(no subject)
Dec. 17th, 2004 10:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
molly_oThis will be two posts in one, to make up for the not-posting yesterday.
First, last night CGU and I watched disc 1 of an evening with Kevin Smith. Parts of it were hilarious; parts got on my nerves. (He was kinda brusque with the silly, hero-worshipping students, and I do understand he hears their unimaginative questions all the time, and most likely is exasperated with all these folks who seem to think he's in an entirely different league, but I still feel like it would be better for him to swallow his irritation and be gracious to his fans, no matter how inane their questions.) Still, he's a brilliant asshole, and he knows how to tell a story.
Second,![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
justacat started a conversation about her pet peeve -- people who have whole rec pages dedicated to a fandom they freely admit they've barely watched. SO then I posted this:
I think I'd have to agree with a lot of people here and say reccing is ok, but writing not so much. There's more to a good story than fidelity to canon. (I've read very compelling fic that takes great liberties.) A reader who is unfamiliar with canon can legitimately say, "this story was well-written and really moved me," and that can be useful information to someone who is looking for something to read. If the reccer qualifies the rec by saying s/he hasn't seen many episodes, then the reader looking for recs is forewarned that attention to canon is probably not one of the criteria this reccer uses.
But then, I *would* feel this way, because I haven't seen the full canon of most of my TV fandoms. Really. I've read bunches of Voyager and Highlander and Sentinel, but I've missed entire seasons of Voyager and only seen a handful of eps of the latter two shows. Even in Due South -- the fandom that sucked me in whole and spat me out as little flecks of Kowalski-loving ooze -- I've only watched season 3/4, plus a half-dozen Vecchio eps. I *have* watched every ep of Sports Night, but then I haven't read any SN for a couple years.
I'd go so far as to say that, for me, watching ALL the eps somehow limits a fandom, takes away a certain sense of possibility. Does this make me a Bad Fan? I hope not -- though it does makes me a very different fan from you, Justacat.
(But for writing? For writing, I think canon is like grammar -- it's only OK to violate it once you've mastered it. Which is *another* reason why I've never written. :) )
So now I've had this epiphany, that knowing the complete canon somehow takes away something from a fandom for me. I'd never try to write or beta a fandom in which I don't know all the canon, but somehow, seeing every ep makes a fandom *finite* for me.
This isn't a hard and fast rule -- the tremendous possibility offered by the Due South finale only increases the potential of that fandom, and I generally don't have this problem with movie fandoms -- but the shows that I own in toto on DVD? I don't read. Which seems kinda perverse, but then somehow doesn't surprise me, 'cause I've always been contrary (as well as something of a dilettante).
First, last night CGU and I watched disc 1 of an evening with Kevin Smith. Parts of it were hilarious; parts got on my nerves. (He was kinda brusque with the silly, hero-worshipping students, and I do understand he hears their unimaginative questions all the time, and most likely is exasperated with all these folks who seem to think he's in an entirely different league, but I still feel like it would be better for him to swallow his irritation and be gracious to his fans, no matter how inane their questions.) Still, he's a brilliant asshole, and he knows how to tell a story.
Second,
justacat started a conversation about her pet peeve -- people who have whole rec pages dedicated to a fandom they freely admit they've barely watched. SO then I posted this:I think I'd have to agree with a lot of people here and say reccing is ok, but writing not so much. There's more to a good story than fidelity to canon. (I've read very compelling fic that takes great liberties.) A reader who is unfamiliar with canon can legitimately say, "this story was well-written and really moved me," and that can be useful information to someone who is looking for something to read. If the reccer qualifies the rec by saying s/he hasn't seen many episodes, then the reader looking for recs is forewarned that attention to canon is probably not one of the criteria this reccer uses.
But then, I *would* feel this way, because I haven't seen the full canon of most of my TV fandoms. Really. I've read bunches of Voyager and Highlander and Sentinel, but I've missed entire seasons of Voyager and only seen a handful of eps of the latter two shows. Even in Due South -- the fandom that sucked me in whole and spat me out as little flecks of Kowalski-loving ooze -- I've only watched season 3/4, plus a half-dozen Vecchio eps. I *have* watched every ep of Sports Night, but then I haven't read any SN for a couple years.
I'd go so far as to say that, for me, watching ALL the eps somehow limits a fandom, takes away a certain sense of possibility. Does this make me a Bad Fan? I hope not -- though it does makes me a very different fan from you, Justacat.
(But for writing? For writing, I think canon is like grammar -- it's only OK to violate it once you've mastered it. Which is *another* reason why I've never written. :) )
So now I've had this epiphany, that knowing the complete canon somehow takes away something from a fandom for me. I'd never try to write or beta a fandom in which I don't know all the canon, but somehow, seeing every ep makes a fandom *finite* for me.
This isn't a hard and fast rule -- the tremendous possibility offered by the Due South finale only increases the potential of that fandom, and I generally don't have this problem with movie fandoms -- but the shows that I own in toto on DVD? I don't read. Which seems kinda perverse, but then somehow doesn't surprise me, 'cause I've always been contrary (as well as something of a dilettante).