Fanfic and the Magical Forget Ray, or Things I do when I should be doing homework.

[icarus]

Recently a gen fanfic writer wrote a anti-slash screed. (Doesn't she know that an anti-slash screed is what got me reading and writing slash in the first place, says Icarus, 150 slashfics later.)

The question came up as to whether or not we should read or rec this gen writer's stories in the future. You know, the usual, "Ew, if that's her attitude I don't want to read her." -- "Me neither."

destina had a really good post/article about this... somewhere... a very long time ago. But I can't find it. Guess I'll have to write my own.


Fanfic and the Magical Forget Ray

Because we post stories to personal networking sites, we know a lot more about fanfic writers than we once did. Instead of belonging to a list or Yahoo Group and reading fics in a vacuum, we enounter... people.

This can be good. We might like them. We might wonder why they haven't updated their WIP in ten million years -- and reading their Livejournal, we can find out why.

This can also be bad. We can learn that not only do they write gen, they also write slash (oh my). We might stumble across political beliefs we don't agree with, or an anti-slash screed (uh-oh). I know I liked Anne Rice a lot better before she had a blog.

The person who wrote this screed, well, 1) I didn't like her screed, 2) I didn't like the fact that she deleted comments who disagreed with her and left the ones she agreed with, I think that's dishonest, 3) I didn't like how she started banning people who wrote comments she disagreed with, no matter how mild (for example, "Huh. Really? I'm surprised. I think people should write what they like").

That doesn't matter. In my view at least, the personalities behind the stories are irrelevant. The stories stand by themselves. I may not like someone. I'll still read their fic. I'll still recommend it if I think it's good.

Why?

Because my own credibility will be done for as a reccer (okay, I don't rec as much as I used to, but anyway...) if my recs are swayed by my personal feelings about the authors. That is why the Oscars suck. Overblown Hollywood crap wins because the judges like the director and feel he's deserving.

It's hard to forget when someone's been an utter wanker, of course. And here I wanted to quote destina because her response was classy. (I still can't find that post.)

For myself, I use the "Magical Forget Ray."

It works a bit like the S.E.P. field* in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and looks exactly like an oversized hair dryer from the 1950s (curlers not required). You sit under this baby for about 50 seconds, and voila! What a fine new author you've discovered. Never heard of them before. All that's left behind is a vague sense of unease that causes you to never, ever, read their personal posts again.




* = Somebody Else's Problem, the most effective form of invisibility cloak.

Comments

[ix-tab.livejournal.com]

Ha, oh sigh. I need one of those.

There is a writer who writes in a tiny fandom, and is fabulous, and who posts snippets under flock, so I can't delete her...but all of her personal and opinion posts make me want to rip out my hair and teeth.

Next time I stumble across her personal stuff, I'll just zap myself with the Magical Forget Ray.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

They're surprisingly inexpensive, although the shipping's exorbitant.

[orca-girl.livejournal.com]

I do see what you mean, and I think it *is* a fair way to approach things.

But it does get me thinking. Because I've had this reaction to published authors, where I find out more about the author and their views, and that colors how I view the books they've published, and it affects whether I'd ever read them. (Plus, often, an author's skeevy issues come out as skeevy issues in their books.)

I'm still a fan of McCaffrey's world (inasmuch as I still play in it), but I won't read anything she or any of her proxies wrote after ca. 1995, because I feel that strongly about her Issues with Homosexuality. I've actually never read any Anne Rice, but everything I've heard about her since makes me even more unlikely to ever give her books a try. And don't *even* get me started on Orson Scott Card. :P

Should the art stand on its own? It'd be nice if it did. But the asshatness of those three permeates their work, IMO, so... yeah.

As far as I'm concerned, this is just a function of the market. I don't feel much need to be "fair" to those authors -- they've said what they've said, and I'm reacting to it as a consumer.

And it gets me to wondering... why is it "unfair" if we do much the same thing to fan writers? Why do we worry that if we hold a fan-writer's thoughts *about fanfic* (what "should" be written, which means, what her peers and fellow fans are doing) against both her and her own works, that we're somehow engaging in a popularity-contest? Is that what I'm doing when I say that I think OSC is a vile person and that the worldview presented in his books is vile? I don't think it is. Sure, I'm making a statement, but I don't think I'm engaging in a popularity-contest type of politics.

To be clear, I don't have a dog in this hunt -- the person you're referring to writes in a fandom I'm not in and don't read. So my feelings on her case are pretty much hypothetical. (I've read her screed, but it doesn't affect how I would approach her fic.)

Hmm. To address another salient example -- I don't know that I could ever rec "The LOTR Very Secret Diaries" today, without *at least* including a caveat. That's not the same thing as refusing to rec them at all; but I can't forget the other context I've come to know about their writers, and what's more, I wouldn't *want* to rec them without reference to it, and have people think that I just don't care about those issues. (That I think that having written something very funny excuses asshat behavior, that is.)

I agree that these are difficult waters to navigate, though.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Fairness isn't the issue. Professionalism is.

A reader and a reccer have different roles. As a reader I can avoid McCaffrey. Or I can write subversive Pern slash. (I so slash that universe. Those green riders? Totally taking it up the ass.) As a reccer I value the trust people might have in me, and I'm recommending stories, not people. There's a writer who completely trashed a friend of mine. I still recommend her stories.

If I were a professional reviewer for a journal, I would feel responsible for reviewing the author sans their personal beliefs. I feel the same way about my recs. Someone's views may affect my reading of the story but they aren't relevant to the story unless I'm including biographical details. How relevant are biographical details to the story itself? If reccing the Draco Trilogy I might include a nod to the controversy about that series. If reccing the "LOTR Very Secret Diaries," no, I wouldn't.

Most of my individual story recommendations are formalist in their approach. For fanfic I read for the form of the story. I'm on board with Tolkien in that respect. The exception is my yearly (2007 is still in the works) "flavor of the year" for SGA where I look at stories in context with each other, focusing on intertextuality. Even then, I don't go into such-and-so's personality issue with such-and-so, but rather look at themes.

If my attitude results in fairness, good. I like fairmindedness. But professionalism's my aim. You should be able to trust that I'm not recommending a story just because it was written by a friend, and that I won't be silent about a story just because it was written by an "enemy."

[princessofg.livejournal.com]

i agree that it's really important to rec stories on the basis of the story, not because you either loathe or adore the writer. that's why I try to do.

as far as the anti-slash screed, was she anti-homosexuality per se, or was she totally invested in the totally literal heteronormative idea of sticking to canon Above All Else, a literal canon purist, as it were, or was it Some Other Reason?

*cheers*

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

My reading of her post was that she hated slash, incest in particular, and was particularly horrified by its predominance in her fandom. On the one hand, she didn't like being called homophobic. On the other hand, she thought that slash should go back into the closet where it belonged. She referred to her gen-only journal as a "safe haven" for non-slashers and was annoyed that she'd clicked on a Gen story link, only to be taken to a journal that had a photomanipped slash banner.

Therefore, the fact that the dark side of this fandom has become so vocal, so in-your-face, and so "I can do what I want, and if you don't like it, I don't give a shit" to the point that all fanfiction is painted with the same unfriendly brush, that my work is thrown into the same basket with things that years ago were underground and I believe SHOULD HAVE STAYED THERE, infuriates me.

I would say she's NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) about homosexuality at best.

[isiscolo.livejournal.com]

This is why anonymous fests are so wonderful. It gives us a chance to evaluate stories (and rec them or not, and feedback or not) based on nothing other than the story itself.

I mean, of course I try to let each story stand on its merits entirely, without considering my personal feelings toward the writer. I try. But I suspect that I am unable to completely rid myself of bias, despite my honest attempts to do so. And I suspect most people are like this, as well.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I think it impacts my tone and level of enthusiasm. I don't gush about a writer who's offended me (not that I'm all that gushy to begin with). But when I catch myself resisting a story because of the author, I cut that off at the pass and read, and if the story is good, I'll rec it, period. I do my best. That's all we can do.

[magic-8ball.livejournal.com]

We might stumble across political beliefs we don't agree with . . .

Funny, just before reading my flist posts, I wrote an entry where I stated an intention to refrain from the political stuff in my LJ, which is a trend I've been enforcing on myself for awhile, anyway. And it's not like anyone goes to my journal much anyway, but still... it seemed odd to have an LJ with political stuff, fandom stuff, fanfic, and the emotional trials and tribulations of being a Mets fan. And it's not like I'm afraid of offending people -- I've had years of practice getting used to doing that in person... offense via blog isn't going to bother me at all -- I just think it's not something someone might be interested in if they go to my LJ to read fic. But if I could just get an SEP Field instead...

[lttledvl.livejournal.com]

I seperated mine. I have a journal solely for fanfics and fandomness.

Not because I don't want people to be offended by my views or beliefs, et al., but because I didn't want the fics to become 'lost' in the mish-mosh of random crud I sometimes post. :)

[slb44.livejournal.com]

I have the same issue with actors. Don't want to know, because there are several I can no longer watch because it just turns my stomach knowing what they did in rl.

However, just like with actors, it depends on how egregious the act, statement etc. is. I can overlook some things but others just stick in my craw and no matter how hard I try I can't get over it.

I wish I had the Magical Forget Ray. It would make life much more fun.

Above you mention Anne McCaffrey and Orson Scott Card. I share your issues and will not read their work any more because of it.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Oh, I didn't mention McCaffrey or Card, someone else did. I still read (and recommend) both. But I so slash McCaffrey's universe. In my world, the Weyr is homoerotic heaven, overlaid with the kind of machismo you find in a leather bar.

*g*

[aerynvala.livejournal.com]

You raise many good points. I just can't read/watch/listen to things sans context once I know it. I've tried, my brain just doesn't work that way. However, knowing this about myself, I do try to limit the negative context I encounter. If I see an article about some paid-writer, actor, etc that looks like it's going to tell me something I'd really rather not know I skip it. And with fan writers/artists I do the same. If I like one story/art I'll poke at their journal or website for more, but the second I see the least hint of something that will piss me off I avert my eyes (so to speak). And for the most part, that works for me. There are times when the negative context is too big, too obvious, too horrid for me to ignore/miss/skip. And while that's a pain, and often sad, I realize that it's my issue and I am fine with owning it.

Re: that particular anti-slash screed? I think she's um...special and I laughed my ass off at her post. I won't be reading any of her stories again, not because she's anti-slash, but because she is a whiny "poor me I need more feedback!" sort. That's WAY more off-putting to me. The fact that she tried to pair that with her homophobia was just pathetically funny.

And I'm not sure my non-angry/casual tone comes through above, but just in case: I'm not upset and ranting.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I try to deal with this stuff by seeing if I can put myself in the other person's shoes. I don't get the "this should have stayed underground" issue at all.

But I can kind of relate to the bummed out feeling you get when you're in the "dip" of a long story and the reviews slack off. It always leaves the author feeling vulnerable. Even though it's natural. There are certain points where you get reviews: in the beginning, when the story's fresh and new. After the sex scenes. After the funny parts. At the climax. And at the end. Transition chapters (and just the name "chapter 11" sounds like a transition to me) always get less attention.

[dunv-i.livejournal.com]

This is why I still love love love Orson Scott Card's Ender series (especially Ender's Shadow, but anyway). His intense homophobia is indiscernible in his work, and I like his works. If he wrote his books with a theme of "EVAL HOMOSEXUALS," then, uh... no.

[fer-de-lance.livejournal.com]

His intense misogyny, however, nearly put me off Ender's Game.

Girls don't make it to Battle School because they've got "too much evolution working against them" -- srlsy?!

[inkscribe.livejournal.com]

Just dropping in to say *nods* at the reccing being different from reading, and particularly if approaching as a professional, then the bigger-picture stuff about the author's personal life doesn't really have a place there.

I found it intriguing that you used the SEP. I love DNA's work, and have since forever. Still, I found out he was adamantly atheist only a few years ago, and I was gobsmacked. Not that I normally care one way or the other what sort of spiritual beliefs someone holds, but I had built up this picture in my head that included DNA's many many in-fiction comments on Christian theology and dogma as being satire, not outright pointing-and-laughing. That discovery took awhile to settle before I could really enjoy those parts of his work again. As satire, I found them brilliant. As mocking, not so much. *dilemma*

Finally, the anti-slash screed you mention was notable to me not so much because she was airing her possibly-not-so-latent homophobic tendencies, but for her statement (in one iteration of the post -- possibly now edited out; not sure) that anyone who had friended her therefore believed as she did ... or else. ;-)

[erinptah]

I think the DNA case is different -- being an atheist doesn't mean you have to have a problem with people of faith, while a homophobic person has a problem with gay people by definition.

As a Flying Spaghetti Monsterist myself, I make jokes about pretty much any religion. But it's all in fun, honestly ^_^

[lttledvl.livejournal.com]

It is possible to still read a written work, even if you don't like the author in question.

I love Mercedes Lackey, for instance. I've read most of her books. But I encountered her once at a convention and thought she was being rather...well, to put it bluntly, a cold bitch to her fans.

That attitude did not impress me at all. And I wouldn't bother to waste my time to get her autograph or speak with her because of that instance. But I still read her books and recommend them.

[fer-de-lance.livejournal.com]

Isn't she also rather anti-fanfic?

[poisontaster]

Hmmm. This is an interesting train of thought. For me, I do try to make it a point of pride that I can admit I like a story or that a story is good, even if I don't like the person personally. I mean, if I thought a story by someone I disliked was good, I would still say so to that person and potentially rec it on my LJ.

OTOH, I don't feel any particular onus to set out to read the fics (or books, for that matter) or writers that I dislike in some personal manner. I mean, I don't think that I ever read anything by ficwriter before...and I definitely will not go out of my way to read her writing now. And if I should happen to run across her work and like it, then okay, but I have no desire to seek it out any more than I have a desire to seek out Robin Hobb's work, after hearing her anti-internet, anti-LJ, anti-fanfic manifestos.

What I read, why I read it, what I like and what I dislike is not an objective medium. It is the quintessence of subjectivity. And I don't feel the need to pretend otherwise. And for me to try and impose an objective standard to it feels--to me--both dishonest and likely to impact my enjoyment of what I read in a negative way.

I mean...WHY should I seek out the writing of someone whom I dislike? There are plenty of writers around, professional and amateur. I am never at a lack for reading material and, more often than not, I feel behind the eight ball in despair of ever "catching up". And I agree with the other commenters that people's world vision and personal opinions often infuse their writing in the same way my own does. Certainly the awareness of some of John Ringo's more distasteful material--and the fact that he himself describes this as his id-landscape--affects my desire to EVER read anything else by him. And I have no good reason as to why I should fight that. I don't think of that as fairness.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

For me, for this writer it's a moot point. I have read her stories. (I've reviewed her glowingly, and in one case I passed her story along to a friend who maintains a popular rec-list.)

It may be a moot point for every writer. I always read in a fandom before I join it in any visible way, and as a rule I'm "out of the loop" on the latest wanks unless a friend of mine posts about it (and I'm random about keeping up with the f-list). So far I've always encountered the writings before the writer. That moment of "gnah, this is an obnoxious person and I'm resisting this story" has always been about someone I've already read and know is good.

Of course, I won't be reviewing her glowingly in the future. I can't. I'm the one who commented, "Huh. Really? I'm surprised. I think people should write what they like" and got banned. I guess that'll save me a few minutes of typing, eh? Ironic, given her screed was prompted by a lull in comments for her gen fics.

[squishtoy.livejournal.com]

...you know, that makes a lot of sense. It's not the easy sort of sense-making, but it does.

However, I just wonder about how much unease we can take.

here from metafandom

[thelana.livejournal.com]

I decided a long time ago that the best way to interact with fandom is to have a really terrible name memory. I honestly never hold anything against people, because I honestly don't remember them. I might remember "I had this really nasty argument with somebody" or "I read this really wanky rants", but when I encounter them again I will not associate them with it.

And when there are people whose names I do remember (for example because maybe we used to be friends), I try my hardest to forget them and give them the same benefit of non-association that everybody else gets.

But, it's hard though. I fully agree that it's a double edged sword to have this chance to get to know the writers more (and WORD on Anne Rice; sometimes I think professional creators in general should be forbidden from having blogs unless they can prove extraordinary awesomeness). Actors are the same. I often loathe to find out more of their personal lives because I'm always paranoid that they will turn out ot be assholes.

Because in theory it shouldn't matter. Somebody can be the nicest, sweetest person in the universe, but that doesn't mean that it will make their movies any better if the projects they pick or their acting sucks. Same, if I just saw the most amazing movie or performance in my life and then find out that the actor in question is a dick does that really change what I saw and the emotional reaction I had to it?

For me it's a bigger problem with actors. Because if it turns out that let's say Sean Connery admits to slapping his wife or Mel Gibson turns out ot be huge douchebag it creates a problem for me. Because if I lust after them, then I'm raising their celebrity profile and aid them in getting more money. And do I really want to be responsible for douchebags, cheaters or wifebeaters getting paid more?

Sigh. That's why I made it a rule to lust after characters only and stay away from forming an opinion on the actors behind the role.

Because really, the work should stand alone, ideally.

[fer-de-lance.livejournal.com]

The stories stand by themselves. I may not like someone. I'll still read their fic.

...I'm torn.

To a degree, I feel this is right, but on the other hand I know a line is drawn somewhere. (Even if I liked Anne Rice's books, I won't read them now because of her wankery. I also refuse to buy books from authors who are vehemently/actively against fanfic.)

It's figuring out where the line is that I find tricky. :D

The Magical Forget Ray sounds like my personal approach to actors, though -- I absolutely refuse to pay attention to the lives/activities of actors, because I'm not interested in them. I like the characters, and I don't want any realworld stuff intruding on that -- finding out that Space Captain Rigel is played by a bigor would crush me, so I just... refuse to find out. :D Most of the time I don't even know actors' names, the better to protect me, and to protect their characters.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I think it's the right thing to do. It's just not easy.

I cracked open the Magical Forget Ray (hey, someone has to wonder how this thing works, right?).

It contained several Gizmos and Rationlization Gears:

- "you've done this, too...."
- "everyone has bad hair days...."
- "remember when person [Z] and [Y] cut you some slack...."
- "BNFness is a temporary condition and comes with its own idiot ray...."
- "when backed into a corner, most people will stand their ground, even if they know they're wrong...."
- "we don't know everything about person [X]... maybe something else is going on...."
- "they must feel completely mortified now...."

Then there's an Ego Puffing fan:

- "you are above this petty shit...."
- "you can be the bigger person here...."
- "you have principles...."

Followed by a Minimizing Hot Air Compressor:

- "how important is this in the greater scheme of things...."
- "will we remember this in a year...."
- "fandom is supposed to be fun...."

Then along the side there's this Mental Redirection/Distraction Belt:

- "let's go write some fanfic...."
- "ooo, shiney, someone just posted [X]...!"
- "you are getting sleeeeepyyyy...."

I see how this thing works now. :D

[blue-underwing.livejournal.com]

This is the second of your posts I've read this week that's lead to me to think deep thoughts about fandom, so I figured I toss my two cents in: (Clears throat)

I agree with you in theory. I'd like to keep my opinion of the author separate from my opinion of their stories, if only because I'd like to enjoy as many stories as possible. In practice, it can be very hard to continue liking a story once you realize it's been written by that guy. This is, of course, where your Magical Forget Ray comes in. However, I've noticed that the operation of the Magical Forget Ray can be severely compromised by the Get Off My Side effect.

Take two anti-slash rants (both of which I've heard, both of which I disagree with, and both of which can and have modified to fit any topic under the sun).

Rant A goes: "Homosexuality is evil, and writing slash condones and perpetuates this evil. Stop it."

Rant B goes: "Writing slash trivializes the real problems faced by homosexuals in the world and exploits a source of deep emotional pain for cheep thrills, thereby perpetuating the evil oppression inherent in our current heteronormative and homophobic culture. Stop it."

Note that both ranters do pretty much the same thing: they try to claim the moral high ground, they say that slash perpetuates evil, and they demand that people stop writing it. However, while it is relatively easy to dismiss Ranter A as a bigot and move on and forget about it, it is a lot hard to dismiss Ranter B. Why? Because you (that's you-general unless otherwise specified) are ostensibly on the same side. You both agree that homophobia is bad and equality is good, but they're saying you're hurting THE CAUSE. Now it's personal. It's extremely hard to just walk away from this one, with out offering up some defence. Even if you got the willpower not to post, you're still probably spending far too much time thinking about it than you probably should.

So in the end, while the Magic Forget Ray worked very well on Rant A, which you only thought about for maybe two minutes, Rant B in nearly indelible and will taint all your future thoughts about Ranter B despite the fact they're the person you actual somewhat agree with.

Okay, it's seems I've rambled very off topic, but this is one of those strange paradoxes that my inner cultural anthropologist just loves to babble endlessly about. I do adore the term "Magic Forget Ray" though and I hope you (specific ^_^) don't mind if I borrow it.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Magical Forget Ray is all yours. And everyone's.

I have noticed that its effectiveness seems to decrease according to the degree of irritation, but I understand an industrial strength Magical Forget Ray is in testing as we speak. Granted, the initial testers couldn't remember their names but I'm sure they'll have the bugs worked out in a jiffy.

[sherrold.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's very different than in pro sf fandom -- there are pro writers I will only buy used because I don't ever want to give them money, or make their editors think they deserve money for their next book [g]; but in fandom, if I give an annoying person the egoboo of one more click on their hit counter...so what.