Ranty, Ranty, Rant...
So I was searching around one of the old sites I used to frequent when I was a fan of ER and whilst re-reading one of the threads I found myself beginning an internal debate...
In every fandom I've been involved in shippers have been treated like foolish, idiotic, squeeing fangirls with nay more than a pair of brain cells to rub together. It seems that if you express a liking for a particular relationship dynamic, there's always somebody there to slap you in the face and tell you you're being a romantic featherweight.
So my questions are these: Why is it that when there is a hint of a relationship portrayed in a series or book, we get legions of people slapping it in the face? Why was Rose Tyler considered weak for crying her heart out after she was separated from the Doctor? Why was Doug Ross considered weak for walking away from Carol after Ricky died? Why is Tonks considered weak for being depressed by Remus's denial of their love in HBP?
Why is it so difficult to believe that fictional characters should have real human emotions and be affected by them in same way that any of us are? It seems as if some people want their fictional characters not to have the flaws and features that make us human, that they want them to always make the perfect choices and never make mistakes, over-react or, for that matter, under-react... Because when they do display an iota of realistic, believable behaviour to the stimuli of grief, love, sadness, loss and all those other utterly powerful and compelling emotions, people detract the characters and demean those people who support them. And that's what I find so confusing. How can believing in the true nature of human reactions, be they good, bad or indifferent be considered weak or pathetic or fangirly?
To me, fiction is not fiction if you cannot recognise in it elements of real life and facets of human nature.
In every fandom I've been involved in shippers have been treated like foolish, idiotic, squeeing fangirls with nay more than a pair of brain cells to rub together. It seems that if you express a liking for a particular relationship dynamic, there's always somebody there to slap you in the face and tell you you're being a romantic featherweight.
So my questions are these: Why is it that when there is a hint of a relationship portrayed in a series or book, we get legions of people slapping it in the face? Why was Rose Tyler considered weak for crying her heart out after she was separated from the Doctor? Why was Doug Ross considered weak for walking away from Carol after Ricky died? Why is Tonks considered weak for being depressed by Remus's denial of their love in HBP?
Why is it so difficult to believe that fictional characters should have real human emotions and be affected by them in same way that any of us are? It seems as if some people want their fictional characters not to have the flaws and features that make us human, that they want them to always make the perfect choices and never make mistakes, over-react or, for that matter, under-react... Because when they do display an iota of realistic, believable behaviour to the stimuli of grief, love, sadness, loss and all those other utterly powerful and compelling emotions, people detract the characters and demean those people who support them. And that's what I find so confusing. How can believing in the true nature of human reactions, be they good, bad or indifferent be considered weak or pathetic or fangirly?
To me, fiction is not fiction if you cannot recognise in it elements of real life and facets of human nature.