Icon very much appropriate

[apiphile]

I really don't think I'm cut out for fannishness. Quite apart from antisocial tendencies, I view reading a book - especially books - as a private conversation between myself and the author, with whom I may agree or disagree by turns, but whatever my conversation with THEM, I find it rude and infuriating when someone butts in. This realisation has

Comments

[wolfy_writing]

This realisation has led to a far less frequent sharing-of-thoughts on things which I am deeply fond of, in part because I don't particularly need or want anyone else's input and in part because I want, irrationally perhaps, to protect the thing from anyone else.

I have certain things where I do not share them with fandom, because I have such an intensely personal attachment.

Sometimes this is achieved by slavishly acknowledging the criticisms that could be made to an extent that the positives are never outlined; this is hardly new, of course, and the mindset of "I will tell you everything horrible about myself so that you have nothing left to call me" has even been capitalised upon for a fucking advertising campaign for shoes.

There's this movie I really like, Different for Girls. It's one of the very few romance movies that really grabs me. And it's better than most movies at handling trans issues. However, something in my head starts ticking "Problematic, problematic, problematic" and pointing out every single potentially

[apiphile]

However, something in my head starts ticking "Problematic, problematic, problematic" and pointing out every single potentially questionable detail in the movie every time I think of bringing it up

I have a similar problem with things I like, even when I'm watching them for the first time, and it's often not because they specifically offend or annoy me but because I can see precisely what people are going to pick at. Also, is "Different for Girls" the one with Rupert Graves in?

I'm a total sucker for heroes. I have a small mountain of heroism fantasies and the sort of martyrdom fixation that would make way more sense if I was exposed to more than trace amounts of Catholicism in childhood.Well like I said, it was a different thing for me but everyone identifies with different types - what I found interesting was that John E Mack talks about how different people see different things in Lawrence, parts of themselves (which he said almost immediately after I'd just heavily overidentified with him over something, hahah OUCH); so you might

[wolfy_writing]

Also, is "Different for Girls" the one with Rupert Graves in?

Yep, that's the one!

so you might well find that his heroic fantasies and martyrdom ideals and notions of chivalric quest might appeal to you, whereas for me it's his desperation for self-abasement that appeals. Loz was always very keen on leading an enslaved people to freedom.

His self-abasement is somewhat interesting to read about. It doesn't carry the same raw emotional appeal for me unless it's combined with a certain dazzling quality in terms of talent or genius or accomplishment (which he had), and a concern for others (again, yeah). But that kind of combination really grabs me.

Which troubling enough even before you consider that as social justice humans we're also supposed to be sex-positive ... I am assuming "sex positive the way I tell you to be" is the case there.I've seen a few people edging around the idea that one should try to make one's desires conform with outside views on what is considered right and good. Not coming right out and saying it, but

[apiphile]

It doesn't carry the same raw emotional appeal for me unless it's combined with a certain dazzling quality in terms of talent or genius or accomplishment (which he had), and a concern for others (again, yeah).

The last chapter deals with that in more detail and it's a complicated beast, but I think the core of his being seems to be down to a very strong desire to give to others as much as possible (his generosity comes up again and again), in part out of a desire to atone for something terrible (partly him, partly his background), and he seems to have been uniquely placed in terms of ability as well as history to be ABLE to do that much giving. Quite remarkable, but the more I read the more sad I feel for him. He seems to have been crushingly self-hating at times.

I've seen a few people edging around the idea that one should try to make one's desires conform with outside views on what is considered right and good. Not coming right out and saying it, but making a point of saying it's possible to control and correct one's desires

[medusa]

Dunno why, but I thought you'd rather have an LJ comment than a bloody email, which I am shit at sending and also replying to

[swear_jar]

Not at all surprisingly we like the same things in Lawrence.

And yeah the book is annoyingly hard to get hold of, which is stupid because it is VERY GOOD. It should be re-printed.

[apiphile]

I have more spectularly emo overidentification thoughts which ramble off in every direction, still trying to work out if I should post them or delete them or cut them down a bit. (On the chapter about his sexuality at the moment. Mostly emo-ing and whining on "POOR LOZ" a lot.)

[swear_jar]

The chapter about his sexuality was pretty goddamn depressing and definitely warrants a whole fuckload of POOR LOZ.

I say post all the things! I enjoy your Lawrence thoughts a lot.