![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
An Education and today's fandom WTF moment.
1. Watched the Oscar nominated British film, An Education last night. The film does provide some stellar performances from Olivia Williams and Alfred Molina. As well as newcomer Carey Mulligan. And the script by Nick Hornby is serviceable - there are few excellent lines. Such as the young school-girl Jenny's reaction upon having sex for the first time. "It's funny for something that so many have written songs and poetry about, the actual act is quite short, takes hardly any time at all." Truer words were never spoken. And later - her statement to her teacher - "I've learned there are no shortcuts." The story is a female coming of age story, but disturbingly it is once again based on her relationship with a guy. I hate to tell you this, but most women come of age without necessarily having sex with or a relationship with a guy. Guy's aren't necessary for a girl to become a woman. Jane Austen, Louisa May Alcott, and numerous others did quite well without you. You aren't THAT important.
The film is basically the older man - young girl trope. I remember reading a French novel at the age of sixteen about a girl in Paris discovering her sexuality with a much older man. In reality? It is gross. In books, romantic. In this film - a bit of both. Hornby to give him credit - does show that a man in his 40s who is preying on a 16 year old girl - is not someone you want to know. He's charming, clever, seductive and fun. She goes to nice restaurants, auctions, and believes that she's met CS Lewis. The story takes place in the early 1960s in London. He's the dream. Loves her music, can discuss culture, is patient, and charms her parents. He even proposes and they are the ultimate star crossed lovers. Then we get the reveal, and of course there is one. He's married, has a wife and son. And Jenny is just one of many women he's seduced in this manner. This story in some respects is the Buffy/Angel tale without the metaphors. The older guy who makes you feel oh sooo adult, yet you realize afterwards that you aren't not quite.
Watching this film, I thought back to when I was 16 and 17 - I went to France that year, and I remember a guy attempting to French kiss me, and freaking out. I was sooo young. And yes, older men came onto me - one attempted to molest me in Wales at the age of 22. It was gross. It was not romantic. And the guy was over 20 years older. My parents to give them credit would not have permitted what happens in the film. But it is in part the time period, and in part the culture - her father wants her to be taken care of. That's all. And sees David as a means to that end. They don't see beyond the charming act, and are as taken in by David as Jenny herself.
I didn't like the film. It bugged me. It felt condescending. And as if it were telling me this is what women are like and what we do. These are our options. And our lives are centered on the men that enter them. Not true, as most women can tell you. Men are important, sure. But our lives no more center on them than theirs center on us. For a few perhaps.
A good film overall, just one that I find myself in disagreement with. I'm oddly pleased The Hurt Locker - a film about war and men, directed by a female director won instead. An Education a film about a girl coming of age after her romance with a much much older man, was writtenand directed by by a men, [ETA: but apparently "loosely" based on a memoire written by a woman, and directed by a woman. Note to self - google the film before writing a view based on what you recollect from reading the credits.] It's told in her pov, but from a male angle [this might be due to Hornby's script]. The Hurt Locker was by far the better film. They are different of course, with different intents. But An Education felt sort of cliche to me - as if I'd seen it before, and the Hurt Locker brand new and something I had not. Could just be that I've long ago outgrown the older guy who is so into the young girl, she's over the moon with the attention motif - one does, when one gets older, eventually.
2. While waiting for the elevator at work saw the following posted on the glass doors leading to the security desk for the school board:
* No Hoods, Do-rags, Hats, or Bandanas permitted. No Weapons of any kind (more explanation in small writing I could not read below).
For some reason that amused me. But then I make fun of everything. I treat life as a cosmic joke - it's the only way, sometimes.
3. On Lj came across a WTF moment. Apparently people think it is improper etiquette or wrong to write reviews of fanfic in your own live journal??? As if Fanfic, and we're talking about FANFIC, is some holy untouchable grail that none should touch but to squee over! My first thought upon reading this is, okay, now I remember why I didn't take fanfic seriously for a long time and why the vast majority of people don't. Second thought - I get why its illegal. Makes total sense. If people act like its their holy property - when in reality they've stolen someone else's ideas, characters, and verse to write it... I mean honestly can you think of anything more hypocritical than a fanfic writer telling you that you can't critique, review, parody or write your own fanfic based on their fic? (Note not plagarise, write fanfic on it). Sort of like the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. Third thought - How the heck do you think you get nominated and win awards? It's not just by the people who squee in your lj. And how do you think people find your work? If you can't handle concrit or reviews, then don't write.
Honestly folks, if I had a dollar for every time someone referenced a post of mine, ripped a post of mine apart, or critiqued one on a forum that I accidentally discovered and did not know about - I'd be a rich woman, and none of that was fanfic - it was meta. And while it may be aggravating and send my blood-pressure sky-rocketing, I do not for a minute contest their right to do it. IF I post a entry to the public, and don't lock or filter it - then by posting it publicly, I gave people the right to discuss it. That's the nature of the internet. For the same reason we can critique Doctor Horrible or The Girl Who Circumvented Fairyland or The Guild or Lady Gaga's latest YouTube vid - we can critique a story someone has posted for the public in their blog or livejournal or on a fanfic site, particularly a fanfic site. Why do people think fanfic is some untouchable holy piece of work that can't be critiqued? I mean, we're not talking about an original story or a memoir - we're talking about a story that you posted under a pseudonyme on the internet using characters from someone else's story.
How do you expect to get better at writing? Do you even care about your writing or are you just writing to jerk off? (If the latter, trust me, we can tell, and no one writes review or critiques of those stories, because why bother? ) Also why do people care what someone they've never met and don't know exists writes about their fanfic in their lj? (I am not so egotistical that I think for one minute that Joss Whedon gives a shit what I think about his stories or most of the fanficers I've written about. I mean come on, I'm just a woman musing in her journal.) Just as you can post fanfic, we can critique it. And we can post fanfic based on your fanfic. We can even finish your fanfic if you don't. (Never done it, but certainly been tempted - stupid WIP's that never get completed - they are just asking for it!) We can make fun of it and parody it. Writing fanfic is hardly polite. Hate to tell you this, but the internet version of Miss Manners would not approve - if she did, you could do a heck of a lot more with it. You are taking someone else's property and making it your own. Without their knowledge or permission. To suddenly come out and say, oh, you are being nasty to me for critiquing it or playing with what I wrote without telling me..... I'm sorry but welcome to the wonderful world of sharing your art work and writing with others. It's not all squees and accolades! Once it is in the sandbox, the other kids get to play with your toys. You can't be the only one who gets to write fanfic or write critiques on stories. And if you can't handle someone doing it to you? Don't post fanfic publically on the internet. (Personal posts are another issue entirely of course - writing a critique of someone's personal essay on their dead grandmother or a post on their workday - is just plain tacky. But fanfic???? WTF?? Are people crazy? (sigh, they are fans, of course they are crazy. Goes with the territory. (joking...well sort of. I make fun of everything. Life is a joke, we just happen to not be in on it.)
And yes, it goes without saying, I'll continue to write whatever I damn well please in my own live journal, thank you very much.
The film is basically the older man - young girl trope. I remember reading a French novel at the age of sixteen about a girl in Paris discovering her sexuality with a much older man. In reality? It is gross. In books, romantic. In this film - a bit of both. Hornby to give him credit - does show that a man in his 40s who is preying on a 16 year old girl - is not someone you want to know. He's charming, clever, seductive and fun. She goes to nice restaurants, auctions, and believes that she's met CS Lewis. The story takes place in the early 1960s in London. He's the dream. Loves her music, can discuss culture, is patient, and charms her parents. He even proposes and they are the ultimate star crossed lovers. Then we get the reveal, and of course there is one. He's married, has a wife and son. And Jenny is just one of many women he's seduced in this manner. This story in some respects is the Buffy/Angel tale without the metaphors. The older guy who makes you feel oh sooo adult, yet you realize afterwards that you aren't not quite.
Watching this film, I thought back to when I was 16 and 17 - I went to France that year, and I remember a guy attempting to French kiss me, and freaking out. I was sooo young. And yes, older men came onto me - one attempted to molest me in Wales at the age of 22. It was gross. It was not romantic. And the guy was over 20 years older. My parents to give them credit would not have permitted what happens in the film. But it is in part the time period, and in part the culture - her father wants her to be taken care of. That's all. And sees David as a means to that end. They don't see beyond the charming act, and are as taken in by David as Jenny herself.
I didn't like the film. It bugged me. It felt condescending. And as if it were telling me this is what women are like and what we do. These are our options. And our lives are centered on the men that enter them. Not true, as most women can tell you. Men are important, sure. But our lives no more center on them than theirs center on us. For a few perhaps.
A good film overall, just one that I find myself in disagreement with. I'm oddly pleased The Hurt Locker - a film about war and men, directed by a female director won instead. An Education a film about a girl coming of age after her romance with a much much older man, was written
2. While waiting for the elevator at work saw the following posted on the glass doors leading to the security desk for the school board:
* No Hoods, Do-rags, Hats, or Bandanas permitted. No Weapons of any kind (more explanation in small writing I could not read below).
For some reason that amused me. But then I make fun of everything. I treat life as a cosmic joke - it's the only way, sometimes.
3. On Lj came across a WTF moment. Apparently people think it is improper etiquette or wrong to write reviews of fanfic in your own live journal??? As if Fanfic, and we're talking about FANFIC, is some holy untouchable grail that none should touch but to squee over! My first thought upon reading this is, okay, now I remember why I didn't take fanfic seriously for a long time and why the vast majority of people don't. Second thought - I get why its illegal. Makes total sense. If people act like its their holy property - when in reality they've stolen someone else's ideas, characters, and verse to write it... I mean honestly can you think of anything more hypocritical than a fanfic writer telling you that you can't critique, review, parody or write your own fanfic based on their fic? (Note not plagarise, write fanfic on it). Sort of like the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. Third thought - How the heck do you think you get nominated and win awards? It's not just by the people who squee in your lj. And how do you think people find your work? If you can't handle concrit or reviews, then don't write.
Honestly folks, if I had a dollar for every time someone referenced a post of mine, ripped a post of mine apart, or critiqued one on a forum that I accidentally discovered and did not know about - I'd be a rich woman, and none of that was fanfic - it was meta. And while it may be aggravating and send my blood-pressure sky-rocketing, I do not for a minute contest their right to do it. IF I post a entry to the public, and don't lock or filter it - then by posting it publicly, I gave people the right to discuss it. That's the nature of the internet. For the same reason we can critique Doctor Horrible or The Girl Who Circumvented Fairyland or The Guild or Lady Gaga's latest YouTube vid - we can critique a story someone has posted for the public in their blog or livejournal or on a fanfic site, particularly a fanfic site. Why do people think fanfic is some untouchable holy piece of work that can't be critiqued? I mean, we're not talking about an original story or a memoir - we're talking about a story that you posted under a pseudonyme on the internet using characters from someone else's story.
How do you expect to get better at writing? Do you even care about your writing or are you just writing to jerk off? (If the latter, trust me, we can tell, and no one writes review or critiques of those stories, because why bother? ) Also why do people care what someone they've never met and don't know exists writes about their fanfic in their lj? (I am not so egotistical that I think for one minute that Joss Whedon gives a shit what I think about his stories or most of the fanficers I've written about. I mean come on, I'm just a woman musing in her journal.) Just as you can post fanfic, we can critique it. And we can post fanfic based on your fanfic. We can even finish your fanfic if you don't. (Never done it, but certainly been tempted - stupid WIP's that never get completed - they are just asking for it!) We can make fun of it and parody it. Writing fanfic is hardly polite. Hate to tell you this, but the internet version of Miss Manners would not approve - if she did, you could do a heck of a lot more with it. You are taking someone else's property and making it your own. Without their knowledge or permission. To suddenly come out and say, oh, you are being nasty to me for critiquing it or playing with what I wrote without telling me..... I'm sorry but welcome to the wonderful world of sharing your art work and writing with others. It's not all squees and accolades! Once it is in the sandbox, the other kids get to play with your toys. You can't be the only one who gets to write fanfic or write critiques on stories. And if you can't handle someone doing it to you? Don't post fanfic publically on the internet. (Personal posts are another issue entirely of course - writing a critique of someone's personal essay on their dead grandmother or a post on their workday - is just plain tacky. But fanfic???? WTF?? Are people crazy? (sigh, they are fans, of course they are crazy. Goes with the territory. (joking...well sort of. I make fun of everything. Life is a joke, we just happen to not be in on it.)
And yes, it goes without saying, I'll continue to write whatever I damn well please in my own live journal, thank you very much.
no subject
So I guess I feel that all the well-meaning attempts to insulate writers from getting their feelings hurt are kind of pointless. Sooner or later it'll probably happen anyway. That's life.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
What I find difficult to wrap my brain around is the whole "lets insulate writers from criticism". It makes sense to bolster a person's self-estreem so they can deflect criticism.
But to insulate? What is accomplished or gained? If anything you are hurting them by protecting them. The world is critical.
You can't walk down the street without someone looking at you and criticizing how you walk, fart, what clothes you wear, or
your hair-cut. So the insulation basically is akin to putting a person in a bubble and never exposing them to germs - they get out of that bubble - the first germ that hits? They fall apart.
no subject
Reviewing someones work is fine if that's all it is, but I've seen comments posted to such reviews in the past end up making me feel very embarrassed for the author. Many a time I've seen these type of crits turn into slagging matches and without the author being present to explain themselves it can often make for uncomfortable reading.
Also at the end of the day lj writing is by fans just trying to have a bit of fun, and not trying to win the Booker prize or publish a novel. If they were then have it it I say. *g*
Respectfully Disagree
Also, everything posted on lj - if it is not locked can be linked to or posted elsewhere. This is far from an insular community and it is hardly private.
I have over 139 people who have friended me. Others on my flist have over 381. They don't know all these people. I certainly don't. I've only met 10 of the people who have friended me. And I'm pretty sure only 10-15 know my real name or much about me. My personal stuff is locked.
So, I hate to break this to you - but yes, everything you post is open to the public unless you lock or filter it. There are people you don't know about lurking and reading.
And publishing a story on livejournal is publishing it for public consumption. You have opened yourself up for critique. If you don't want that? Lock the story and only allow a select group to read it. Then, yes, it is small and select.
I learned this by experience - I posted on Dollhouse, a lengthy meta - which got linked to outside lj and
attacked by people outside of lj. While upsetting, I shrugged it off. I had a choice - I could have locked and made friends only. Or filtered. And I've done that with my own fanfic - it is locked, and NOT open to the public. And if posted - on private forums. Not hard to do. But LJ is only private - if you friends lock or filter or hit private. Otherwise it's as open as every other blog on the net. Facebook is the one that you have to friend people and they have to friend you back to read. That's not LJ. My parents, friends, etc can read my posts on lj - if I told them about them. That's one of the many reasons I use a pseudonyme and I rarely post about work. I know it's public and I'm sorry, it's not safe. If you think it is - you are wrong.
Re: Respectfully Disagree
But the kind of fic I end up reading is only fandom related. Created by a select few who are on there to have fun and try their hand at writing. They are not trying to compete with published authors in the real world and so I think that has to be taken into consideration when folks decided they wont to play reviewer of such peoples work. Many aren't trying to be pros.
Your fl obviously isn't, but mine is a very community based affair, with many of my fl knowing each other directly or indirectly and so when someone tries their hand at reviewing another work then I think the polite thing to do is either fl such review or let the author know. But thats just me. :)
Too any times I've seen so called balances reviews turn into public slag off sessions and thats what ends up making me feel uncomfortable.
You seem to be able to brush such things off, but sadly not everyone is going to be able to do so.
Re: Respectfully Disagree
Yeah, I get that bad reviews hurt. If you've done anything remotely creative in your lifetime that you've shared with the public - you've received negative reviews. And if you live long enough - you've gotten far worse.
At the age of 13 - I got some good advice - don't read reviews of your own work. Also when reading "reviews" it is best to keep in mind that the opinion is a subjective one. Much like the review I gave above of the film An Education. If you read the comments thread - you'll notice only person agreed with my review of it. Reviews are written for readers not writers. They are written to share a work we've found interesting or despised with others. To explain why we loved or hated it to ourselves and other readers. When you create something and decide to share it with others - not everyone will like it. And it is no longer yours. If you have the right to write a fanfic based on story you saw on tv - which may even be and most often is critical of that story and envisions in your view a better ending or provides your view of how it was told, why shouldn't a reader of your story question your view? Or write about your view? It's the reader's why of having fun too. Why should their views be censored to promote your fun and protect your feelings? You don't have to read their views. They are not stopping you from sharing.
Re: Respectfully Disagree
Oh I know, I worked on Dr Who for 3 years and still bump into reviews of the episodes that I worked on, and read some right bitchy comments about them, But then that's easier to deal with as A) I don't know who's doing the slagging off, and B) I'm a hardened professional, not a fan doing it for fun.
"Why should their views be censored to promote your fun and protect your feelings?"
Oh I dunno, maybe because some don't want to upset some other people they actually know online. Many writers on fanfic circles actually know each other and when folks end up criting their work it can come across likesomeone having a conversation about you in a room next door where you're not invited in and can't actually explain your reasoning.
Re: Respectfully Disagree
Of the six reviews - four of the fanfic writers who were being reviewed thanked me for writing the review.
Three asked me to write reviews of their work in threads on their journals. These reviews were admittedly positive in nature - I rarely write negative reviews on anything - because, seriously?
What is the point? When I do, I state clearly that this is subjective and it may upset folks who loved whatever I disliked. (Most notably the Buffy comics - there are quite a few fans of the comics on my flist, and I like to be considerate of their feelings - so warn them if my review is negative in tone, and always put it behind a live journal cut. If I hate tv show or film and I know my flist loves it - I try not to talk about it.)
There were two reviews that I did that I did not know the fanfic writer and they don't know me. In both situations - the fics had been reviewed and rec'd by people on my flist. That was how I knew about them.
They had also won numerous awards. The writers of both fics - were either accomplished writers or had over 1200 comments praising their fic.
The only fic I reviewed - which could be considered at all negative - was written by a professional writer, who taught creative writing courses, critiqued and reviewed writing for a living. I know this - from a biographical bit of information that she posted at the end of her fic, informing her readers that she was a professional writer.
The only writers who were not professional writers whose fic I reviewed - indicated to me that they wanted me to review it and would be flattered if I did so. They knew I did it. They responded directly to the review. And my review was linked to.
Also in all cases? The writers were made aware of the reviews by their fans. They all had the opportunity to comment if they wished.
The only people who ever complained - were fans of the writers, who for reasons I do not understand took exception to their favorite fun fic being analyzed or critiqued or discussed. And the only feelings hurt?
Have been my own - mostly by those "fans" who wish to insulate their favorite fanfic writers, and keep attacking me for posting reviews on it.
Re: Respectfully Disagree
Re: Respectfully Disagree
And I deal with insults on a daily basis. That's life. Not everyone will treat you nice, not everyone is polite, not everyone is kind. We can't control what others do. And imposing rules on fandom - that you can't review fic because the troll over there is being nasty, is sort of pointless. You're not stopping the troll - they'll do whatever they damn well please, but you are stopping the polite people who might actually provide you with food for thought.
What I like about LJ is unlike fanforums and fan boards - I can delete your ass if you piss me off. And I can ban you. And I can screen. And I can delete my own posts or make them private.
I can control my own little journal. That's all I can do. I can't tell everyone else what to do with theirs. No one can. Heck not even lj - they've tried to impose rules - and just end up with mass exoduses to other forums. Dreamwidth - a lot of people prefer because you can control who reads your content and what content you read even more than you can here. But even there - that's all we can control.
Anything more than that? You end up with a slippery slope - you end up restricting content you don't want to restrict along with content you do - which eventually does lead to censorship and big brother, whether that is your intent or not.
Re: Respectfully Disagree
Hey It doesn't have to be. :)
"You end up with a slippery slope - you end up restricting content you don't want to restrict along with content you do - which eventually does lead to censorship and big brother, whether that is your intent or not."
But considering the feelings of others shouldn't be that. In this case it means that some could either flock their reviews or tell the author upfront what they're about to do, as hell, they'd probably hear about it anyway later down the line. lj is a very small world and news travels quickly.
I think you can consider the feelings of others without turning into big brother. Sorry, but then that's just me by the looks of it. *g*
In a perfect world perhaps, but we don't live in one
For example - I think you should use a live-journal cut with a topic heading displayed. Whenever you do a negative review - state this is a negative review on the Buffy comics, don't enter ... And you should definitely use it for long posts. But the vast majority of my flist rarely uses lj-cut, they find lj-cut annoying and wish people wouldn't use it, except for spoilers - of course.
We got into a discussion about it a while back.
Another fight? That people shouldn't post fanfic outside of fan communities.
And in the profile section at the front of my journal? I clearly state what I do, who I am, and what commentators should not do.
Do they read my info? Of course not.
I work in a profession that has more rules and regulations and procedures than I can count, it is highly regulated and my job is in part to interpret the rules and impose them on people who think they are stupid and a waste of time. People get rebellious when you tell them to do something that they consider stupid or time-consuming. And they don't particularly like being told what to do. And from their perspective - it is a waste of time.
And I used to work in copyright - specifically internet copyright law. I spent hours discussing internet content rights and regulations with librarians, writers, artists, indexers, editors, lawyers, and content owners. I remember Napster. It is illegal to scan and post magazine articles on the net - and it hurts magazines, but people do it. It is illegal to share films and music and books with folks electronically - but people do it.
It's illegal to download and share television scripts. How many times have you or your friends done any of the above? If caught, you'd be fined. But it is really hard to catch and stop people.
Part of my job was to send cease and desist letters to web sites that used published content without permission.
Look at the internet as the wild west. Professional writers tend to hate it - more than one has complained incessantly about the untamed net that has no rules and where their content gets stolen.
In short, what you are complaining about? Is fairly minor. Writer's content is stolen on a daily basis. Music is distributed.
And we think nothing of it. Kids cruelly tease and spread gossip on Facebook - to the point that people are committing suicide.
There were three suicides based on Facebook hazings in NY State alone.
So a fanfic writer isn't warned that their fic is being reviewed?
Heck do you always warn people when you post a link to their journal entry in your blog? (I know you've posted links to mine without warning me.) Not that I mind - but it has on occasion brought a few trolls my way. I've learned that's the net. Suck it up. And deal. OR leave. It's the wild west. People keep trying to tame it - but has yet to happen.
As for fanfic reviews? I've stopped doing them, not worth the fuss and trouble. Going back to my old rule - if you read fanfic, don't tell anyone. Much safer. ;-)
Re: In a perfect world perhaps, but we don't live in one
Doesn't stop us trying to make one though does it. All journeys start with one step.
"In short, what you are complaining about?"
Me, nothing. I'm just replying to your post and saying I don't happen to agree with it or your view of how lj works in a fandom setting thats all. :)
"Kids cruelly tease and spread gossip on Facebook - to the point that people are committing suicide.
There were three suicides based on Facebook hazings in NY State alone."
Even more reason to try and take others into consideration when online I would have thought. But hey, I loathe Facebook for all sorts of reasons, and this just confirms my initial feelings about the place.
"Heck do you always warn people when you post a link to their journal entry in your blog? (I know you've posted links to mine without warning me.) Not that I mind - but it has on occasion brought a few trolls my way."
Linking an open post isn't the same as reviewing a persons fic is it now. *g* Also I won't make that mistake again If you don't like it. I just leave that to the su_herald instead.
"Suck it up. And deal. OR leave. It's the wild west. People keep trying to tame it - but has yet to happen."
In the professional world yes, in this 'world', no imo. I can't be that hard I'm afraid. Sorry. :)
no subject
no subject
BUT, and this is where I part ways with the be-nice-to-authors crowd, concrit and reviews are two different things. Reviews aren't for the author. And if any authors out there fondly imagine that because they've never seen anyone discussing their work in less than adoring tones in public, that their work never gets discussed in less than adoring tones, they're in for a sad surprise one of these days when the bubble pops. No one is so popular and brilliant that everyone likes their work. God knows I've stumbled across a "Man, that Barb C is sure over-rated," conversation a time or two, and bitten my tongue, sat on my hands, and quietly back-buttoned away.
no subject
BUT, and this is where I part ways with the be-nice-to-authors crowd, concrit and reviews are two different things. Reviews aren't for the author. And if any authors out there fondly imagine that because they've never seen anyone discussing their work in less than adoring tones in public, that their work never gets discussed in less than adoring tones, they're in for a sad surprise one of these days when the bubble pops. No one is so popular and brilliant that everyone likes their work.
Yes. If you step outside your little group of fans, you will hit detractors. It's interesting - this happens with meta essays as well. For everyone who applauds your work and gives it an reward, there's someone out there who hates it.
I remember reading a blistering review of a performance I gave in a play when I was a teen. It was a summer theater camp for kids, I wasn't getting paid, actually was paying for the experience and
it was from my perspective for fun. The play was the Hobbit. I was playing the Great Goblin. I couldn't have been more than 12, maybe 13 at the time. A professional theater critic reviewed the play and attacked my performance. After reading it, and being understandably upset by it, a professional actor working with us - gave me a rather good piece of advice. "I never read reviews of my work," he said. "If they are great they make me cocky, if they are horrible they depress me. Best to ignore." This advice was later echoed by Bebe Neuwirth when asked if she read the horrific reviews of her performance on the Broadway play the Adams Family, no she said - Bob Fosse taught me ages ago not to read or pay attention to them.
Reviews...aren't for the writer or actor or artist, they are for the audience. Concrit on the other hand is for the writer.
no subject
no subject
no subject
So true. The first fic I ever almost-wrote (I spent a lot of time daydreaming fic at that job) was finishing off Mary's Journeys series. At the time I was confused enough about the etiquette that I was scared off, but maybe now you've inspired me to revisit it.
no subject
So very very true. I'm going to quote you forever...
no subject
After I watched the film, I read online (I don't have the link--I don't remember where I found it, sorry) a write-up by the woman off whose memoirs the film was based. And it was actually very instructive, because the film didn't actually stay that close to her personal experience. Some elements were true--I think the "I'm not going to lose my virginity to a piece of fruit" incident really happened, and her parents really were enthusiastic and accepting of her strange new partner. But in fact the man that she went out with didn't look like Peter Sarsgaard--he was somewaht ugly, and she says in the write-up that she wasn't particularly interested in him. Essentially, that there was no love, and she went out with him because...well, because she did. I think in order to try to make the romance appealing conventionally, and in order to make the audience understand the main character, the film (and Nick Hornby's screenplay) fall back on some cliches, like the sexy older guy, rather than portray the somewhat more complex truth that she wasn't under his spell, or in love. Carey Mulligan gets some of this across but I think the movie is a bit too cliched.
The ending, where she mentions having found a nice boy at college, and that she never mentioned her old boyfriend, was a bit of an odd moment--I'm all for good relationships, but there's something patronizing about the idea that she felt she had to (and should) pretend that she wasn't experienced, in order to be with a new guy.
(I also felt that the "academic training montage!" at the end of the movie was a little silly--framing the story as being about her fall from academic grace is an interesting one, but it becomes difficult then to show her redemption by studying really hard for about one minute of screen time.)
Anyway, I do think the film does do some things right--as you say, there are quite a few good lines, and the performances are good. But it's not really great.
And I agree that The Hurt Locker is a much better film.
no subject
Thank you for posting that. It does explain Mulligan's odd performance - which I'd wondered about. She doesn't appear to love David much at all, so much as his lifestyle and the things they are doing. He's fun. She is in love with what he has or she believes he has and will provide for her. And that makes the story a little less creepy, a bit more balanced, and David a little bit more sympathetic. She's using him, in a way, as much as he is using her.
The ending, where she mentions having found a nice boy at college, and that she never mentioned her old boyfriend, was a bit of an odd moment--I'm all for good relationships, but there's something patronizing about the idea that she felt she had to (and should) pretend that she wasn't experienced, in order to be with a new guy.
Had similar problems with it. Jenny wasn't that likable or rather, I had difficulty liking her. She was quite arrogant and had a sense of entitlement that was often aggravating. There's a couple of scenes with her teacher, Ms. Stubbs, played by Olivia Williams (who is rapidbly becoming one of my favorite actresses) that demonstrated it.
no subject
no subject
Member of the Wedding - where the focal point is on something else.
But film and television appear to paint a different message.
So, too, for that matter, does popular fiction - ie the stuff on the best-seller lists, which is interesting.
no subject
I actually really loved the film, I didn't think it was (or was meant to be) a universal statement of how women 'come of age' (although I've seen so many films of young men coming of age in love with an older woman). I thought it showed some very different women (her Mother, her teacher, and her Head Mistress, in a very nice performance by Emma Thompson) who were all vaguely dissatisfied with their lives but who were doing their best to make their lives productive and fulfilling.... It certainly didn't show marriage as the ideal answer for any woman, certainly her Mother, or her lover's wife were not women totally happy in their marriages. It really wasn't romanticizing anything IMO: the girl romanticized everything herself, thinking she had found the answers that everyone else had missed, only to discover that she was wrong. I'm glad you focused on the line:
"I've learned there are no shortcuts."
because I do think that that line is key, young people often think they have found the short cut, and heaven knows we all wish for the short cut (the pill that will make a thin, the lottery which will make us rich, whatever).
I actually liked the friend (I don't know the characters or actor's name), who was much more honest about being a thief, and recognizing that the girl was just fooling herself.... That she over-looked the robbery, so why was she surprised about the adultery? I really liked a lot of things about this film.