(very) brief meta point

[lotesse]

Tangentially jumping off of a topic on narrative friendship at fangs, fur, & fey -

It's a mistake, I think, to see all fannish involvement with a text as somehow indicative of what fen want that text to be. Ficcing a pairing doesn't mean you want them together in canon - although it can mean that, of course - so much as it means that you see an interesting possible story in their hooking up. Fanwriting is spidery. Unlike prowriting, it doesn't per se drive toward a goal narrative.

This is negative capability with a vengeance - no irritable grasping, just flinging webs of possible, divergent stories. Ideally unprivileged? Like some sort of pornographic quantum event, where everything is everywhere at once until we look straight at it, and becomes so once again after we look away.

Comments

[shiinabambi.livejournal.com]

IAWTP.

[lotesse]

:)

[ladymordecai.livejournal.com]

I'm right on with your first paragraph--maybe it's because the fandoms I'm most present in are heavy in AU fic and contradictory canon, but I've never ever seen fanfic as anything other than a sort of literary exploration, a "What if things were different?" Sometimes it's, "What if canon as we know it now goes this way in the future?" sometimes it's, "This is what this offscreen/panel/page scene might have looked like" and then sometimes it's, "What if all the main characters were vampires?" All manners of approaching fanfic are equally valid, and sometimes (often?) are done precisely because a ficwriter wants to take the text somewhere it can never and perhaps should never go in canon.

As for your second paragraph . . .

This is negative capability with a vengeance - no irritable grasping, just flinging webs of possible, divergent stories. Ideally unprivileged? Like some sort of pornographic quantum event, where everything is everywhere at once until we look straight at it, and becomes so once again after we look away.

Either you've lost me (which is possible, as I am not as versed in litcrit as you) or I disagree. I really feel like I'm misinterpreting "negative capability"--I read "negative" as "bad" and while in context that feels wrong, it also kinda chimes with the rest of your paragraph. My absolute favorite thing about fanfic is just that, the limitless possibility that exists.

I think I need that paragraph explained because I feel very flaily and lost.

[lotesse]

mmmn, no, not bad. Negative Capability is a Keats thing, the quality he says allows for great art - lemme dig up the quote - "several things dovetailed in my mind, & at once it struck me, what quality went to form a Man of Achievement especially in literature & which Shakespeare possessed so enormously - I mean Negative Capability, that is when man is capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts without any irritable reaching after fact & reason."

So what I'm getting at is total multiplicity, free from any irritable grasping after "the real story". Make sense?

(Errata: I actually heard about Neg.Cap. as a kid, because Philip Pullman is all about it - that Keats bit is directly quoted in Golden Compass, which is cool.)

[ladymordecai.livejournal.com]

Okay, now I get it. I think I dislike the term more than the concept--but Keats and I had a falling out some years ago, so that's not anybody's fault.

And--yes! Agree. The concept of "the real story" confuses me anyway, I have too much grounding in things like fairy tales and comics. And hey, criminology! Ask seventeen people what they saw happen and you'll get seventeen answers. People are diverse and contain multitudes.

[lotesse]

I don't love the term myself, but I do adore his explanation of it - irritable grasping! - so they're his words that I use.

Cool point on criminology - this deconstuction stuff always goes further than I think it will.

[ineptshieldmaid.livejournal.com]

Well said!

Some of my pairings I naturally want to see together - Arthur and Merlin, for example. My Narnia characters? No, no and a thousand times no - it would be SO out of place in canon.

[lotesse]

Right, yes. I need Arthur/Merlin to be canon - and anyway it kind of is, insofar as they're sides of a coin and all that. I mean, the show is about them becoming close to one another, so our shippiness just intensifies the already extant narrative pull. But Pevensiecest in Narnia proper would be - majorly disruptive, let' say.

[ineptshieldmaid.livejournal.com]

Snort. I don't even write 'cest, but... any kind of sex in Narnia proper would be Not On. Ze fic, it is about exploring possibilities excluded by our good Prof. Lewis.

[alias_sqbr]

(here from metafandom)

I think it's important not to overgeneralise: I agree that not all fannish involvement by all fans is indicative of what that fan wants that text to be.

But afaict some fans do only write fic which reflects what they want from (or see in) the text, and may be unhappy even reading anything which, say, contradicts their OTP.

I'd say my own approach is more like yours, but thought it worth pointing out that not all ficcers write fic for the same reasons.

Anyway, I think you've described how I see fanfic very well :)

[lotesse]

Right, totally. Though I also think it's possible to be both kinds of fan at once - that is, some of my fannish OTPs are of the "they must be together" variety, and some are just throwing wet spaghetti up against the wall. The two types of shipping aren't contradictive within the same person, though they often are within a singular fandom.

[alias_sqbr]

That's very true. Heck, you might even have both in the one fic, if it includes both your OTP and, say, flying unicorns :)

[cleo]

Here via metafandom!

Great thoughts here. Fic is so interesting from a reader response perspective; there's a lot there to work with.

This is negative capability with a vengeance - no irritable grasping, just flinging webs of possible, divergent stories. Ideally unprivileged? Like some sort of pornographic quantum event, where everything is everywhere at once until we look straight at it, and becomes so once again after we look away.

Yes! This is the beauty of fandom, but I don't think most of fandom in general embraces the concept even remotely (otherwise there would be no ship wars, etc. Lol). In my experience, there is more willingness to allow for multiple layers of what the readers want/need out of a pairing/piece in smaller fandoms are niches within large fandoms.

[lotesse]

Yep, ita with the idea that this kind of thinking is niche as opposed to fandom-wide. I wonder if that's not because it's derived from a more academic mindset? Either from within the academe proper or from within analytic/nonjudgemental perspectives?

I think I learned this way of reading from my mother, who's an academically trained painter. It's only been reinforced by my own academic training.

[(Anonymous)]

Yep, ita with the idea that this kind of thinking is niche as opposed to fandom-wide. I wonder if that's not because it's derived from a more academic mindset? Either from within the academe proper or from within analytic/nonjudgemental perspectives?

Does anyone in LJ Fandom go to the theater, ballet, or opera? Where part of the fun is the different casts interpreting the same "text". Then there is how different theatrical traditions affect the casts' performance of the original "text". The ability for people to accept and compare different theatrical interpretations has been around for a long time outside of academia.

Apparently in the 1800's some producers "restored" the happy ending to King Lear justifying it on the basis the source story Shakespeare used had Lear return to his throne and reconciliated with Cordelia. The Soviets did a similar change to the ending of Swan Lake.

[lotesse]

hey, anon, signing your comments with a name will let me keep track of who you are!

I've actually written kind of lot on this wrt theater and oral literature - I wrote my thesis on fairytales, which are all about reinterpretation. If you check along my tags, I've posted some ideas on multiplicity in Shakespeare specifically.

(and seriously, that Victorian Lear is cracked out omg)

[lookfar.livejournal.com]

Ah, well, ship wars aren't really about people's conceptual idea of what they are doing. There's a lot of just - needing drama, trying out Mean Girl stuff, being insecure and easily hurt. I think of fan fiction as a huge sandbox filled with happy toddlers engaged in parallel play. That's at its best; if I like your castle, I can just admire it. You can drive your truck and make a road. It's a really *big* sandbox.

[lotesse]

I really, really like the idea that ship wars aren't actually about the text. Yay paradigm shift - they almost make sense to me now! thanks for the insight

[starbrow.livejournal.com]

Yes, absolutely.

It's 'what if?' instead 'this must be!'

Which has always been my problem with writing original fic - I think of AUs before the original idea is fully solidified in my head.

[lotesse]

I have the exact same problem in writing orig - I can't get things to hold still in my mind!

[schemingreader.livejournal.com]

Here via metafandom. Amazingly well put--I've long thought of this in this way but never with this nice imagery.

[lotesse]

thanks - mmm, your icon is lovely!

[schemingreader.livejournal.com]

Thank you! My friend rexluscus, an amazing fan artist (and writer!) made the art for me for my 40th birthday. I'll bet you would like her stuff.

[ceares.livejournal.com]

Here from metafandom. Very well put. I think it's the thing that keeps me engaged with fandom. I found a whole world where people ask and answer the kinds of questions I always have about text.

[lotesse]

Yes! If I could find an rl classroom with half the intellectual creativity on display daily in fandom...

Here from metafandom

[copracat]

pornographic quantum event

What a splendid idea. The OT4-er in me applauds wildly.

Re: Here from metafandom

[lotesse]

Because really, why not four hot, interesting, lovable people having sex at once? Simultaneity is my favorite principle :)

Also here from metafandom

[firefly99.livejournal.com]

So, until canon opens the box, the cat can be either alive, dead, or shagging any of the other cats in the cast.

I like that way of looking at it. ♥