Leave a comment

Comments 9

(The comment has been removed)

b_hallward April 3 2009, 00:03:16 UTC
And dirtybadwrong this certainly is. The places fandom leads you... But what really shocked me writing this is how much easier it was to linger over Arthur's beauty than when I write Merlin/Arthur; even when they're viewing each other sexually the effect is so different and the power dynamics generally don't run in such a way as to make this particular kind of objectification available, to allow this kind of gaze to be turned on Arthur.

special hell here I come

Don't I know it. <3

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

b_hallward April 3 2009, 00:48:02 UTC
a sort of camaraderie and the way they joke around and act like stupid boys

Exactly. And for me getting Arthur to view Merlin sexually is always a bit of a challenge: he looks and all he sees is Merlin, this puzzling irritating person. The whole weight and texture of their attraction is so physical rather than visual: more gravitational. Even all of their amazing eye-sex (which I love with a love that passeth understanding) is at once too directly physical and too ethereal. And they're so pretty! As a writer, I want to go there.

Reply


veleda_k April 3 2009, 00:09:41 UTC
This is still lovely and horrifying in equal parts. (And in case that doesn't sound like a compliment, um, it is supposed to be.)

Reply

b_hallward April 3 2009, 00:50:46 UTC
Oh I take it as a compliment. I accepted I was as much a horror writer as anything else years ago. *g*

Reply

veleda_k April 3 2009, 01:26:46 UTC
Oh, and, uh, off-topic, but can I just say how glad I am that you warned for "coersed non-con"? You do not want to know how times I find myself ranting, "There can be no real consent in this situation, therefore it is non-consensual!" while reading a story that warned for "dubious consent" or something similar.

...Er, yes, sorry about that.

Reply

b_hallward April 3 2009, 02:28:56 UTC
It is unambiguously non-consensual. Sadly, whether it's rape in the legal sense is debatable. And this confusion is compounded by how non-con carries the fannish connotation of violent rape, whereas dub-con generally means (as it's used) coercive sex at least part of which is non-consensual but which stops short of serious bodily injury. These are quite different tastes and so you have a signaling problem if you use non-con for nonviolent scenarios.

Violent non-con, coercive non-con, violent consensual sex, and a tiny category of genuine dub-con would be more accurate labels for these distinctions; but it's hard to change widely used terminology.

Reply


puckling April 3 2009, 17:22:21 UTC
You are wrong. Really really wrong.

Those same blue eyes. And suddenly Uther needs this to be unrecognizably different. He locks away every memory, shoving them into the deep places that will always ache, and covers them over with fine-grained anger. He won't sully the past with this.

I kinda like it

Reply

b_hallward April 3 2009, 22:13:37 UTC
Oh I know I'm wrong. This is, like, bad behavior.

I kinda like it

*g* That's the really awful part, isn't it?

Reply


wordsofastory July 24 2009, 17:57:10 UTC
Oh my god this is so wrong. But so pretty. And awful. And good. I adore it, in the special hell way.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up