set in the American West circa 1975, anything other than an American accent would be really silly.

6. Angst. Oh, god, I am a sucker for angst. And the amazing thing - to me - is that in real life I am NOT a girl that looks for a man to fix. I run far far away from needy/unbalanced/brooding/I-can-fix-him men. But in my fic? Give me an angsty man.
Michael - heh. the definition of angst.
Aragorn - broody. the reluctant hero. (sigh)
Will - a conventional man forced to become an unconventional rule-breaker
Sully - afraid to commit (his first wife died - measles, I think)
Sayid - trying to come to terms with the man he *was*

I don't fixate on the actors, only the characters. So while I may squee at Roy Dupuis' latest picture, or Naveen Andrews being in Bride and Prejudice, I'm not really interested in them. I've never seen any of Roy's other movies - someone made me a copy of J'en Suis years ago and I've NEVER watched it.

I will go see Orlando Bloom's newest film, Kingdom of Heaven, but not simply because he's in it. It's medieval and I'm DYING to see it for the production values. It helps if I know the actor and am a fan of one of his characters, but I haven't seen Troy or Hildago.

does that tell you way too much about me? LOL

From:

Hmmm. Interesting questions about "identify with" and "fall in love with" (in the sense you explained to Jaybee - which is what I assumed you meant, as I do the same thing. ;-)

In LFN land I know that I actually identify most closely with Michael, which is part of the reason I'm so stumped in trying to articulate my thoughts about him. He just 'makes sense' to me - or rather, the one in my head and my stories does.... I think it has something to do with the dutiful eldest child vibe that I get from him, that and his ambivilance about ambition.

I fell in love with Nikita though. Immediately and without reserve. (Which may be another reason I identify with Michael....) I don't have many qualities that are the same as her's, so I don't identify with her so much as I empathize with her; if I had her courage and her determination (which are the things about her I most admire) I would hope to respond similiarly in similar situations.

I'm not sure I've responded as strongly to many other characters. I know in the two other fandoms I have spent the most time poking around hte edges of, LOTR and Farscape, there aren't any characters that have so seized my imaginiation - certainly not to the extent of wanting to write about them. In Farscape I'm totally in love with the heat and the tension of John and Areyn's relationship - and I like them both a great deal. But I can't really identify with either - John is about a million times smarter than I will ever be and Areyn's background is truly alien. I struggle to empathize with her when I think she's being stupid. If there is any character there that I do identify with it is probably Crais. Who is actually a bit like Michael in some ways, come to think of it.

Mostly though, in Farscape and LOTR, it is the whole mosaic I love - not so much any one piece of it.

As for mocking - heh - I followed some of those links around. Interesting from several perspectives. I mock from a distance because, well, sometimes stuff is really funny without intending to be. Hysterial comparisons to Nazis, declarations of leaving forever, horrible Mary Sues, etc....but I have no relationships with the authors of these things and to laugh at them directly seems unwarrented and cruel. To laugh at a distance though seems, well, fine to me.

I also have found great solace in recognizing how *similiar* fanish behavior is, across fandoms, and in seeing how easy it is to disrupt fannish communities. Nothing in LFNdom is weird or strange in that sense, only a microcosim of the whole. Helps me keep things in perspective and hold my own primary fandom with both respect and care.

As for the flocking thing that so many seemed concerned about in the link you shared - well, I've been a (mostly) flocked only poster since long before I even came to lj or ever heard of fandom_wank, so the big concern with being 'silenced' by fear of wank reports means nothing to me. At some level I don't even understand the concern. *shrugs*

What did you think of it all?

From:

In LFN land I know that I actually identify most closely with Michael

Really?!

I'm so surprised by this, you could knock me over just by looking at me. Shows what I know, eh?

From:

Yeah, well - for a variety of reasons it's not something I broadcast. *g*

I'm a little surprised that you were so surprised....but then, it's awfully slow going to build a complete picture of some one only via words on a screen.

Nell

From:

I think my surprise arises from the fact that you are SO vehement in defending Nikita. It never occurred to me that it would come out of something other than identification, or that you would identify with someone else more.

Ah, the assumptions we make...*g*

From:

I'm sure most people assume that I identify with Nikita primarily, and that I defend her because I think I am *like* her in some way. It is actually far more that I am intensely protective of her, much in the way a lover would be. An irony I am fully aware of.

I know I am vehement about her - and it is almost beyond my control. I don't know how I feel about this, so I usually try not to think about it too much. *g*

From:

So, you see some of yourself in Michael, and you *get* Nikita and love her beyond words? And whose eyes do you see through in a story first, his, or hers?

I *so* need to work through my identification issues.

Swatkat

From:

So, you see some of yourself in Michael, and you *get* Nikita and love her beyond words?

Um - sort of, but not quite. Nikita has qualities I wish I had, and I find her endlessly sympathetic, and I empathize with her all the time. She is most definitely my main point of reference for the show and all the fanfic. But - I don't really 'recognize' very much in her as familiar from my own experience of myself, except by extrapolation.

Michael, on the other hand, does have a lot of qualities I do recognize - I do see parts of myself reflected in him. This, in some ways, actually makes it fairly easy for me to pass over him and leap into the more interesting, because it is more strange, POV of Nikita - because his almost always feels sort of - yeah, well, duh. Next!

And whose eyes do you see through in a story first, his, or hers?

I still read fiction, in general, like I did when I was a child, travelling along inside whichever POV is telling the story. I do skim, of course, if the story doesn't grab me or I don't care for the perfect self insert narrator. I also will start hopping around if I'm looking for some grounding that hasn't been offered, and I'm a huge self-spoiler in that I often skip to the end to see how it will all turn out. But, assuming that I like the story in the first place, then I go back to wherever I left off and head straight again - nestled securely inside who ever is talking to me.

In LFN land, assuming that there is no techical reason the story is hard to read - I see the story, first, through which ever character is telling it. I may decide at a certain point that the non-POV characters are not 'acting like themselves' - and this may destroy the story's hold on me, or it may not, depending on a whole host of factors.

The series itself? I saw that almost entirely through Nikita's eyes. At first, of course, because her's was the dominant POV - later, I continued to see the show that way because what happened to her was most interesting to me.

From:

Hmm, see, this brings up another issue – does identifying means seeing yourself in a character, or seeing something else, something that you don’t necessarily see in yourself and yet understand perfectly in the character? Who would you sympathise with first, Michael or Nikita? Your Michael maybe more like you, but when you’re watching LFN, you’re Nikita, right? *ponders*

Swatkat

From:

That is a pondering sort of question.

From the beginning, watching the series, I sympathized with Nikita and that never wavered.

I didn't really notice Michael at first - he was generic hot boss guy. It was only later, much later, that I realized how closely I identified with his helpless fascination with Nikita, and from there I came to realize how much more I recognized/identified within him. That was when my sympathy for him began to grow by leaps and bounds. Then later still, as I was working on yet another of my endless WIP, that one of the readers said something about the balance between Michael and Nikita in the story that made me see still more clearly how much of myself I read into Michael.

In the first, self insert fic that I never wrote very much of (or shared with anyone or put on line, thank heavens) - the character I immagined putting into section was a LOT like Michael - and very little like Nikita, even though the story was primarily from her POV. That was an utterly instinctive move - I didn't yet have any community of friends to talk with about fic, and the great lj system of comms for reading about and picking up the lexicon, the issues, etc. of meta-fic did not yet exist. It was only later, looking back, that I see how telling it was.

I'm pretty sure, though, that I *watch* from my own perspective. Reading is quite different.....I sometimes realize that I have begun to read a story from Nikita's POV even when she isn't there - which is quite disorienting and so I have to shake my head and start over from teh beginning in order to even make sense of the story - and once I've gotten on board, I read from within whomever is narrating.

From:

Hmm - reading this again, I may have been too quick with my response - it sounds pretty dismissive of a guy I claim to identify with. *g*

Maybe this will make more sense - writing Michael is - relatively easy for me. I like the Michael I write and while I edit to smooth things out, I rarely find that I have to pitch something and do it over because his characterization feels off. (As opposed to plot, which is - for me - a different processs).

Nikita on the other hand, well - Mrs. Sam is undergoing slow work because basically - while keeping the same sturdy environment, I've reworked Nikitia more or less completely, especially in the later parts (where I decided she got more and more off track in the original version). Some of the other WIP that are on hold are on hold for similar reasons, I'm struggling to hit what feels like "Nikita" for me.

I'm also wondering if I misread your second question.

Do you mean, when I as a story teller think up a story? The only answer there is, it depends on the story. Some stories are entirely (or mostly) his, some are entirely (or mostly - like Mrs. Sam) hers. Others are much more evenly split between the two of them. Still others, very, very short ones, drabbles and the like mind, have come to me in Madeline's POV.

From:

I love your Michael, I really do. While I don’t agree with half the things you say about him (I’ll never stop being surprised about the difference in individual interpretations), you make your vision perfectly believable in your writing. However, there’s something utterly charming about your Nikita (and I’m thinking particularly about Mrs.Sam here) that just gets me. You obsess over her more, maybe that’s why you’re nit-pickier about her voice? I’ve seen many Faith-authors say that. Faith has a very distinct voice, and even a slight error might ruin the characterization. Maybe because you see so many OOC Nikitas around you, you’re particular about your own? (And one day we’ll have to talk about her and find out how differently we see her)

You read the second question right – I wasn’t talking about writing, I was talking about watching the show or reading a fic. For me it’s a bit strange: I see the story through the eyes of the character telling it, but if the other character involved is someone I get so well, I also see what that character is thinking, without having the author tell me that. For example, if it’s a Michael-POV Michael/Nikita, where Michael doesn’t understand something Nikita is doing and is utterly bewildered, I feel his pain, but I also know *why* Nikita is doing what she’s doing (even if it’s the stupidest thing ever) and how she’s feeling about Michael’s treatment of her. Does that make sense?

Swatkat

From:

I love your Michael, I really do. While I don’t agree with half the things you say about him (I’ll never stop being surprised about the difference in individual interpretations), you make your vision perfectly believable in your writing.

Thanks! I suspect that he is believable in my writing because I believe in him, in the reality of a person like him.

However, there’s something utterly charming about your Nikita (and I’m thinking particularly about Mrs.Sam here) that just gets me. You obsess over her more, maybe that’s why you’re nit-pickier about her voice? I’ve seen many Faith-authors say that. Faith has a very distinct voice, and even a slight error might ruin the characterization. Maybe because you see so many OOC Nikitas around you, you’re particular about your own?

Thank you again! I'm sure my obsession's have a lot to do with it - also, honestly, I suspect my growing skills as a writer come into play. I think (obviously) my basic idea for Mrs. Sam was sound - but as it dragged on as a WIP being posted in progresss, Nikita slipped into generic heroine mold with some fanon filips - partially because her POV also bears the brunt of the plot progress and so I was juggling with to compeating issues - her voice and story continuity. The reason I embarked on the re-write was to see if I could fix her voice now that I had the whole story to work with.

(And one day we’ll have to talk about her and find out how differently we see her)

Someday, I'd like to do that!

From:

What did you think of it all?

My thoughts in this issue are so muddled that I just don't know where to start talking, really. I adore F_W, I really do. I wouldn't give it up for anything. I'm all for pointing and laughing. And yet, as some posters have rightly pointed out, the pointing and laughing often descends to cruelty, and that bothers me. Again, mocking a story - I'm all for mocking badfics, and the person who said that *no* story should ever be mocked just made me laugh a lot. I *adore* pottersues. But again, despite all these comms having 'no personal attacks' and 'no pointing to the authors', it keeps happening, and that bothers me too. And then there are all those thoughts about *why* we mock in the first place, and the importance of mocking as a form of criticism, and the need for a balanced perspective in all of us and how pointing and laughing tries to achieve that...

I've been a (mostly) flocked only poster since long before I even came to lj or ever heard of fandom_wank, so the big concern with being 'silenced' by fear of wank reports means nothing to me. At some level I don't even understand the concern. *shrugs*

You see, many posters, including myself, enjoy the ability to speak their minds on their LJ (as in good, thoughtful discussions and putting forward opinions, even strong ones) without having to think about offending others, as it happens on public comms or message boards. That's why I didn't post my Michael rant in the FFMB, but had absolutely no problem doing so here in a post that wasn't even flocked. And while there are some people who can laugh and brush off harsh criticism, there *are* people who find it difficult to do so, even if they aren't thin-skinned trolls. I don't think I would be one of them (I have dragon hide *g*), but the OP in the above discussion expressed her feelings well, and that made me think. And even a great concern is the weight that the word 'wank' carries these days. Even a pointless vendetta-wank may alarm people to the point where they stop going ahead with a thoughtful discussion simply because they wouldn't want to draw further attention to themselves.

I know I'm not making sense, but that's how my thoughts are on this - confused.

Swatkat

From: