[ SECRET POST #4486 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4486 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 08 secrets from Secret Submission Post #642.
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)]

What does "declaiming meta" refer to in this context? Do you mean that they participate in discussions and criticize others' opinions?

For my part, I don't think writing OOC characters in fanfic necessarily means that the writer will bring distorted views into meta discussions of characters. I've always viewed fanfic to be kind of a separate thing, mostly because so much of the ficcing process is about following whims and what-ifs to their admittedly outlandish conclusions.

[(Anonymous)]

It can be separate, but I think there's a lot of people who do meta solely to push their view of shipping. I don't really mind this - it's easy to ignore - until it gets into RPF and then you get things like that hockey fan declaring that a player couldn't have been a rapist IRL because she doesn't write him that way.

[(Anonymous)]

Do you mean when people meta about ships, or just about the characters but their views are influenced by their shipping preferences? Even so, that's still quite not what I'm talking about when I say that what fanfic people write tends to be a separate thing just by virtue of how the writing process goes. I think engaging in meta discussions in fandom is like any other discussion in that you should only engage with the arguments. If they're inaccurate or misguided or lacking in evidentiary support, they should be accordingly criticized for being poor arguments. That criticism shouldn't come down to whether the holder of said arguments writes ABC fic or ships XYZ pairing, like they did so-and-so in separate context what do they know.

[(Anonymous)]

Both! I mean when people interpret the entire canon via their ship, and what supports it (i.e. everything). So one meta writer might talk about how a scene is about John and Jane's trust in the face of a growing government conspiracy. That might be shippy or not. But the shipping meta writer I'm talking about would discuss how the whole conspiracy is designed to push John and Jane closer together because they are destined and the Men in Black know this and here are the three scenes where John is in front of a green background while Jane is working with Mary, showing how he is jealous and they must be together again.

[(Anonymous)]

that sure hasn't been the case in my experiences in fandom. when someone is writing fic where the characters behave wildly ooc and it's not deliberate - that is, they don't realize the characters are behaving unlike canon because they actually have a distorted view of the characters' personalities and believe they're totally writing them ic - they already hold that view of the character. So everything they say about the character, from jokes to angry call-outs of people who dare criticize their precious cinnamon roll, is flavored by their ooc view. and yes, that includes meta. especially meta.

contrast that to people who know they're writing the characters a bit ooc and don't give a fuck. those folks are pretty mellow and their meta might be a bit more balanced and self-aware.