Et in Italia reprise, from Pros-land

[justacat]

I am in the Land of Pros - London, of course.  I've been offline for the past few days, because I was in Milton Keynes at Nattercon - a NBP (nothin' but Pros *g*) weekend, and it was beyond wonderful (more about the con next post, but right now I'm fighting post-con blues and want to write about something else).  I've been here since Thursday

Comments

[justacat]

Well, when I said Sebastian at her best, I was referring more to her writing rather than to the content - technically her writing is beautiful here, to me at least; liquid and gorgeous and evocative and more layered and sophisticated than her earlier stuff. I differ from you in that I do like the story - but for the ending. Though then again, if I say the ending ruins the story for me, does that really make any sense?

Anyway, I'm with you in far, far preferring her earlier stuff, though; I love the dreaminess and sweetness of it, love the endings. I am certainly not someone who adores her later stories, not at all, though I know many people do; I hate that under the bridge one (can't recall the name offhand) too. And I wish I better understood why she went that way. It could have been, as you say, because of the whole Artiste thing - to grow as a writer I must write darker stories and unhappy or ambiguous endings. But I suppose it could also have been that that's where her muse took her, that's what she found cathartic; perhaps something in her life changed. As gwyn_r said up above, some people like darker stories, as hard as that is for me to fathom!

So I don't understand, and I wish I did; wish I understood why she wrote Et in Italia as she did - and what she envisioned as happening next.

And as for realism ... this is one of my pet peeves, when people complain that a story isn't "realistic." What they mean is that it lacks realism with respect to a particular aspect that they like to see portrayed realistically - because when you push you see they're always perfectly happy to accept lack of realism in other areas! Coincidentally I've come across a few good posts about this recently; the one I quoted in the post and also a few others. In one someone commented "There's enough 'reality' to be found in real life already," which is exactly my view, and also that "'Reality' has already ruined the entertainment value of TV," which is something I hadn't thought of! *g*

I want my happy ending, realistic or not - though it does have to be convincing for me in the context of the story, I'm really not all that concerned about whether it could happen in "real life." After all, we're talking about made-up characters from a TV show - it's not real life to begin with. If B and D can do those outrageous things, the gunfights etc., and no one blinks - well then, why can't they live happily ever after?

(And thanks :-)

[nakeisha]

Well, when I said Sebastian at her best, I was referring more to her writing rather than to the content - technically her writing is beautiful here, to me at least; liquid and gorgeous and evocative and more layered and sophisticated than her earlier stuff.

This is another one of those 'can a 'well-written' story ever be a bad story', and 'can a poorly written story every be a good story', kind of thing. And also, the 'is a story I like the same as a good story. To me the answers are: Yes. Yes. No. If I don't like a story for whatever reason, then IMO it's not a good story, no matter how technically perfect, or wonderfully written it is. So whilst I can appreciate Sebastian's use of words and language in this story, to me she is far from her best. In fact to some extent I feel she's gone over-technical and lost some of her beauty with words. But that's just my opinion of course.

After all, we're talking about made-up characters from a TV show - it's not real life to begin with. If B and D can do those outrageous things, the gunfights etc., and no one blinks - well then, why can't they live happily ever after?

You'll get no argument from me over this. In fact, if I ever have a nice quiet half an hour to finish my post on realism in fanfic, you'll see that I say this very thing.

[justacat]

Hmmm. I try very hard when I write about stories to define what I mean by "bad." "Bad" is a word that is used often without the user explaining whether she means that the story was "badly written" - a piece of crap, the person needs to go back to school, she has no idea of grammar or plot or story construction - or that the user didn't like it. And to me these *aren't* the same - I'm not quite prepared to say that a story I like is the same as a good story, or that a story I dislike is the same as a bad story.

There are well-written, well-constructed stories that I don't like - many of them, in fact - but I'm not quite comfortable labeling them "bad," because that dismisses a) the author's skill, which may be considerable, and b) the taste of the other readers who like the story. I don't like when someone says "that story is a piece of crap" - the implication being that anyone who likes it has no taste, or that the author was a "crappy writer." I prefer to say that it may be well-written, but I don't like it because of x y or z, or that it's not good *fanfic* for me because despite its technical merits it doesn't give me what I want from fanfic. Or, to take the reverse, to say that it may have been a good story idea, but the typos and lack of coherence and poor editing were too much for me to overcome, so I really don't like it.

Actually, I don't really like "good" and "bad" at all to describe stories - too broad, too judgmental, not enough nuance. One of the things I love about fandom is that there's something for *everyone*, no matter her tastes or proclivities, so I generally hate (at least in public!) to dismiss something as "bad" knowing that others might love it and think of it as the most wonderful thing ever - though I am prepared to say that *I* don't like it, or that I think it's poorly written and/or edited.

Anyway, I'm rambling here ... to bring it back to the topic, I can see your point about her writing having become more technical. I think her writing always had exceptional beauty, and I adore her earlier stuff, but I actually do think her writing in Et in Italia, her use of words and images, is truly magnificent - it doesn't strike me personally as over-techcnical - but that's not enough to make me love the story, that's for sure!

And I'd love to see your post about realism in fanfic, if you do find time to finish it! I know all about half-finished posts, believe me ... *g* This seems to be the topic-of-the-moment; I've come across (through metafandom) a number of posts about it recently, and I find it endlessly interesting.

[nakeisha]

Actually, I realised that I didn't really make myself totally clear. Most of what I said wasn't me advocating the use of 'good' or 'bad', merely that it's an argument and one that I can academically answer, without necessarily using the terms and saying that it is possible for a poorly written story to be a 'good' story, etc.

There are well-written, well-constructed stories that I don't like - many of them, in fact

Me too.

but I'm not quite comfortable labeling them "bad," because that dismisses a) the author's skill, which may be considerable, and b) the taste of the other readers who like the story.

Again, I agree, entirely. In fact I cannot think of any story I would personally dismiss as 'bad' or 'a load of crap'. Even stories I personally dislike, I'm more than happy to say something positive, e.g. 'it was well written, but not my cup of tea'. What irks me beyond measure is the way that so many people dish stories that they personally don't like and call them 'rubbish', etc. thus, as you say, people who does like the story often feel that she has no taste for liking it.

'Bad' and 'good' are indeed far too subjective and judgemental, as I once argued on Pros_Lit. And like you I will rarely (if ever) dismiss a story in public, for the reasons you state - plus the fact that the poor author might be reading it. I'd be prepared to say that I personally didn't like it, but I wouldn't comment on the writing/editing.

I think that maybe the fact that she failed to convince me throughout Et in Italia of the characters, the scenario, etc. has to an extent coloured my view on her style. I do admit it's good, but then I've always thought her word use is wonderful, but I think she's written better, but as I say I am more than prepared to confess that my personal dislike of the story (although dislike is actually too strong a word) has to an extent affected my objectivity, and this from someone who reckons she's capable of being more objective than a lot of people. BTW, the other story we both didn't care for is called Down 'To The Waterline'.

I fully intend to finish the post and it is fact working its way up my 'to do' list. I'm a member of metafandom, but catching up on all the interesting posts is also on my 'to do' list. Why are there not more hours in the day?