Fandom ... one must love it... really ...

[jhava]

Firstly: yes, I'm backing everything up (which I haven't done in a few months). But, I don't think LJ is going anywhere that quickly. If you read various posts by people within the IT industry, you'll be reassured that LJ won't collapse overnight. These types of sites can run for months with minimal oversight (absent a major server failure). What

Comments

[ms_maree]

You know the funniest thing, I didn't know about Merlin until two days ago, when I was youtubing, and I saw an image and went 'Heh, that's similar to the icons that some of my flist has been uploading' I keep a track on the icons that are uploaded by my flist, it's a shorthand way of finding out what they are into, and it's pretty. It could possibly have been icons you uploaded.

Then I watched a few songvids and went 'Heh, this looks interesting' and emailed a couple of friends about it and I said to one friend after we exchanged comments on some obvious differences with the legendary story:

Just like Xena, I betcha there are gonna be people who are gonna bitch about the historical and mythological accuracy, blah, blah, blah

And they did! Only found out about this fandom two days ago, and it's launched straight into a meta-wank fest. Timing eh?

[jhava]

Fabulous timing on your part!! By the way, interesting to know that you can track icons that are uploaded -- I may need to look into myself.

The bitching about the accuracy doesn't really bother me terribly; that's rather amusing actually. Yes -- all telly is completely accurate. Every single law show, medical show etc. is based on fact. ::shakes head::

But the fact that the OP (and those who agreed with her) began to genuinely take the position that we should not be supporting bad television and taking a strong view on what they consider to be bad television is where I just started shaking my head.

Truly amazing.

By the way, I completely concurred with your comments about some of the worst television inspiring some of the most original transformative works. Now *that* is fandom at its best -- creating something far better than what the actual writers have done.

[ms_maree]

By the way, interesting to know that you can track icons that are uploaded

Yes, it's an option in the message section (I believe, it's been so long since I ticked that option).

It's just a handy visual way of seeing what people are into. It's also fascinating to see how fast people cycle through icons, some people do it almost every day (or almost every day) others rarely.

That little shiny picture is a source of great entertainment :) Heh.

[beeej]

I don't really do meta. I don't want to think so hard about why I like a show, I just want to enjoy it. I either fall in love, or I don't. And if I fall in love, then I fall in love despite the flaws. Isn't that what love is?

As for Shakespeare, the National Shakespeare Theater here in DC does fantastic productions, and many varied interpretations. Maybe we'll have to see what's playing when you come over for a visit. :)

[jhava]

And if I fall in love, then I fall in love despite the flaws. Isn't that what love is?

Exactly! And I'm sorry -- falling in love with perfection (as if such a thing existed) gets old fast. Pretty to look at and watch once, but no real desire to keep going back.

As for the National Shakespeare Theatre, I'm really going to need look into tickets, aren't I?

[txvoodoo]

"And if I fall in love, then I fall in love despite the flaws. Isn't that what love is? "

OH. YES. If my husband were an irreproachable modern-day Mr Darcy-type, I'd pull my hair out. Or kill him :D And the same goes with fandom loves!

Also, in another way - I don't want a stereotypical hero. I'm a huge Lost fan, but despise the character Jack - and one of the biggest reason is because how he's written. He's hugely flawed, but the writers keep holding him up as the example, and editorializing his shortcomings as virtues. That's the flip side, here. My favorite character is Sawyer, because yes, he's flawed, and knows and admits it. So his character has a journey, and struggles, and overcomes some of his issues. Jack just never changes, never even tries. BORING.

[txvoodoo]

I think the problem with fandom movements to boycot for one of the reasons you list is that fandom isn't ONE thing - that which offends some, will not offend others. Some satires are offending to some people, others perceive them differently.

Another issue is that there's room in the world for popcorn and fluff. For brain candy.

And one more thing is that some fans want to see misogyny/homophobia/etc/whatever eliminated - and yet, fiction sometimes has to reflect life as it is, not life as we want it to be. It can be authentic for a character to behave “badly” (for lack of a better word. And not all characters should be regarded as role models.

For me, flawed characters are fascinating. They create dilemmas. If all characters were paragons of PC perfection, how boring would it be?

[jhava]

fandom isn't ONE thing

And that point was missed entirely by the OP; we are shaped by so many different factors that it would be impossible to arrive at any type of consensus.

Simply put, if you find something offensive, turn it off. There are certain matters which are socially and legally deemed offensive and should be criticized; otherwise -- live and let live in my opinion.

And yes -- why can't we have brain candy? Thank you. Fandom is my hobby; it's what I do for "fun". And I like my fun fluffy at times.

And I completely concur with you that flawed characters are fascinating and fandom loves to explore the dilemmas they create for themselves. Thank you!

[txvoodoo]

You're very welcome

[loreley_se]

Yes, yes, and yes.

If people want to dissect TV shows on their PCness and historical accuracy, and write long learnt articles about them, that's great. What annoys me though is when these people get on a high horse vs those like me who are in fandom because it's a distraction from RL, rather than a mirror of it. I'm in it for the shiny and the boytoys, that's fandom for me, and I object to people wanting me to feel bad about that.

The Merlin thing.

[sidhe_woman]

Oh, dear. I won't say what my initial reaction in reading the original post to the Merlin debate. But it was not an agreement *g*. I suppose everyone is going to view a show or film through their own life-lens, and that will effect their reaction to it

Re: The Merlin thing.

[jhava]

This really has been very fascinating; people have tended to feel very strongly one way or another.

But as you say, ... the bottom line is there are many ways of entering fandom, and all of them are right...

Exactly. And I'm grateful for the variety of fandoms and artists/writers/vidders we have within them.

[pat_t]

I read all your other comments and I agree with everything they said. I'm assuming they are talking about Merlin. I haven't started watching it yet, although I have the first three episodes downloaded on my computer (thanks to Becky). But I've seen the pictures and the icons. Everyone is very pretty.

As for the Buffy thing though, I think part of that is the fact that *we* were younger when Buffy came on. The older we get the younger they get. The age difference is widening. It's one thing love young guys when you're in your thirties and early forties, but another as you're heading into your fifties. Big difference with "he's almost young enough to be my son" to "he's young enough to be my grandson. Frankly, though, I never fell for the young ones even then. It was Angel and Spike I fell for and the chemistry between them that *dinged* my fandom antenna.

And I think that's one reason I love my Highlander boys. They were gorgeous, sexy and men - not boys.

However, that said, I love beeej's idea that the star is her tv boytoy since he's

[jhava]

I'm using my special Geezer icon because the Stargate fandom is still going through an unpleasant period where they've cancelled *our* show and booted out the late 30s/early 40s characters to replace it with SGU -- which promises to have a "younger" cast. Hmmmmprh. As you can tell, I'm not pleased

[txvoodoo]

"What I was really trying to say is, despite all of our wishes (;0)), as we get older, many of the actors we watch will get younger. Telly and film like their 20 somethings. But, I'm with you: personally, I've always preferred my tv boyfriends as men -- not boytoys. My first crush was on Spock of all characters! What does that tell you? And yes, I think TV boytoy is a fabulous new phrase ;)"

Oh, yes. Spock was mine, also ;)

You made me think about this, and my tv crushes are and have been very different. I think that it's about the character, for me. Not the age, looks, or any other easily-classified attribute. There's no "I like blue-eyed blondes". I tend to crush on the anti-heroes, but deviate from that at times

[jhava]

I think that it's about the character, for me.

Exactly! I've gone from Spock to Mulder to Picard to Captain Jack Harkness (both actually ;)) to McKay to Sheppard (throw in Lorne because there's something very appealing about a solid, reliable 2nd in command) to Arthur to Hephaestion (as played by one extremely hot Jared Leto in an atrocious movie) to Methos. They certainly don't fall into one easily definable category ...

But age? Well, I think those who can't crush on people substantially older or younger than they are don't have the disconnect that I do: my crushes are 100% in my head, and I know that.

::applauds:: And that's where I like my crushes best.

You get the pretty boys icon ;)