Hmm. Do I wade back into this mess?
Jul. 3rd, 2006 01:19 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icarusDo 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:
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.
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.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-07-06 04:50 pm (UTC)When I commented in someone else's journal weeks ago (before the DVD commentary) I got ambushed there, too. It felt like going to the bathroom at a bar, only to have someone follow and confront you there.
I'm beginning to suspect that I'm not the first to be bullied by SGA fans who only want one flavor, just a little worse for me because I keep coming back for more rather than slinking away quietly.
Naturally, this makes me want to write 8 morally questionable and/or dark SGA fics.
And, FWIW, I really do think that this characterization of John hit so many nerves because it is both very realistic in general, and a very plausible (if dark) take on John as presented in canon.
Thank you. I'm really getting that impression.
The rest of the story (26 scenes) is about how John ends up eating out of Rodney's hands, and in a relationship with no clear idea how he got there. But if I write it now... *shrugs*... it'll feel like I'm trying to rehabilitate Last Port Of Call.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2006-07-07 12:07 am (UTC)But if I write it now... *shrugs*... it'll feel like I'm trying to rehabilitate Last Port Of Call.
Oh, I hope you don't let that stop you. If that's where the story should go next, then it's okay to let it.
LPOC is a good story, one I've read twice now, partly because I was curious at the objections people have been giving over the content, and partly because it was intriguing. I honestly liked it right out of the gate; it is definitely an uncomfortable story, but it felt like a John that could be real. He often acts without thinking through the effects of those actions, and once he's acted he doesn't back off or reassess very willingly. John is very sure of himself. That came through wonderfully, if somewhat horrifyingly - though that's really too strong of a word. I mean, I didn't *like* John here, but, really, was I supposed to? I certainly felt for him. It seemed obvious to me that even John had started noticing the error of his plan and was just trying to ignore it, which, again, was believable and realistic. I loved the little touches you put in that showed John, to a certain extent, deluding himself. They gave some necessary insight.
I like the stories where the characters are real, a bit messy or misguided and fumbling. Where there are communication problems and issues to work out - or not - and complications and people assuming lots of things. That's life.
I would love to see the aftermath of LPOC, especially the kind you're talking about above. And, if it's a somewhat happier ending, so what? I can see them fixing their issues eventually, adjusting themselves enough to make it work. But I have never seen a McShep relationship as "easy" for them to fall into anyway, so LPOC in all it's uncomfortableness has been right up my alley.