Some thoughts and questions about why we like what we like. Oh, and Kirk.
I have things I should probably talk about, that might be interesting, but I keep falling into that cycle of "I'm too tired/busy/braindead to do it justice right now" which is what leads to not posting for months (and it also why I fail at emailing/calling/socializing back).
But for now, in an effort to just babble about what's on my mind, and to risk everyone going "good lord, not Kirk again," I want to talk about something I just saw on fandomsecrets. The secret itself doesn't matter much: it's several days old now, and basically said "I can't read TOS fanfiction because it highlights how much of a joke Shatner is/was when you try to make that character make sense."
I thought this was interesting because, as you know, I don't feel that way at all. I used to, when I hadn't seen the show, and I think to a large number of people who haven't and many who have, Shatner is a joke. Obviously anon can feel however they feel, and part of what's interesting to me is how we all gravitate towards particular things that are invisible to others even when we're all ostensibly looking at the same thing.
There are two things I'm talking about here, in my messy way: both that I don't think the character of James T. Kirk is a joke (though he is frequently ridiculous), and that I wonder how certain characters or shows or whatever else (movies books music historical periods/figures) acquire such wholly different resonance with individuals.
So. Kirk. The anon who sparked this in me just now mentioned that because Shatner is who he is, it makes Kirk himself a joke; another commenter agreed that they couldn't read/write fic because they kept thinking "What would William Shatner Do?". Which is interesting because for me, Kirk is decidedly not Shatner. Kirk is, for me, Christopher Pike + Shatner. And it's the fact that you've got Mr. Upstanding Compassionface mixed with Mr. I Melt Rocks with my Sexeyes (or At Least I Act Like I Can) that, for me, gives him a weird depth that probably shouldn't work but does because people often don't make consistent sense. I think Shatner might think he is/was Kirk. But I don't think he has that in him, that other side that's reconciling all the sex and drama and ridiculousness with a deep devotion to duty. That's not a dig at Shatner, and I'm not saying Kirk or someone like him exists. I'm saying that there's a layering there of disperate elements which makes Kirk something different from Shatner, and makes him closer to a whole, interesting person than I think he'd be without both of those things working against/in tandem.
This was illustrated for me while re-watching the films, where I see Shatner and Kirk getting closer and closer together until the character is unrecognizable. And I think, in another sense, it goes to the idea of Trek as camp, or a guilty pleasure, or cheese we are fond of. I see all of those things, I do. I don't think Star Trek is serious business, but I also don't think it has nothing to say and no real value apart from that. I love the Adam West Batman, but I don't think their in the same camp (haha) either. I'm guessing lots of people probably see them as quite similar in tone--at least, that's how I always figured, never watching either, and it's what I see in peoples' description of Star Trek. But as often as they fail (on various levels), I think TOS was trying for something more and sometimes succeeds. At least, it does for me. (Conversely, I think Batman, which was aiming lower, probably succeeds a lot better overall at what it's doing.)
I don't know where I'm going with this, other than the idea that Kirk is a fascinating and complex character for me for the very reason that other people find him ridiculous. It's just that the mix of absurd and earnest works for me, now that I've given it a chance. Or maybe now that I'm older, and less serious than I was. I don't know why, exactly, and I'm not sure, either, why it bothers me not to understand why it holds resonance for me personally. Maybe this is my subject for the Shatner blogathon coming up, for which I am struggling to narrow down a topic.
The second part is for you, if you've gotten this far. And that is: do you have someone who seems to occupy this space for you, as muddled as I might have been describing it? What I mean is, what movie/show/music/character/WHATEVER you admire and adore gets treated as the opposite of what you think it is by others? Did you used to feel that way, before you knew it/them better? Is there something everyone thinks is camp that touches you deeply? Do you know why? Do you have to deny its camp value to embrace it, or can camp and depth co-exist? I know I'm being terribly unclear, and maybe that's why I'm interested. Because I am not entirely sure what this is. In a sense, it's like asking why YOUR favorite color isn't green when it is so clearly superior to all other colors. Except in this case, I'm not asking about those things you define as guilty pleasures--more like those things others would, but you feel sincerely are worth more than that. Even if you freely admit the absurdity, as well.
This entry is also posted at http://my-daroga.dreamwidth.org/259221.html. Feel free to comment wherever you want.
But for now, in an effort to just babble about what's on my mind, and to risk everyone going "good lord, not Kirk again," I want to talk about something I just saw on fandomsecrets. The secret itself doesn't matter much: it's several days old now, and basically said "I can't read TOS fanfiction because it highlights how much of a joke Shatner is/was when you try to make that character make sense."
I thought this was interesting because, as you know, I don't feel that way at all. I used to, when I hadn't seen the show, and I think to a large number of people who haven't and many who have, Shatner is a joke. Obviously anon can feel however they feel, and part of what's interesting to me is how we all gravitate towards particular things that are invisible to others even when we're all ostensibly looking at the same thing.
There are two things I'm talking about here, in my messy way: both that I don't think the character of James T. Kirk is a joke (though he is frequently ridiculous), and that I wonder how certain characters or shows or whatever else (movies books music historical periods/figures) acquire such wholly different resonance with individuals.
So. Kirk. The anon who sparked this in me just now mentioned that because Shatner is who he is, it makes Kirk himself a joke; another commenter agreed that they couldn't read/write fic because they kept thinking "What would William Shatner Do?". Which is interesting because for me, Kirk is decidedly not Shatner. Kirk is, for me, Christopher Pike + Shatner. And it's the fact that you've got Mr. Upstanding Compassionface mixed with Mr. I Melt Rocks with my Sexeyes (or At Least I Act Like I Can) that, for me, gives him a weird depth that probably shouldn't work but does because people often don't make consistent sense. I think Shatner might think he is/was Kirk. But I don't think he has that in him, that other side that's reconciling all the sex and drama and ridiculousness with a deep devotion to duty. That's not a dig at Shatner, and I'm not saying Kirk or someone like him exists. I'm saying that there's a layering there of disperate elements which makes Kirk something different from Shatner, and makes him closer to a whole, interesting person than I think he'd be without both of those things working against/in tandem.
This was illustrated for me while re-watching the films, where I see Shatner and Kirk getting closer and closer together until the character is unrecognizable. And I think, in another sense, it goes to the idea of Trek as camp, or a guilty pleasure, or cheese we are fond of. I see all of those things, I do. I don't think Star Trek is serious business, but I also don't think it has nothing to say and no real value apart from that. I love the Adam West Batman, but I don't think their in the same camp (haha) either. I'm guessing lots of people probably see them as quite similar in tone--at least, that's how I always figured, never watching either, and it's what I see in peoples' description of Star Trek. But as often as they fail (on various levels), I think TOS was trying for something more and sometimes succeeds. At least, it does for me. (Conversely, I think Batman, which was aiming lower, probably succeeds a lot better overall at what it's doing.)
I don't know where I'm going with this, other than the idea that Kirk is a fascinating and complex character for me for the very reason that other people find him ridiculous. It's just that the mix of absurd and earnest works for me, now that I've given it a chance. Or maybe now that I'm older, and less serious than I was. I don't know why, exactly, and I'm not sure, either, why it bothers me not to understand why it holds resonance for me personally. Maybe this is my subject for the Shatner blogathon coming up, for which I am struggling to narrow down a topic.
The second part is for you, if you've gotten this far. And that is: do you have someone who seems to occupy this space for you, as muddled as I might have been describing it? What I mean is, what movie/show/music/character/WHATEVER you admire and adore gets treated as the opposite of what you think it is by others? Did you used to feel that way, before you knew it/them better? Is there something everyone thinks is camp that touches you deeply? Do you know why? Do you have to deny its camp value to embrace it, or can camp and depth co-exist? I know I'm being terribly unclear, and maybe that's why I'm interested. Because I am not entirely sure what this is. In a sense, it's like asking why YOUR favorite color isn't green when it is so clearly superior to all other colors. Except in this case, I'm not asking about those things you define as guilty pleasures--more like those things others would, but you feel sincerely are worth more than that. Even if you freely admit the absurdity, as well.
This entry is also posted at http://my-daroga.dreamwidth.org/259221.html. Feel free to comment wherever you want.