![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatCongratulate me, I made it through my entire correspondence list, after adding another person to it, ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
fannishly after reading an entry that oursin linked me to about Tam Lin. I haven't read Tam Lin, but have read The Secret History and Waking the Moon and more or less agree with fannishly's takes on both. Also she wrote a lovely entry about accepting oneself as one is and not needing to be perfect or be what others want that I identified with. I can't explain to you why I choose some journals to read over others - there's no real method. It's purely intiutive. Gut level. And well, currently speaking, I pick based on the writing. Took me three hours to read correspondence list - course this is partly due to the fact that I became enthralled by a discussion by three separate posters - who appear to be aware of one another, but posted about the topic separately in their journals - about "self-indulgence" in writing. Not sure how I feel about "self-indulgence". I find "the red shoes" take somewhat reassuring since I tend to be very self-indulgent in my writing and consider it one of my greatest flaws.
[Looked "self-indulgence" up in the dictionary to be certain my definition of the word coincides with everyone else's (also to make sure it didn't have more than one definition, it means: " excessive indulgence of one's own appetites and desires." - Hmmm. Sounds like a synonyme for "bingeing". Looked up the word binge - and guess what? It is. "Means a drunken spree" or a period of "uncontrolled self-indulgence." Now that explains the attitudes online about it. Also the emotional reactions. Think about this for a minute. In Catholicism, Judaeism, Islam and pagan cultures - we have a holiday where you have to fast, then you have to binge. We live in a culture of extremes - you either give it all up or you go crazy. If you travel across the US you'll hit all you can eat restaurants - places to binge to your heart's content. On New Year's - people get "drunk", on St. Patrick's day - drunken sprees are encouraged. How you feel about this has a lot to do with who you are and what you are going through. Personally? I cringe at the word self-indulgence and see it as a criticism. Why? Bingeing has hurt me. I can't binge on food anymore. It put me in the hospital. I've had to give up things, things I love in order to get well and as a result, for the first time in six years I feel physically attractive. I actually like my body. I'm at my correct weight, I have a flat stomach. And I don't have heartburn 24/7 or all those other ailments, nor am I physically depressed to the extent that I wanted to just stay home - like I felt way back in Feb and March. Binging on food - made me ill. I lost myself within it. So I stopped. I was self-indulgent and that hurt me. The opposite of self-indulgent is not eating anything at all, not indulging, fasting. And we live in a culture, unfortunately, of extreems. It seems something is either brilliant or horrible, big or small, skinny or fat, beautiful or ugly,nothing in moderation. Or maybe that's just how it feels today. It's Xmas in NY and NY binges on Xmas.]
It can be said, I suppose, that writing, in particular lj writing, is self-indulgent. I know I'm self-indulgent. Also possibly narcissitic, and masturbatory. Then again, I'm not sure we can place "writing", "any writing" into such a neat definitive category. I'm not sure things are as black and white as we'd like to make them. Makes life easier if they are. So many choices, you know, so much easier if we can neatly categorize them. Being human this seems to be our natural tendency - categorize things, define them, make sense of them.
There was another link, this one in matiocalo's post, that took me to a journal entry about "bad reading", then one on "bad writing". Sorry too tired to hunt the link - it's past 1 am, damn it. Must sleep or won't. The bad writing lj entry amused me - partly because it was so poorly written and partly because the example it used of bad writing reminded me of a paragraph from Dorothy Dunnett's novel Game of Kings reproduced in The Red Shoes lj. So, I'm not sure we can neatly categorize anything. I know the publishing industry would like to categorize self-published novels as bad writing - but then the publishing industry, especially the New York Publishing Industry is woefully insecure and possibly a tad on the pretentious/self-important end of the spectrum. You'd be too, if you were surrounded by stock-brokers, movie-producers, high finance, and making next to nothing in a place that considers itself the center of the universe, it's not, but it certainly thinks it is. Ugh. There I go again, categorizing things. See? Natural human tendency. We can't avoid it. But life is messy and everything, I'm beginning to realize, refuses to neatly fit into a box. Doesn't keep me from trying to do it though. Even though things have a messy way of spilling out of the boxes I put them in.
Speaking of categorizing, found myself reading numerous posts onwhedoneseque about which BTVS Seasons were the best. Reminded me of a conversation I had with a friend on the same topic. I mentioned off-hand how I prefered the later seasons and even though I watched during the earlier ones and when the show first started, it wasn't until the 6th Season that I went nuts. (ie. become woefully self-indulgent). The friend remarked the only reason this happened was Spike was my sexual fantasy come to life. (no one on lj) Sigh.
Yes, but if that were the case, why the heck would I have written over 50 essays, over 50% having zip to do with Spike? The same friend later admitted, 'say what you will about Buffy the Vampire Slayer, it did a very good job of showing what it was like for everyone in high school - showing how tough high school was for all people'. And life, I added. It's one of the few shows that depicts the difficulty of dealing with personal demons across multiple spectrums. Towards the end of the high school years, Buffy realizes and states her realization aloud, that everyone has demons they have to slay, no matter who they are or what they look like - she knows, she's had to slay them. Then at the end of the series, she discovers, having finally slayed her childhood demons, seeing her fears for their actual size, smaller, not towering demons at all, she closes that chapter, and shares her knowledge with the next generation. Those metaphors - are what Veronica Mars and other shows lack.
I can't categorize BTVS or rank the episodes. I can no longer tell you which seasons were the best. Or the worste. I can tell you which ones I prefer now. But I know, being me, that will change. It certainly has changed in the last year. While I watched Season 7 - it was my least favorite, I disliked it. And wrote a scathing review of it. Now, three years after the series has concluded. It has become one of my favorite seasons and I own it on DVD. I'm an oddity. Different from everyone on my flist and on whedonesque. Why? Simple. I own the last three seasons of the series, not the first four. And have no interest in buying the first four. Nor do I feel the need to defend my choice to you or explain it. It just is. Well not completely true. I think the reason is that those are the three seasons that I identify with the most emotionally. They speak to me. They fit with my objective reality. And not for the reasons that my friend suggested above, although that does play a part, Marsters is an actor who acts with his whole body, as opposed to just his mouth, and that is a preference of mine in watching actors. No the reason was that in those last three seasons - I felt the writers were hitting on demons I was internally struggling with. I simply identified. And I think, speaking solely for myself here, that is what attracts me to a story be it a book, play, song, poem, movie, tv show or work of art - an emotional identification - something in that work of art speaks to me. It isn't always something I can explain or give voice to, or even consciously understand, but when it speaks to me - I feel the desire to embrace it, hold it close to my heart, cuddle it, and learn from it. When we speak of self-indulgence - that may be my sin, I get overly self-indulgent about cultural things that speak to me. And like a mother tiger will defend them or a mother sea turtle, pull them inside my shell, out of view. Quiet like.
Was going to post something else...but that feels like the best note to leave off on.
Off to sleep.
fannishly after reading an entry that oursin linked me to about Tam Lin. I haven't read Tam Lin, but have read The Secret History and Waking the Moon and more or less agree with fannishly's takes on both. Also she wrote a lovely entry about accepting oneself as one is and not needing to be perfect or be what others want that I identified with. I can't explain to you why I choose some journals to read over others - there's no real method. It's purely intiutive. Gut level. And well, currently speaking, I pick based on the writing. Took me three hours to read correspondence list - course this is partly due to the fact that I became enthralled by a discussion by three separate posters - who appear to be aware of one another, but posted about the topic separately in their journals - about "self-indulgence" in writing. Not sure how I feel about "self-indulgence". I find "the red shoes" take somewhat reassuring since I tend to be very self-indulgent in my writing and consider it one of my greatest flaws. [Looked "self-indulgence" up in the dictionary to be certain my definition of the word coincides with everyone else's (also to make sure it didn't have more than one definition, it means: " excessive indulgence of one's own appetites and desires." - Hmmm. Sounds like a synonyme for "bingeing". Looked up the word binge - and guess what? It is. "Means a drunken spree" or a period of "uncontrolled self-indulgence." Now that explains the attitudes online about it. Also the emotional reactions. Think about this for a minute. In Catholicism, Judaeism, Islam and pagan cultures - we have a holiday where you have to fast, then you have to binge. We live in a culture of extremes - you either give it all up or you go crazy. If you travel across the US you'll hit all you can eat restaurants - places to binge to your heart's content. On New Year's - people get "drunk", on St. Patrick's day - drunken sprees are encouraged. How you feel about this has a lot to do with who you are and what you are going through. Personally? I cringe at the word self-indulgence and see it as a criticism. Why? Bingeing has hurt me. I can't binge on food anymore. It put me in the hospital. I've had to give up things, things I love in order to get well and as a result, for the first time in six years I feel physically attractive. I actually like my body. I'm at my correct weight, I have a flat stomach. And I don't have heartburn 24/7 or all those other ailments, nor am I physically depressed to the extent that I wanted to just stay home - like I felt way back in Feb and March. Binging on food - made me ill. I lost myself within it. So I stopped. I was self-indulgent and that hurt me. The opposite of self-indulgent is not eating anything at all, not indulging, fasting. And we live in a culture, unfortunately, of extreems. It seems something is either brilliant or horrible, big or small, skinny or fat, beautiful or ugly,nothing in moderation. Or maybe that's just how it feels today. It's Xmas in NY and NY binges on Xmas.]
It can be said, I suppose, that writing, in particular lj writing, is self-indulgent. I know I'm self-indulgent. Also possibly narcissitic, and masturbatory. Then again, I'm not sure we can place "writing", "any writing" into such a neat definitive category. I'm not sure things are as black and white as we'd like to make them. Makes life easier if they are. So many choices, you know, so much easier if we can neatly categorize them. Being human this seems to be our natural tendency - categorize things, define them, make sense of them.
There was another link, this one in matiocalo's post, that took me to a journal entry about "bad reading", then one on "bad writing". Sorry too tired to hunt the link - it's past 1 am, damn it. Must sleep or won't. The bad writing lj entry amused me - partly because it was so poorly written and partly because the example it used of bad writing reminded me of a paragraph from Dorothy Dunnett's novel Game of Kings reproduced in The Red Shoes lj. So, I'm not sure we can neatly categorize anything. I know the publishing industry would like to categorize self-published novels as bad writing - but then the publishing industry, especially the New York Publishing Industry is woefully insecure and possibly a tad on the pretentious/self-important end of the spectrum. You'd be too, if you were surrounded by stock-brokers, movie-producers, high finance, and making next to nothing in a place that considers itself the center of the universe, it's not, but it certainly thinks it is. Ugh. There I go again, categorizing things. See? Natural human tendency. We can't avoid it. But life is messy and everything, I'm beginning to realize, refuses to neatly fit into a box. Doesn't keep me from trying to do it though. Even though things have a messy way of spilling out of the boxes I put them in.
Speaking of categorizing, found myself reading numerous posts on
whedoneseque about which BTVS Seasons were the best. Reminded me of a conversation I had with a friend on the same topic. I mentioned off-hand how I prefered the later seasons and even though I watched during the earlier ones and when the show first started, it wasn't until the 6th Season that I went nuts. (ie. become woefully self-indulgent). The friend remarked the only reason this happened was Spike was my sexual fantasy come to life. (no one on lj) Sigh.Yes, but if that were the case, why the heck would I have written over 50 essays, over 50% having zip to do with Spike? The same friend later admitted, 'say what you will about Buffy the Vampire Slayer, it did a very good job of showing what it was like for everyone in high school - showing how tough high school was for all people'. And life, I added. It's one of the few shows that depicts the difficulty of dealing with personal demons across multiple spectrums. Towards the end of the high school years, Buffy realizes and states her realization aloud, that everyone has demons they have to slay, no matter who they are or what they look like - she knows, she's had to slay them. Then at the end of the series, she discovers, having finally slayed her childhood demons, seeing her fears for their actual size, smaller, not towering demons at all, she closes that chapter, and shares her knowledge with the next generation. Those metaphors - are what Veronica Mars and other shows lack.
I can't categorize BTVS or rank the episodes. I can no longer tell you which seasons were the best. Or the worste. I can tell you which ones I prefer now. But I know, being me, that will change. It certainly has changed in the last year. While I watched Season 7 - it was my least favorite, I disliked it. And wrote a scathing review of it. Now, three years after the series has concluded. It has become one of my favorite seasons and I own it on DVD. I'm an oddity. Different from everyone on my flist and on whedonesque. Why? Simple. I own the last three seasons of the series, not the first four. And have no interest in buying the first four. Nor do I feel the need to defend my choice to you or explain it. It just is. Well not completely true. I think the reason is that those are the three seasons that I identify with the most emotionally. They speak to me. They fit with my objective reality. And not for the reasons that my friend suggested above, although that does play a part, Marsters is an actor who acts with his whole body, as opposed to just his mouth, and that is a preference of mine in watching actors. No the reason was that in those last three seasons - I felt the writers were hitting on demons I was internally struggling with. I simply identified. And I think, speaking solely for myself here, that is what attracts me to a story be it a book, play, song, poem, movie, tv show or work of art - an emotional identification - something in that work of art speaks to me. It isn't always something I can explain or give voice to, or even consciously understand, but when it speaks to me - I feel the desire to embrace it, hold it close to my heart, cuddle it, and learn from it. When we speak of self-indulgence - that may be my sin, I get overly self-indulgent about cultural things that speak to me. And like a mother tiger will defend them or a mother sea turtle, pull them inside my shell, out of view. Quiet like.
Was going to post something else...but that feels like the best note to leave off on.
Off to sleep.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-12-03 07:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-03 03:43 pm (UTC)Apropos of nothing
Date: 2005-12-03 03:47 pm (UTC)This is entirely about me, and not about you, but my reaction kind of stunned me. If my reaction is something others have experienced, it explains a lot of the pointless kerfluffles we have in fandom, though. I wonder where that reaction comes from.
*ponders*
no subject
Date: 2005-12-03 04:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-03 05:18 pm (UTC)And re self-indulgence, I have a lot of sympathy for my idea of the Epicureans, who were about neither over-indulging nor being ascetic but living out a good life of moderation in all things. Getting away from binary either/ors.
Re: Apropos of nothing
Date: 2005-12-03 06:49 pm (UTC)Had a discussion with a friend last night - this friend does not understand my love of the following things: Harry Potter (simply does not get it, never read the books, has no interest in the movies), BTVS (watched it occassionally but does not understand why I bought any DVDS), and hates musicals (unless they are plays such as Cabaret). She is a very close friend (Wales), and while we're talking - I'm getting more and more defensive. I accuse her at one point of judging my tastes, of being "snooty" or snobby about movies and music. And annoyed, she states, no, I'm not.
You're misreading me. I just don't understand why you like those things. I don't like them. I'm not judging you for liking them. We get to talking some more and I find myself explaining why I don't like live rock concerts in bars or places where the music has to amplified, everyone is screaming and yelling, etc. Wales loves them, she does not understand why I don't. The reason is simple we experience the concert differently. But it doesn't change the fact that I feel defensive about it.
I think it comes from a desire to relate to people, to share interests and tastes. To feel that someone we like or enjoy has the same tastes we do. Is it validation? You share the same tastes therefore the same reality - ie. your reality validates mine? Sort of like in the show lost - when a character gets a vision of something, they think they are nuts, until another character sees it too? I went for years not knowing anyone who liked BTVS, it was my guilty secret. It wasn't until 2001 that I found anyone else who liked it. Everyone I knew saw it as a silly kids show and I was constantly defending it or saying nothing about it all. Finding people who loved it too, not only loved but were obsessed about it, in 2001 then in 2002 was an odd experience, a relief. I felt oddly validated. I know I shouldn't care what others think, but I do. I want to think that the reality in my head is not just in my head, if that makes sense. I see this reaction all the time in lj - someone will rant about something they've read in someone else's journal or in a forum, then post lots of posts agreeing with their view or that they agree with - often taken out context, supporting them. And in academic journals as well as legal briefs - we'll look for arguments supporting our own view on the matter, bolstering us. We're taught to do this. I can't help but wonder if that training effects us in other ways?
I don't know. Been reading a lot about it lately, but still have no clear answers, just lots of questions like yours. Sometimes I wonder if I think too much about this stuff.
Re: Apropos of nothing
Date: 2005-12-03 07:04 pm (UTC)We all need a stable sense of reality in order to navigate through the world and not go nuts. And we do that in part by judging our perceptions of the world against others. I know my senses are working normally if they agree with other people's: "Is there a horse standing ten feet from us?" "Why, yes there is, Kate."
That's par for the course with more objective things. But we also use the same scheme in the more subjective realms. It's a reflex, I think. We get the same sense of reassurance that we get when we agree on more objective matters. But more than that. When we find people who agree with us in matters of taste, we experience real pleasure. It increases our enjoyment of art, it increases our assuredness that this, that, or the other political system is right or wrong, etc.
When people disagree on matters of taste, you would think we could live and let live. And often, this is true. How many times have you sat eating with someone and they offered to let you have a bite of their meal, which they think is great, and you don't, and you say so, and everyone shrugs and gets back to eating?
But in some matters of taste, we can't just let it go. I think art does this sometimes because the stuff we like, as you say, we come to like because we can relate to it personally. We invest in a television show because something in it speaks to us deeply. And when there is disagreement, the stakes are higher. It feels like a personal attack simply to disagree.
Re: Apropos of nothing
Date: 2005-12-04 07:05 am (UTC)I do the same, feel quite defensive about my favourite shows if someone scoffs at it's importance. I can see the flaws, but it doesn't change the way I react to the show itself. With Buffy, every season resonates with me, and I love them all; I do have seasons that I like better than others, but the whole series is a journey I'm emotionally invested in somehow.
Re: Apropos of nothing
Date: 2005-12-04 02:37 pm (UTC)Re: Apropos of nothing
Date: 2005-12-04 05:24 pm (UTC)Which were better, which were worse. I'm sure I annoyed the heck out of him when I changed my mind about S7, then again maybe not - considering he just told me he respected me more when I disagreed. Between the two of us we have the entire series on DVD. He has the first four seasons - which he lent me in 2004 and 2005 and I watched to the point of burn-out. And I have the last three - one of which he got me for my birthday in 2003, the other two I purchased myself and he has no interest in. I think one of the reasons I didn't buy the first four seasons is that I know I can borrow them fairly easily and well, I'd seen them already on DVD. (Season 4 hands down has the best extras. Although I did like some of the extra's on Season 2 DVD, it bugged me that the quality of the episodes on the package weren't as high as on my tapes of them. Also I find Season 2 the hardest to navigate and the most annoying of the DVD's package wise. They also cut lines from episodes. Season 3 on the other hand, I've debated buying along with Season 4 - both have great episode reproduction. But S3's extras disappointed me. What no commentary on Dopplegangland or The Wish? How about Lover's Walk - a pivotal episode, with or without Spike? One just seems too bare to spend the money on and the pictures on the package make me cringe. Also there's this new slayer collection that I've been eyeing - all 144 episodes together, but wait I already have DVDs for seasons 7,6 and 5, wouldn't it be cheaper to buy the other's separately? Should I? No.) I do love the entire series.
And I honestly have yet to see a tv series about the high school and post-high school experience capture these periods as well. Veronica Mars, to give it credit tries, but it lacks the metaphors and philosophical crunchiness of Buffy to truly grab the Academic audience's attention. It contains all the pop culture references, but has not made up it's own slang, nor does it reference the demons of childhood in quite the same way. Not that I want it to. I think one of the reasons I adored BTVS was that it was so unique, so different, and the characters so interesting. It is the only series I've watched that I let myself become completely obsessed with.
Re: Apropos of nothing
Date: 2005-12-04 05:34 pm (UTC)::geek::
Of course, in terms of buy or not buy, it helped that my two favorite shows (btvs and ats) had among the least expensive DVDs. I still hardly own any Treks even though I adored all those shows. They're just too expensive. And I have tapes. ; )