I agree that the act of 'slashing' is a sexualizing of the original non-sexual subtext between (normally) two men
I'm not sure how you can agree with that, since I never said it, and in fact vehemently disagree with it. When I slash a fannish source, I'm commenting on and making overt the sexuality I see in the source. If I find the source non-sexual, I don't slash it.
Which is kinda why QaF fic works for me even though it's about a canon same-sex relationship-- because I think most fic still subverts the text by making it a romantic as well as sexual relationship-- most (good) fics seem to be focusing on Brian's journey to admit his feelings for Justin, which is an interesting breed of slash, but is still slash in that it messes with an existing relationship between a same-sex couple.
Wow, do I disagree with your reading of the B/J relationship. To me, it's both sexual and romantic, and has been since the beginning. But then, my definition of romance is much broader than what is written between the covers of a Harlequin, which seems to be the definition you're using here. In any case, when I write QaF fanfic, I'm commenting on what I already see in the source. It's a unique case in that I don't have to make the sexual subtext overt, but I'm still exploring the relationship through my own filter. Though I'd hardly call that "messing" with it.
If it's got the 'slash aesthetic', then I'm just not sure what that -is- without the act of slashing-- from an existing source text, which an original fic would clearly lack. That is, you could obviously have a sexual relationship between two men-- but what would be the source text? That's what I don't get at all.
The source text is the text that you yourself are writing. You slash it by taking what would be subtextual sexual tension between your characters and making it overt. And usually, the you slashing it is a slash author writing for a slash audience, but using original characters. I agree original slash falls under the umbrella of "romance," but I find the specificity of the term useful in many instances.
Mostly I just wanted to say that to 'view a source text in a certain way', you'd need to have a source text.
You don't think you can view your own text in a certain way as you're writing it? I do, and have.
And you could say that an original fic would kind of create a non-sexual foundation at the same time as it slashed itself, but I've read a number of so-called original 'slash' fics, and I've never seen this dual narrative work, and am not sure how it would.
See, I think this is where we're bound to keep disagreeing. I don't think you need a "non-sexual foundation" on which to base slash. I don't think slash can be based on a "non-sexual foundation." Hence all the discussion of sexual subtext in fannish sources. What original slash does is move that sexual layer into the text based on its own subtext. And given the numerous arguments I've seen about convincing your audience of your pairing within the course of your story, then I'd say it's definitely possible to set up your own subtext and slash it, whether the subtext is drawn from another source or from the author's own knowledge of the world and characters of her story.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-11-16 08:52 pm (UTC)I'm not sure how you can agree with that, since I never said it, and in fact vehemently disagree with it. When I slash a fannish source, I'm commenting on and making overt the sexuality I see in the source. If I find the source non-sexual, I don't slash it.
Which is kinda why QaF fic works for me even though it's about a canon same-sex relationship-- because I think most fic still subverts the text by making it a romantic as well as sexual relationship-- most (good) fics seem to be focusing on Brian's journey to admit his feelings for Justin, which is an interesting breed of slash, but is still slash in that it messes with an existing relationship between a same-sex couple.
Wow, do I disagree with your reading of the B/J relationship. To me, it's both sexual and romantic, and has been since the beginning. But then, my definition of romance is much broader than what is written between the covers of a Harlequin, which seems to be the definition you're using here. In any case, when I write QaF fanfic, I'm commenting on what I already see in the source. It's a unique case in that I don't have to make the sexual subtext overt, but I'm still exploring the relationship through my own filter. Though I'd hardly call that "messing" with it.
If it's got the 'slash aesthetic', then I'm just not sure what that -is- without the act of slashing-- from an existing source text, which an original fic would clearly lack. That is, you could obviously have a sexual relationship between two men-- but what would be the source text? That's what I don't get at all.
The source text is the text that you yourself are writing. You slash it by taking what would be subtextual sexual tension between your characters and making it overt. And usually, the you slashing it is a slash author writing for a slash audience, but using original characters. I agree original slash falls under the umbrella of "romance," but I find the specificity of the term useful in many instances.
Mostly I just wanted to say that to 'view a source text in a certain way', you'd need to have a source text.
You don't think you can view your own text in a certain way as you're writing it? I do, and have.
And you could say that an original fic would kind of create a non-sexual foundation at the same time as it slashed itself, but I've read a number of so-called original 'slash' fics, and I've never seen this dual narrative work, and am not sure how it would.
See, I think this is where we're bound to keep disagreeing. I don't think you need a "non-sexual foundation" on which to base slash. I don't think slash can be based on a "non-sexual foundation." Hence all the discussion of sexual subtext in fannish sources. What original slash does is move that sexual layer into the text based on its own subtext. And given the numerous arguments I've seen about convincing your audience of your pairing within the course of your story, then I'd say it's definitely possible to set up your own subtext and slash it, whether the subtext is drawn from another source or from the author's own knowledge of the world and characters of her story.