Just a few days left to vote in the Sunnydale Memorial Fanfic Awards
Voting in Round 28 of the SunnyD Awards ends June 30th, so hurry over, check it out and cast your ballets now. Quite a lot of the stories and authors were entirely new to me and I would never have known about otherwise, which is one of the best things about these fanfic awards.
( Read more... )
( Read more... )
As a judge, a category where you can dismiss half the entries is much easier, but one in which you agonize over 1/2 points in an effort to figure out which wonderful story is the most wonderful is much more rewarding. :)
Reply
Exactly - it's one of those wonderful problems to have. Almost every category in the SunnyD awards this time was fairly easy for me except one and I AGONIZED over it. Again, good problem - I want the fic to be that good.
I think thats part of the reason I like fic recs, or things like the Buffyverse Top 5 site. You can list favorite stories without having to rate them numerically. (I know people who love to make lists, like Nathaniel Rogers and his The Film Experience blog, but it doesn't come naturally to me.)
Reply
I wish there were judged awards, or more like there used to be. They seem... more fair? I'm not a big fan of SunnyD simply because it seems more kinky smut = more votes; grammar, plot, and characterization be damned. On the other hand, better open voting than no award sites at all. Even if I often don't agree with the results, at least it opens my eyes to new authors.
(And here is where I remind myself that everybody is just trying their best and having fun, and there's no need to be such a *snob* about it. Yes, I have often been accused of being an intellectual snob as well, but that attitude came directly from both my parents. The downside of growing up in a family filled with PhDs. I still can't shake the belief that an award for 'BEST' should actually mean 'BEST', though.)
Even if I'm willing to blab about who I nominated, I'm not as likely to admit what I voted for, especially when it comes to the 'big' categories. Do your damndest, you'll never get my choice for 'Best Author' out of me. :) Also, unlike Slaymesoftly, not that many people pay attention to what I say. With her, a recommendation one way or the other means something. For me, hardly anybody cares. So I don't have to be as circumspect.
I'm with Slayme on reasons to nominate older authors... when I first saw the nominees this round, I wanted to add an author of substance, because (at that time, partway through open nominations) there few choices I would vote for, or out of the ones I would, they'd won over and over and over already. And I didn't want to nominate a current author who had already won recently. I admit, I get tired of seeing the same names over and over. Hence my personal rule about nominating unknown/fringe/never won before authors.
With regards to slash - I never thought about the fact that it separates straight from gay relationships on purpose. I suppose because in my mind (and ONLY in my mind), 'slash' means shipping a cannonically straight character in a gay relationship. I wouldn't consider W/T slash, but W/Buffy would be. Spike/Angel is border slash for me (I will read it, because it's not that unlikely a pairing), but Spike/Xander? Definitely slash. Trust me, it makes sense in my mind. :) I suppose by my definition, putting a gay character in a straight relationship is also slash. *Thinks about it* Yep, I wouldn't read Tara/Spike either. I think it has to do with characterization. Don't make Giles mean and stupid, don't make Buffy a horndogger, and don't make Xander gay or Tara straight. It just ain't right.
(And Buffy being with Satsu doesn't change my opinion that she is 100% straight. To me, that was part of them trying on various Buffys for size - and trying to boost sales. JewelThief!Buffy. Superman!Buffy. Lush!Buffy. HittingonmybestmalefriendbecauseI'mdesperate!Buffy. Gaynow!Buffy. Loser!Buffy. Pregnant!Buffy. Robot!Buffy. Helpless!Buffy. The list of remade Buffys is endless... And they wonder why everybody thinks they've assassinated her character. One or two changes can be seen as character development. A whole slew of them is ridiculous. At least she finally seems to be Buffy again.)
Anaross *IS* a lovely person. She didn't know me, and yet she helped me with some poetry questions when I emailed her out of the blue. I was very grateful and impressed.
Reply
That's part of what I like about the Absence of Light Awards. It's based on a certain set of criteria, which doesn't mean we all agree on what's best even then, but for me at least it made me examine WHY I like or disliked a given story more carefully.
And here is where I remind myself that everybody is just trying their best and having fun, and there's no need to be such a *snob* about it.
Well why not? *ducks flying tomatoes* Remember back in the day when at most we got to share our writing with a few friends, assuming it didn't end up in a dresser drawer? The internet allows the world to have access to your work and that's heady stuff. But I think some people are more selective (read: insecure) about the value of their work, sometimes to a fault; on the other extreme you have people who think every damn word they write is precious.
Yes, I have often been accused of being an intellectual snob as well, but that attitude came directly from both my parents. The downside of growing up in a family filled with PhDs.
I came from a working class family; neither of my parents, or either of my ex-stepfathers, went to college. I can't tell you how many times I heard from classmates "Why do you use words with so many syllables?" (and in the next breath "Help me with my homework!" Which is fun (not) when it's the same people who treat you like shit on a daily basis. But enough about me...)
OT for a second: One of my pet peeves though is the notion that being "smart" and "intellectual" - however the hell you define it - is "bad". (Isn't more people having access to higher education part of the American dream? Am I supposed to want to be dumb and ignorant?)
I still can't shake the belief that an award for 'BEST' should actually mean 'BEST', though.
If that makes me a "snob"? I can live with that. I'm not downgrading my criteria for anybody. Nor is anyone else obligated to change theirs to suit me. I'll just continue to direct people to what I think is good work and continue to encourage writers who are sincerely dedicated to their craft and want to improve.
Also, unlike Slaymesoftly, not that many people pay attention to what I say. With her, a recommendation one way or the other means something. For me, hardly anybody cares.
Really? What do you base that on? I appreciate your opinion, but maybe Slaymesoftly has been in fandom longer than you? Most (all?) of the people I interact with in fandom buck the trends of popular opinion, including Slaymesoftly, even if they disagree with me and each other. I wouldn't have it any other way.
I admit, I get tired of seeing the same names over and over. Hence my personal rule about nominating unknown/fringe/never won before authors.
I think that's a very good rule. There are some authors I see repeatedly who really are just that damn good (ok, one in particular) or are extremely active in the fandon; part of it also is just who people know, how big your audience is? We can be pretty damn insular in our fandom pockets. The last round of the Willowy Goodness Awards was filled with names/stories I had never heard of before.
Reply
I'm not sure that was the original intention? But that's what it's become. it highlights the fact that there are almost no outright gay characters and almost all same sex shipping is non-canonical by necessity.
I wouldn't consider W/T slash, but W/Buffy would be. Spike/Angel is border slash for me...but Spike/Xander? Definitely slash.
Your definition hinges on canonical or non-canonical, if I'm reading correctly; but I don't think that's the general definition? there's still a problem in that, or at least for me as a "lesbian" (yes, I know that's still a label) because I've lived with my relationship not being considered not as "real" or legitimate (morally or legally) as if I were with a man. Whereas I'm fine with canon/noncanon, and Smut/Romance as categories. Those apply to any pairing regardless of gender. With the SunnyD awards this time the categories were confusing: "unconventional pairing" "conventional pairing" etc categories, and what was actually nominated only added to my confusion: do the terms refer to what's canonical or noncanonical? to what's popular or frequently written in fanon? Both?
(And my apologies to anyone reading this who is an awards moderator, I don't mean to offend anyone personally!)
I wouldn't read Tara/Spike either. I think it has to do with characterization. Don't make Giles mean and stupid, don't make Buffy a horndogger, and don't make Xander gay or Tara straight. It just ain't right.
AMEN, SISTER. I don't know if you saw the conversation I was having with eilowyn on my Buffy & Tara meta thread on the subject of Spike/Tara shipping, and why I find it problematic at best and offensive at worst on several levels?
http://red-satin-doll.livejournal.com/17902.html?thread=378094#t378094 (NOTE: edited to fix link)
If a writer wants to change the characters that badly, then why the hell write in fandom? write OC's. Even if you want to write about Spike - make a few changes and you've got an OC. Its not that difficult. There's a difference between changing canon events and changing characterization; the best fan writers IMHO understand that.
And Buffy being with Satsu doesn't change my opinion that she is 100% straight.
Total agreement. I think it's because of the way Sarah plays it. I don't see any indication of erotic interest in women, although there's a lot of subtext in her relationship with Faith. (And people had to point that out to Joss, who then toned it down. And we were stuck with Bangel S3. Dumbass.) OTOH, I enjoy it in fanfic though, when it's well done; Snowpuppies and Emmie (angearia) made a B/F fanon shipper out of me; and I don't ship B/T but then I just wrote a rough draft for such a story *runs and hides*.
To me, that was part of them trying on various Buffys for size - and trying to boost sales... And they wonder why everybody thinks they've assassinated her character.
THIS. I love every word of this paragraph, esp "various Buffys" . that's exactly it. it points up the importance of another thing I've discussed on other people's journals: having an actor who will fight for the integrity of the character. Sarah gets a lot of shit thrown her way for that, but I love that about her. It's really gross to think that the comics represent what Joss would have liked to have done the whole time, specifically to Buffy and her body.
Anaross *IS* a lovely person.
I've never spoke to her myself but heard nothing but high praise about her.
Reply
I know folks who ship Tara/Spike, and the idea is definitely 'Spike deserves better than Buffy (that b*itch), and Tara is the nicest'. She accepts Spike! She even says he's good and Buffy should love him (that b*tch)! I didn't read the thread, but I can pretty much imagine how it goes. Everybody has their filter they view the show through?
With regards to some people thinking their every word is precious... I started a story yesterday that was *coughterriblecough*, and the author's notes were filled with admonitions not to flame or complain about the story. Normally I just quietly hit the back button, but boy did I want to leave a review suggesting the use of... oh, I don't know. Spell check. A dictionary. A beta. A grammar book. All of the above. :) If my 11yo is a better writer than you, you should not be so proud of your skillz. Sorry. Not everyone deserves a medal.
Reply
I guess. I think the distinctions bother me on an ethical/social/personal level as I've said (and you're the first person I've said all that to. Lucky you, being the guinea pig for my meta-splurge!) So I think well, ok, just smut, romance, fluff, and gen are fine with me. But then, what about the story that incorporate smut and particular pairing with gen and romance? How do we break that down? And those stories are kind of rare, or maybe I haven't heard hard enough? Like, the canon verse has all of this stuff, but we focus on what we like and leave out the rest. But what happens when a writer doesn't? Actually, 3Hours Spirit of the Woods is a pretty good example of being true to canon, I think. Gen with an implied pairing, etc. (I'm glad you nominated it.)
I guess for me the bottom line is, I want a good story, whether or not it conforms to any "Category" - and categories can be limiting to writing as well as providing a focus or guide - but I also want "different relationship" (same sex, etc) to not be put in different categories. Thats why I hate DOMA and really dislike the very term "gay marriage". It's about marriage, period and end of sentence. a 'ship is a 'ship is a 'ship.
Also I'm trying (again) to expand my reading beyond Buffy&Spike - again. I fall back into habit until I get sick of the tropes.
the idea is definitely 'Spike deserves better than Buffy (that b*itch), and Tara is the nicest'. She accepts Spike! She even says he's good and Buffy should love him (that b*tch)!
angearia said the same thing the other day to me (ie the why of the pairing), but you just hit on one my biggest fandom pet peeves: Tara recognized that Spike had "done good things" and "he does love you" in DT (although she didn't go out of her way to praise him or hang with him); but she NEVER said Buffy "should" love Spike, that she was somehow obligated to do so. NEVER - which of course you know, but I've seen that opinion stated as fact. How do we get from "He's done good things and he does love you" and "It's ok if you do love him and it's ok if you don't" in DT, to "should love him"? In OAFA she protects Buffy and Willow from other people pressuring them. "You might want to put some ice on it" is more subtle than blocking Anya fTranslation: Cool it, mister. Same with Willow re: Anya; the message is the same in both cases: "Back off." (Someone else in fandom on Wordpress actually made the parallel btw. I wish I could claim it as mine.)
But you know all about wonky interpretations not supported by the text, don't you? :0
I started a story yesterday that was *coughterriblecough*, and the author's notes were filled with admonitions not to flame or complain about the story. Normally I just quietly hit the back button, but boy did I want to leave a review
Holy sweet potatoes, do I know that feeling. "Don't flame" - ie be mean, spiteful, attack the author, etc - is a legitimate request. "Don't complain"? is not. Not if the review is polite, fair, objective, constructive, etc. And I know constructive crit can be hard to find, but if you are putting something up on the internet you are inviting a response of some sort. Telling the reader they can't complain is honest I guess - the writer only wants hugs and puppies and praise. What are they going to do in the RW if they try to get published?
Then again, "don't complain" seems pretty pervasive nowadays even amoung successful (creators, politicians, CEO's etc?) Joss, Baz Luhrmann, etc - it's a rather immature stance. "Don't say mean things to me, don't point out that I'm racist/sexist/my plots make no sense/underage children in other countries work in my factories etc, 'cause you just don't understand me and what I have to go through, waaaahhhhhh." In business the model as far as I can tell isn't "the customer is always right" (which, untrue) but "the customer doesn't matter at all." So maybe we shouldn't be surprised to see it in writers on the internet. That's pretty much the cultural model nowadays: "Nothing I do is wrong".
If my 11yo is a better writer than you, you should not be so proud of your skillz.
You know it!
Reply
I'm not sure either how we get from Tara affirming Buffy's feelings are valid and not entirely 'monstrous' to encouraging all things Spike. Her behavior with Spike is distinctly discouraging, IMO, and for a good reason. As James Marsters says himself, over and over, Spike was the wrong boyfriend for Buffy (at that time). *Forces mouth shut before a rant starts.* There are many, many times I think I must have watched an entirely different show from everybody else.
Don't even get me started on "Nothing I do is wrong." A little guilt/insecurity/humility is a good thing. :P On the other hand, so is knowing and using your talents - and being appropriately proud of them, instead of always putting yourself down when you get well-deserved compliments.
Reply
That's it exactly.
As James Marsters says himself, over and over, Spike was the wrong boyfriend for Buffy (at that time).
Did you get a chance to read infinitewhale's meta on Buffy's dream in Dead Things that I linked to on another post? It's f'locked now, but tell him I sent you. ;) His view of Buffy&Spike in S6 is pretty blunt and truthful in terms of how fucked up it was, especially Spike's behavior. He's actually gotten me looking a bit more deeply at Spike's behavior through S5-6 - ME - and realizing just how creepy it is. I mean, I knew but even I've missed stuff. Or rather, I'm getting back in touch with how I felt about it watching last year, with no preconceived notions, before I got into fandom, I guess?
http://infinitewhale.livejournal.com/29995.html
*Forces mouth shut before a rant starts.*
PREACH, SISTER. Rant away - you know I've got your back.
There are many, many times I think I must have watched an entirely different show from everybody else.
elisi had reminded me of the article/concept "Your friends are not watching the same show as you and that's ok" but - honestly? I don't entirely agree with that. Don't ruin a friendship over something like a tv show, but there are limits to how a given text can be stretched and distorted. That's different from "this is what I would have liked to have happened instead." (The Barbverse, for instance.) If you're not interested in what the story has to say, why are you watching it?
On the other hand, so is knowing and using your talents - and being appropriately proud of them, instead of always putting yourself down when you get well-deserved compliments.
That's an excellent point. And I know a lot of people - myself included, as you've no doubt seen - who err on the side of doubt and insecurity. Oddly enough, when I've seen other people put down their own writing over the years (on the internet) I've got no problem saying "Don't put down your work because there will always be someone else who is happy to do so. Be proud of it. You're being too modest, you're better than you think you are. " etc Easy to say to someone else, not so easy to apply to myself.
I think some of it may be a pre-emptive strike of sorts? "I'll insult myself before anyone else has a chance to." I think there's an element of that in my humor on my posts, which I realize is often self-deprecating. But I've read that's often true of female stand-up comics over the decades. Because we've been taught not too appear to be immodest? And/or being allowed a voice and a spotlight in public, or careers on par with men, is still pretty new to us? There's a cringy-ness there sometimes. Full confidence doesn't come naturally, even when I get a lot of positive response to my writing here and in other venues. (Whereas my cooking? Oh hell yeah I'm a terrific cook. I have room for improvement, but my assessment of my strengths and weakness in that area is pretty accurate; there's no cringing there. Maybe writing is more personal?)
I don't think I see that "Cringing" in your posts or writing, btw, but you know that. You don't suffer fools gladly. and that is something I really admire; and I admire it in my sister. And why I enjoy watching certain so-called "bitchy" female characters like Buffy, Jordan Cavenaugh and Renee Walcott on Crossing Jordan, Temperance Brennan on Bones.
Reply
Leave a comment