Hmm. Do I wade back into this mess?

[icarus]

Do I do it, or not?

People in the SGA fandom were really pissed off about Last Port Of Call. The discussion started out interesting, revealing, and turned ugly. There are a couple of theories about this kicking around.

1) The "young fandom" theory, where everything's fresh and new, but the controversies haven't cropped up yet; "the explorers are the ones with the arrows in their backs";

2) The "drunken luau" theory, where yes, SGA is a fun drunken luau, but the flip side of that is that serious, challenging stories are not acceptable, the way you don't discuss the Holocaust at a cocktail party;

3) The characterization of John was really off. If I were a new writer, I'd consider it, but... no, I don't think so. I've been writing quite some time now, and characterization has always been where I'm solid. Now if someone came after me with a pitchfork about my yerk-transitions, or the stripped-down scenery ("Hello, Icarus? This is not a one-act play with a tree and a bucket, tell us where they are") or sloppily using the same word fifteen times in three pages, yeah okay.

Besides, the reaction was just too strong for it to be a simple characterization issue. Poor characterization you just go *snerk* and walk. It doesn't launch a crusade. Nor does the story get recc'd by people whose opinions I respect.

Nah. The issue was content.

But that's not what this poll is about. Or it is, but only sort of.

You see, I have another probably-guaranteed-to-be-unpopular John-fic. An SGA story where the content might fan the flames. It comes from the question:

If Rodney screws up due to hubris and ends up blowing up a solar system, and Carson screws up due to his medical curiosity and far-too-flexible ethics for the sake of his bright-eyed good intentions and fucks up a sentient being, and Weir screws up by bargaining away her principles for the sake of 'pragmatism' and gives away the position of Atlantis -- how and why does John screw up?

Okay, there are worse things in life than being controversial. But I'm feeling gun-shy. This isn't what I expected of SGA, naive of me, I know. I haven't encountered a reaction this bad since I defended slash to a group of Lord of the Rings anti-slashers in 2002 (and the arguments were eerily familar).

So, to everyone on the f-list, not just the SGA fandom who might not respond (results are viewable by none but me):

[Poll #761572]


ETA: Adds "if Carson screws up." Because "if Carson screws due to his medical curiosity and far-too-flexible ethics" has a completely different meaning.

ETA2: Wow. I'm far behind on answering everyone's comments, but that answered the question pretty thoroughly. I did not expect "er, I kinda liked Last Port" to be the strongest response, not by a long shot. So either a) the people who hated Last Port Of Call don't read my LJ (a good possibility), or b) the ones who hated it were a strident, vocal minority, and I got the wrong impression about how the story was received. Those who liked it were shouted down by those who didn't.

Either way, there's enough interest to, okay, write the Sheppard Screws Up story. But I warn you: it's het. It might not be that bad, I just... I didn't think Last Port Of Call was that controversial either.

ETA3: I'm so glad this person stopped by. Yes. Perfect example. This is the tone and nasty attitude that I've encountered over Last Port Of Call.

I've made the poll viewable to only me so that SGA readers can feel free to respond without facing problems from others. Most of the responders are SGA readers.

Comments

[giglet.livejournal.com]

Please please write what you want to write. SGA fandom may be characterized by fluffy crackfic rather than deep disturbing and/or ethics-delving stories, but that isn't all it is, or should be. It should be a group of people interested in SGA, in whatever form.

Another way to look at it: there are some truly awful writers who produce dozens of fics. They are (apparently) internally motivated. I hope you are too, because your stories can only elevate the quality of fic in the fandom.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

They are (apparently) internally motivated.

Okay, what have you written? Recs, please. Because that sort of wry observation can only make for a very good writer.

SGA fandom may be characterized by fluffy crackfic rather than deep disturbing and/or ethics-delving stories, but that isn't all it is, or should be.

I've been developing a theory that SGA is very interconnected, with its newsletters and whatnot, but that means that people are more likely to stumble across something they don't like. But it's not right to jump on an author for writing something they don't like. That has a chilling effect on the entire fandom. Then, yeah, you will get just crackfic and fluff.

Hmm. It works like this.

- Person writes angsty, dark story.
- Someone looking for fluff reads it. They flip.
- Fluff reader retaliates, saying publicly why they didn't like it, largely to affect public opinion.
- Other readers who like both fluff and angsty dark!fic read the retaliation and question their own judgment, or veer off reviewing because of the bad vibe.
- The negative response is exaggerated as a result.
- The writer goes, "Wow, that was awful" and doesn't want to write the angsty stuff any more.
- The people who like the story go with the vibe that was created and you get disclaimers when they rec it, "the characterization of Rodney was questioned, however..."

End result: people write and rec fluffy crack!fic ad infinitum, don't write the angsty dark stuff, and when people write angsty dark stuff, the rec'ers recommend it very gingerly, and only to an audience they're sure is receptive.

What do we currently have in SGA? A lot of fluffy crack!fic, it's hard to find the good dark!fic because people are cautious about rec'ing it... the symptoms fit. I would be very surprised if, in a fandom that has eps like Michael, no one's interested in writing anything dark.

I say, support your local dark!fic. Rec some today!

Icarus

[giglet.livejournal.com]

Okay, what have you written? Recs, please. Because that sort of wry observation can only make for a very good writer.

LOL! I've written very little in SGA, and only a few snippets in any fandom. But thank you for the compliment -- it made my day!

I've been developing a theory that SGA is very interconnected, with its newsletters and whatnot, but that means that people are more likely to stumble across something they don't like. But it's not right to jump on an author for writing something they don't like. That has a chilling effect on the entire fandom. Then, yeah, you will get just crackfic and fluff.

Well... yes. I agree with you, with some caveats.

Having a public clearinghouse for all fic (like the newsletters) is a good thing, because it gives readers a chance at all sorts of fic. Compared to the Balkanized state of some fandoms (where authors and readers only find each other by accident or word-of-mouth) SGA is a model of fannish accessibility.

Of course readers shouldn't criticize a writer just for producing a story the reader doesn't like. (On the other hand, readers do and should have the right to talk about why they dislike, as well as like, a story. I'm ambivalent about whether public feedback to the author is the best venue for that, but the way LJ is set up, public comments on the author's account are the most obvious way to discuss a story.)

I agree with you that attacking a story simply because it isn't to one's taste does have a chilling effect on the people who see the attack. Then again, I've seen fandoms where the fluffy stories were attacked, and crack!fic was right out, where angst and gore and dark!fic of all sorts were the predominant theme. There isn't a lot of fluff in Oz. HL, which had plenty of canon silliness, had relatively few fluffy stories -- instead there was a tendency towards even more gore and darkness than the show contained. Due South fandom has come around (thank god), but there was a time when abusing and maiming main characters was in vogue.

I think that fandoms tend to homogenize over time, simply because most people learn by example: Good and popular stories are emulated, particularly pleasing original details are adopted by others and become fanon, and the fandom as a whole moves to explore one direction while others lie fallow. (I can give examples of fandom-changing fic. And as someone who wrote an AU of an AU of SGA, I'm a living example of the follow-the-leader mentality.) And now that SGA fandom has a reputation for fluffy crack!fic, it's attracting people who are interested in that.

But something *else* also happens: after a while, the dominant area is tapped out. There are only so many turned-into-an-animal fics that any fandom can take. (Unless the fandom is Ranma 1/2, in which case it's canon and the canon is crack. But I digress.) One or two good stories, dropped into an environment of fannish ennui, attracts a lot of positive interest, and gets people thinking along those lines. (Again, I have examples.)

Which is all my long-winded way to encourage you to continue writing what you want to write, do your best to shrug off the people who stumble over your dark!fic while seeking fluff, and wait. If the stories are available, then dark!fic's time to come.

Huh. And I wonder if cereta would have anything to say on the subject.