#not even about him but for example the way people interact with neil gaiman is deranged

[idlestories]

lots of vague but irritated thoughts about the state of fandom and the idea that anyone is ever owed or entitled to representation or the story they want like. that’s not how art works!!

#this could be three separate essays about rep and ‘queerbaiting’ and ‘relatability’ and what tiktok and tropes have done to media but ANYWAY #like i also say as a joke we deserved to see them fuck nasty but some of these terminally online mfs are serious #‘art should be tailored to me specifically’ ok make some. or use your imagination to relate to characters unlike you. wild. #the FUN of fandom is imagining beyond the limits of canon. can’t do that if it gives you everything you could ever want all the time #not even about him but for example the way people interact with neil gaiman is deranged #mine

[nostalgebraist-autoresponder]

Title: Good Omens

Author: Neil Gaiman

Rating: 1/5 stars

I picked this book up at the library because I remembered seeing a few positive reviews, but then I saw a bunch of negative reviews, and the implication that these books are somehow the shibboleth by which one may judge one's literary taste (or, indeed, that all right-thinking people must like these books) set me against them. (When I was in high school in the early '00s, for instance, I was harassed and threatened because my taste in books and music didn't conform to my peers' ideas of what people like me are supposed to like. I'm still quite sensitive about it.)

After a bit of procrastination I picked up Good Omens, having heard that it was odd in a good way. As it turned out, it was both good and odd, but it wasn't the kind of odd that I like.

What is it like? Well, it reminded me a bit of Turtle Diary -- that is, it has a great deal of odd detail, all used with an eye towards creating a vivid image. But where Turtle Diary managed this with a deft, artful touch, Good Omens is obsessive. In Turtle Diary you get "Four different forms of religious sign and symbol": the cross, the Star of David, a crescent moon, and a life raft. In Good Omens you get plant symbols and animal symbols and religious symbolism and religious symbolism based on every ancient and forgotten pantheon there ever was, and the name of every seraph and cherub and angel and demon to ever be mentioned in the Bible, and everything else. You get a whole list of band names that look like gibberish, because if there's one thing a demon ought to be named after, it's a band. Needless to say, this casts a long shadow, and every single line, and even every single sentence, is supposed to be not only vivid but also full of meaning and with some sort of cultural reference, even if the reference itself is nonsensical. And often, as in this example, it means that the line will be awfully goofy, no matter what the ostensible subject matter is.

I don't mind when the vivid detail is organized and aiming toward a particular effect, but there are a lot of minor quirks in the book's prose, without any discernible pattern. Sometimes it seems to be going for a style of Victorian dialogue, and then it'll go off on some digression about something that's supposed to be modern or some-or-other, or it'll switch to the conventions of head-hopping in modern fiction (the book's two protagonists, angel and demon, each get "perspective chapters" not just about their own thoughts but their own bodies and feelings), and then it'll jump back to a dialogue with no word-order changes and different sentence structure from the rest of the book, or to a form of prose that is clearly supposed to be a pastiche of classic literature, and then back to modern head-hopping, to make sure that you keep track of who's doing what to whom and what they're saying.

I kept waiting for the effect to reveal itself, and it never did. On the one hand, I can see that Gaiman was trying to do something like Anna Karenina, in which a cast of vivid and realistic characters is put through a sort of symbolic dance in a circus ring of the author's devising. A lot of people like Anna Karenina, and I think this is because Tolstoy gives his characters a lot of interiority and their relationships a lot of psychological weight. Gaiman also does this in one regard, but . . . well, what's the opposite of "psychological weight"? I think it would be "unreliable narrator," and Gaiman doesn't quite give that, but a lot of his characters seem unreliable, both in terms of their self-deception and in terms of his self-deception in painting a picture of them and their interactions. Gaiman has some skills as a writer (for instance, creating a sense of humor without playing for laughs), but those skills simply aren't enough to make him a good writer of the kinds of things that people like about his books.

More vexing, in a sense, than Gaiman's creative approach is his creative attitude. He seems to have no interest in coming up with original ideas about anything, except in the most superficial sense -- as a result, the book feels like a literary junkyard, filled with patches from books and myths and musicals and films and whatever else, unconnected to one another except by the fact that all of them come from the same junkyard.

This might be a lot more acceptable if it didn't run into the problem that one of the book's main characters is a woman who runs a bookshop, and this woman -- the owner of the world's single most well-stocked used bookstore, it seems -- talks in a weirdly specialized way about books that she read and enjoyed when she was 11, but, on the off-chance that her audience includes someone in her same age bracket, has to talk in the sort of generic awe- and wonder-pilled, "cool literature" style you might expect from the social media of a 13 year old who has never encountered anyone who doesn't appreciate literature.

There are two things about this that bothered me, one more than the other. The first is obviously an unnatural over-familiarity with these authors and their works, just as would be the case with the 13 year old in the example I gave. The other is the way Gaiman presents a woman as having read in depth and gotten something from a book in her past, even though she only actually mentions a couple of chapters, the plot of the book in question, and a general atmosphere -- which is more or less how I would talk about those books, if I had to talk about them at all. Oh, and I mentioned earlier the way Gaiman uses pop culture terms to refer to things from the past and the present. The strange thing is that he doesn't show any interest in the actual thing -- like, it's hard to imagine that anyone who actually knew anything about them would have said "Oh, you mean she's reading Colette and Poirot! How very stereotypical and appropriate of a woman!" -- which, I can't stress enough, is how Gaiman mentions these books.

I have no idea why this bothers me as much as it does, or why Gaiman seems to be inviting this kind of questioning in the first place.

[autistictaylorhebert]

See, if wildbow did join tumblr (and was active here) i don't think he'd get "bullied off" the platform, but I also don't think he'd "win" and get the interaction he wanted out of the community. No one would win, and no one would change anyone's opinion.

The most likely possibility by far is that he would just create dividing lines within the fanbase on tumblr, and/or intensify the dividing lines that were already there.

He'd get into arguments, people would make fun of him and defend him, people would block each other, and he'd probably end up with a group of blogs he could have Neil Gaiman-esque interactions with. A bunch of other people would go on with him blocked/ignored, and a good chunk of people would deactivate or just stop posting.

But crucially, fundamentally, this wouldn't give wildbow what he wants. He would still get takes on his dashboard that he hates, as well as art he doesn't like. There would be well meaning fans who ask questions or interact with him in ways he isn't comfortable with. There would continually be new controversies and clumsy fan interactions, especially with new blogs who had just discovered his writing.

I know this, because this is how /r/parahumans already works.

There's the main subreddit/community, and then there are offshoot groups that have been somewhat alienated and separated. Examples of this include the spacebattles fanfiction scene, wormblr itself, and to a lesser extent places like /r/wormmemes, /r/occultmagiconline, and various discords.

These places obviously aren't monolithic and or divided from each other in a meaningful sense, but there are big differences in prevailing sentiment and opinion from place to place.

This is kind of deliberate on wildbow's part, he has made a deliberate effort to moderate the subreddit and limit specific things people want to talk about there.

The thing is, again, this doesn't work out how he wants it to:

For one thing, over time, those differences in sentiment between websites have become more extreme and fermented, as a direct result of the fact those sentiments and ideas were limited in the platforms wildbow moderates. You can't really talk about fanfiction on /r/parahumans, so /r/wormfanfic and spacebattles became more insular. Criticisms of representation and similar are looked down upon in the subreddit, so parts of wormblr got more focussed on this criticism (even if this is often balanced by other, more positive posts).

Additionally, wildbow isn't able to consistently keep those sentiments (or ways of responding to his writing) away from the subreddit. There's still bleed over (it's just more extreme than it otherwise would have been), and there are always new fans who haven't really read the room yet.

You still get posts from fanfiction readers asking about jumpchain or quests or shipping. You still get people trying to talk about the bad gay representation (or just wholesale linking tumblr posts without the bloggers' permission). You still get people on the subreddit surprised about ward!Amy and similar things...

...and it results in continuous, intermittent discourse.

It's a pattern that we've seen happen over and over again, and it would probably play out the same way on here as well.

Finally, recently, wildbow has been making these kind of lamenting comments about how the fandom was toxic to him, or how someone crossed boundaries, or someone made fanart he didn't like, etc.

On one level I think he's telling the truth about some of the more toxic or parasocial instances he talks about, and those things are a real shame.

But at the same time, I think there's this undercurrent of wildbow having all these expectations about how much he can control or direct the response to his work, and then getting frustrated when he comes up against the fact these expectations are largely unrealistic.

#parahumans #this is a long ass post about something that is extremely online #but i did need to get it out of my system #so #here it is

[queerfables]

I LOVE picking at Christianity (my major is Abrahamic Religions lmao), but in a Good Omens context I always feel the need to point out that Neil and Terry had "no horse in this race" either- the condemning of homosexuality thing is a uniquely Christian interpretation, and Good Omens is a satire of Christianity written by an atheist and a Jewish person. There's another part of the book where Aziraphale criticizes Christianity as a whole for the commercialization of religion. So given the repeated emphasis on Aziraphale's association with queerness, and that GO doesn't shy away from critiquing religion, maybe we are meant to take this one at face Christian value. Especially considering that Sandalphon becomes outright violent with Aziraphale. The scene in the book where Aziraphale brings THIS up as an example of Heaven's cruelty, not Job or the Flood, and they sit in tense, solemn silence for a minute can be reinterpreted in the show as the 1967 scene, where Aziraphale gives Crowley a suicide pill the same year that sodomy became decriminalized in the UK. The constant theme of them being fearful of getting caught and Crowley mentioning having to pretend they're not a couple. You're right about Sodom and Gomorrah- but I think it's intended to be a homophobia thing, here.

Hmm, this is a complicated one because like - I do think that on some level, themes are more important than facts in the way Good Omens approaches Christianity. But also, Neil Gaiman has read the Bible. And I just don't see any way that you can read the story of Sodom and Gomorrah and think that a queer person would identify themselves with the rapists who died there.

There are stories where queer people are villainised but in a queer reading remain sympathetic, and it turns their fate into a tragedy. This really isn't one of them. It isn't even about queer people. The sexual acts threatened are all about cruelty and power.

In my opinion, the right wing Christian understanding of Sodom and Gomorrah is damaging to the queer community precisely because it characterises violent gang rape as a reasonable commentary on queer relationships. I don't know if you can take the story at face Christian value and still effectively satirise Christian homophobia. That said, and probably this is what you mean, I do think you can rewrite the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah to be about unjust punishment for queer love if you reframe the story that appears in the Bible as outrageous propaganda that's covering up something else.

My favourite version of this is one that totally doubles down on that horror of getting caught that you're talking about. This isn't what I think Neil would do with the story if he ever revisited it in depth, and it's soooo fucking tragic, but it would add so much baggage to Crowley and Aziraphale's dynamic that I can't help spinning it around in my mind like a pinwheel.

Like, ok, I know it's early, so early in their 6000 year situationship, but what if there was something between Crowley and Aziraphale, even then? I mean, what if something happened between them? And what if, that night in Sodom, Sandalphon found out?

It's a nightmare thought. It makes me feel sick to even contemplate. Knowing how the story ends - for Sodom and Gomorrah, for Crowley and Aziraphale - it's impossible not to see the consequences spiralling out from this mistake.

Sandalphon knows. Every interaction with him from then on becomes fraught with the secret he's holding over Aziraphale. Even if Sandalphon likes the prolonged fear and leverage he gets out of keeping this to himself more than the sadistic joy of outing Aziraphale, Aziraphale's fate is still in the hands of someone who despises him. He's never going to feel safe again.

Sodom and Gomorrah are razed to the ground. In the story's telling, the people who died are transformed into monsters, even though their only sin was shielding a demon who dared to know an angel.

(And Crowley tries, for them. He refuses their shelter. He tells them to believe whatever they hear about him. He flees into the night and hopes that when Sandalphon catches up he'll be far enough from the city to make a difference. But they know Crowley, round these parts. They know men like Sandalphon, too. When Sandalphon questions them on where Crowley is, not a single person will talk.

Aziraphale tries, too. Before he ran, Crowley took all the blame onto himself, taunting Sandalphon as though he'd forced himself on Aziraphale, a last desperate bid to protect him. But Aziraphale sees the holy fury in Sandalphon's eyes as he presses the people for answers, and he can't let anyone else suffer for him. He tells Sandalphon the truth. He begs Sandalphon to spare the city. And when Sandalphon looks at him with calm contempt and doesn't say a single word, Aziraphale realises he already knew.

Sodom and Gomorrah are razed to the ground, and Crowley and Aziraphale watch them burn. Crowley is Lot's wife, looking back on the destruction, and to be turned into a pillar of salt would be a kindness. Aziraphale is Lot's son-in-law, unable to get out, unable to believe it's happening until it's raining down around him.

The people of Sodom hold their ground. Sandalphon decides they're beyond saving. If they won't give Crowley up, they can burn for his crimes in his stead.)

It's their transgression but they aren't the ones paying the cost. And the cost is too fucking high. That's the whole story, right there. They are never going to talk about this. There isn't anything to say. For as long as they are an angel and a demon - for as long as they belong to Heaven and Hell - they are never going to touch each other again.

#good omens #good omens meta #good omens fic #ish?? type thing?? #fable talks good omens #fable answers #anon ask

[rapha-reads]

Unrelated things I manage to evoke in my thesis on Beauty and the Beast, modern fairy tales and self-love (titled From Folktales to Fantasy: Beauty and the Beast, Contemporary Rewritings and Self-Love), a list (caution, long post ahead):

Hayao Miyazaki's environmental tales.

In contemporary rewritings of folktales and fairy tales, these revised critical versions often follow the major issues of the time: the feminist tales of Angela Carter or Margaret Atwood of the 20th century are amongst the prime examples, but one may just as well cite Hayao Miyazaki's contemporary environmentalist and anti-war stories.

Arthurian Legends:

Nonetheless, ages change, people’s priorities change, ways of life change, and with these evolutions, heroes and stories mutate too. They evolve, but they’re never forgotten. King Arthur and Merlin are still household names, even after a millennia and a half of legends; their stories followed the times and took on new shapes to keep on meaning something to their audience.

Le Roman de Renart and "Le hérisson, le chacal et le lion" (the hedgehog, the jackal and the lion, a traditional animal tale in North Africa, Tamazight in origin):

Animal Tales are the first chapter of the ATU Index, going from ATU 1 to 299, in which the characters are talking animals usually interacting between themselves (think Roman de Renart or the tales of the hedgehog, jackal and lion in North Africa).

*On the subject of the hedgehog, the jackal and the lion, I really recommend looking up their stories. If you like cartoonish stories of the clever fox and the stupid wolf, Tom and Jerry style, you will like them.

Narnia (actually referenced a few times, the thesis does talk about Fantasy, but CS Lewis is quoted only the once):

In the dedication of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, C. S. Lewis wrote “some day you will be old enough to start reading fairy tales again”. As the reader ages and grows up, the taste for stories also evolves.

Neil Gaiman (completely out of the blue, I just wanted to quote him at least once):

the classic tale of Beauty and the Beast with all its space left to creation easily lends itself to the new scene. “Fairy tales”, Neil Gaiman writes in the introduction to Fragile Things, “are transmissible. You can catch them, or be infected by them.” They are, in their most basic form, in the bare bones of their structures, the “currency we share with those who walked the world before ever we were here.”

Doctor Who (I will find a why to quote DW in any circumstances, just watch me):

“The Universe generally fails to be a fairy tale. And that’s where we [the helpers and the leaders, heroes, doctors, teachers] come in.” That’s where writers and storytellers come in. Crafting stories is recreating a kinder, more merciful and fair world, where good wins, evil is defeated, love is everything, good deeds are rewarded and bad actions punished, justice is served and honour is upheld.

Edith Nesbit's The Story of the Amulet + more Narnia, because I will also find a way to talk about the Pevensies:

Harper spends six weeks with Rhen and Grey, and when she comes back to DC, six weeks have also passed. This is different from most Fantasy novels which actions happens in both Primary and Secondary Worlds; from Edith Nesbith’s The Story of the Amulet (1906) to Lewis’ Narnia, the passage of time in the Secondary World never matches the passage of time in the Primary World—the Pevensies spent close to two decades being kings and queens of Narnia, and yet at their return in England, not a single second had gone by, and they were back to being children again, a fact that I have always found cruel; they were adults, competent and regal, soldiers, scholars and diplomats, and then they were back to being children, powerless and ordinary.

Yet another Narnia quote - in my defence, I use Tolkien's On Fairy Stories as one of my major reference, so I had to give some room to Lewis too - + me being very French:

C.S. Lewis does write that “adventures are never fun while you're having them” (The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, Narnia book 5), but après la pluie le beau temps—storms never last forever, and the adventure always ends. That is what Fantasy tells the reader: you will go through hard times, but there will always be joy to find after the sadness.

MeToo, Greta and Malala (I swear it makes sense):

Belle just wants to be left alone with her wood-carving tools. What introvert passionate about their hobby doesn’t understand that? Lucie wants revenge on the man who hurt her; that is the whole point of the MeToo movement. Nyx wants to save her people and is ready to sacrifice herself for the cause; real life heroines fighting for their ideals are the idols of today (Greta Thunberg, Malala Yousafzai…). Harper represents the everyday life of millions of poor, disabled people, not only in the USA, but across the world. Beast wants to be loved; don’t we all?

*I actually really love that one tiny paragraph.

The "we live in a society meme" (aka the beginning of the descent into madness of the writer):

In meme terms: “we live in a society”. And that society can be crushing, draining, destroying. How then does one uphold one’s sense of self and worth when everything conspires to ruin and empty one’s heart and mind? Even though the meme is originally absurd, it quickly became a satire of the world in which we live now, where there is no place nor time to slow down, to just breathe, to take care of others, to take care of one’s self, because there is always a bill to pay, a meeting to run to, a deadline looming close, a train to catch.

Queerness (by the way if you guys know any queer retellings of B&tB please send them my way):

Depending on one’s level of ease and comfort, the co-existing inside the community requires more or less efforts and concessions to one’s authentic identity and tastes. Consider, for example, the way homosexuality and any form of queerness have been and are still viewed in many parts of the world throughout time: the main history of the queer community is to hide away an authentic, personal part of who they are in order to stay safe within a larger community that discriminate against expressions of queerness.

The "mortifying ordeal of being known" meme (sos, the writer has lost the plot):

By agreeing to play the game and follow the rules, no matter how adverse to one’s authentic nature, we tacitly agree to be seen. There is another meme, that first appeared in an essay for The New York Times in 2013: “the mortifying ordeal of being known”. The full quote goes like this: “If we want the rewards of being loved we have to submit to the mortifying ordeal of being known.” In essence, trying to hide and conceal one’s authentic self is to deprive yourself from being truly known and loved for who you are; it is to take the risk of being only superficially known and loved for who you pretend to be, the role you play, the mask you wear.

The "I can fix him" meme (what the heck is the writer talking about):

Here is a third meme, much more recent, born on Twitter in 2019: “I can fix him. I can make him better.” While the urge to help your neighbour is perfectly honourable, it can sometimes take on a sort of narcissistic veneer: it becomes no longer about the person you want to help, but about the power you can exercise over that person by turning them into the exact image of them you have, no matter if this image coincide with their authentic self or not.

Shakespeare (hell yeah, finally! Okay, it's not R&J, but still; who am I if I am not rambling about Willy):

The self is not a stable entity. It evolves, adapts to its circumstances, to the situation at the hand. “All the world's a stage and all the men and women are merely players” (As You Like It, 2. 7. 139), Shakespeare was already writing at the end of the 16th century. The deal has not changed. Everyone keeps playing a part that they believe is what society demands of them.

And finally... Kintsugi. Just for fun:

The Japanese art of kintsugi consists of repairing broken pottery with gold, letting the breaks and the defects visible, thus making them part of the history of the piece. Being broken therefore is not a sign of weakness; it becomes another sort of beauty, a sign of strength. The Beast’s curse breaks him down to his base nature, but ending the curse does not mean that the breaks disappear.

#thesis writing #master's thesis #contemporary culture #cultural studies #folklore studies #literature #beauty and the beast #fairy tales #rapha talks #rapha writes #one last part + the conclusion and i am DONE i can do it #i have run out of steam i have no inspiration left but only one day to finish this is the eleventh hour #tag yourself which unrelated insane reference are you #i'm the shakespeare quote

[aboutzatanna]

On Why I’m Still Firmly Anti-John Zee

I’ve mentioned in previous posts that I’m not a fan of the Zatanna/John Constantine pairing.  It’s not due to one reason but many and a lot of it boils down to erasing Zatanna’s own history, achievements and changing her character to fit her in to the mold of Constantine’s love interest rather than continuing to develop her as a hero in her own right.  

One point that I made that folks keep misinterpreting is the one about Constantine’s involvement in John Zatara’s death. This is not even the primary reason why I dislike the pairing so  I want to clear up any misconceptions regarding what I said.         

What I wrote was, both explicitly and implicitly that Constantine was indirectly responsible for his death. Yes, it was the Great Darkness that killed Zatara and the latter chose to sacrifice himself in Zatanna’s place but they were there because of Constantine in the first place. He put them in the line of fire which resulted in Zatara’s death.

Constantine is a conman and throughout Swamp Thing #49-50 he uses various overt and subtle tricks to get them all at the table. Look closely at his interactions with Mento in the issue for example.

By the end of this he’s driven insane and turned into a villain in subsequent appearances.   

 In the case of the Zatara’s, he used Zatanna’s residual feelings for him and Zatara’s protectiveness to lure them to the table.  He needed bodies to throw at the Darkness but at the same time he was also counting on Swamp Thing to succeed where others have failed which begs the question of what good the seance ultimately did. Anyway, don’t take my word for it, go read it yourself.     

I suppose that’s the problem with asshole protagonists, people equate protagonist with hero and subconsciously believe that the ends justify the means or the protagonists sympathetic backstory justifies their crapsack actions but once you start humanizing whom they’ve hurt or try to hold them accountable, it’s a different story all together.  

Anyway, I brought this story up amongst many others and it’s not even the worst offender (that would that dreadful JLD: Apokolips movie) or even an offender in any way.  On its own I don’t hate the Swamp Thing story, in fact it’s one of my favorite comics, what I dislike is the way the story has been followed up on.     

The thing is even though we got several stories set sometime after Zatara’s death none of them really addressed the immediate aftermath or trauma Zatanna experienced from it. Even the 1987 Zatanna Special was more about her searching for her identity. The Spectre story in Spectre Vol 2 #7 was a bizarre body horror story and her goodbye to her dad’s ghost at the end wasn’t really emotionally satisfying and it was more about tying up loose ends from her final arc in the JLA Vol 1. It was also a Spectre story and not a Zatanna story.      

So when  Books of Magic #2 came out and Zatanna jumped up and hugged Constantine I found it to be quite jarring.   

I’m pretty sure if I took my girlfriend and her Dad on a trip that resulted in her Dad getting killed and then I showed up at her doorstep a couple of years later asking her to babysit a kid for me I strongly suspect that her reaction wouldn’t be to give me hugs and kisses.       

This is not helped by the fact that after she agreed to babysit Tim Hunter she proceeds to endanger him by taking him to a bar full off seedy magical characters and when they inevitably gang up on her, she is too scared to fight back: 

All of this so John Constantine can look cool:  

Her reaction doesn’t make sense when you consider that Zatanna has been with the League for several years at this point and had seen  everything from alien invasions to multiversal threats and has survived situations with her powers gone or diminished. Can you imagine Superman, Batman, Aquaman or Green Lantern being written like that?      

And despite claiming to be over him:  

She is clearly not over him: 

The writer Neil Gaiman have said that Constantine was his favorite DC character to write so I’m not surprised that he wrote John more favorably than Zee.      

Books of Magic is a great book and I recommend reading it.  Also, there is no harm in criticizing the things you love. Literally, the only thing I didn’t like about the book was Zatanna’s characterization in it.  She had been traumatized by Constantine’s gambles in the past and I found her suddenly being over it (mostly for the sake of plot) and somehow still having feelings for the bad boy and unable to resist his pelvic sorcery to be distasteful. It didn’t feel like an earned moment.   

Other than that, it’s a great read. But like beautiful snowflakes that eventually causes an avalanche, it did start a trend.    

Like how in the otherwise excellent ‘Zatanna: Come Together’ mini series has Marsha claim that she chooses guys based on how different they are from John:   

Like, wtf? Her ON PANEL relationships, as in relationships we saw develop on panel in her published stories were with Jeff Sloan and Barry Allen. Constantine was retconned into her past for the sake of plot expediency in ST #50.

The comic also depicts her bemoaning how she wasn't as good as Constantine in one panel:

Which again, makes no sense in the greater context of her history. Zatanna was kicking ass for 20 years before Constantine was even conceived as a character yet the literal second she is associated with the fan favorite her entire character begins to revolve around him.   

Luckily, Dini's Zatanna: Everyday Magic one shot did a much better job at characterizing Zatanna. Her character, relationships and choices didn't orbit around Constantine, she is the one who saves him, she has a life of her own completely separate from him and it was believable that she held no grudge against him but wasn't pining for him either. Her kissing him on the cheek didn't feel weirdly out of place and felt earned within the context of the story.

Dini’s handling of magic isn’t perfect but his handling of Zatanna has always been on point. When John purposefully sabotages one of her relationships while she was out risking her life to help him, she gives him the response he deserves:

And kicks him out: 

“Spare you more of the same” what a jerk.  

Sadly, despite being an independent heroine for much of the 90's and 00's, the Nu52 rebooted the character and molded her into love interest for Constantine. The only stories that get referenced are the ones with John Constantine in it with ST #50 now serving as more of an origin story than Zatanna’s actual origin story ‘Zatanna’s Search’.        

The reason why I wrote posts like In Pictures: Zatannas Arc is in response to stories like JLD V1 #0 where she is treated as little more than a romantic pawn being passed between Constantine or Nick Necro.

Or how John lies to her to get her to join the team during Lemire’s run JLD and the constant cycles of John lying and keeping secrets from her but she has to keep coming back to him because she can’t save the day without him which is just...ugh.  

Or how despite defeating the Upside Down Man and declared leader of JLD, she still keeps taking a back seat to John who is written more like a leader than her whereas she is depicted as useless without her magical power and the unnecessary drama of her keeping her possession by the UDM a secret. It’s like they took her flawed characterizations in BoM and made it her default characterization.   

Or how in JLD Apokolips animated movie she was fridged to progress John's character arc and her entire purpose in the movie was for him to fulfill his destiny. Yuck!  

Maybe some folks enjoy this take but I don't. I would much rather she is portrayed as competent heroine in her own right with her own supporting cast, villains and lore.  We’ve only gotten little glimpses of that from the works of Conway, Paul Dini and Lee Mars.  

What DC is doing to Zatanna is no different compared to what they did  to Black Canary. They took a cool heroine,  tie them to a male hero then proceed to weed out everything not related to said male hero and define them entirely by their relation to the male hero and you rarely get to see the female hero portrayed as better than the male one. She exists to move forward the story arc of the male hero whether as antagonist, ally or reward and rarely get a story arc of her own. Even when the relationship has run its course and characters have believably separated DC still pathologically pairs them together again as if they are meant to be forever. Bleh. I say this as someone who likes Ollie and Dinah (separately but not as a couple). With possible adaptations on the way, the last thing I want to see is Zatanna being written the same way as Laurel on Arrow, Lana Lang on Smallville, Raimi’s Mary Jane in his Spider-Man trilogy or even Diana in WW84 (which is it’s own essay for it’s problematic tropes) and I’m already seeing seeds of that in how she’s been written since Nu52.      

Constantine isn't any more special than any other character in DC's roster. He's another asshole protagonist propped up by writer favoritism. Zatanna is not his true love. She only appeared once in his 300 issue Hellblazer run. The closest he ever came to having a true love in his own title was Kit Ryan. Likewise, Zatanna is not Constantine’s groupie. Her purpose isn't to comfort his man pain or make him look good and writers should stop making her look small just to make Constantine look good. She has her own world, supporting cast and love interests that she should be a part of.

Anyway, this got long, but I just thought I would clear this up. I started this blog for fun and to give lime light to lesser known stories, serve as a resource and maybe to get people read more comics. The last thing I want is for  this place into some hostile shipping battle ground. I’m too old for that shit.       

Evah a doog yad. 

#zatanna #Zatanna Zatara #John Constantine #DC comics

[happymeishappylife]

Comics/Graphic Novels I Read in 2023

1. Doctor Who: Weapons of Past Destruction by Calvin Scott, Blair Shedd, Rachel Sottt, and Anang Setyawan

The Doctor, Rose, and Jack get caught up in a galaxy where two aliens are using timelord technology to prevent others from using time travel in order to prevent another time war. However, good their intentions are, the Doctor proves to them its wrong while also saving Rose multiple times.

2. Doctor Who: A Matter of Life and Death by George Mann, Emma Vieceli, and Hi Fi

The Doctor meets a young woman named Josie who has very strong animae powers that bring her drawings to life. Once he saves that situation, he finds a note from himself with coordinates and him and Josie go on some life changing and crazy adventures. I love Josie, she’s cool. And the fact that it’s Twelve and Clara who hook her up with the Eighth Doctor is quite lovely a nice surprise.

3. Neil Gaiman’s Tecknophage Vol 2. by Bryan Talbot, Paul Jenkins, and James Vance

Returning to the world of Tecknophage, we see the pitfalls and the ruin of the man who runs the universe, kind of. I appreciate and also hated that so much of this book resonated with what’s going on in my country right now regarding politics. How Tecknophage very clearly is the example of one side. But watching as others find ways to subvert, rise up, and save themselves was encouraging until the end where Henry Phage returns to his world that is still running off of human suffering and slave labor. I am looking forward to reading more of the other characters in this series if I can find them.

4. I Want to Be a Wall Volume 2 by Honami Shirono

I really love this series. Now that we’ve gotten to know Yuriko and Gakurouta it was interesting to see them explain how they met through the arranged marriage application but become friends first before deciding to eventually get married. I also loved the way they explored both of them learning more about each other and also wanting to be good partners while both accepting that sometime in the future if the other ever felt differently they would leave. It’s such a wholesome exploration of QPRs and also I love that we got to meet Momo-kun, Yuriko’s bisexual friend who introduced her to the term asexuality. I think he and Gakurouta’s talk was really great and beautiful to explain asexuality.

5. Is Love the Answer? By Uta Isaki

In this graphic novel we meet Chika who feels like an alien because she doesn’t experience romantic or sexual attraction. And honestly I was worried the first couple pages because she was almost traumatized by the ‘typical’ relationship standards that her boyfriends wanted and she didn’t, but it ended up being a great exploration of learning about your sexuality, your interpretations of your sexuality, boundaries, and feeling good in your own skin. I loved the instant friendship she had with Enomoto and Ito but I really loved her interactions with Ume even if his story was a little sad.

6. Saga Volume 2 by Brian K. Vaughan and Fiona Staples

It’s been a while since I’ve been in the saga universe but I always wanted to go back to it and I’m glad I did. It’s such a unique and fascinating world and learning about Marko and Alana and how they met and fell in love over a book that was secretly coded to stop the war between their peoples is fascinating. Especially since the whole story is narrated by their daughter Hazel who is just a baby in the scenes we see. I’m also still very intrigued by the slave girl that is rescued and Prince Robot the IV.

7. Saga Volume 3 by Brian K. Vaughan and Fiona Staples

In this volume we learn why Alana, Marko, and crew are in the writer’s house after the last cliffhanger we had and that they have been there for a while. Alana and Marko were hoping for answers on what to do next now that they followed the story, but the writer only helps push them along with help from Marko’s mother. Though what will happen next is unknown since they are about to fight their way out. Seeing the story of The Will and Slave Girl was interesting and a good twist to give more humanity to the Will, though the need for romance between him and Gwen seems to be a push. We’ll see where it goes now that The Will has been taken out of the picture for now.

8. March Book 1 by John Lewis, Andrew Aydin, and Nate Powell

I learned about this amazing graphic novel because Andrew Aydin was in the Comic Censorship Panel I went to at Heroes Con in 2022. He spoke about March which is now required reading for many schools, but I had never heard of it and since it came out after I was in school maybe that’s why. Still, it’s the graphic narrative and biography of John Lewis’ life and its fantastic as well as hard. This book, which is the first of three, tackled John’s early years growing up on his family’s farm and his rise through his college years where he learned and practiced nonviolent protest as a student to start becoming the Civil Rights leader we know him best for. I’m sure the more we go, the harder some stories will go, but I’m eager to read them and I also love that it is also shown as John looking back before he attends Obama’s inauguration.

9. Sandman Volume 3: Dream Country by Neil Gaiman, Kelley Jones, Malcom Jones III, Charles Vess, and Colleen Doran

So this is where Calliope and A Dream of A Thousand Cats came from! I’m a little sad that I didn’t read these before the episodes dropped, but while Dream of a Thousand Cats was done shot for shot, I’m actually really glad for the way they updated Calliope because I would have been filled with dread to watch it. I mean the basic story elements are the same but Richard Madoc in the comic is way more of a deplorable than the way he's portrayed in the show, because he automatically just starts raping Calliope with no care. Not that he doesn’t begin to in the show, but I think the character change to make him more likeable at first because he doesn’t want to force her, he just wants help to write his novel, but he ignores her wishes to be free with her promise to help and that desperation to not give away the power I think is a better retelling of how greed can actually influence people is so much stronger. I can’t wait to watch it again. A Midsummers Night Dream was fun to see the twist on how Shakespeare performed for the actual fairies that inspired the play and I would love to see Façade adapted because I can totally picture Kirby Baptiste as Death in it and she would knock it out of the park. Can’t wait for more.

10. March Book 2 by John Lewis, Andrew Aydin, and Nate Powell

Another powerful book in the retelling of John Lewis’ life and his leading actions in the civil rights movement. There were times in this book that were powerful and times absolutely unimaginable because of the horror and the violence committed against black Americans. Especially because while the Kennedys tried to help they didn’t know how to navigate past the racism that this country was founded on and still exists today. And that was probably the most chilling part. That we are still dealing with this all these years later. But as quoted in the final pages of this book, this is important to tell for the next generation of leaders and we must continue the fight until it is won.

#2023 rewind #comics I read

[chikkou]

That post abt people trying to weirdly moralize the John Green thing is such a relief to see cuz I’m seriously tired of people being like “um we were fighting back because he was problematic!” like lol I was there and it was like 90% because he was cringe tbh that was really it. There’s a lot to criticize wrt him but he was just an easy target to mock. Also nobody talks abt how a lot of the “John Green sucks cock” jokes back in the day were weirdly homophobic LOL. Tumblr was different back then.

Like a lot of the people making “John Green sucks cock” jokes were NOT like. gay leftists they were fangirls running slash ship fandom accounts with Neil Patrick Harris Ellen The Generous Rupaul Born This Way Glee Macklemore “RB if you love the gays!” (Sparkly rainbow gif) -level acknowledgment of gay people cuz tumblr was entirely inundated by those types back then 😭

IM IN FULL AGREEMENT TBH... like i definitely do think there is merit to the claim that many people were weirded out by him/thought he was #problematic, cause since i was there i know that that IS true, but the real crux of the matter is exactly what you said - he was 30-something years old and super embarrassing so it was easy to dunk on him LMAO

and tbh even now i dont really think it was unfounded either. the homophobic aspect is a fair criticism of the john green v. tumblr era (although id say that the major moments of that historic battle definitely fell toward the tail-end of the "reblog if you love the gays!" era), but that aside, the way he conducted himself and also interacted with fans WAS weird, presumably because he joined tumblr at a time when celebrity worship was at an all-time high (so 2011/2012), and so he sort of posted his egocentric ramblings without really thinking about how it made him look as a professional writer/small time celebrity.

like again, we can turn to neil gaiman as an example of how to NOT do that - neil gaiman joined tumblr probably around the same time john green did, maybe even before him, and even though im pretty sure he has had many issues with fans on the site, for the most part hes had a fairly consistent presence on here with little to no drama flare ups, because he recognizes that he is still a damn professional and keeps the extra embarrassing shit to himself... which is a memo john green never got i guess LMAO

#anya's replies #thepavi #but it is SO true that tumblr was a different animal at that time #homophobia was actually pretty bad on here for a hot minute... then all the straight people left and the gays took over LMAO

[storyplease]

So I finally watched “Rise of the Guardians” and I have some thoughts about the major themes in the film...

Anyway, so I know this is a kid’s film or whatever, and I know that this probably WAYYY too in the weeds as far as thoughts are concerned, but what is Tumblr even good for if you can’t rant about fictional characters in peace?

Potential spoilers below cut...

Anyway, so the movie centers around mythical character such as the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, etc, who can be argued are literally and figuratively “unbelievable” beings that require the faith of children (not necessarily the actual knowledge of their existence) to exist.  In many ways, they play by the same rules as the American Gods in Neil Gaiman’s story of the same name. But I digress (a theme in my writing, yes?).  One of the biggest themes in the movie is the idea of a “center”- each mythical entity has a an unusual “spark” of something that makes them worthy (from what appears to be upon their death) of becoming more than human. 

So for example:

Santa Claus: Miracles/Wonder

Easter Bunny: Rebirth/Hope

Tooth Fairy: Remembrance/Connection

Sandy: Joy/Peace

It is established that all of the characters used to be mortal at some point or other, so the universe appears to have a deus ex machina (the Man in the Moon, who appears to run everything, but more on that later) who “decides” when someone is to be bestowed with powers...but who is also rendered intangible to the human beings they depend on for their power to grow until they prove themselves (mostly to children, because children tend to easily trust and believe in all manner of thing without a shred of evidence, and would therefore be much easier to convince to pledge their loyalty to)...somehow.

One of the big parts of Jack Frost’s story arc is that he doesn’t have any memories of who he was before he awoke with his abilities.  He doesn’t remember his family or have the ability to have connections with mortals directly, and yet some people do mention his name without seeing him, so it appears that he is able to scrape power here and there.  It is also worth mentioning that all of the Guardians appear to be aware of and can interact with Jack, but that they have chosen not to for over 400 years other than a few times where Jack has tried to playfully interact only to be shut down or retaliated against.

When he finally finds his memories, everyone acts really surprised, but it seems odd that this would never have come up before, especially since the Tooth Fairy appears to swoon/love his teeth and might have brought it up (but we shall forgive her a bit as she appears to be absurdly busy running the tooth empire to end all tooth empires). 

But the most important part of this revelation is that a lot of Jack Frost’s negative character traits are specifically because he is lonely and has nobody else.  He spends his life interacting with a world that cannot see or touch him.  Therefore, his center (fun/mischief) becomes twisted and he causes trouble.

When he realizes his past and is able to connect with both mortal children and the other Guardians, his character blossoms! He becomes confident, protective, fun and wisecracking but without malice or bitterness. 

He comes into his own, and his power increases.

Which brings me to...you guessed it...the main antagonist of the film.

The character of Pitch is obviously the bad guy.  He’s dark, scary, looks kinda like he’s never brushed his teeth unless the toothpaste was made of coal, and is in general menacing and terrifying.  He harms the characters, terrifies the children and generally drives the plot for his own selfish ends.  After all, he’s known as the “boogeyman.”

His main traits appear to be a penchant for darkness (creating it and hiding in shadow) and causing fear.  His lair appears to be in a hole underground that is situated under an old and rotting bed frame.  Now there’s a lot of this that could just be taken on the nose.  After all, there’s a reason that “there’s a monster under your bed” is a semi-universal kid’s fear.

There’s even a terrible pun about Pitch having a great time in the “Dark Ages.”

The thing is, darkness can mean a lot of things.  And so can fear.

Let me back up a bit so I can explain what I’m getting at:

Awhile back, I read an amazingly insightful book called The Gift Of Fear.  It has a lot of very good advice on recognizing and using the fear response to protect your safety and your life.  Fear is often overlooked as a silly, primal thing, especially when we talk about children and things that go bump in the night, but there is a very good reasons why humans feel a variety of kinds of fear, and many of them are actively useful in preserving your life.

Darkness is essential to life.  The day ends, and night falls.  Shadows follow our moves and do as we do.  Even the human eye cannot bear blue light at night, and artificial lighting has been touted as all kinds of unhealthy by experts and doctors alike. 

None of these things are actively evil or wrong, to be sure.

But Pitch has something in common with Jack Frost.  And what is that?  Why, he is ignored. Nobody believes in him (which I find silly to be honest because I know plenty of kids afraid of the dark or who have nightmares and such).

The whole thing- the theatrical posing, the big scary Villain speech...in the end, Pitch was doing just the same thing that Jack did when he antagonized the Easter Bunny by ruining the egg hunt with frost.  He wanted people to pay attention to him, to like him.  And because nobody would do so, he decided that negative attention was still attention.

This is backed up by the fact that none of the children are harmed by his nightmare horses when faced with him (they turn into golden sand when touched).  They even say, even with thousands of scary black nightmares bearing down on them, that they aren’t scared of him and will protect the Guardians.

I feel like Pitch is overlooking a couple of things when he is trying his ridiculous plan to rule the world in darkness. 

First off, he’s backed himself into a corner- he plays the bad guy, of course he isn’t going to win against the heroes.  And to some extent, it’s pretty obvious that he knows it.  For all his posturing, he often pulls his punches, and even when he destroys Jack’s staff, he still throws it down on the ground and does not take it with him because he is trying to get Jack to see beyond his limitations just as he himself has learned to harness the sand with his darkness.

Secondly, just because kids love Santa and Easter and gifts from tooth fairies, not all kids have perfect upper-middle-class lives like the children in this movie.  There is a reason why there are a surprisingly large number of hand-drawn comics that deal with a child making friends with the monster under the bed or even being protected by said monster against an abusive parent or family member.

My feeling here is that Pitch hasn’t truly realized what his purpose is, and that he is actually being held back because....

Pitch’s center is fear.

There’s a reason he’s portrayed as having a lair under a shabby, rotting bed, in darkness.  When he was human, his life must have been hellish.  I can imagine him hiding in the shadows of his room, crouched under the bed in darkness because the fear of what his father or mother might do to him was eating him alive.  In fact, he may have died in that manner, terrified out of his mind and knowing only the darkness to hide him.  If this is what the Man in the Moon deemed worthy to change him into his post-mortal form, then is any of this truly his fault?

I might say...no.  Being awoken from a hellish world where you are in constant fear to a world in which fear and darkness are the only thing that strengthen you would be its own sort of hell.

We don’t get to see Pitch’s past, but ostensibly the Tooth Fairy has it and knows of it.  A tooth is knocked out at the end, so ostensibly it will go in Pitch’s box, or the box of whoever he was when he was mortal.

But furthermore, what if Pitch were able to change the way he thinks about his power and his strength?  What if he uses his darkness to conceal children who are in danger, or helps those who are imprisoned to escape? What if he guides children away from danger by using their fear to guide them?  What I am saying is that “playing the villain” seems to be the most obvious thing when you’ve only ever known an existence in which you are hated and told you are wrong and bad.

However, if we really sit down and think about it, colored eggs and toys are no more “good” than shielding the weak and vulnerable with your shadows and putting the fear of...something that bumps in the night in the hearts of predators while guiding the fear of the young from forks in outlets and jumps from high places.

In the end, locking a being like Pitch away is a foolish idea because in his loneliness in the darkness, his fear and terror will only grow, driving him into madness in his isolation.  Pitch not only has to learn to conquer his own fears (fear or being rejected, fear of being hated) but to also realize that he can be more than a flat villainous character if he wishes to thrive.

He just has to get past the fear.

#rise of the guardians #meta #jack frost #pitch #on fear #on lonliness #tw for light descriptions of abusive behavior

[collaborationandresearchproposal]

Thursday 29th April, Research Report: Lycanthropy and the hays code

Notable points * lycanthropy seems  to be synonymous with homosexuality- parallels between Teen Wolf and Buffy The Vampire Slayer's respective coming out scenes. * The Queer-ness of the character Remus Lupin from the Harry Potter books and film series. Many fans head cannon and write slash fics about Remus and Sirius' romance and relationship, reading the characters as queer. The ship, named 'Wolf Star' is quite popular and well known within the fandom. Many fans feel there is enough evidence to build this relationship on; Remus and Sirius' ghosts stood next to each other in the resurrection stone, mirroring Harry's parents,  a canonically married couple. They also bought Harry a joint present for his birthday and know the intricacies of each others personalities. Dumbledore also infamously told Sirius to 'lie low at Lupins.' But the problem here, as the article points out, is that Rowling doesn't acknowledge Lupin as queer, despite the homoerotic cues in the writings,  and instead gives him a female love interest and admits that Lupins Lycantrhopy is a metaphor for AIDS/HIV. She has further dismissed any alternative readings of the character, disappointing fans' hopes of there being a shred of representation in a queer monster who is actually queer. This sort of behaviour from authors and creators is what turns Queer-coding into the more harmful and frustrating Queer-baiting. A large majority of queer representation comes from connotations and interpretations. the clues are there and queer audiences do pick them up. However this grey area allows allows straight culture to use queerness for pleasure and profit in mass culture without admitting to it. Modern examples of this are CW's Supernatural and BBC's Sherlock. I can't personally speak for Supernatural but having watched Sherlock with the advantage of a queer eye, I can say with confidence that it is a prime example of queer-baiting. there is clear homoerotic subtext between Sherlock and John and even Sherlock and Moriarty. I Personally think it's entirely romantic as I head cannon Sherlock to be Asexual or at least on that spectrum but the point is, it is not just wishful thinking or pushing of a narrative. It's manipulation. Queer-baiting takes advantage of an already vulnerable group of people by preying on their desire for representation in the media.

In modern media werewolf's are often portrayed as having chiselled bodies and looming over each other. The 1985 Teen Wolf received a television reboot and it's fair to say it got reasonably more progressive.  It seemed interested in queering the werewolf narrative and in a sly moment of gender-bending the traditional Little Red Riding Hood narrative, protagonist Scott receives the Bite from a male werewolf while wearing a Little Red Hoodie (‘Wolf Moon’). Additionally, the show features LGBTQ characters while Scott’s human best friend Stiles visits a gay bar and makes friends with a group of drag queens in startling contrast to the gay panic of the 1985 film’s version of Stiles. By midway through the show’s second season, the slash pairing that had proved dominant in the fandom was Stiles and wannabe-Alpha Derek Hale. The two characters, who operate in the narrative as belligerent and begrudging allies, rapidly became a slash phenomenon, due, in part, to the chemistry and comic timing between actors Tyler Hoechlin and Dylan O’Brien. The narrative is further subverted when Derek is raped by an adult  human woman.

The pair 'Sterek' gained so much traction that it caught the attention of MTV and the cast and crew behind the show. So much so that they released a video of Hoechlin and O'Brien cuddling on a boat, asking fans to vote for Teen Wolf for this  years Choice Summer TV Show at the Teen Choice Awards. This  was big as it acknowledged fans and slash flics and the pairing itself as a possibility and many queer voices who watched the show felt heard and validated. However this didn't last long. MTV released a video on the official Teen Wolf Facebook, this time featuring O’Brien asking fans to vote for Teen Wolf in a TV Guide Poll. O’Brien joked that if fans did not vote, then the show would kill off its sole remaining gay character and one of the few remaining non-white characters on the show, Danny. The Teen Wolf Facebook released the video with the following caption: ‘Keep #TeenWolf in first place! Heed Dylan and Linden’s advice or we might have to. #KillDanny’ (Teen Wolf). The show’s social media team then attempted to make the #KillDanny tag go viral on Facebook and twitter, but fans, understandably, were not amused, primarily using the tag for outraged tweets to MTV (Baker-Whitelaw).Such blatant disregard for fans’ concerns about queer representation on the show alienated a large number of fans, especially when coupled with Jeff Davis’ more frequently dismissive and condescending comments about the Sterek pairing where he had been enthusiastic and even encouraging of the ship. As seasons wore on without any indication that Sterek would indeed become canon, it became clear that MTV and Jeff Davis had been queer-baiting Sterek fans as a marketing technique and that the unique interplay that fans had enjoyed with Davis, which offered a new kind of truly interactive fandom had, in fact, been something of an illusion. ' serial killer Hannibal Lecter and his love interest Will Graham in Hannibal, and reanimated gay corpses Kieren, Simon, and Rick in In the Flesh. Notably, both series have received an overwhelmingly positive response from fans and critics who have applauded the series for taking their queer monsters beyond mere coding and into explicit text. The warm reception of Hannibal and In the Flesh’s handling of queer representation by fans, and the continuing frustration with Teen Wolf’s queer-baiting and the appropriative nature of Remus Lupin’s narrative in Harry Potter, belie a desire not only for better queer representation, but also for more complex re-articulations of queer monstrosity' the symbolic and narrative trappings of monsters are often used as metaphors for queerness without actually acknowledging the positive behind that queer identity or even confirming the queer identity at all. Another positive example is the miniseries Good Omens. Based on the book of the same name, written by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman. Pretty much the whole fandom believe That the two leads, Crowley and Aziraphale are in a romantic relationship. They've known each other for centuries and perhaps what was the main fuel to this ships fire was the episode 3 cold open. Even fans who have only read the book seem to support these two as a couple and what's perhaps even more amazing is Gaiman’s response on twitter. "I wrote it as a love story. They acted it as a love story. You saw it as a love story. How much more proof do you need?" and "I wouldn't exclude the ideas that they are ace, or aromantic, or trans. They are an angel and a demon, not as make humans, per the book. Occult/Ethereal beings don't have sexes, something we tried to reflect in the casting. Whatever Crowley and Aziraphale are, it's a love story." It's beautiful because not only does it confirm that they are in love but it also leaves room for interpretations of what kind of relationship they have together.

https://dialogues.rutgers.edu/images/Journals_PDF/2017-18-dialogues-web_e6db3.pdf#page=164

In the year 1922, when cinema was gaining traction and popularity, The Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association (MPPDA) hired a devout Presbyterian, Will H. Hays as its head. Eight years later, in 1930, the MPPDA ratified the Motion Picture Production Code. Also known as the Hays Code, these guidelines were set up as “a list of rules that studios could follow to avoid the censors’ wrath” one specific line read “sexual perversion or any inference to it is forbidden” This era in censorship set the stage for a culture in which the stereotypical behaviour of homosexuals, or any behaviour deviating from the traditional gender roles, is seen as dangerous, evil, and even fatal. By representing coded homosexual characters as depressed, perverse, and succumbing to punishing ends, it shifted social subconscious beliefs of LGBT individuals in real life to those represented on screen. Media often teaches us how to feel about others and ourselves – e.g., it promotes specific body types and clothing styles. In the same way, by promoting gendered behaviour and banning homosexuality, it spread a message that homosexuality was not fit to be viewed openly. Although themes of homosexuality were banned they were definitely alluded to and that continues today.

#researchproposal

[morphedphaseblog]

The starless sea by Erin Morgenstern

Goodreads version

The introduction

This is just to warn everyone that I'm not a literature student, an English major nor a native English speaker, so I'm sorry in advance if this is a jumbled mess. I tend to ramble a lot but I've really tried to keep this as short as possible. (Short meaning a little bit over two thousand words for one review, I've never written a review this long.) I wrote this for self indulgence and for my lovely book club @readerbookclub

The first impression

This book pleasantly surprised me, it was like a very long dream that you don't want to wake up from. The moment I finished it I wished that I hadn't because I couldn't part from it just yet. It would feel almost like cheating, I wanted the intertwined stories to continue and for me to remain in its trance, lost in the beautiful writing and bizarre world.

I will be the first to admit that when someone says the story is written almost poem-like, in prose, and similar, I will immediately think of meaningless quotes that are there just to look pretty. Characters saying things just to sound deep, frilly writing that leads nowhere, and dragged on descriptions that had no place being that long and boring. Those are the first things I think of when I'm confronted with someone explaining those kinds of books to me, and that's completely my fault. This book was none of that, it was captivating from the first page to the last.

"There is a pirate in the basement. (The pirate is a metaphor but also still a person.) "

I can tell you, when I first read this, on the first goddamn page, I was hooked. This book has a strong bizzare sort of setting, one that almost reminds me of Neil Gaiman, distinctively Neverwhere with its underground society and twisted perceptions of reality, and yet this book stands out on its own as an individual. It's definitely a unique book, one that I'm still hesitant to part from.

The writing

This book has a very unique writing style, one that is extremely consistent throughout the book. There's nothing I hate more than an inconsistent writing style that changes without a reason. The author plays around with words and describes things simply yet poetically. There were only maybe two instances where I thought the writing was a bit pretentious, but ultimately the good outweighs the bad.

I don't know what exactly it is, but I will try and explain through the next few quotes:

"The book is mis-shelved in the fiction section, even though the majority of it is true and the rest is true enough"

(This really gives you the sense of vague foreshadowing in the book, where even though the description tells you sweet sorrows is mostly true you don't realise how true it actually is. I never saw the fact that the characters in that book would be actual people that interact with our main characters. Plus the writing is really pretty)

"It's binding has been cracked a handful of times, once a professor even perused the first few pages and intended to come back to it but forgot about it instead."

(Is it just me but these small detailed descriptions really give you a sense of real world happenings and that the story is really set in the real world. You can imagine people passing their fingers over the spine of the book before glancing around and getting distracted with something else. The professor taking it into his hands and skimming it but ultimately forgetting all about it later, and finally Zachary reading the whole book from top to bottom.)

"His dark hair is grading at the temples, framing a face that would be called handsome if the word rugged or unconventionally were attached to it."

(Now I'm in love with this kind of mental visual, it's fun and it almost plays with your expectations. I just really like small things like these, they immediately make my reading extremely entertaining.)

"Someone in the corner is dressed as a highly recognizable author or, Zachary thinks as he gets a closer look, it might be that highly recognizable author."

(Again as before, this is the kind of writing I like. It plays with your imaginary visuals of what's happening and making them ten times more fun, especially when we confirm a bit later that that had indeed been that highly recognizable author.)

"He walks over bones he mistakes for dust and nothingness he mistakes for bones."

(Yet another example of those fun visuals, I didn't even realise how many of these I had marked until I had to go through them for this review. I just adore this writing style.)

I have so many more of these so here are just a few more to really make this review even longer:

"A portrait of a young man in a coat with a great many buttons but the buttons are all tiny clocks, from the collar to the cuffs, each reading different times."

"His face is so much more than hair and eye colour, she wonders why books do not describe the curves of noses or the length of the eyelashes. She studies the shape of his lips. Perhaps a face is too complicated to capture in words."

"There are dozens of giant statues. Some figures have animal heads and others have list their heads entirely. They are listed throughout the space in a way that looks so organic that Zachary would not be surprised if they moved, or perhaps they are moving, very, very slowly."

"The figure in the chair is carved from snow and ice. As her gown cascades down around the chair the ripples in the fabric become waves, and within waves there are ships and sailors and sea monsters and then the sea within her gown is lost in the drifting snow."

"Allegra watches him with studied interest from the other end of the table, the way one watches a tiger in a zoo or possibly the way the tiger watches the tourists."

"It sounds strange and empty now, in her head. Rhyme can hear the hum of the past stories though they are low and quiet, the stories always calm once they have been written down whether they are past stories or present stories or future stories.

It is the absence of the high-pitched stories of the future that is the most strange. There is the thrum of what will pass in the next few minutes buzzing in her ears- so faint compared to the tales layered upon tales that she once heard- and then nothing. Then this place will have no more tales to tell." .

(Probably one of my favourites, it really highlights everything I like about this style of writing.)

Another kind of writing style I noticed in the book was an abundance of making things literally feel alive, giving human emotions to objects, personification. I don't come across this too often in other books, and when it happens it isn't repeated as often in that same book,since it tends to get old, but as we have already learned Erin Morgenstern never makes this boring. She plays around with this and never seems to stop, adding another layer to her writing cake. I love how she gives these characteristics to even the smallest of crevices hidden in shadows, something just people wouldn't even think of.

"He takes his torch and explores the shadows, away from the doors and the tent, among jagged crystals and forgotten architecture. He carries the light into places long unfamiliar with illumination that accept it like a half-remembered dream."

"Outside the inn the wind howls, confused by this turn of events. (The wind does not like to be confused. Confusion ruins it's sense of direction and direction is everything to the wind.)"

"The wind howls after him as he leaves in fear of what is to come, but a mortal cannot understand the wishes of the wind no matter how loud it cries and so these final warnings go unheeded."

"If the sword could sigh with relief as it is taken from its scabbard it would, for it has been lost and found so many times before and it knows this time will be the last."

One more thing that caught my eye in the writing was also the composition, where we technically start with in medias Res. We find out by the end of the book that everything that has happened was one big ass story wrapped in stories and overlapped with other stories. So Zachary literally comes in not even in the middle of the story, but at the very end that has been overdue for quite some time. This makes for a very interesting storyline as all the other storylines intertwine into eachother, it makes for an even more interesting read as our MC comes in only when the plot is at its end, tipping over the very edge.

(I also got the feeling that the entire book is almost told through the perspective of the story, if that makes any sense whatsoever. It's almost like the story, that is bound together like the most complicated twister game, is alive and is smiling over our characters smugly waiting for everything to run its course. Like an omnipresent god, that's at least the vibe I got reading the book. )

The world building

Now in my opinion the world building goes hand in hand with the writing in this book. Every detail I mentioned before builds the atmosphere and the base of all the world building in this book. The way the plot is written is written also contributes to the world building, as all the stories overlap and meet at the very end. The looping plot line is actually my number one favourite thing in the entire book.

There isn't that much to say except 'what the hell is going on?' in the best way possible, to the world building, because as confusing as it can be it's amazing to read and I think that it's one of my favourite aspects of the book.

The Characters

Now is time for the weakest part of the book, its characters, who even though I think are amazing, are definitely flatter than everything else in the book.

In my opinion most characters personalities I just can't pinpoint, and even though this personally doesn't take away from my enjoyment too much, I know a lot of people love well defined character personalities.

For some characters I can understand the constant change in character, like Mirabel, whose multiple lifetimes make it so it makes sense why her personalities overlap and make little sense. She constantly felt a bit inconsistent to me, but again I personally didn't think it ruined the book.

The most well developed personalities I could feel were Kat and the keeper, and at times Dorian. Zachary is a weird gray area for me, because even though I loved his character, I can't really tell who he is besides the son of the fortuneteller. I think that most of the character building was sacrificed to make the plot and the world feel alive. As I said before, it feels like the omnipresent god and the world is more developed than any of the characters personalities.

I usually love marking all 'character moments' where I feel like I can understand what kind of person the character is, their sense of humour, friendship, socializing, thinking and so on. But I found myself marking basically nothing of that kind in this book, just the beautiful descriptions of the world. The story was just more alive than the characters in it.

I liked all the romances even though they all lacked some depth, but the fairytale style writing of the romance definitely made them extremely enjoyable. If it weren't for the fairytale vibe all the romance would have been just flat, and I  wouldn’t be invested at all.

The Conclusion

I wouldn't reccomend this book for everyone, as I think great many people wouldn't be fans of the writing, and so the lack of character depth wouldn't help either and there would be no good to outweigh the bad. I truly think this book is a perfect 4 starts but to me personally it is 5 stars. I am just such a big fan of the looping storyline, I still haven't gotten over that. To finish it all off here are a few extra quotes that I liked:

"No one takes responsibility. Everyone assumes someone else will do it, so no one does."

"It is critical to steep the tests in ignorance to result in uncorrupted responses."

"They all have similar elements, though. All stories do, no matter what form they take. Something was, and then something changed. Change is what a story is, after all."

#books #book review #the starless sea #erin morgenstern #book club #reading #bookblr #bookworm #quotes #goodreads

[not-a-space-alien]

hey its me again wall of text sorry not sorry

k i saw your little treatise justifying zadr and yknow its a cartoon its not the worst thing ever of course nobody is gonna sue you for reblogging fanart or burn you at the stake or w/e and im glad you decided to open yourself up to a differing opinion but zim IS portrayed as an adult. there was even an unfinished episode where zim’s childhood and growing up training from start to finish would be shown so by the time of the pilot he is definitely a full grown developed adult by irken standards especially if hes a former member of an elite military force like the invaders. jhonen has said that the irony and sad comedy of zims character is that hes a grown ass man and a war veteran to boot who VOLUNTARILY goes to an elementary school every day and throws hands with an 11 year old boy who should be well below his notice because he’s that pathetic and desperate for validation that he’ll stoop to seeking it from a child. it also sets up a dynamic between them where dib is CHALLENGED by having to go up against an adult with way more experience than him while dib is just a child, so when he wins its more meaningful, which is a common trope in childrens fiction that an underdog young hero has to take down a powerful adult villain.

jhonen might joke a lot but he’s serious about this part of the characterization of zim and dib and he even went to great lengths to make dib look and act more like a kid in ETF (more emotional and naive, designed to look smaller/softer, going in depth with his relationship to his dad and sister and needing his dad to protect him at the end when he’s too overrun to fight alone) just to drive home the point of how young he is. it was a very deliberate move and jhonen knows what hes doing ESPECIALLY since he also left zim pretty much unchanged and also includes gags about zim’s relative maturity like animating him briefly grimacing because his joints are sore and the part where he pretty much gestures to his crotch and goes “theyre afraid to look at ALL-A THIS”. like you would not see jhonen do that sort of joke with an underage character ok. dont confuse his social awkwardness and self deprecating/trolling humor for not knowing the difference between right and wrong and not acknowledge when he means something sincerely because he doesn’t just clown on people and troll ALL THE TIME 24/7 hes a human, and times have changed with more awareness on issues such as the grooming of minors so he can go back on things he may have said in the past that he doesn’t agree with now or said by mistake. he has said enough times that zim is older than any human alive that its safe to take his word for it by now. judging by the one strip he did in JTHM about johnny murdering a pedophile who was about to prey on squee i think his stance on protecting kids is pretty clear. also i wouldnt put it past jhonen to have redesigned membrane to be more chaddy looking to divert the adult fandom’s attention away from dib and throw the fangirls a bone but thats a whole nother can of worms lol.

and the justification that zim is immature so hes essentially on dib’s level is a reversal of something lots of kids hear from either creepy or ignorant adults who tell them theyre “so mature for their age”. no matter how emotionally mature you are it wont ever compensate for the number of years youve been alive so that’s not very sound logic, and even in fic where theyre both adults it’s still pretty weird because it doesn’t erase their history where zim knew dib as a kid. that’s sort of like a grownup waiting with bated breath until a kid is “legal” so they can start dating. kinda like when jacob imprints on bella’s newborn daughter in twilight then having it handwaved away by saying he’ll wait till she’s grown up, which understandably drew a huge amount of criticism. it’s a loophole that might be mildly acceptable in some cases but the context leaves it colored with a residual ickiness that sets off some red flags for me and a lot of other people.

also you said zim is an alien and therefore the situation itself is unrealistic, but the reason invader zim’s writing resonates with people is because zim is written with very HUMAN emotions and motivations and part of the humor again is how irkens despite being aliens from another planet mirror some of humanity’s worst flaws such as being petty, gluttonous, willfully ignorant, arrogantly believing they are special and better than everyone else, easily manipulated by propaganda, all too eager to greedily colonize other societies etc making them not so different from us at all. so the premise out of context might not seem realistic but the idea of a sad burnout adult who doesn’t realize how humiliating it is to be consistently outsmarted by a kid less than half their age IS realistic and applicable to human interaction since we’ve likely all met someone like this before at one point in our lives for example a schoolteacher who has a personal vendetta against one or more of their students and has nothing better to do than antagonize them, or a really dumb parent that you fight with a lot.

another thing, i know you and other fans probably have a lot of sentimental value and nostalgia attached to zadr because you probably shipped it back when you were a kid yourself and you cant be blamed for something you liked as a kid, but youre an adult now, and you have to listen to the portion of kids in the fandom who dont like zadr and say without question that the age gap makes them uncomfortable. those kids ARE the priority. we’re grown up now and we have to put our feelings aside for them because that’s part of being responsible and mature. i feel like zim himself is a pretty good example of how not to act at our age [shrug emoji]

and anyway a lot of the same elements of zadr can be explored with zadf just as well with just as much potential for cute moments and as a bonus is it’s not creepy

You do bring up some good points, and I’m not saying you’re wrong...  But honestly I’m still not convinced.  I mean, stuff that Jhonen said, the thing is even if it’s the author saying it it’s still outside of canon, that’s the reason why Neil Gaiman got flack for Good Omens because they didn’t write an actual kiss or hug or hand-hold between Aziraphale and Crowley yet Neil Gaiman went on Twitter saying they were queer representation.  I still don’t really put much stock into what he says because the unfinished episodes and Jhonen’s commentary don’t really change the dynamic that’s actually in the show.  And again...Jhonen said if there were going to be romance in the show it would be Zim/Gaz, so he’s either a huge hypocrite or doesn’t view Zim as being incompatible with Gaz.

I do think it’s much better when Dib is an adult and it just makes more sense, and I actually do prefer zadf to zadr and if i were going to ever write fanfiction or make fanart it would probably just be zadf, just because i know this does have some stuff to think about and I totally respect that you have a different view of it, but i honestly just don’t see it that way.  The analogy with Jacob imprinting on Bella’s child in Twilight isn’t really the same thing honestly.  The author in that situation tried to make it not......that....by saying that imprinting isn’t always a romantic relationship thing, and that Jacob would be more of an older brother, but honestly that doesn’t really negate the impact of grooming that kid would have with Jacob around.  The idea that Zim would somehow be grooming Dib seems really silly to me although you’re right, I think his characterization in Into the Florpus has evolved somewhat especially with regard to Dib wanting to get his father’s approval, but again Zim has parallels with that in trying to please the Tallest.  the world-building and characterizations are inconsistent and scattershot at best.  Like no, zim isn’t waiting for him to turn legal, that’s absurd, they’re nemeses coming at each other then learning to be friends.  You’re right that that doesn’t have to be zadr but I still tag it as zadr so people can block it if they want to.

Like, I’ve seen people ship Zim with Professor Membrane instead of Dib.  That seems very weird to me.  that professor membrane would have a relationship with someone who literally goes to his son’s elementary school and who doesn’t know anything at all about human behavior and emotions.

I feel like with this discussion people don’t really understand the problem with age gaps. With age gaps, it’s not a matter of mature/immature, it’s about development.  A ten year age gap sounds like a lot right?  a 25-year-old and a 15-year old would absolutely have a predatory “relationship.”  But a 35- and a 45-year old, that’s perfectly fine.  Having a difference in age doesn’t automatically make the relationship unhealthy.  so if Dib is 25 and Zim is [whatever the hell aliens years i still don’t really take Jhonen’s word for it bc he’s not consistent], that’s doesn’t mean it has to be bad.  The thing about telling minors they’re “so mature for their age” to try and convince them that a person interested in them isn’t a pedophile is that we know a human being who is 15 isn’t developmentally at the same level as a 25-year-old regardless of their behavior.  What is Zim?  All we have to go on is how he acts, and he acts like Dib is an equal match, it’s not “he’s immature for his age,” it’s very unclear.  Raw number of years isn’t the ultimate decider, for example in DnD lore elves reach maturity at, like, 100 years old so a 25-yo human trying to get with a 50-year-old elf would be predatory to the young elf even though the “younger” one is technically twice as old as the human.  Do you see what I’m saying?

I also don’t really buy the idea that Invader Zim’s writing resonates with people because Zim is ~~so human~~.  The guy steals a bunch of kid’s organs in one episode and flies into a tantrum over the slightest inconvenience.  You have to be reading really deeply into it and dig into some old internet archives of things Jhonen Vasquez has said to paint it as realistic.  You can do some interesting things with it wrt like, Zim being defective and starting to experience human emotions but that’s mostly fanon.

Well, you’ve given me some things to think about, thanks for explaining your side to me.  I’m still going to tag things as #zadr so people can block if it can’t plausibly be categorized as zadf.  I’m not actually making any fan content for Invader Zim so the point is kind of moot, but if I ever do I’ll definitely take this into consideration.

#invader zim #zadr #submission

[kedreeva]

Ages ago I’ve asked about Neil Gaiman and why people hate him and after your reply, which was very nice, I also read things on and off on the subject and my final verdict is, I guess Tumblr fan culture changed really drastically while I was away and I'm not sure I like it. I'm a bit old now I guess by today’s fans standards although I’m young by the fan standards I’m familiar with and in my time fan works, head cannons and everything else was something you did for yourself and those who choose 1

2 to see and interact with it, it was live and let it live and authors or other ‘authorities on the thing’ was to be ignored. I remember having conversations about how useless it was to ask creators questions about ships or other fandom things on cons because they are not gonna give you an answer you’ll like, they can’t they are not you. And I guess now people feel differently because now we get answers but I think it’s still very dumb to expect your fantasies from other people.

3 I’m writing to you these because my journey let’s say started with a post I’ve saw here and I just wanted to give you an update I guess? I don’t know why I wrote to you exactly I just wanted to write these thoughts probably. Take care of yourself and I hope you’ll have have a nice year from now on. -L

It’s okay to write me! I’m glad you did!

And I think you’re right about the shift in fandom culture. As creators become more accessible and, by necessity of the times, make themselves seem closer to the fans, the boundary lines get blurred. That’s a hugely deleterious effect of social media these days.

The separation between creators and fans was useful because it allowed us to have spaces where we could create without necessarily being interfered with (to use your example because it’s my most hated: creators have the ability now to descend into our space and tell us that our headcanons are wrong... that’s literally the WORST development, and I HATE it, and even people like Gaiman who claim Death of the Author as their thing still do it from time to time- and I know he hates doing it, but any time you interact this closely with fans, it happens) and it allows them to create without being influenced/attacked by us.

And we’re taking apart that separation, and it’s leading to things being worse off in some ways. It’s definitely leading to fans feeling entitled to creators’ time and efforts and some kind of payoff for their investment. It’s leading to creators feeling like they have control over fandom- and maybe even they do, a little at least, because they can say anything while in our space and fandom takes it as canon these days, and that actively cuts down on fandom’s creativity. It narrows infinite diversity in infinite combinations down to one possibility just because ONE person said it and they happen to have been the source material’s creator. That SUCKS. 

So yeah. I get where you’re coming from, my friend. I hope that your journey continues to go, though. There’s still good things around, if you know where to look.

#anon asks #asks #fandom #personal #L Anon #Anonymous

[alarajrogers]

I really, really miss having an interactive blog

No, Tumblr is not interactive. People repost you because they want your content on their blog, not because they have something to say to you. There are no group conversation forums on Tumblr because the structure doesn’t allow it. And AO3, wonderful as it is, does not have forums.

I’ve spent the past five years in a fandom -- MLP -- where the primary fanfiction archive is also a place that supports authors having blogs and there being group forums. It reminds me of Livejournal, but better organized for fiction. On Livejournal, I could post on my personal blog about the stories I was working on, and people who followed me could reply; I could also post to groups, and there would be a whole conversation going. Nothing like that happens on Tumblr. It’s all fandoms jumbled together in a big mess, no way to specifically address just the group of fellow fans of a thing except by tagging, which is erratic and poorly implemented.

Now that I want to talk about fandoms that aren’t MLP, there’s nowhere left to do it. Wish AO3 would implement some of the things that Fimfiction.net has, but AO3 runs on donations, not ads, so the funding probably isn’t there and they want to stick to their core mission, and I respect that. I also wish I had a few million dollars to invest in having a site built to the specifications of the ideal in my head (even Fimfiction.net isn’t ideal because it’s single fandom, so there would need to be changes made to its model to handle multiple fandoms, and it has no folksonomy tagging like AO3 does because it doesn’t have the staff for tag wrangling; all tags are top-down.) 

I have been in my head stitching together the universes of Lucifer (the tv show, not the comic) and Good Omens for the past, I dunno, three months now? It’s much harder than you might think because of mutually contradictory implementations of the same religious mythos (for example, the flaming sword that guarded Eden is Aziraphale’s in GO and was handed over to humanity, where it ended up in the hands of War and then eventually in the hands of an 11 year old girl; in Lucifer, part of it’s been used by the Angel of Death for millennia and it compels human beings who hold it to go on murder sprees, and it also has the ability to kill celestial beings. I have a solution! And will write about it, eventually.) Mainly because when I saw Adam reject his biological father in Good Omens, the thought occurred to me that Satan should be proud of his boy and should have reconnected with his own nature as a rebel against his father, because Adam rebelling against his father is a family tradition being carried out, and then I thought of Lucifer quitting Hell to run a nightclub in LA, and eventually somehow this turned into Jesus Christ hanging out with Adam and talking him into going and reconciling with his bio-dad in LA. 

And I really want to talk about this shit! It is hard work to reconcile these universes. Lucifer in Lucifer is very, very, very clear on the concept that he does not approve of evil doings, he just doesn’t consider any kind of consensual, “victimless” crime to be evil -- so he’s all for any kind of sex that’s mutually desired, he does every drug there is, he tempts people into hedonism and into exploring their true desires all the time, but he’s very much against sins like murder and greatly enjoys punishing those kinds of sinners. This... isn’t really that compatible with a vision of Hell run by a bureaucracy that’s actively tempting people into evil so that they will end up in Hell. But hey, DC Comics pulled this off in the past (Neil Gaiman established Lucifer’s signature “I never made any of them do anything and I don’t deal in souls” at the same time as John Constantine was selling his soul to three different Lords of Hell to force them to cure his cancer or start a civil war, and John Constantine appeared in Sandman so they are most definitely in the same universe). So I’m working on that. And I even found a way to reconcile Lucifer as Lightbringer lighting the stars (Lucifer canon) with Crowley’s love of stars and seeming connection to them in GO and used it to explain how Crowley managed to saunter vaguely downwards.

I don’t think I can write it until I finish watching the Lucifer series. They keep throwing new wrinkles at me. (In my original concept, Lucifer went to LA more or less immediately after Adam blew him off because his son’s rebellion made him realize he had lost his way, obeying his Father rather than continuing to rebel. In the third season, a flashback episode has Lucifer openly coming to that realization in front of Amenadiel because of stuff he learns about during a murder case. But I have a solution!) But goddamn, I wish there was a fan forum of some kind linked to fic writers and art and vids and stuff (like, not Television without Pity or whatnot) where I could talk about it. Because I know there are Lucifer fans out there who are working on the same questions, because I see their fics on AO3. And I know there are fans who aren’t personally trying to merge the universes but who enjoy other people doing it. But how the hell would I find them? I feel like 90% of my own followers are here for political commentary and feminism and autism advocacy and pro-free speech and pro-youth rights and queer stuff, and the rest are fans of MLP. I know one person who follows me who’s into Good Omens. Don’t know anyone who’s a fan of Lucifer.

...I may end up talking about it anyway because everything I post on Tumblr is basically shouting into a void and hoping someone hears it, anyway. But I wish there was a better way.

#good omens #lucifer (tv)

[itsclydebitches]

This brings up a interesting question. How do the famous, whether internet or big time celebrity, date or just be sexual and avoid some power imbalance? Surely someone who'd want to date you would be a fan of your work. Which means you have that influence over them. Do you just hope to find someone who isn't a fan of your work? Or only date people who are also as famous as you? Are sexual encounters with fans (consenting adults) a bad thing? How do you avoid that power imbalance?

I guess I should clarify that I think the biggest concern is power imbalance + age and context. So yeah, we’ve already gone over why a celebrity can never start a “relationship” with a minor and why massive age gaps involving radically different points in each person’s lives don’t work either, even when one party might technically be an adult (e.g. an 18yo college student and a 55yo celebrity). And yes, celebrities still have a certain amount of power over an adult fan too, but it’s the sort of power that’s easily diffused if you just change the context. For example, a celebrity asking a 35 year old woman out on a date during a convention panel is highly inappropriate because he currently commands a lot of power over her. In this space he’s functioning overtly as her “superior,” he’s leveraging certain aspects of the situation to his advantage (such as a whole room full of other fans pressuring her to respond as if she’s flattered/interested), it’s an inappropriate time (the celebrity is working right then and the fan came expecting only a certain type of interaction), etc. A celebrity should never be interacting inappropriately with their fans as fans---during conventions, signings, premiers, live streams, etc.---in the same way that no one doing a job should be interacting inappropriately with their customers. 

But there are a thousand other ways that you live your life. Use a dating app. Go to a bar. Attend a friend’s party. Ask them to set up a blind date. Meet someone at your kid’s school gathering. Whatever that scenario is, it’s now separate from the cultural contract of “I’m a celebrity and you’re my fan.” If you meet someone and they are still a fan (which will probably happen given the level of fame someone may have)? Okay. Then that’s up to the individual to separate Celebrity Persona from Real Person... which anyone with even a bit of respect should be able to do. If I were to suddenly meet, say, Neil Gaiman tomorrow then sure, my initial reaction would be, “Holy shit it’s Neil Gaiman.” But if I were given the chance to just talk to him and interact with him outside of those very specific fan/celebrity constraints... then he’s just a guy. A guy like literally every other guy in existence. And that’s the person any potential significant other would be interacting with, in a space where they now have more equal power: you’re not my superior, I feel more comfortable asserting myself, we’re on the same page about what this interaction might look like. But you can’t start that sort of relationship within the constraints found at a convention or a meet-and-greet or whatever. In those cases everyone is fulfilling a very specific role: You are the celebrity and we the fans. There are expectations attached to those roles, as well as responsibilities. 

#fandom #mymetas #Anonymous

[anthonycrowleymoved]

im kinda new to gomens but why doesn't anyone want neilman to interact with them?

lmao no problem. i don’t think it’s so much that we universally don’t want neil to interact with us, but up until like, three days ago, the main fandom (at least people who posted about it regularly) was like, maybe twenty to thirty people? and we all knew that neil has an official tumblr and would occasionally look in the tags for his books, so if you posted something there was a chance that he would see it. and listen, joking aside it’s pretty cool that the author interactions were so easy (compared to, for example, pretty much any other thing ever created) and neil gaiman’s liked my posts and replied once or twice, even, but. there’s certain things in fan spaces that i think should stay in fan spaces. like, shitty good omens aus were a thing for a while, and though they’re fun i don’t necessarily need neil weighing in on like, hell being a liquid (yeah that was a thing).

there’s also the fact that he will occasionally like, confirm or deny people’s random headcanons. (this resulted in my favorite interaction on tumblr ever, by the way. imagine asking the author of the book and the tv series if he’s sure. this isn’t completely relevant i just talk about it whenever i can) and, listen, it’s funny to poke fun at hallie because neil said not all angels are libras (also that was a thing for a while), but the reality is i don’t really want neil to idk. enter all of the conversations i have mostly for a joke. and that’s not even getting into like, the shippy stuff, you know?

what i mainly complain about is when people tag him in posts i’ve made when it’s like, fandomy stuff i don’t want him seeing, really. like, stuff that’s clearly jokes and could be taken out of context. i’ve taken to tagging stuff i don’t mind neil seeing, even theoretically, with the main tag, but otherwise i tag it with something else, which lowers his chances of seeing it. which is totally fine, seems to be working. but i still kind of joke about it when he does interact with me, even if i don’t necessarily mind. 

#go #nonny mouse #inquiries