Sleepy and incoherent

[swatkat]

Today's metafandom is full of discussions on March- whether or not it is fanfic, and why; whether it is somehow 'better' than what we understand as fanfic; what makes it 'better', if we assume it to be so, etc etc. My first instinct, of course, is to call March fanfic. And while I shouldn't comment on something I haven't actually read, I don't think it's even particularly interesting fanfic. Because in re-telling Mr. March's story, Brooke is telling us the story of an ordinary, sensitive man in times of war (who also happens to be Mr. March, the father of Jo March) – and how many times have we heard that story again? Little Women OTOH is about those left behind, about the *women* left behind, and that, to me, is a more interesting story than the same old Man vs. War story.

This is not to say I'm *against* re-telling stories. No, of course not. Would I be in fandom if I were? It's just that unless Brooke has managed to give us some new and interesting perspective on the old Man vs. War story, or on the Little Women universe (which I love dearly. someday I shall write a post on how this book changed my life. no, really – it did.) in her fic, I don't really care much about it.

*

And because I'm slightly (*cough*) obsessed with Wicked these days, I naturally started thinking whether you could call Wicked fanfiction. And I was quite astonished by my own answer to the question – I actually hesitated to call it fanfic, though it very clearly is a derivative work (a brilliant AU, if you like). Or 'just' fanfic. Which has a horribly derogatory ring to it, and that is so not what I meant to say. I think what I wanted to say is that fanfic – or to be more specific, shipfic, with its hyperfocus on romance and sex - often does not consider any other issue than romance (not that there's anything wrong with it), which maybe alright for the *fans* of that particular universe, but probably not so for everyone else. Does that at all make sense? *is hopelessly muddled*

P.S - GIP. Okay, so this is not a scene from the book. But Glinda sobbing over Elphaba's hat? There is no bad there. *sigh*

Comments

[nell65.livejournal.com]

However, I never got the impression that h/c in fanfic was inconsistent with the characters being equals.

Heh - no, I don't either! I just meant that, at least in the case of Jane Eyre - the 'comfort' part isn't really an equivilent to the 'magickal healing sex' that I tend to think of in the h/c realm - in that Rochester isn't actually 'healed.' He stays blind, and comparatively, helpless and scared, and dependent on Jane's sufferance. It is a kind of h/c I suppose - but, my point was, you can re-genre all sorts of things depending on what point you're looking to make.

But the pro fanfic examples I had in mind were, in addition to Wicked, things like the innumerable Sherlock Holmes stories that have been written over the years, all the different King Arthur/Grail books, horror fiction that plays in H.P. Lovecraft's universe, Tarzan, Dracula, etc. While some of these certainly include a romance as part of the plot (such as the Arthur/Guenevere(sp?)/Lancelot triangle), romance doesn't seem to be the the primary focus. It's an element of something larger, not the ultimate point.

Well, I suppose in part it depends on how narrowly we're construing the genre lable 'romance.' For example, most Jane Austen doesnt' actually fit the current publishing house description of romance - though finding a husband is the essential plot of all her books.

There is one way to read LOTR where the entire saga is nothing more than striaght up romance, where Aragon overcomes obstacles to win Arwen and live happily ever after for the rest of his life. It certainly isn't the only way, or probably even one of the dominent ways to read that text - but I've seen it used as a way to dismiss the story by those who don't like it.

So this creates a bit a naming problem when talking about fanfic/derivative fic as well - what do you mean by 'romance'? and how central to the story does the romance have to be to push a story from 'about something else with romance on teh side,' to 'romance mostly, with something else on the side'?

I'm not a horror fan, so I've never read Lovecraft, much less anything remotely fanficcish for it! As for the rest - well, some of the King Arthur/Grail books I've read *are* what *I* would call romance - and not always the classic triangle either, there is one entire series devoted to Merlin's POV in which Merlin's decision to become sexually active and fall in love is the root cause of hte loss of Camelot, much like MZB's Mists of Avalon, only in her story it's Mordred's mother's sexual/romantic decisions that drive the fall - and, some aren't, same with Dracula.

With the Sherlock Holmes fanfic - as it happens, the only SH I've read not written by Doyle is the fanfic with the OFC who marries Holmes himself! I'm really not sure what the 'rest' of the SH world of "pro" fic is like - though I gather a lot of the actual online stuff isn't published b/c its all m/m romance featuring Holmes and Watson!

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

I just meant that, at least in the case of Jane Eyre - the 'comfort' part isn't really an equivilent to the 'magickal healing sex' that I tend to think of in the h/c realm - in that Rochester isn't actually 'healed.'

Ah, OK. Since I've never read this and can't discuss it even remotely intelligently, I can't really add anything more here.

Well, I suppose in part it depends on how narrowly we're construing the genre lable 'romance.'

True. I think my definition is broader than the publishing house category definition, though. I'd define romance as anything where a romantic relationship is the primary focus of the work.

There is one way to read LOTR where the entire saga is nothing more than striaght up romance, where Aragon overcomes obstacles to win Arwen and live happily ever after for the rest of his life. It certainly isn't the only way, or probably even one of the dominent ways to read that text - but I've seen it used as a way to dismiss the story by those who don't like it.

Really? I haven't read LOTR since junior high, but I didn't even remember Arwen being *in* the books. I guess that's how much of an impression she made on me! LOL.

and how central to the story does the romance have to be to push a story from 'about something else with romance on teh side,' to 'romance mostly, with something else on the side'?

Well, yeah. Perhaps it's one of those, "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it!" sorts of things. ;-)

I haven't read much of the romance-type versions of King Arthur or Dracula, so it's interesting that you've come across those. (It wouldn't surprise me if I have a sort of self-selecting ability to avoid them and choose the versions that don't have romance as the main focus -- probably clues on the dust jacket keep me away!) As for Sherlock Homes, my father has quite a few books in that "fandom," and the vast majority seem to simply be additional adventures/mysteries for Holmes to solve. I found the Holmes/OFC books in my father's collection, too, and made the mistake of reading one -- I wanted to exclaim, "OMG, this is the biggest Mary Sue EVER!" except that Dad wouldn't have had the faintest idea what a Mary Sue was.

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

Really? I haven't read LOTR since junior high, but I didn't even remember Arwen being *in* the books. I guess that's how much of an impression she made on me! LOL.

She isn't. Much. A couple of times in FOTR, and then Aragorn marries her in ROTK. Their love story is in the appendix - which I'm very fond of, by the way. *g*

[nell65.livejournal.com]

No, she isn't around much in the text - and the obstacles to their relationship aren't their personalities, but rather external problems. You know, the ruling ring, the embodiement of evil, the passing of Middle earth - stuff like that!

But - as a motivation for Aragorn - she's omnipresent, especially after you've read the appendices and then forever after as you re-read the story itself. Really, from at least one perfectly legitimate POV - how much more 'romantic' and 'romance' filled can you get?

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

Really, from at least one perfectly legitimate POV - how much more 'romantic' and 'romance' filled can you get?

But the romance is not the entire story, is it? It's also about Aragorn reclaiming what is his, restoring Gondor to its former glory, defeating the forces of evil that threaten to destroy their world. Arwen is only *one* of the motivations (albeit a very important one). And LOTR is not just Aragorn's story - only a part of it is.

[nell65.livejournal.com]

Oh, I don't think LOTR is a romance, for all the reasons you mention and more. But I have seen people dismiss it by tarring it as one; and if they aren't right - they aren't entirely wrong either.

[nell65.livejournal.com]

I think my definition is broader too - but I'm not at all sure where the lines are, and so much depends on context.

Take again the Merlin series I was talking about - Merlin has no affairs until the third book, but his affair when he does have it destroys Camelot (and him too, of course). So, the romance is absolutely central to the longer story arc, not a tangent, not a sub plot - but *the* plot. The ultimate reason for everything.

Is it a romance? Or not?

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Hmmm, OK, with the caveat that I haven't read this series, I'd say no, it's not a romance in my opinion of the term. While a romantic relationship may be a central plot element, the success or failure of the romance isn't *the* main point of the books. Rather, the romantic relationship causes something else important to happen. Thus, the romance serves the plot, not the other way around.

In a romance, the plot is important *only* because it adds tension/obstacles to (or, alternatively, advances the development of) the romantic relationship. That doesn't seem to be the case in what you're describing.

[nell65.livejournal.com]

But how do you decide what the central plot *is*? And which elements serve the plot, and which are the plot?

In Mary!Sunday Sue, to go back to that story - I thought the plot was "Mossad agent blows up Section."

You thought the plot was "Birkoff gets laid while Section burns."

In the Merlin Triology, I think the plot is "Merlin finally gets girl, loses Camelot" - but you could also call it "Merlin does everything, Arthur watches from the wings."

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Well, let's discuss the LFN story, since we both read that one! LOL.

I look at what the relationship of the plot elements are to each other. Birkoff and OFC#1 getting together didn't lead to Section being destroyed; rather, Section being destroyed enabled the two of them to live happily ever after together. *That* was the payoff and the ultimate goal of the story.

[nell65.livejournal.com]

Well - that's the thing. I thought the ultimate goal of the story was to see Section destroyed.

Birkoff and girl were just icing.

But, sadly, perhaps that's because I was not interested enough in Birkoff, or OFC #1, to pay attention to their plot line - or percieve it as central to the story, which I thought revolved all around OFC #2 being smarter than Paul and Madeline, and getting Michael as some sort of a reward for her wonderfulness.

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Ah. Well. The story was told entirely from OFC#1's point of view, and everything involved her and her experiences. OFC#2 didn't even show up until about halfway through.

The way I saw it, the whole point was to get OFC#1 together with Birkoff and then set them free to be happy ever after together -- the specific method (Section being blown up by Mossad, thanks to OFC#2's super-double-agent skillz) could have been changed to something else (say, a computer virus erases all evidence of their existence from Section's computers, so they can't be tracked), but the story wouldn't have felt much different.

Here's the story framework, as I saw it: Cute and snarky haxor grrll gets recruited. She clashes with Birky but because they're both so smrt! they fall in love. Something dramatic happens and woohoo, they escape Section! End story, as they walk hand in hand into the sunset. OFC#2 was simply the means for the "something dramatic happens" part. A very annoying and Mary Sueish means, but don't let the Mary Sueishness fool you: she wasn't the main self-insert, but rather the secondary one.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not sure where to go next.

That is certainly an accurate version of the story - I just didn't think it was the 'point' of the story, so to speak; the narrator, haxor grrll, didn't seem to me to serve any particular story purpose except to report on it - the story, I thought, was the end of section.

*shrugs helplessly*

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Hmm. This *is* a dead-end, but a kind of interesting one in that it really shows how subjective everything is!

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

So this creates a bit a naming problem when talking about fanfic/derivative fic as well - what do you mean by 'romance'? and how central to the story does the romance have to be to push a story from 'about something else with romance on teh side,' to 'romance mostly, with something else on the side'?

Heh. I'm not sure we can define it that way. But yes, like jaybee65, I know it when I see it. You've been reading Pratchett, right? Pterry's a *master* at 'something else with romance on the side'. Think Carrot/Angua in Men at Arms, for instance (and then in the later books he even uses the ship to comment on some Issues). Or Susan/Lobsang is Thief of Time (*happy sigh*). Or Adora/Moist in Going Postal. Or Teppic/Ptraci in Pyramids. And so on.

And you know what? I don't actually mind it when fanfic focuses on 'just romance'. But it annoys me *immensely* in profic for reasons I'm not sure of. *scratches head*

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not sure what we're trying to talk about -- 'romance in fanfic' or 'ship fic' -- really has a good label, or for that matter with pro-fic either.

Why is Bridges of Madison County, or Cold Mountain a novel, but Heyer's Friday's Child is a romance? Because men wrote the first two and a woman wrote the third?

I do know what *you* mean, I think, though - and agree that Prachett, frex, for the most part, adds romantic sub/side plots, but generally speaking, his stories aren't romances, he's commenting on other things. I'm also not a big fan of "pro fic" romance stories - especially not those that have snuck out of the 'romance' section and into the main "lit" section.

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

Oh please. Bridges of Madison Country (which I only vaguely remember) is so a romance. It's even sold in the romance category here - is it different out there?

I do know what *you* mean, I think, though - and agree that Prachett, frex, for the most part, adds romantic sub/side plots, but generally speaking, his stories aren't romances, he's commenting on other things.

And that's what I love about him. He's got this perfect ability to blend everything together.

especially not those that have snuck out of the 'romance' section and into the main "lit" section.

I call them Pretentious Romances. *g*