(no subject)

[tree_and_leaf]

I took a brief look at one of the Narnia fic comms, and scuttled back again fairly rapidly. Is it just me, or is the scariness of fic in inverse proportion to the shippiness/ sexual content of the original canon? I suppose if fan-fiction is about filling in blanks, then it's somewhat logical, but the reverse doesn't seem to be entirely true, otherwise Torchwood fandom would consist almost entirely of long, plotty mystery stories and friendship fics, whereas as far as I can see it's mostly soggy Janto (incidentally, why are some fandoms more prone to silly smushed names than others?). Though Doctor Who-fic is certainly pretty scary at times, and it's a kid's show.

Given the difficulty of finding Narnia-fic that isn't NC-17 incest-fic (I suppose I should be grateful than Ben Barnes is so pretty, as there is now another popular category, R-rated Caspian Does Everyone, but it's a minor consolation), it's maybe a good thing that there's no Swallows and Amazons fandom to speak of. In a way it would be nice if there was a Narnia comm that didn't take incest-fic, but I fear it might not get meet with much interest.†

In other news, Edinburgh is still standing despite the best efforts of the men digging up the roads for the trams, and I had a very good lunch at the Bar Roma in Queensferry St - heartily recommended, if you are in the area; excellent Italian food.

ETA: Have just found - thanks to estelyn_strider - a wonderful Jasper Fforde fic, in which Thursday deals with a problem inside The Lord of the Rings. Extremely funny, a spot-on Thursday voice, and jolly interactions between Thursday and various Tolkien characters, including a justifiably pissed off Boromir and an absolutely brilliant Sauron. Possibly not for you if you have violent objections to off-stage Frodo/ Sam, but I think the Professor himself would have overlooked it given the perfect take on the Dark Lord.... Also includes a Titus Andronicus joke.

† This being fandom, I almost feel that I ought to apologise for saying that, but the switch of 'your kink is not my kink and that's ok' is surely 'I do not want mental images of your kink and that's ok, too'?

Comments

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

† This being fandom, I almost feel that I ought to apologise for saying that, but the switch of 'your kink is not my kink and that's ok' is surely 'I do not want mental images of your kink and that's ok, too'?

One day I will get round to writing my LJ post on me and fandom which will emphasise that it - and that's 'old' Doctor Who fandom - was largely a slash-free zone, as indeed those reservoirs of old fandom still are. I don't want to stop people writing what they want to write, and recognise that fiction-led slash writing has rich heritage. I just want people to remember that there are other definitions and experiences.

[tree_and_leaf]

LJ does skew very heavily towards slash - I tend to forget it isn't all of fandom, but you are of course right.

I vaguely remember mentioning the popularity of Doctor/ Jamie to an old school fan - on LJ, but not active in LJ Who fandom - and he was baffled by the concept...

(I think it may have been snorkack_catcher, but I'm not sure).

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

Second Doctor/Jamie contradicts and even misses the point of the traditional fan view of the cherished relationship between the second Doctor and Jamie - that together they act as agents of chaos in ordered situations which are vulnerable because they are unbending; Jamie's lack of technical knowledge and the tendency of the Doctor's mind to move too fast for the liking of successive bureaucrats combined with his gypsy-like appearance (clothes chosen for him by the TARDIS, presumably, as he is somehow wearing them after the transformation from the first Doctor...) to give the impression of children set loose and taking over an adult world. I find this at its strongest in season five, alongside Victoria.

This might suggest that old fandom emphasised in commenting on and expanding the text, whereas slash is by its nature subversive. This statement is in turn open to challenge...