Pitfalls of Being in Fandoms

[shadowkat]

1. The Pitfall of Being a Fan of a Series of Books or of a writer, only to realize they are a complete asshole.

* I've spent more time this week than I wanted to ...thinking about JKR and the Harry Potter Fandom.

Wales stumbled onto JKR on Twitter via the NY Times. There was a fight with NY Times, who for reasons...had decided to JKR. This erupted into a fight on Twitter. Wales, not reading the article, dove in and said they should pick their battles and defend women's reproductive rights, and well when I tried to explain, she clarified that this including women who no longer had access to their reproductive organs. To which, I had to clarify further.

Then Wales texted me that she was listening to The Witch Trials of JKR.

So, I explained to Wales in a series of texts that JKR is a TERF - and I sent her the link defining it. TERF = trans-exclusionary radical feminist. I also went into the history of the Harry Potter fandom and JKR, abbreviated.

Anyhow today, Book Twitter was all-a-Twitter about JKR and Joyce Carol Oates having separate viral tweet wars about transgender. Joyce Carol Oates was defending trans-gender rights, while JKR was denouncing them. Book Twitter was hoping they'd discover each other - and enter into a flame war that would take down Twitter.

They didn't. Unfortunately.

This has all sprouted up because of the forthcoming Harry Potter video game. (I have no interest - it's a video game.)

* Penguin Puffin is apparently publishing the works of Roald Dahl, who as you may or may not already know is an anti-semitic asshole or was one. I think he's long dead. I can't remember whose dead and who isn't sometimes. He's a good writer, biting. JKR actually - always reminded me of Roald Dahl light. Both have the biting British Wit, although he's more biting than she is.

Roald Dahl Controversy

The controversy is about how his works were rewritten - to get rid of offensive material. Which means he is undoubtedly dead, because there's no way in hell that he'd have permitted that.

“The Roald Dahl Classic Collection” will be available alongside the newly released Puffin Roald Dahl books for young readers, “which are designed for children who may be navigating written content independently for the first time,” Puffin said. “Readers will be free to choose which version of Dahl’s stories they prefer.”

Last week, Puffin was in the eye of a storm when it emerged that the works of Dahl, who died in 1990, had been rewritten, with the phrase “enormously fat” edited to just “enormous” and “most formidable female” to “most formidable woman” among numerous other examples from his most famous books. People who opposed the edits include author Salman Rushdie, who described it as “absurd censorship,” and U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.

The original versions will be released under the Penguin logo and will include archive material relevant to each of the stories.

* And..I found out Twitter that..Scott Adams the cartoonist/creator of Dilbert is a racist Trump Supporter - and 80 newspapers pulled his cartoon due to racist content.

[ETC: To clarify? He was dropped from newspapers because of a racist rant on Youtube, not because of his satirical cartoon. The racist rant kind of changed how everyone perceived the satire in his cartoon.

Adams rant can be found HERE - if you wish to see it for yourselves.

The majority of newspaper publishers (with the possible exception of the right wing publications) considered it a racist rant and kicked Adams to the curb. Newspapers have dropped dilbert comic strip after a racist rant by its creator.]

Sigh. Remember when Dilbert was cool and innocuous? I've admittedly not been following it since well the early 00s if that. I stopped reading the Sunday funnies sometime around 2008. [ ETC: Not because I disliked Dilbert - I just no longer read print newspapers. I get a digital version of the NY Times. I'm not reading any Sunday comics at the moment - haven't for the last IDK, ten years? ]

2. The Pitfalls of Being in a Long-Running Fandom - Star Wars

Star Wars has always been a dicey fandom to participate in, but that is most likely true of all fandoms? It was even dicey in the 1980s when it more or less began. (The first film came out in 1977, so technically 1977.)

Got into a lengthy discussion/debate on a friend's journal posting about Andor, which I enjoyed. But isn't for everyone. Unlike most of the Star Wars stuff - it's geared towards the over-twenty-five group. Most of Star Wars was geared towards the 10 to 25 group by Lucas. He really wrote the films for families and kids. Andor and Rogue One stand out a bit - because they are written for adults. It's not that folks between 18-25 can't enjoy them, but I wouldn't be inviting people between 10-18 to the party. The individual I was talking to - didn't like Andor (they were bored by it, and I suspect not the intended audience for it. Andor is a weird fit for Disney + and may actually belong on Hulu.)

Star Wars is a long-running fandom. Roughly doing the math? It's about forty years old? (Let's see I saw it at 11 or 12, I'm fifty-five now, so about forty.) And like most long-running fandoms, there's disagreement over well everything. And so much of it has to do with when you entered the fandom (if you ever truly did?), and the degree to which you invested, why, etc. Also what you watched, what is canon, what is good, what isn't good, what works, what doesn't, what makes a true fan, etc. And people are fannish in different ways - which I keep trying to explain to folks.

Not everyone likes to interact with other fans, some people are private about it. (I know I am.) Nor do you have to see everything or read everything to be a fan of a series. People can pick and choose. Not everyone feels the need to be a completist.

There's this view in fandom that if you're not "fanatical" - you aren't a fan. Not true. There are degrees. For example, you can be a fan of Star Wars and dislike the films. There's enough content out there now, that you could just be a fan of the comic books and be fine.

The difficulty with long-running fandoms - is it is rather easy to stumble over land-mines or into a heated debate over something as trivial as...Episodes 1-3 were better than Episodes 4-6. Or in the case of Star Wars, the Original Trilogy is better than any of the other films (which in my opinion it was - with the possible exception of Rogue One).

Our debate began over Andor than jumped into Original Series (OT) vs. Prequels, which in turn derived from an disagreement over the non-original character sequels and series being slightly better than those series/films that focused on them. (ie. Andor and Rogue One - are better than say Force Awakens - Rise, Mandalorian, Bobba Fett, Obi Wan...because they are not dependent on the characters from the Original Trilogy. )

This is typical of most fandoms. And among the pitfalls of being in fandom, when all you really want to do is analyze the films, characters, stories, critique them, and figure out what works for you, what doesn't, why you love it, and what intrigues you.

Comparing other long-running fandoms to Star Wars

The Buffy fandom had two problems, one is an asshole creator. At least George Lucas to date isn't an asshole. Although give it time, he's human, and from what I saw in the Industrial Light and Magic Documentary - could be a beast to work with. It took about twenty some years for all the dirt about Whedon to come out.

The other, like Star Wars, Buffy had content across multiple mediums. While lovely, it does pose issues with a fandom. The fandom fights over what is canon to the fandom - whenever you have multiple mediums. And in case of Star Wars it's confusing, because it's not necessarily clear by medium what is canon or not, and Lucas mad it very difficult by stating some things were, then saying, no wait, I changed my mind. For example, Splinter in the Minds Eye was canonical to Star Wars, and approved as such, until Return of the Jedi kind of blew it up. (In Splinter - Luke and Leia aren't brother and sister. Although thinking about it - we should have known, look at the names.)

Buffy like Star Wars has content across various mediums. There's the movie, the novelizations, the comics, the television series, the reboots in the comics, the video games.

For a while, it was which season, or ship you followed. The Buffy fandom was annoyingly "shipper" centric, mainly because the writers wrote it like a soap opera, with depth, so Buffy's ill-fated romantic interests were often front and center to the plot. In S1-3, it was Angel. S4-5(part I) - it was Riley. In S5(Part II)-7, it was Spike. And fans fought over which love interest ruled and she should be with. Including those she hadn't been paired with.

Once the comics came out - it was were you a Buffy comics fan, original series fan, and did you consider the comics canon? I got into a lot of debates with people over whether the comics could be considered canon. (I don't.) It's kind of similar to Star Wars - I'm not entirely sure I buy that the prequels are canon, since not all the collaborators were involved. But unlike Buffy - it was at least in the same medium, and Lucas did the whole thing - he just didn't have the same screen writer. Also, I disliked the prequels. The prequels killed my fandom. Like the Buffy comics killed my fandom in a way?

Or I just lost interest eventually. It happens, when the content is no longer rewarding.

And just like the Star Wars fandom, we had fights over whether people were true fans of the show - based on who they liked, which episodes, when they came into it, how they watched it, etc. And since it became a long running fandom, with people who had watched as it aired, on VHS, on DVD, then finally streaming...the fandom much like Star Wars became defused. People weren't seeing the same show, they certainly weren't watching it the same way, and often saw pieces out of order, or cut out.

With Star Wars - Lucas edited the first films and re-released them. So people who saw them for the first time in the 00s didn't see the same films I saw on the big screen in the 1970s and 80s. We didn't see the same movie.
Even if they saw the unedited version - on a big screen in 2003, it wouldn't be the same film. I know, I watched the re-released films on the big screen in the early 00s - they weren't the same films I saw in the 70s and 80s. I also saw them again in the 90s, where various things were enhanced - and no, not the same films. And my perception of those films changed with time - because cinema changed, how I viewed cinema and movies changed - plus I'd seen other films in between.

So in Star Wars - you have fans who saw the films in the 20th Century vs. people who didn't see them until the 21st, because they frankly didn't exist in the 80s and 70s, they were in fact the kids of the people who saw them in the 80s and 70s as kids.

Buffy? Same situation. The kids of the people who grew up watching Buffy are watching it now. My niece watched it with my brother - she binged the entire series within about two or three weekends. Keep in mind this is a seven year series. And she binged both it and Angel. At the age of 14.
I watched the series at the age of 28, as it aired, and long before streaming or DVR's existed. There were episodes I missed upon original airing - and got later either by F/X reruns or VHS. We were mailing tapes to each other back then. Or sending computer files. Hunting spoilers - to find out what happened next in between the long breaks between episodes. Worrying about it getting canceled. I doubt seriously I'd have become a fan of the series - if I binged it in three to four weekends with my Dad. (My father didn't watch it.) I certainly wouldn't have become obsessed enough to hunt down discussion boards and write meta on the internet about it. Not if I just streamed it in under a month. There's no anticipation. Part of the reason I sought out discussion boards and hunted the fandom - was to deal with the long waits between episodes, to figure out where it was going. The "anticipation" fueled the desire for fanfic, for meta, for all of it. Without that? I doubt I'd have ever entered the fandom. And I also seriously doubt that I'm alone in that view - I think a lot of fans wouldn't have. Does that make us less of a fan than someone who binged all the episodes in a month and is writing fanfic and meta on it? Of course not. But we did not see the same series - or experience it the same way.

So there's this cognitive dissonance or gap between viewers.

Doctor Who in Comparison to Star Wars

If Star Wars and Buffy are bad in this regard. Try Doctor Who. This is a 60 year old series. Worse, it's a 60 year series with large gaps between content, and different actors playing the lead role, different creators, different writers, and different companions. So, as a result, there are people who have only seen portions of it, I'm among them. There's Old School Who and New School Who. The people who loved the Tenth Doctor, and those who loved all of the Doctors but Ten, or preferred 11 or 12 or 13 or 7. Some prefer one companion over another. Some prefer a season. Some like all of it, some only liked two seasons of it.

And unless you've seen all of it - which is impossible for everyone, you can be at a loss with die-hard Who fans. Some Who fans don't believe you can be a true fan unless you have seen it all. Much like Star Wars fans, there are Who fans who feel rather strongly that unless you love the early seasons - you aren't a true Who fan. Like Star Wars, Who fans are weirdly competitive about it, and some are obsessive about being a completist - you have to watch all of it. At least Who fans don't appear to insist that you read all the comics and books and cartoons. Different medium, not canon.
Who like the other two runs across multiple mediums.

General Hospital - A Day-Time Soap Opera that is Celebrating it's 60th Anniversary next month, has the same problem.

60 years of a soap opera isn't going to be seen by everyone. It's impossible. Some fans may have seen all of it. Most will have seen sections. So of course they don't agree on anything. I mean we have people who were into it in the 70s and 80s - the era of Luke and Laura, and Robert and Anna...and soon Sonny and Brenda, then there are folks who didn't start watching until the late 1990s, when all of those pairings were gone.

It's not like the old episodes are easily accessible or rerun anywhere.
So people obviously see different shows. And aren't fans of the same shows or characters. When they argue it is at cross purposes.

On social media - people are constantly throwing things characters did over twenty years ago at fans. Fans hold grudges against specific characters longer than the characters do - and often long after the writers have changed. The actors and writers don't remember the things the fans remember. While character history matters - if it is over ten years old, it's time to let it go. Particularly if it happened to characters who are long dead or gone.

In relation to Star Wars, this is true of the varying types of fans. I can't legitimately expect a fan who was born in 2001 to appreciate the 1970s and 80s films in the same way I did, or prefer them to the other films. The changes in technology and special effects along dictate against that. That said, Star Wars isn't a soap opera, not really. It's more like Star Trek than Battle Star Galatica or Farscape in that regard. While it does have the problem of being around for a long time - it's not 60 years old yet. And it's not really a serial in the same way a soap is, plus it has more continuity (there is relatively little continuity in soap operas).
So it is actually easier to be a Star Wars fan than a GH fan.

***

I can go on and on with examples. Star Trek has this problem, as does Battle Star Galatica (it has two competing versions), as does the Marvel Universe - the films vs the animation vs the comics canons. I am not a fan of the animated canon - the X-men, irritated me. I prefer the comics. But there are those who only saw the animated versions. Or only the movies.
Or only the television shows.

It makes navigating these fandoms dicey at best. And is among the many reasons I've often been leery of joining them.

It's late. Off to bed. [Sorry for the typos and leaving you with a rough draft of this post. I edited, so should be better now.]

Comments

[iddewes]

I always thought JKR kind of shot herself in the foot with her nasty views and support of even nastier people (eg Julie Burchill, who’s a massive racist as well), because SO MANY young queer people seem to have been into Harry Potter. It almost seems like more queer people were into the books than straight people. What a way to treat a huge part of your audience.

[shadowkat]

I agree. The young woman who talked me into reading Harry Potter when they first came out was a lesbian (she most likely still is - I just no longer know her). Most of the people I saw online who were into them were LGBTA. She's managed to alienate all of them.

I know she alienated me - I've seen the tweets. I was following her for a while, and for a while she was okay - and seemed very progressive. She was pro-LGB or seemed to be, with the response that Professor A was gay. But then went off the boards was transphobia. I don't know if she's racist, but the transphobia is definitely there.

[iddewes]

Yes I originally thought she was progressive as well. I don’t know that she’s actually said anything racist herself, just defended people like Burchill who definitely have.

[shadowkat]

She may not have know Burchill did? Or was she defending her after she did, and fully aware of the statement? Sigh.

JKR is an example of how people can be more than one thing. Also a cautionary tale - on why it is important to mindful of what we state on social media. It isn't a forum in which we can or should say whatever is on our minds at any given moment.

[mefisto]

Great points about Buffy and Star Wars (I don't know enough about the other examples to comment).

[shadowkat]

I'm not sure the other two examples fit quite as well. At least with Buffy and Star Wars - you can reasonably find let alone see all the content or canonical content, you can't with the other two examples.

[jesuswasbatman]

Nobody under sixty has seen all of Who because so many of the sixties episodes are lost. And to have seen/read/heard all the non-TV stuff you would need to be a millionaire and do literally nothing else all the time.

[shadowkat]

Oh so it's worse than I thought? I honestly think the Doctor Who and General Hospital fandoms are impossible. There's no way you can have seen all the episodes in either - unless you are over 60, and a millionaire, and do nothing else. You can't be a completist in either. I'm comparing them because they are sharing a 60th Birthday this year, both started in 1963, and both are the longest scripted television series currently on at the moment. And neither fandom is willing to acknowledge the other one. Even the actors don't - one GH actor stated that GH was the longest running scripted television series - and I corrected him. No, there's also Doctor Who.

[jesuswasbatman]

Doctor Who had the hiatus from 1989 to 2005 (apart from the 1996 TV movie) so GH is probably longer as a continuous show.

[shadowkat]

Yeah, GH never had a real hiatus, even when the pandemic hit - it just showed reruns of specific episodes that it could clear all the rights to.

So, it's basically had an episode five times a week, with breaks for holidays, and news pre-emptions since 1963, and is an hour long.

I'd say it wins.

[trepkos]

And then there's all the audio book stories.

[yourlibrarian]

There's this view in fandom that if you're not "fanatical" - you aren't a fan. Not true. There are degrees. For example, you can be a fan of Star Wars and dislike the films. There's enough content out there now, that you could just be a fan of the comic books and be fine.

True, a lot of franchises are like this now, with a lot of different canon in different formats.

The difficulty with long-running fandoms - is it is rather easy to stumble over land-mines or into a heated debate over something as trivial as...Episodes 1-3 were better than Episodes 4-6. Or in the case of Star Wars, the Original Trilogy is better than any of the other films (which in my opinion it was - with the possible exception of Rogue One).

I'm with you there.

[shadowkat]

There are people out there who honestly believe that the prequels are better and adore them. I didn't know these fans existed until this week. So, I was taken by surprise. I need to be more careful with my responses to friends posts in the Star Wars fandom.

[yourlibrarian]

I couldn't imagine it either. But I suspect it has to do with whether or not it was the first SW they had seen, and also if a favorite character is Obi-Wan, Anakin, Padme or another new character who either aren't or are barely seen in later films.

[shadowkat]

In this particular interaction? That fits - since the poster who preferred the prequels - saw the prequels first, and on the big screen. (She saw the original trilogy on VHS). And her favorite character was Padme, who she dressed up as for Halloween as a kid.

So yeah, I think that may be part of it. If they saw the prequels first and on the big screen and fell for any of those characters, those will be their favorite films.

[kerk_hiraeth]

I've been lucky in most cases with fandom; only real heartbreak I had was the was the Willow & Tara fans started tearing into each other after Seeing Red. Seeing friends speaking too each other like that will never be okay.

I realised about the time the gatekeeper fans were hating on Rey & Finn that I had never really been a Star Wars fan ~ only original I really enjoyed rewatching was Empire; never liked Darth Vader's redemption and had really wanted Leia to save Luke from the Dark Side; also never felt comfortable with the way Han's pursuit of Leia was portrayed; concreted later with Anakin & Padme + (and I was always quick to make a joke of this; by then I had learned) but I really liked Jar-Jar.

I adored Rogue One; even if I was unhappy with the rewrite of how the plans got to Leia (much preferred the radio version) and felt so unhappy with the way Leia's image appeared I literally cannot watch beyond "Launch". Never finished watching The Last Jedi, or whatever the second of the third trilogy is called and have never watched the last one; even though I have the DVD. After not enjoying the plotlines of the third original; though perversely I do like the movie, I could see the way the third was going ~ still don't quite understand why I bought the DVD.

Worst sin of all I love the third of the prequels; badly preserved cheese and all.

With Doctor Who I think there was just too long a gap with no sense of the evolution of a show. If I had not grown up on the original I'd have really liked it I think, but even there all the things that have put me off the new incarnation were already there; some of them as far back as Tom Baker, so whether I'd have still been watching it; well it's a moot point I guess.

I got to see Colin Baker before his first story appeared and I was heartbroken at the way a man who was so enthusiastic about. playing a role he'd wanted back when Tom Baker replaced Jon Pertwee was treated by the show and the fans; unfortuately the BBC was already trying to rid itself of the show; or that's my impression, and the writing was awful ~ felt equally bad for the actor playing Peri. My favourite companion after Sarah-Jane; at least until Amy & Rory appeared, was Ace, and I love Zoe & Liz Shaw; even though it was years later when VHS tapes came along before I got to see them properly.

I seem to have a Master's Degree in not being part of the 'popular' trends within fandoms.

With BtVS I really liked Spike, but hated the way fans who were otherwise logical and loved in depth analysis would go for each other because loved Angel and the other loved Spike; was almost as bad as when Spike got his soul back.

Took me a while after the show ended but I realised I only liked Willow when she was with Oz or Tara; less so when she was crushing on Xander, and I was one of the ones who felt Kennedy was rushed; and only got to lik eher through fanfic.

For some bizarre reason I really liked Cordelia from the start, and my crush on Giles was almost embarrassing; even there I only truly liked Xander when he and Cordy were a thing and, though I really liked Jenny; Olivia was so much more his equal in terms of snark and intelligence. Jenny's portrayal was all over the place fo rme and the 'betrayal' plot twist made even less sense than Julian's Genetic Engineering storyline on DS9.

I cried when Giles found her body though.

From what I read these days book fans can be just as bad though, so maybe I'm just the kind of person that gravitates to 'fandoms of one'; have had people say they see Faith in a different light when they read one of my Faith/Tara fics so that's something to hold onto I guess.

Fandom I miss the most is the Darkover fandom, which seemed to disappear overnight when the revelations of her awfulness became more than what appeared to have been an open secret. Despite that she was one of those responsible for the kind of person I grew up to be ~ it is kinda scary the number of my childhood heroes who turned out to be monsters of one kind or another.

After a while though it's kind of numbing, and leaves you with a wish never to know anything about what your heroes are really like.

"Seems to me everyone who got a statue built of'em was some kind of sonuvabitch or another"

I just want to love the stuff I love in the way I want and if i don't like what you like can we just leave other the fuck alone?

kerk

[shadowkat]

I think if you want to love the stuff you love and hate the stuff you hate and not have to deal with other's opinions on it - you have to stay off the internet? Or not discuss it. Because people tend to like to fight over things, regardless of what they are. I remember someone getting upset that people didn't appear to have the same moral values - my response was, well considering we can't seem to agree on the definition of what a "soul" is...honestly, I had a lengthy debate once with over twenty people with differing views on how a soul was defined.

It's not just fandom, it's people.

The problem though that most people have with fandom - is they aren't watching the same films or shows or in order. We didn't see the same Star Wars story. I saw it in the theater, while I had the book version of the "radio play" - I never really read it or listened to it, so I have no idea what you were talking about in regards to liking how the characters were represented in it over saw the films.

Also, how you come to the films is different. I was eleven when the first film was released.
And in my teens when Empire came about. Harrison Ford's Han Solo was hot to a 15 year old girl.
I can see why Fisher fell for him, she was 21. I think. (By the way, Fisher and Ford had an affair during the making of Star Wars, and he was married at the time. Which may explain the chemistry - also they bonded over rewriting the dialogue.)

So many things factor into it. And the more variations in content, the harder it is to find a common denominator at times or maybe it's easier? IDK.

I'm not sure there is such a thing as a typical fan though. Doctor Who has a 60 year history, but a good percentage of current fans haven't seen any episodes prior to 21st Century. They didn't see the 20th Century version at all. That's a huge gap in the fandom. The show most likely changed a great deal between the 20th and 21st Century's or so I've been told.

On Buffy - as stated above, it was very "Shipper" centric in regards to the fandom. I had to hunt for non-shipper centric sites, that's how I know. And it was hard. The shipper sites drove me insane. The writers (and to some degree the actors) were always pissing off the shippers.

I was more interested in the individual character arcs than necessarily the romantic pairings.
Mainly because the romantic pairings were kind of ...problematic. (As you kind of state above.)
I also had a crush on ASH who played Giles. Then I got engrossed in the character of Spike who fascinated me, and the relationship between Buffy and Spike. But fandom had its issues. Sigh.

[kerk_hiraeth]

O, Harrison Ford Was hot to me when I was a 14/15 year old in 1977!

I've been thinking and I do believe that ep.III is the only one I ever saw in a cinema when it was released; went to see it with my nephew.

I loved the character arcs on Buffy; mostly, but when I go searching for ideas for fics it's always the moments that leap out at me and I like to write. It works much the same way with the movies I like, and the books I re-read. I can link to a moment; such as Dawn's friend watching her breakdown in The Body; or an earnest heartbreaking conversation between two secondary characters on a web series, or a passage in a novel and build worlds around them.

I've built backstories for characters who appeared in a single scene, or episode and were never seen or mentioned again. I've got a whole 'verse built around something that someone said in a conversation on a website that disappeared years ago that I'm still to write a proper story for.

I used to have discussions that lasted all night at Trek cons (they'd be ended by someone googling the facts now) that still stick in my mind and appear when I try to write a Trek fic.

I love Worfy-babes to bits, but doth not look like a Klingon to me; even managed to slip a gag about that into a Buffy-fic once.

If I had to pick a moment when fandom changed it would be the first cons where TNG fans; rather than fans of Trek who loved having new Trek to gossip about, began to appear. They could not understand how we could make fun of Trek, and we could not understand why they took it so seriously. We'd tease each other relentlessly over who fancied Spock more than Kirk, and marvel and the filth that the; largely female authors would post in the K/S fanzines ~ later the B7 fanzines as well.

Some of us were a little scared of them :-) The same writers were also more politically aware I recall now, I was aware there were things in Trek & Who that troubled me but I didn't figure out why until after those cons had ceased to be and the commercial cons were running.

When I went to Doctor Who fans; especially after the hiatus had begun they seemed such a stiff bunch. I loved the emotions the moments evoked, and they loved the minutiae. About the only thing we had in common, or so it appeared at times, was that we mocked the idea of Doctor Who canon.

Watching reactions to a Thai lesbian web series recently I've been smiling at the comments about having to wait a week for episodes or - horrors! - two weeks because of holidays. I can bingewatch a disc of a series; three or four episodes, but I can't imagine watching more than that in a single go - there are always exceptions of course, but mostly that happens when old age makes me sleepy and I find a different episode playing and I have to go back.

The thing I miss most is the ability to disagree profoundly about Yoda & Obi-wan's 'from a certain point of view' explanation to Luke, and not resorting to friendship ending insults. It hurts to see someone you recognise abusing Rey as a 'Mary-Sue' that you used to have those all-nighters with.

What's wrong with a Mary-Sue anyway? Don't all writers put something of themselves in their art anyway? Even when you're creating something outside your direct experience you do that. Sometimes it makes you question your entire moral compass; even change an opinion you had safely held for years.

Spike's moral compass slowly drifted throughout his story, and I will personally always regret that the re-ensoulment happened the way it did. I would have found it so much more interesting if it was revealed that the chip was repressing the demon within him; allowing his human soul to emerge. The moral implications would have been fascinating to explore.

Alas it was never to be, but I have found a similar vein in exploring the similarities in Faith & Tara's backstories; or at least how I've interpreted them. It's so hard to find anywhere to discuss them, and while someone liking your fic is nice, a discussion that inspires it does not make.

I regret too that we got so little of General Leia; who I think of whenever I Leia comes to mind. There are still people who are able to look past what they are used to; though a few less comments about the late 90s being 'the old days' would be nice ;-) Some find different things to love and see in watching old stories that I saw when was a kid or before got old than I ever did; sometimes making me see things I'd never noticed before.

I wish though we could sit down in the same video room and watch episodes together and argue over our different interpretations, and try to convince each other of where the show (whatever it might be) should have gone.

Maybe I might find someone to talk to who likes Riley... :-)

kerk

[atpo_onm]

Sigh. Remember when Dilbert was cool and innocuous?

Scott Adams is a creator of satire, which can be fairly gentle or nearly vicious depending on mood or the times one is commenting on. I do recall him saying some complimentary things about Trump on his blog back then. He may have been sincere (possibly) or was deliberately looking for an argument from fans to get ideas for new strips (also possibly).

I wonder sometimes if people just don't get the concept of satire, they take whatever they read literally, see no other possible levels or intent in it. As to the Dilbert thing, I've read his strip daily for decades (he's in my local paper) and he is getting to where I see him pushing buttons that could irritate some people. But then-- is the National Lampoon still around? I read thing in that decades ago that, if taken literally-- Whooo!! Even MAD Magazine could do some questionable stuff at times, but got away with it because it was more "cartoony" overall.

I recall you aren't a fan of satire, which is fine. I always have been, hey, that's just me. I love nearly all forms of music, but not Rap or Opera, and 90% of Heavy Metal. There are also musicians I'm enjoy who personally... ehh, not so cool. But like with Buffy and Whedon, or Adams and Dilbert, or any number of film directors, for me great art transcends the creator's issues.

[shadowkat]

Hmmm. To clarify? He was dropped from newspapers because of a racist rant on Youtube, not because of his satirical cartoon. The racist rant kind of changed how everyone perceived the satire in his cartoon.

I don't think he's being satiric HERE

Nor does the majority of newspaper publishers (with the possible exception of the right wing publications). Newspapers have dropped dilbert comic strip after a racist rant by its creator

Sorry for the confusion. Should have been clearer. Will fix the above.
Satire is not an excuse for a white privileged guy ranting about Black people.

Be very careful about defending racism with satire. It's kind of like Anti-Semitic Jokes - they work only when told by JEWS. And even then, somewhat dicey. You can't tell a joke about the Holocaust if you aren't Jewish. (Not that you should be doing it anyhow). Or telling an Irish or Catholic joke without being Irish or Catholic.

Insult humor doesn't equal satire. Racist rants aren't satire.

[atpo_onm]

nsult humor doesn't equal satire. Racist rants aren't satire.

No disagreement there. I checked out the link you gave to the interview, but only got about 20 minutes into the 2 hour long total-- will get to the rest of it later when I have more time. So far (in the 20 minutes) not hearing anything truly racist, although he did freely admit he didn't qualify the statements he made sufficiently.

We'll see when I get back to it.

[shadowkat]

This is what he said in the racist rant...apparently:

According to the Associated Press, the controversy began this week after Scott Adams referred to Black Americans as a “hate group” and urged white people to “get the hell away from” Black people. The cartoonist, who launched the Dilbert comic strip in 1989, made the remarks in a recent episode of his eponymous podcast, where he addressed a Rasmussen poll about U.S. race relations.

Adams highlighted a portion of the survey that asked if participants agreed with the following statement: “It’s OK to be white.” The poll found that 26 percent of Black respondents said they didn’t agree with the statement, while 21 percent said they were unsure.

“If nearly half of all Blacks are not OK with white people—according to this poll, not to me—that’s a hate group,” he said during the episode. “That’s a hate group, and I don’t want anything to do with them.” “And I would say, based on the current way things are going, the best advice I can give to white people is to get the hell away from Black people … There is no fixing this. This can’t be fixed. You just have to escape.”

Adams went on to say he has relocated to a neighborhood with a “very low Black population.” He also said “it made no sense, whatsoever—as a white citizen of America—to try to help Black citizens.”

Outlets Drop Dilbert Comic After Creators Racist Rant.

Elon Musk is defending him. As are all the other white libertarian racist assholes. And Adams apparently couldn't be happier with publicity.

[mtbc]

I've indeed seen nearly all of what still exists of Doctor Who (including much of that animated because the video was lost), and much of that more than once. (I'm probably omitting a little bit but I don't know what.) It's a tricky one because the show currently has so little about what I like about some of the early stories, it feels like quite a different thing. I have no particular interest in drawing any lines between fans and others, just more that I'm noting that, despite being fans of the same show, perhaps people are fans of quite different things, because there have been such changes over its run(s), which no doubt doesn't help everybody to all get along nicely.

[shadowkat]

Well also not everyone can see all of it like you have. I can't. So they may perceive it as a completely different series? I'm really only familiar with the episodes that aired during the reboot - or when RT Davies took over, starting with Chris Eccleston as Doctor Who or 9 and up and including David Tennant after Jodi C. But anything prior to that? I didn't see or watch. I did see a little of 1970s Who, but I don't remember any of it - except that I thought it was scary - but I was also about 7 or 8 at the time. I found Star Trek episodes scary back then.

[mtbc]

Also, if you do get to watch earlier ones and aren't impressed, it's not like that invalidates your opinion in any regard! I'd like to rewatch some of that (too brief) Chris Eccleston era, planning to get around to that someday.