[ SECRET POST #4366 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4366 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 35 secrets from Secret Submission Post #625.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not really arguing anything.

I said, in my opinion, if it's a good story, it's a good story. I think something can have characterization that's OOC wrt the source material, but still good characterization for the story. I know that's not what a lot of people are looking for in their fanfic. But for me personally it's fine because if it's a good story, it's a good story, in my opinion.

[philstar22]

But at that point is it really fic? At that point, it seems to me it is original fiction with the names of fanon characters stuck on it. And it should be labelled as such.

[(Anonymous)]

It honestly just doesn't matter that much whether or not it's labeled as fic if it's a good story.

[(Anonymous)]

doesn't matter to YOU. Other people have different viewpoints how are you not getting this

[(Anonymous)]

Sorry, I should have added another "to me personally" to that most recent post. But I feel like I've been pretty consistent in what I'm saying and that it's my personal opinion.

[(Anonymous)]

You keep saying that as though "good story" isn't subjective, though. It is. And for many, many people, OOC =/= good. So just saying, "... but the rest of it is good" isn't terribly helpful because it's like delivering an anchovy pizza to someone who doesn't like anchovies and saying, "... but the rest of the pizza is good" simply because YOU don't mind anchovies on your pizza.

[(Anonymous)]

Of course "good" is subjective. When I say something is "good", I mean "it's my subjective opinion that this is good", the same way that I would mean if I said that any other movie or book or TV show was "good" in ordinary conversation. I apologize if this wasn't clear.

My point about the OOC thing is, whether a fanfic is "OOC" is essentially a judgment about whether or not it's accurate to the source canon. Right? You can have a character who's different from the original character in the source material, but still well-characterized in the story itself, just in a different way than the original character. My personal, subjective opinion is that this is fine, even though I know that other people feel differently.

I don't think that anyone else should necessarily feel the same way about me. I don't know what to tell you. I don't think the idea of someone saying "Anchovy pizza is good IMO" would be unreasonable but ymmv I guess.

[(Anonymous)]

"You can have a character who's different from the original character in the source material, but still well-characterized in the story itself, just in a different way than the original character."

That's true, but that's also not what "in character" means. It's not as flexible of a term as you're trying to argue it is. When people say "in character", they mean in character as relating to canon, not in character as relating to whatever story the character happens to be in. Otherwise all characters would be in character, no matter how bizarre or crackfic-like the story is.

"I don't think the idea of someone saying "Anchovy pizza is good IMO" would be unreasonable but ymmv I guess."

It's not, and I never said it was. You're removing that from the context, which is important. Saying "Anchovy pizza is good" is fine, because it's your personal opinion. The problem lies in telling someone else who doesn't like anchovies that their anchovy pizza is good is missing the rather flamingly obvious point that from their perspective, it isn't.

[(Anonymous)]

That's true, but that's also not what "in character" means. It's not as flexible of a term as you're trying to argue it is. When people say "in character", they mean in character as relating to canon, not in character as relating to whatever story the character happens to be in. Otherwise all characters would be in character, no matter how bizarre or crackfic-like the story is.


The point I'm making is that "good characterization" and "in-character" are fundamentally different standards. "In-character" is a standard that only makes sense in terms of fidelity to the source material; "good characterization" is a standard that can be applied to a story on its own. I said that a character can still be a good character even if they're OOC, and I still think that's true. I definitely don't think that you can be in-character, relating to canon, if they're OOC.

And I don't think that's an expression of a value preference in any way, to be clear. I understand that many people reading fanfic are fundamentally interested in reading stuff that is in-character, and I respect that and am not arguing that this is wrong. It's just not something that matters to me personally. If it matters to you whether a character is IC, that's entirely valid. I don't think that's the only possible way for a character to be well-written, but it's still a valid thing to want to read.

The problem lies in telling someone else who doesn't like anchovies that their anchovy pizza is good is missing the rather flamingly obvious point that from their perspective, it isn't.

I don't think I ever said that this was anything other than my own personal perspective. If replying to a post to say that you don't share a person's views is bad, then I'm guilty of that, but I don't think I've said that anyone else should share my personal views about whether or not being OOC matters.