Underage thoughts

[sistermagpie]

Since I haven't seen ROTK yet, I'll stick with the other major topic on my flist, chan! Only this isn't really about chan but a side issue of underage characters and slash...



I was reading cathexys's journal, which contained a link to thete1's journal. It brought up first the subject of labeling certain kinds of fic--thete used chan, underage and pedo I think. I think these kinds of labels are useful myself, not as a moral barometer but just for clarity. It's always better to know what a person means by a term when they're referring to certain stories. If I use the word chan I think it's helpful to know I am not referring to LUW, for instance, just so we can communicate.

What struck me was that Thete had a category for "underage" to refer to anyone under the age of, say, 18. Some people consider that (or maybe under aged 16) to be chan. I basically have no word whatsoever to describe stories about people under 16 (but into puberty) that include sex. To me that they're that age and there's sex involved means pretty much nothing at all--at least, not any more than a story where they were that age and death, drinking, school or food was involved.

I started to wonder about that...why does it seem such a non-issue when for some reason it makes a big difference? Is it just that I know teenagers are sexual? I doubt it, because I'm sure the people who find it disturbing know that just as well. Or that TV regularly parades sex at this age across the screen so it seems normal? Again, they see the same shows I do. It's not that I don't make a distinction when it comes to age in real life. The last time I looked at a 16-year-old boy and imagined myself with him I was probably 16 myself. I look at a boy that age today and see a kid. And yet, here's the thing, in slash terms I usually gravitate to teenaged boys rather than men: H/D, Will/Bran for The Dark is Rising...and F/S (more on that later). I'll read stories where they're aged up but prefer them somewhat youthful--if not 15 then, like, in their early-20's I suppose.

That led me to think about the fact that I simply identify with boys in general and always have. My first character I really glommed on to on some level in terms of wanting to be him was Walt Disney's version of Robin Hood (who was a fox) when I was probably 4 or 5. (Have a great picture of me with him at Disney World--::sigh::). Then Robin as in Batman in Robin. Will Stanton, Frodo... It's not that I didn't like girl characters because they were girls, nor have I ever been the kind of female who got along mostly with men. I like guys and have guy friends, but my closest friends have usually been female (I even went to a women's college). I just never understood the need I heard about in some girls to have girls to identify with in fiction. When people point out there's barely any women in LOTR I'm like, "Huh? Oh yeah, you're right. So?" Similarly with Superheroes WonderWoman did nothing for me, not did most any other female superhero. I was Robin. Because of this I was a very young slasher, long before I knew such a thing existed and before I added anything sexual in the mix. I was just into the two guys' being intensely involved somehow.

Part of this is maybe psychological. These male characters just tend to be dealing with issues I find more personally interesting than the ones the female characters are. I saw a thing recently about DC Comics that pointed out that early WW was uproariously S&M--she was always getting tied up and mind-controlled. One comic even had her getting spanked. Even apart from that, though, her troubles just didn't interest me. But Dick Grayson and his troubled father/son stuff with Bruce? Please give me more. Love the Bruce/Dick dynamic (though I don't really slash 'em--ultimately I love my Father/Son dynamic without the sex).

But lately I've been thinking there's an even more basic physical element. I don't look like WonderWoman. I can, in my imagination, look more like Robin Hood, Robin, Frodo or a teen-aged Will or Draco. There's a lot of reasons I don't like romance novels, but one is that I simply can't identify with the heroines ever, neither mentally nor physically. I think people often like, in romance, to have some idealized version of themselves to project into, and the girl with the heaving bosom was just never going to be me. But Dick Grayson? He's small, but he's strong, graceful rather than powerhouse solid like Bruce, not soft and curvy but long and lean. Plus I think he's seen more as I'd want to be seen. He's sexy, but not in that (imo) rather burdensome way that female superheroes are, where they're in high heeled boots with their boobs jutting out in front of them. He just seems...freer, like his sexiness is all his own unless he chooses to share it. The female superheroes always just seem so out there whether they like it or not.

Slash just seems to take this and run with it. I remember reading a story once where Draco was described as having filled out so he had these broad shoulders and I literally got jolted out of the story. What? Broad-shoulders? I think not! Draco may be tall, but you can't mess with his body-type to that extent, imo. That infamous "Seeker's Build" is important in my boys. Frodo, thanks to Elijah Wood, has turned out even better than he was in canon. Me, only BEAUTIFUL! Granted I always saw Frodo in canon as looking much that way anyway--I always focused on the "elvish air" rather than the "hobbits are chubby" concept. (Plus isn't he a Fallowhide? Anyway, doesn't really matter. He is to me.) Now Samwise, he's got the broad shoulders and that's fine because he's the other guy. I can love a guy like Sam, I just can't be him.

Anyway, the thing these teen-aged boys and hobbits have in common is, obviously, that they are small and light (not in terms of weight necessarily but build). They are also usually interested more in the things that interest me in ways girl and women characters often aren't. They're all into how to make a mark on the world and what to fight for, how to prove their worth and learning what they need to know. It's the Youth Archetype, I suppose, that resonates with me in ways the doesn't maybe. I've just always identified with the page rather than the knight or the king, the apprentice rather than the wizard.

So that, in my long-winded way, is why I just don't see them as "underage" in any sense of the word. Their youth means they are untried, have to rely on cleverness rather than brute strength, and have much to learn. Intellectually I may know that they have some growing to do physically but I do not. Therefore I really don't see them as underaged. Or something. Or maybe I'm just a big perv. That's always a possibility.

Comments

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

I think you bring out two really important points: one is that many of us gravitate toward slash, b/c it is harder to identify with women b/c women's bodies are marked and overdetermined. Second, you point to something that has come up several times now in comments in my journal which I guess I had never fully grasped: that we do not actually read the teenagers necessarily as 15-year-old boys but rather as something altogether different.

I think that's where my cognitive dissonance started when I actually *saw* Justin Timberlake in an interview...he's cute, but he's like my students' age :-) I couldn't cathect onto him the way I certainly do onto "Justin Timberlake" in a popslash story. I think that distinction is very important! Our fantasy lives are much more complicated and convoluted than we usually assume, I guess :-)

Which makes it even more important that we are aware of CONTEXT, something both Te and Kaiz brought up, namely, that chan or underage or non-con or mpreg or... is read very, very differently *within* the fandom than it looks like to the outside. We understand these differences in ways that someone who has no idea what we're doing might not. [In fact, that does remind me of the way we talk about the guys in RPS: to anyone outside of the group it seems like we're tinhats when everyone inside totally knows that every squeeing 'they're so gay' statement about joint appearances or what not is totally under erasure, has this big caveat that everyone *inside* knows about!)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yes, you tend to forget how things look from the outside. I'm struck by how that's so true about everything in fandom. You literally don't see canon the same way when you're in a fandom. You're always aware of this ongoing dialogue, the jokes, the common opinins, the different factions. It's particularly strange in something like LOTR where there's the group of people who roll their eyes and say, "They're so gay," with totally different meaning.

The other weird thing is with celebrities even though I don't read RPS is I still have a sense of them as characters in my head from fandom discussions. We know these little facts about them and people put together a character from things we know. There's something weird about possibly actually meeting one and suddenly realizing this person is a total stranger you don't know at all even though they look so familiar.

yaoi

[shusu.livejournal.com]

And then you add in anime. There is a cultural exchange there, as other cultures are much more open about sex at younger ages, and that reflects some of the ages of their characters. Kayura? Twelve years old. The Gundam W boys? Fifteen and piloting mecha. Personally it crosses the line into chan when the mind of the character is below the age of consent. In my backfiles I've a dark fic where a character's memories are wiped, thus de-aging him -- that scene, if I ever write it, would read much like a 'typical' chan fic than the thirty year olds these guys are.

The Japanese have a word for it... bishounen. Pretty boys, yes, but also lithe, young, in the flower of youth, literally. In a country which traditionally immortalizes the youthful warrior because he's going to die soon in battle, age takes on a different meaning. There is the youth and the untriedness. I'm more attracted to that... youth as a flower, with all the fragility, beauty, and untapped strength inherent.

Someone might argue that slash and yaoi are basically the same beasts, but IMO, by and large, communities contrasted with each other? Slash seems to be more about taboo; yaoi seems to be more about inhibition. The yaoi writers I've met talk about underaged sex in terms of protecting their hobby, i.e. avoiding retribution from the Man-- seldom do they argue about its finer points and definitions. To us, it's a fantasy, nothing more.

It's gotten to where I can tell if someone started out in yaoi. Going through RS.org, I came across Aspen. Had no idea who she was. Her fics were wild, uninhibited, lush and just pretty. There was nothing dirty about the sex, no matter how taboo and squicky the topics were. Then I realized she was a mainstay of an anime fandom, and had moved on, and changed her name.

Out of all the stories of RS.org, and yes I did read the entire archive in the first months, her style stuck out. Not just as an individual writer, but because everyone else was writing with the tone of 'oh, we're naughty! we're dirty! we're taboo.' (The tentacle sex was rather disappointing. ;) ) Whereas her fics were just enjoying themselves, and I spotted them, even subconsciously.

So that's really where I come from... if chan is a touchy subject, then one has to have sex = dirty as a corollary. Of course that's a turn-on, but it's not a turn-on for everyone. Especially in long fics, an author's attitude will shine through; if it is a paradigm of taboo-ness, then by all means it should be labeled, it should be explored from that angle. Taboos can cause much distress, whether enforcing them or breaking them. But if the sex is beautiful, the writing is beautiful, and the love and/or physical pleasure's unrestrained, in my humble opinion the underaged boys are contextually in exactly the right place to turn me on.

Re: yaoi

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

This angle is totally fascinating. I know the term yaoi and it always seemed it was slightly different. I had no idea the taboo-ness didn't come up in yaoi--it's such a given in most slash I guess it was hard to imagine it without it.

But then it sounds like there is also an element of disapproval in yaoi coming from outside, with people needing to protect their hobby. What form exactly does that take? I love the idea of the sex just being a celebration whatever form it takes--is there a reason this centers on boy/boy instead of boy/girl?

[shusu.livejournal.com]

Well truly that's just my subjective read on it. But I have trawled through dozens of fandoms, in the sense of reading all major yaoi archives from A to Z in a particular fandom, and patterns start to show up. Things that are written in author introductions, tone of voice, how people talk about stories or don't talk about them in their LJs, blogs, recs.

But then it sounds like there is also an element of disapproval in yaoi coming from outside

Oh, that was a bit tongue-in-cheek. We rarely get served cease-and-desists even if we know full well the Japanese corporation disapproves of fan works. Some smaller manga (comic) circles like CLAMP will ask their fans not to reproduce their work on the web and go wild with the fan stuff.

For the most part, we don't worry about covering our asses, other than the obligatory warning page. That said, I have never seen a fan yaoi site without a warning page.

The celebration is mostly enjoying the sex and the stories. And the company, of course. Nothing too deep there ^^ I guess what I'm trying to say is that yaoi writers generally have a different comfort zone. Most of us will hit the same wall when we start talking about really distinctly immoral stuff or squicky stuff. But grey areas like chan? If someone has an unusual, left-of-center kink in a slash fandom, there's just like... either embarrassment or over-compensation (like opening a site?). In yaoi, equal size fandom... the dude before you probably wrote some tentacle sex. It's no big deal.

is there a reason this centers on boy/boy instead of boy/girl?

Yaoi because it is inherently M/M and in Japan it was originally aimed at young girls. (There's more quibble on the semantics, but that's the basics.) So the demographics tend to be female.

M/F on the other hand, gets a bit weird. There are far more graphic hentai (porn) pictures to support M/F; unless it's a pocket of relatively sane persons slashing the male and female leads, you're wandering into a den of teenage boys. Or likeminded. And geez that's scary. Oddly you start getting back into taboo, but it boils down to badly written wanks (in the dirty sense, not the fandom sense.)

The relatively sane persons otoh find themselves besieged by the yaoi M/M and of course the yuri F/F. It's not really personal, IMO. They're just madly outnumbered. Plus some of us have het squicks *G*.

Anyway, I'm making some broad sweeping generalizations. There's lots of people who do both slash and yaoi, and do it well. However if there weren't some distinctions, those two terms (and camps) wouldn't exist and persist. Lots of people would say they're the same thing. I say, they're fandoms, all fandoms are the same animal. Just different stripes. ^^

[shusu.livejournal.com]

Also... they're pictures. Not visceral, as a rule.

I personally find that makes a huge difference.

taboo-ness

[shusu.livejournal.com]

Oh, it does come up. Meaning to say that it's not a... hangup? Especially not for basic sex scenes. Again, a subjective read on tone variations.

There's probably been discussions on chan, but I've never heard of really protracted ones in yaoi circles.

[closet-geek.livejournal.com]

I don't take issue with the chan or underage character debates that have been going around lately. I don't see them as underage, because, well, me=underage. It's not an issue with me as it is with the majority of the people having these debates, like you said "To me that they're that age and there's sex involved means pretty much nothing at all". We come to the same conclusion, but because of different circumstances--obviously, the idea of youth sex to me isn't strange, because when I read those fics it's as if I'm listening to my friends talk, or reading about my own experiences. When I look at a sixteen year old boy and imagine myself with him, I'm probably looking at my boyfriend. (He better hope so, anyway.) I don't view chan as horribly wrong or immoral, because that would be like pointing back to my last Friday out and shouting, "Whore!" It's difficult for me to imagine why exactly youth sex is wrong, even from the viewpoint of someone older than me, because even though they are going through the trainwreck of their teenage years, I'm sure they at least have memories. (But I haven't been following the discussion, so I'm going to find that sock and put it in. *gag*)

But re: the boys vs. girls...When I was growing up I was always looking for girls in my books and in my movies to identify with--if I was into LOTR, I would probably be one of those girls who would mention the fact that there were no major female characters. I know it's more based on the physical element rather than, or more so, the psychological element. Or maybe in my case they're intertwined. It goes farther than simply looking for girls to identify with, because in my mind they have to be Asian as well. Growing up in the Middle East more populated with Pakistanis, Indians, and Arabs than Asians or Orientals, added onto the fact that it was an intensely male-dominated country, had me yearning for a familiar face, one that looked like mine. The face had to be female because there were never enough of them around, and she had to be Asian, because there were even less of them knocking around my town. But I never got the Asian girl to identify with. (Mulan came out a little later than I needed.) So it's a bit more than identifying more with males than females, WW and her troubles aren't interesting to me either, but as a kid I would've grabbed onto the fact that they were *female* troubles. It's an almost primal instinct for me, because even though I didn't look like WW or Heaving Bosom Lady (please. When I fall face forward, my boobs don't spring me back up) it's enough that she's a woman, and I take comfort that she's there.

Anyway, I don't see these characters as underaged either. Of course I wouldn't. They're me. Obviously, you don't either, so at ease, and perv along.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Permission to perv! Excellent!

Yeah, this is why I think the labels can be helpful. For me "chan" refers to a story with a kid who's a kid physically. No older than 14 but usually younger, and the other person's probably an adult. It's all about mixing an adult sexuality with a pre-sexual kid. With two teenagers they're at an age where it's normal for them to be sexual so anything goes. I mean, if it's a teacher/student their ages are going to be an issue and regardless somebody's age is part of their personality, but I don't think the fact that they're having sex is any different than someone else. Even though I'm technically older than the kids in the story I'm not that aware of it...I guess about as much as I would be if I were 50 and reading about two 22-year-olds. So yeah, it doesn't strike me as immoral. Neither does chan, really, which is about little kids and adults. I'm not into it but it doesn't freak me out that it exists and I don't wonder if somebody's crazy if they like it.

When I fall face forward, my boobs don't spring me back up) it's enough that she's a woman, and I take comfort that she's there.


You're right--I mean, there's probably a huge difference when you've got nothing to choose from. Then you're more likely to just want to see something. I had plenty of books with girls I could have identified with--even setting aside the girl characters I didn't like there were plenty I did like--I just went for the boys!

[ljash.livejournal.com]

Because of this I was a very young slasher, long before I knew such a thing existed and before I added anything sexual in the mix. I was just into the two guys' being intensely involved somehow.

Heh... that's almost bringing back memories and casting them in a different light.

I think that in general there are better stories out there about guys. At least when I was growing up--now the storytellers are getting more strident about having good female characters. I unfortunately felt resigned to identifying with the girls and didn't like it. I wish I had thought of being the boys instead. And it's not because I'm necessarily shaped more like a woman. I think I never really paid attention to that. (though I certainly notice these days that bishounen quality, both in identifying with it and finding it attractive.)

I think sometimes that I'm going through slash to something else. Because of slash I've noticed things that I might not have before. Once I ran across the idea of slashing Lex and Clark on Smallville, which I actually can't do and find kind of absurd, I started noticing how close they are. I started noticing how comfortable they are with each other, and how there's even a vague easy physicality to it. I notice more of those things now and I'm glad I do. Sometimes I'll stretch it into slash but usually that's not necessary or even sensical.

Robin and Batman have a nifty dynamic, and again I wish this is something I'd been drawn to when I was young. They are opposites in many ways and their identities play off each other in interesting ways. They have that mentor/apprentice dynamic which is just always complicated. It's a father/son dynamic but it's not real father and son and never can be, which always leads to a kind of tension that I find touching. It could have a sexual tension to it but doesn't have to, which is of course the nebulous area where slash is born. Most slash is exploratory, I find. It's about seeing what happens when you push something over an edge.

But of course that kind of thing leads you right into cross-generational slash, which is a step away from chan. Well, it's a few steps away.

I also find that, especially in the HP world, I'm drawn to the stories about the kids. Not as 11 or 12-year-olds, but as 15 or 16. Because that's where the canon left off, and because that's where they're exploding with new tensions, and because they simply weren't sexual beings at those prepubescent ages. And they were less interesting as characters then. However, then ask why I'm drawn to the stories about 15-year-olds when I am also way out of that age bracket and would not find a 15-year-old erotic at all as a partner.

Well.. it's fiction. I'm also drawn to Buffy the Vampire Slayer and identify with its first season 16-year-old heroine. Some part of us is always that age, always tender and uncertain like that. I like the HP stories of the kids at 15 or 16 because that's when they're at a certain place in their personalities. They're exploring and uncertain and angry. I'm generally interested in that--the emotional content and the passion. So I don't feel like a voyeuristic adult, and therefore don't feel guilty if the characters are under 18. And I don't really find chan interesting because there's almost never anything there.

But I think the reason some people get upset and others are baffled is due to their role as the reader. (And the writer can have some say in the role of the reader, due to how it's written.) If it's porny and the idea is to be spying on the hot characters, then it might matter whether you're spying on a legitimate sex symbol. But if the idea is to be inside the heads of the characters, then hot sex or not it won't matter how old they are. Because you're not looking across the distance of age at some young thing, you're being that age.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

At least when I was growing up--now the storytellers are getting more strident about having good female characters.

Sometimes I get frustrated when having a good female character becomes about the girl being perfect, of course. And the weird thing is that "girl books" in mass market now are almost entirely about girls who are obsessed with hotties and that's about it. It's like things are swinging back and forth between extremes for girls still while the boys are going along like always. (Or maybe not--it's not like there's many boy characters who are acting like girls!)

I notice more of those things now and I'm glad I do. Sometimes I'll stretch it into slash but usually that's not necessary or even sensical.

That is interesting! It's good to just have that possibility to think about in ways you wouldn't before. I don't consider slash some major blow for gay rights but it probably does make you think of same sex relationships as more expected.

And word on the Batman/Robin not-quite-father/son. I love that about them. Sex would almost avoid all that. That's much the way I feel about Harry/Ron and slash. I find them more interesting as friends.

And I don't really find chan interesting because there's almost never anything there.

Very true! I mean, most chan I've read is more about a fantasy child created specifically for the kink so there's no real personality there to begin with. I find kids themselves fascinating, but they're interested in other things.

But I think the reason some people get upset and others are baffled is due to their role as the reader.

I think maybe the reason it always surprises me that people are freaked out at the idea of writing stuff like this about books like HP is that I read children's books so often and work in them so much that to me they just are literature. I'm used to seeing kids in kids' books as sexual--or sexual in the future. I don't really seperate them from adults in that way; I'm more used to aging them up and down in my head. Whereas I think a lot of people seem to see something as a children's book and assume it's locked into certain childhood mode. This is especially weird in HP since in canon they're teenagers by now anyway. I wouldn't want JKR to deal with them this way because her books are concerned with different issues of growing up, but there's nothing odd about spinning them a different way in fanfic, imo.

[ljash.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I get frustrated when having a good female character becomes about the girl being perfect, of course.

THat might still be true. It's not always true, it seems I've run across some really incredible girl characters. I can't really remember them right now but I'm very tired.

But there's a sense where a girl is always a girl, whereas a boy can be a person. I remember noticing that very early, maybe age 8. You'd have some kind of ensemble group in a story (this would be TV and cartoons, mostly) and everyone would have something that made them stand out; the boys would all have attributes and the girl would be a girl. That's what made her stand out, that's what defined her. Smurfette, for instance, would be the most bald example, though I think I noticed it consciously on Night Court. I guess I was thinking about these things because you were talking about wanting to be Robin Hood and identifying with boy characters. I really wish I'd done that. I'm not sure why it didn't occur to me.

And word on the Batman/Robin not-quite-father/son. I love that about them. Sex would almost avoid all that.

Yes. That's why mentor/student relationships are wicked complicated. They want to be father/son but they can never really be it and everyone knows it. Deciding to be outright sexual would actually simplify things.

I remember taking a look at Smallville slash and deciding that sex between Clark and Lex would actually decrease the tension. It's a similar kind of thing.

I also ultimately gave up on slashing Frodo and Sam, although mostly because nobody (including me) could do it right. Tolkien wrote a powerful and nebulous love and while it could become physical, nobody who tries to write it can ever capture what Tolkien wrote. Anyhow I gave up on that but I just saw RotK a few hours ago and the slash is sinking in. :)

A note on Harry Potter: I don't recall the exact wording and I'll never find it again, but in an interview with JKR she mentioned that her characters were growing up and would become more sexual. She mentioned a letter some mother had sent her asking her to please not do that, to please make the HP world nonsexual and safe. She said, "Safe? Has she been reading the books? When Harry was only eleven he nearly died several times over."

I also like young adult books. I think that when you read them you become that age, and when you do that you lose the adult's perspective on that age. So you're more likely to see the kids as people, capable of desire and decision. When you're looking as an adult you don't entirely see the kids as people.

(Which has some strange implications for the Draco fandom. A lot of people feel sorry for Draco even when Harry and the narration clearly don't. They see his racism as a product of his father's influence and consider him too young to really be hated for it. But of course Harry would never see it like that. Because what person, of any age at all, would ever say, "Oh he's such-and-such-age-which-is-identical-to-my-age so he's not responsible for his own thoughts." No. They'd say that he's capable of thinking for himself just as much as I am. Now some people feel for Draco because they identify with him, and that leads to good fanfic. But I hear a lot of people who are parents or who are around that age, and they feel sorry for Draco in a distanced way. And that might not be so right.)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

THat might still be true. It's not always true, it seems I've run across some really incredible girl characters.

Oh definitely--there are some fantastic ones. I think nowadays sometimes people feel like they have to make a girl live up to certain things and that creates lesser charactes, but always the ones that last are the ones who are great, but flawed. Like anyone else. Like you said, it's better if they can be who they are instead of having to represent "girlness" on some level.

I also ultimately gave up on slashing Frodo and Sam, although mostly because nobody (including me) could do it right. Tolkien wrote a powerful and nebulous love and while it could become physical, nobody who tries to write it can ever capture what Tolkien wrote. Anyhow I gave up on that but I just saw RotK a few hours ago and the slash is sinking in. :)

Weee! It's interesting how there was all this good stuff after FOTR and not as much after TTT. I think part of the whole thing of F/S is never being able to quite reach what's hinted at in Tolkien--which is as it should be, really.

Now some people feel for Draco because they identify with him, and that leads to good fanfic. But I hear a lot of people who are parents or who are around that age, and they feel sorry for Draco in a distanced way. And that might not be so right

That's really really interesting because I always try to guard against that myself (being someone who loves Draco). On the one hand I joke about being a Draco-mum because I love him and want something better for him, but don't think of him as somebody my age, like a character I have a crush on. Otoh, I don't think you can point to certain parts of a personality and say it's the fault of someone else. I think the personality he has is his. I try to balance seeing the reasons for what he is without feeling like this puts the blame for everything he does on other people. So I don't really see him as a child so much as just a very very screwed up person, responsible for his own decision, but also trapped in a self-destructive personality. That type thing.

[ljash.livejournal.com]

Weee! It's interesting how there was all this good stuff after FOTR and not as much after TTT. I think part of the whole thing of F/S is never being able to quite reach what's hinted at in Tolkien--which is as it should be, really.

I think that there were more close moments in FotR than in TTT. I remember that back before I'd even ever heard of slash or considered anything like that in terms of these books/movies (ah those carefree innocent days!), I was watching the movie for the third time and was suddenly surprised by the way Sam would look at Frodo. I hadn't had time to notice before, but a few times he follows Frodo with his eyes when Frodo isn't looking, and it's a startling look. There wasn't so much in TTT, possibly because both characters were so busy. And then RotK. Have you seen it? I keep forgetting what conversations I've had where and what I can say.

So I don't really see him as a child so much as just a very very screwed up person, responsible for his own decision, but also trapped in a self-destructive personality. That type thing.

Yes, I think that's the best way to see him. I don't really like the idea of being a Draco-mum, but I also don't see myself as his peer or have a crush on him. I'm not really in the story at all, except the parts of me that are him.

bishounen

[(Anonymous)]

Bishounen exists in Western literature and art, also. Like in Gainsborough's Blue Boy, Boy's Own lit, and WW1 lit.

Leshii

Re: bishounen

[shusu.livejournal.com]

True. But I wager they don't get cults. ^^

There's also some other specifically Japanese nuances that I just can't remember.

Re: bishounen

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Ah! That shouldn't surprise me. Reading this I did start thinking about references to that type of thing in The Great War and Modern Memory.