[ SECRET POST #2419 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2419 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________















Notes:

Way early because taking dog to the vet. :c

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 075 secrets from Secret Submission Post #346.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - 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 think some are bothered by the fact that in certain fandoms, shipping misses the point of the original work completely. If A writes a novel all about the power of m/m platonic friendship, and B starts slashing them, it kind of voids what the author was originally trying to say about the sacrifices made for bromance rather than romance. Authorial intent gets screwed for an interesting pairing.

[(Anonymous)]

I disagree with your particular example. If you write something about the power of a relationship (friendship or romantic, doesn't matter) and people are still interested in the character relationship even if it's not the way you'd intended, where's the harm?

Then again, I'm one of those people who doesn't think the power of friendship is voided by romance. Maybe I'll never get it.

[(Anonymous)]

A+

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think I'll ever get it either. I see a lot of people complaining about how romance somehow "taints" friendship and it just makes zero sense to me.

[(Anonymous)]

Hm. It's not that romance voids friendship, exactly - it's that, if the friendship is the whole point of the original work, characterisation and plot are very much rearranged by shipping the characters romantically. And in many cases the author may explicitly not want the characters shipped.

I know I will get angry replies for this, but the way I see it is this: it's the author's universe, it's in their head. Shipping twists and ignores the authorial intent if you take it as canon, and that seems kinda like a shitty thing to do to an author (or, well, anyone), even if they'll never know about it. (Example: Someone takes your straight OC and makes them suddenly gay, without your permission. Wouldn't you have issues with this?)

And I say this as someone who used to ship all kinds of pairings.

[(Anonymous)]

I know I will get angry replies for this, but the way I see it is this: it's the author's universe, it's in their head. Shipping twists and ignores the authorial intent if you take it as canon, and that seems kinda like a shitty thing to do to an author (or, well, anyone), even if they'll never know about it. (Example: Someone takes your straight OC and makes them suddenly gay, without your permission. Wouldn't you have issues with this?)

But by that logic isn't all fanfic "a shitty thing to do to an author"?

[(Anonymous)]

Yes. This is said as an ex-fanficcer who got out of it for precisely that reason.

[(Anonymous)]

You decided fanfic was morally wrong, because it was harming ideas.

Okay then.

[(Anonymous)]

But writing reviews, analyses, and speculations are also, by your logic, shitty things to do to an author.

Should we just never write anything about any media? Shit, should we perhaps never talk about it? I mean, if we're discussing a work, then we might get something wrong, which would be unfair to the author.

[(Anonymous)]

Nope, that wasn't what I was saying. Interpreting things a certain way or putting forward evidence for an alternative interpretation is good analysis. Speculation is fine. Shipping pairings which have actually been stated by the author as contrary to their desires - or if there's a lot of evidence it may be - is rather suckish.

Getting things wrong = fine.

Loudly ignoring the author's wishes for something that ultimately belongs to them = not fine.

[blunderbuss]

I disagree. Because there's many times that an author has stated an intent but has not done a good enough job displaying it in their work; they can state what they wanted to say until they're blue in the face but if the work says differently, people can and will refer to the work itself.

Stephanie Meyer may have intended for Twilight to be a great romantic epic, but you'll find plenty of people who can easily construct arguments of abusive relationships. Is that contrary to what she envisioned? Sure. Are they therefore WRONG? Nope.

And it's true that a work belongs to an author - in terms of copyright and intellectual property. But they cannot control people's reactions, and it's unrealistic to say that no one is allowed to disobey an author's vision of their own work. That's the inherit risk of putting your works into public space.

[(Anonymous)]

Lucky me, then. My author has specifically said that adapters can do "whatever you like" to his character.

[(Anonymous)]

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle?

[(Anonymous)]

I know I'm late to the party, but I just had to stop by and respectfully disagree with your opinion.

It's the "ultimately belongs to them" that I take issue with. Because yes, works of fiction, works of art, whatever, belong to their original author/artist. Copyright wise.

When you share your story, which is an IDEA...you can't control the way people respond to it. It's not your JOB to police the way people react to or think about your art. You lose all right to having your characters interpreted the way you intended them to be interpreted the moment you put the story out for mass consumption. Because everybody is different, and will be bringing their past experiences and emotional baggage with them upon reading your story, which colors their interpretation.

Essentially, authorial intent means very little in the long run. And since fanfic isn't for profit, fanfic writers aren't actually damaging anything an author has done. Writing a fic where A and B fuck like rabbits doesn't erase the existence of a canon where A and B are platonic life partners who aren't even remotely sexually attracted to one another. So there is no harm done. You can't be the thought police. People are going to think what they want to think, regardless of what YOU think about it.

[(Anonymous)]

So... basically according to you, ANY reading that deviates from the author intent is wrong and a shitty thing to do to an author?

[(Anonymous)]

It's the author's universe, it's in their head...but once it's on paper, it's fair game. We're not affecting their universe with our shipping at all.

As for your example: no, I would not have issue with it, because I don't build entire characters based around their sexuality. As long as the character is still recognizable, I give no shits.

[(Anonymous)]

I would argue that even if one accepts the "purity of the author's intentions" argument, there's a difference between a single author work of prose and a television show with multiple writers, actors, directors, producers, etc. who all bring their own subtly different intentions to the work.

[thene]

It's a good thing that the author is dead, then, isn't it?

(Snark aside, I believe in fandom as an expression of the death of the author, and I find your way of thinking pretty creepy because it restricts us from criticising authors. I love fanfics that serve as commentary on and criticism of canon, going into points that canon shied away from, or challenging canon's resolutions. I think it's important to give those fanfics room to exist. Centralising the author in the conversation at all times just isn't how I want to culturally exist, sorry.)

[(Anonymous)]

I don't quite see how it's creepy. One can still say that an author is a crap author, that their works are bad, that there are areas the works fail in - or what would reviewers do? I get how fanfic can work and serve as useful analysis (it was one of the main reasons I used to write it, after all).

While I do believe in Death Of The Author to a large extent - people can interpret things however they want, especially if those interpretations are due to the author's own failings in their writing - as long as there's actual evidence for that interpretation - I am also very aware that there is (or was at one point) someone out there producing the media I consume, with thoughts and feelings of their own.

Someone in the thread took my comments as saying that I think fanfiction is morally wrong. Here's the thing: I do. It's the closest thing other than plagiarism to actually stealing ideas. The way I see it, people have the right to have the final say over things that originated in their head and that they've sweated to make. I don't get what's so wrong with that.

[thene]

I disagree, mostly because culture doesn't work that way. For example, I don't get how you could object to fanfic of the TV show Merlin, because none of the characters in it are original to the TV show. This goes for quite a number of other fandoms outright, and tons more make use of longstanding cultural concepts if not specific characters. The idea of there being a 'final say' due to authors on account of their sweat is more of a legal construct than a cultural reality. It certainly doesn't hold in most other mediums, where copyright is often held by a corporation rather than a writer - for example, Rob Liefield's meltdown when Shatterstar (a Marvel character he created) came out as gay years after Liefield had stopped working on the character. No really read this, it pretty much describes how awful your stance can end up IRL. And that was about canon, not fanfic, but morally there is no less reason why Liefield should have 'final say' about his characters' orientations than any individual author. Thank god he doesn't, is all.

Also, I imagine most authors would have their thoughts and feelings hurt far more by everyone calling their work crap than they would by fanfics, and you've said you're fine with that? I don't get how you can justify your stance on fanfic, given that.

The creepy factor stems partly from real-life examples, eg. Liefield, and other people who've stated that they're anti-fic but then been either hypocritical or creepy about it - Jo Walton's 'fanfic is rape' rant, Anne Rice's...well, everything she's ever done since the internet was invented but especially her saying that fanfic is wrong and then immediately turning round and writing tons of Bible fanfic containing zero original characters. Authors who are against fics of their works have this way of showing themselves up.

[(Anonymous)]

And in my fandom the author has specifically said he doesn't care what is done with his characters by others. So by your argument fanfiction in my fandom is A OK, not to mention my author has been dead for 80 years.

Pwned.