Kink, Canon, Fanfic, and Double Standards
For anyone on my f-list who may have wondered what the heck I was on about in this comment on liviapenn's recent post about the egregiously-inappropriately-rated "Heroes for Hire" comic cover, I've clarified further in these two comments to hth_the_first's thoughtful response:
Kink, Canon, Fanfic, and Roller-Coasters [Hornblower fans will no doubt be utterly mystified ( Read more... )
Kink, Canon, Fanfic, and Roller-Coasters [Hornblower fans will no doubt be utterly mystified ( Read more... )
The comics fanboy reaction to objections being raised about the Mary Jane statue disturbed me greatly, so I'm wondering if we aren't seeing dual (or triple or quadruple) tracked trends here, where on the one hand you have the misogynistic ire bubbling up to the surface, while on another you have women claiming the power of viewing men in sexual lights that I'd argue are much tamer and less exploitive than what you find in Hustler magazine.
Tracking cultural trends is always fascinating, not least because there can be contradictory movements and counter-examples and reversals and all sorts of things all at once.
I truly believe that women in the developed world have it a lot better than women in the developing world. I also think that the MJ affair has demonstrated that there's a long way to go before women are treated with respect, as equals, as we deserve. (Lingering salary disparities are an object lesson on an economic front).
Reply
I read that post, but didn't quite feel comfortable replying.
Believe me, I didn't feel quite comfortable replying either. ;-)
I suspect I muddied the waters a bit by asking the question in the context of that particular cover, because there were two levels on which people were finding its subject matter offensive: on the one hand, they were condemning it as inappropriate for its stated target market (which it certainly is); and on the other, they were expressing disgust with the subject matter itself--the way it took these apparently skilled, kick-ass hero(in)es and depicted them as weak, sobbing, and hyper-sexualized in the face of an overtly sexualized threat...and that's the level on which, though my gut agreed, my brain responded with, "But...but..."
Because I've encountered fanfic that takes multiple-PhD, multiple-tragedy-surviving Daniel Jackson, and reduces him to a baby-talking victim who only feels safe when held by Jack; and fanfic in which Kirk (Kirk! The guy who rewrote the Kobayashi Maru! The one who regularly overthrows long-established civilizations if he doesn't agree with them!) can't scheme his way out of a Vulcan slave camp, perhaps because he's too busy being overwhelmed by sexual desire for his master Spock; and fanfic in which the solemn central temple of the Jedi order is depicted as a hive of hormones and gossip barely distinguishable from The O.C....
And, while I personally may dismiss such stories as OOC, they're there, and they have their fans...and there was a fascinating post on metafandom recently (which I would look for and link to if LJ weren't so slow for me today) that suggested that "badfic" may be more representative of the deep structures of fannish desire than those stories which we perceive as more polished and more successful in their sublimations of such desire.
And then I recalled recent posts advocating more commercialization of fanfic, and while I don't think that that's feasible for fanfic of works that are currently under copyright, there is always the option of fanficcing out-of-copyright works for the marketplace, and there's also the oft-given advice of "filing the serial numbers off" enough to come up with a new work that offers pleasures similar to those of the inspiring work. So, if works like that (e.g., slashy Hamlet/Horatio graphic novels, or illustrated zine-like stories about strong, snarky warriors paired up with intellectuals who talk too much) were to enter the marketplace, then how and where would they be sold? It seems to me that there's at least a possibility that female fans might find themselves in the adult sections of comics shops, purchasing works with covers that might appear weirdly kinky to outside observers.
That is, of course, if there is enough of a market to sustain more commercialization of fanfic. I do wonder about that, given that even the few stories that have "eaten fandom" have attracted a relatively small audience, judging by commercial standards.
I'm also intrigued by hth_the_first's contention that one of the attractions of fanfic may be its very non-canonicity--that there's a feeling of safety in playing with the action figures, knowing that they'll always be there in the box again for us when we're done, untouched by whatever we've written. Fans so often mock and express frustration with the "magic reset button" in canonical source texts that it's interesting to consider that in fanfic, by contrast, it may be a desirable feature.
On that point, however, I would counter with something like SPN. (I realize it's not one of your favourites, but I think it offers a good current example of many of the pleasures of fanfic--including some of the more dangerous ones--being successfully incorporated into a canonical source.)
~
Reply
I'd immediately thought of Clark writhing under the influence of Kryptonite, and LJ-based discussions around a Slate article reviewing Casino Royale had me pondering objectification of men last winter (my conclusion: in television, they're all for it if some bare torsos will bring in the female viewers. Smallville, Fastlane, and loads of others that I of course cannot remember now when I need them, have shown that over the past several years).
Yes, I think the bare-male-torso-as-fanservice has become more and more established in recent years. I have a mixed reaction to it, because, one the one hand, if you're going to have your female characters walking around in bathing suits, etc., then by all means, let's balance that situation out...but, on the other hand, I think it's often offered in place of narrative or character developments that I personally (and I realize other female viewers may differ in this) would find much sexier, even if the characters involved were covered from head to toe...and in that sense, I feel like I'm being thrown a bone that the producers just assume I'll enjoy rather than being offered a complete meal which is actually to my taste.
The comics fanboy reaction to objections being raised about the Mary Jane statue disturbed me greatly, so I'm wondering if we aren't seeing dual (or triple or quadruple) tracked trends here, where on the one hand you have the misogynistic ire bubbling up to the surface, while on another you have women claiming the power of viewing men in sexual lights that I'd argue are much tamer and less exploitive than what you find in Hustler magazine.
It's got to be so frustrating for female comics fans, knowing that TPTB for this genre they enjoy are that willing to dismiss them as a demographic. It's such horrible customer service, it's clear that they just don't value their business at all--or, for that matter, the business of those male fans who were equally put off by that cover.
(Given that, from a more mainstream POV, male comics fans are themselves regarded as socially marginalized, it's kind of ironic to see them so fiercely excluding from their sandbox those women who are actually interested in playing there...although, of course, it's not ironic in that it does go a long way towards justifying the stereotype.)
I truly believe that women in the developed world have it a lot better than women in the developing world.
Yes, I think Joss Whedon's recent heartbreaking rant reminded us all quite sharply of that.
~
Reply
~
Reply
Leave a comment