Why it sucks being a fan of certain cultural mediums

[shadowkat]

You ever wonder when you become a fan of a particular tv series, book series or film series that you may be reading or seeing more in the thing than is actually there? And by fan - I mean obsessive to the point of writing about it and searching out fan boards and fanfiction, that type of obsession. Or getting really intrigued by a relationship or thread in it - thinking whoa this is sooo coool. Love. Because something in it grabs you - a thread or character or something.

But you have this nagging little worry or at least it starts out that way ... that maybe, just maybe what I saw isn't there at all? Maybe it's just an illusion? All in my head? Maybe the writer never intended that? Maybe what I fell in love with - was in my own head and projected by me onto the work? Maybe I read more than was actually there? (And when other fans voice this skepticism in their critiques of the work or in posts, you feel the oddest desire to kick them, for stating what you fear in words, making it real? You don't want to read their negativity, for fear they may be right...)

And..then one day, you realize, damn that's not just a maybe, not just a nagging little worry, but, wait.. it's actually true? REAL. There's proof that you can't ignore? What you saw isn't there?? You may read it in a writer's interview or blog - where the writer tells you this straight up. Or they'll write the penultimate chapter of their work and there it is - proof that what you loved in the tale they were weaving, what turned you into a fan - was never there at all? That you were wrong. And..you feel like an idiot for believing it or wanting it to be otherwise?

Sort of like waking up one morning and being told by someone who would know, an established authority on the topic that you actually do trust - that there's no fairies, no Santa Clause, and no magic - all rolled up in one, when you are about 12.

Disappointment, while a fitting word, I think is an understatement.

As an aside, while I know it's not really a word, I prefer "bummed" to discontent. The sound of it fits my mood better. (Also, while this is really off topic? I think I just found out via Facebook that my cousin and his wife who were so in love about five months ago, got a divorce. Facebook is a bewildering medium.)

ETA: Really not about Buffy or whedon this time, although I'm sure it looks like it is...;-) (I'm whinging about a completely different series that I got momentarily enthralled by, and now, sigh, it's gone. Stupid writer.

Comments

[rahirah]

That's pretty much how I feel about Spuffy.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Right now, I'm worried that it is happening with the Kim Harrison novels I've been reading. Made the mistake of checking out her blog and it turns out that according to the writer - she doesn't plan the relationships, has no idea where her characters are going exactly. Ugh. The pattern I found that fascinated me - may be purely coincidental and she may in actually be doing another bizarre supernatural version of the Bachorlette. (Yes, another Whedon.)

Writers really shouldn't be permitted to interact with their fans - they are quite good at destroying their story for us. They should also plot ahead of time their relationship drama not just the action.

[rahirah]

I can see that, actually, since when I'm writing original characters, they often end up in relationships I never planned. It seems to me that I get better chemistry by letting the characters just interact for awhile without plotting to get A and B together, because it may turn out that A and C are way more interesting as a couple. Plots I will plan out to the last detail; characters falling in love, not so much. But if characters do start to interact in a way that might cause readers to think I'm planning something romantic for them, I kind of hope that I would notice that...

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

since when I'm writing original characters, they often end up in relationships I never planned. It seems to me that I get better chemistry by letting the characters just interact for awhile without plotting to get A and B together, because it may turn out that A and C are way more interesting as a couple. Plots I will plan out to the last detail; characters falling in love, not so much.

Oh, I generally agree. You really can't predict chemistry.
That said - Farscape cast for chemistry between Aeryn and John Crichton and did plot out that relationship more or less, so it can be done. And often when it is plotted out it works better.
Not always though.

But if characters do start to interact in a way that might cause readers to think I'm planning something romantic for them, I kind of hope that I would notice that...

This is the bit that bothers me. When they don't notice. Don't see the relationship that is taking off or the one that has clearly ended. Or don't see a thematic arc, although I'm more forgiving of that. Particularly when they've built in little bits here and there, clues...that feel deliberate, until you realize - the writer wasn't conscious of them or put in those clues to resolve a completely separate and one-time plot point - such as just getting character A out of the basement.

Example: In Kim Harrison's novels - the protagonist has to move a very big, very forboding black stallion, in order to sneak into a security grid. Everyone is scared of the stallion. But the stallion loves the heroine. She touches him and he doesn't bite her to her shock and amazement, instead he butts her hand.
And she notices that his name plate is Tulpa, the same word that she randomly picked to spindle energy in her head, and she
realizes that the horse is the "familiar" of the guy she is robbing and it's the same horse she rode once in summer camp with this guy, she's robbing, over 10 years ago, but can't remember. AND they had a game of theft back then, where she stole his hoof pick and he stole stuff from her, yet always returned it. ALSO at the very end, he takes her riding with him. YET - the writer states on her board that she was amazed readers saw a romantic pairing between the heroine and the guy she's robbing?? And while it's possible the guy likes or has feelings for the heroine, she's not so sure about the heroine??
And that she wants to introduce a new love interest for the heroine??? (Is the writer stupid?)

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

You ever wonder when you become a fan of a particular tv series, book series or film series that you may be reading or seeing more in the thing than is actually there?
I've watched Whedon shows, need I say more?

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Grins and nods. ;-)

Yes, nothing more disappointing than thinking a writer and/or writers are brighter than they actually are. Although why I persist in thinking popular tv writers or popular best selling writers can be brilliant, I'll never know - after all they aren't exactly mediums that requires it, if anything quite the opposite. ;-)

[embers-log.livejournal.com]

The power of art, I've always felt, is when something awakens within you stimulated by the art (music/ painting/ book /show/ whatever) which gives you insight into your life, your relationship with your world. And that is what you love, or maybe I should say that is what I love... you may well view art differently.

And (in my opinion) the artist doesn't have to have intended that particular insight for it to be valid or important for me. Just some universality is all that is needed, some window to the soul that allows me to feel or see or sense something relevant to my life and experience. It is true that the ending may fall flat, causing disappointment, disillusionment, and maybe even disgust... but personally I don't think an interview is going to wreck my view of the art (frankly I don't think many artists totally understand their own work).

I've heard actors say that they are shocked when a director throws out a take when they were really feeling it, and keeps one when they felt they were only going through the motions.... because the director felt that the take they used gave the audience/viewer more in some way.

But it is late and I'm rambling ... I hope I'm not annoying you, but I just wanted to express something here. Which I've probably failed to express.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Eh...I was admittedly vague regarding what I was talking about.
It's mostly frustration with a novelist. ;-)

But you do make good points...

[cactuswatcher.livejournal.com]

It's really only natural. When you see something with a lot of promise and possibilities you tend to look most favorably on those parts that match what you like. Sometimes it all goes well and as you see more it mostly fits what you wanted. Sometimes when the author reveals more it's totally in the wrong direction. It can be because the author never intended things to go the way you wanted, sometimes the author's mind changed.

The most famous case I can think of is the Russian author Gogol. The liberal-thinking literary critics of his day loved his first works, to a large extent because they thought he was with them politically. It turns out he was actually a foaming-at-the-mouth reactionary. Knowing that you can see he was making fun of the liberals in his writing. But there is nothing specific in his literary works to point you that way. You have to know his later political writing to see it clearly. When the 19th century critics read his political stuff they were shocked and appalled, not realizing they were mostly upset at their own expectations. It's perfectly valid to read every book on its own without all the baggage of what the author really thinks or what others think about it.

The point is that as long as you were seeing what you wanted, you were enjoying yourself. When it disappoints, it can get confusing. If it continues to disappoint, it's time to move on. Don't get upset for liking what you saw in the first place. Find somebody else writing who does 'believe in fairies.' ;o)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Good points. Just keeps happening - it may well be a genre thing. ;-)

Read recently how people got disillusioned by Christopher Isherwood, after they read his autobiographical writings - where it becomes clear that he truly was a narcissitic bastard.
But if you read "I am the Camera" or "Cabaret" and ignore the later writings, it works fine.