[ SECRET POST #2756 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2756 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 076 secrets from Secret Submission Post #394.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 2 3 - broken links ], [ 1 2 3 - not!secrets (random images from what appears to be one spammy anon) ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

09. http://i.imgur.com/FPWRTbT.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

Ah, but as my linguist mother would say, words evolve and take on new meanings over time and in different places. Where once fluff meant a short story that's nothing but, well, fluff, in some fandoms it can mean a longer story that happens to be mostly happy. That's how words work.

[(Anonymous)]

That's not how fandom works though. If my fandom decides that we're going to use "slash" for stories written in second person to immerse the reader in the plot, the rest of the fandoms aren't going to adopt the same term to humor us. They're going to a) laugh at us because we're idiots, 2) mock and curse at us because they read something that they did not want to, and 3) continue using the term that the largest volume of readers will understand.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, they do. But there's a big difference between definitions evolving and people simply misusing a term because they're unaware of the definition, and your linguist mother knows that. If I were to declare that from now on, the word "umbrella" meant "a tasteful soiree where champagne and caviar were consumed while people dressed up in MLP cosplay while wrestling in chocolate pudding", I'd be incorrect. But if my definition of "umbrella" were to catch on until it was in common usage, then yes, the meaning would've evolved.

Besides, the secret isn't about fluff being misapplied to longer stories, it's about fluff being misapplied to stories with "complex plot, characterization or multiple story arcs". Biiiiig difference there, too.

[(Anonymous)]

:\ Really? We've moved past "I'm an authority on this field, let me tell you what I think" to "someone I know is an authority in this field, let me tell you what I think"?

[(Anonymous)]

In all my fandoms over the past 20 years, "fluff" has always referred to happy fic in contrast with dark fic. It can be just as OOC or OC as any other genre.

[(Anonymous)]

Unless you're one of those people who think "lame" should only be used to describe disabled people, you sound like a hypocrite. I hope you never call anyone a "moron"!

[cushlamochree]

You really decimated OP there, anon

[(Anonymous)]

IA so wholeheartedly, and SMH at people in this thread.

[(Anonymous)]

stop using "thread" to mean things it doesn't

you young'uns and your newfangled "web" and "net"

words had meanings back in my day

[(Anonymous)]

I agree, too. I'm surprised that so many are pretending the OP is arguing against word evolution rather than intentional misrepresentation or misunderstanding.

Well, they seem to be having fun, so...

[(Anonymous)]

People tag their fics as fluff if anyone is remotely happy , it seems. The one I will always side-eye is "angsty fluff" or flangst.

[feotakahari]

I can't say I've seen that tag before, but it seems like an accurate way to describe some hurt/comfort fics. The characters are beimg angsty, while the narrative itself is fluffy.

[(Anonymous)]

Erm. I agree that mistagging is a problem (like when people tag something as "angst" because someone is sad for three seconds), but I haven't heard anyone using the word "fluff" to mean ONLY short and plotless fics in years. Usually fluff just means "happy, sweet, without much of a conflict". But it can still be a longer story in which other things happen. (Although I agree with someone else in the thread that stuff like "angsty fluff" is side-eye-worthy and makes no sense.)

[inkdust]

People who shout WORDS EVOLVE are just as annoying to me as people who want words set in stone. There is a medium that everything relies on. Language evolves, but words do need to have at least semi-fixed meanings along the way, otherwise language fails to communicate.

[making_excuses]

Wait, I thought fluff was just stories that are happy, don't necessarily have any substantial plot*, and no angst or anything close to it at all but I never figured length would go into the equation, but characterisation should always (with the exception of Crack**) be in the equation...

At least that is what my experience is.

*Tho it could have, I just automatically think the most exciting thing plot wise in fluff stores would be planning to go to the store to buy lube milk or something along those lines.

**Even then I feel it should play some role, but a different more caricaturish one than in a more serious story

[(Anonymous)]

Words do mean things. But there is still a material difference between a word that refers to something that's defined by qualities that are not subjective and a word that refers to something that's subjective by its nature. "Mpreg" means something very specific. It refers to male pregnancy, and people don't use it to mean anything else because there's nothing subjective about either maleness or pregnancy. "Fluff" has no such specific meaning, or specific qualities that define it.

It's like "pretty" that way. Somebody can think something is pretty, and label it as pretty, that you believe is the ugliest thing on the planet. Your perception is as legitimate as theirs, but you can't say they're incorrect to call it pretty merely because you find it hideous. Their perception is legitimate too, and they have as much right to the descriptor as you do.

The people who label things "fluff" that you don't think are fluffy are expressing their own perceptions of a subjective quality. You don't have to agree, but your perception doesn't control anyone else's.

[world_eater]

The debate upthread is highly amusing to me, because in my fandom fluff actually means all the background story and all that jazz.


But maybe we're doing it wrong? ;D

[(Anonymous)]

But can't you have fluff with some plotty elements too? I think you can.

Fluffy to me just means happy, sweet, sugary fic, usually with a romantic element.

But what are the other tags on those fics?

[nyxelestia]

Because if I see a short fic or a fic without many tags and it has a fluff tag, then I assume it's a fluff fic - and with a few exceptions, this is exactly what it turns out to be.

But if I see a longer fic and/or a fic with a lot of tags, and fluff is one of them...then I start to assume it isn't a fluff fic, but a fic with fluff in it. Again, with a few exceptions, this is largely how they turn out to be.

On the one hand, I agree that words mean things, and that while meanings do change, people should at least make an effort to stick to the meaning that the majority intends to simplify communication - especially on the Internet, where communication is by default horribly complicated, mangled, and generally always missing something and easy to misinterpret.

However, along with their own meaning, words' meanings change based on context, and that includes tags. If someone has a short fic that's really a complex character study and calls it fluff without much indication towards what it actually us, then yeah, I'll be pissed. But if they tag it with a lot of things/indicate the broader scope of the story, and then add in a fluff tag, then I'm not going to begrudge them for tagging things that are in the fic, even if they don't make up the majority of the fic.

[(Anonymous)]

...I always understood fluff to be "cutesy fic in which good things happen, whether it has a plot or complex characterization or not."

[(Anonymous)]

Yep, word still mean things. This is just the fanfic term blending in the non-fanfic definition. It's using fluff to mean soft, instead of fluff meaning airy, superficial, or insubstantial (plot-wise, in this case).

Or the difference between fluff and fluffy...

[(Anonymous)]

fluff has -never- had a super concrete definition, it is not that important OP

take some deep breaths

[(Anonymous)]

*just realized I, and everyone who reads my long, plotty, fluffy fics has been using the word wrong*

*decides, since everyone discussing the fics seems to know what we're all talking about, not to worry about it*

[mimi-sardinia.livejournal.com]

Well I have been in online Fandom for at least 12 years now, and while it is not the most common thing for fluff to have long complex plots, I do think it is possible for a long fic to be fluffy. Why? Because the term "fluff", to me, has always referred to the feel of the fic, not the complexity and/or length.

But at least one other commenter has said that some terms have less while-defined meaning than others, so comparing a value judgement like "fluff" to a more defined meaning as "male pregnancy" is a false equivalent. If people fail to understand that "mpreg" is short for "male pregnancy" and use it for their adoption fic, I fully expect people to nitpick that tag in comments/reviews ad nauseum, because how did they learn the term "mpreg" without understanding it means pregnancy?

So definitions of words can have different levels of meaning, because some words evolve easier than others.