I guess I don't really think any characters have 'secret lives' away from their creators enough so that I could really believe we're not shown it, but they want each other. Like, I could feel something there, but my perception is mine-- I see the slash but wouldn't claim it's really there because I can't claim any subtext is 'really there' without being proven right by the text. I think I'm seeing the show/source text as 'just a story' more than a real situation, I guess...? And even in RPS, it's still 'just a story' in so far as the fans don't really have access to what I'd consider 'the truth'.
Except even in "just a story," there's plot logic and character logic and you can take what you know of human behavior and extrapolate pretty well on the parts that aren't made explicit in the framework of the story (and there are always such parts). I have no idea if you're a writer or not, but I tend to think that there are parts of characters' lives which are conducted "off the page," and part of the reason I think this is because, as a writer, I know all kinds of things about my characters that never make it into a story explicitly, yet are certainly there informing what my characters do say and do "on the page."
I didn't mean there was low/non-existent sexual subtext-- just low/non-existent sexual text or since actuality-- since one couldn't measure the amount of subtext, and if you wanted, you could imagine they're dying for each other even if they hated each other (...I know I have).
Then perhaps you should not have said "non-sexual subtext." Perhaps you should have said "non-sexual text."
However, I'm not saying that they're creating something out of nothing-- to them it's not nothing. I think I'm saying the act of slashing is subjective, because after all, you can't have 'objective' fanfic or you'd have 'text'-- some sort of authority.
Okay, when you say "non-sexual subtext?" You're saying something out of nothing. Now you're saying that's not what you meant to say, but it's what you did say, and therefore it's what I was responding to.
I don't know if I'm (trying to) make unexamined assumptions-- and my views aren't set in stone or anything. I'm pretty interested in what 'slash' entails to the point where I've been following meta discussions on it for years now. So it's kind of 'what I've picked up' mixed in with my own opinion on it. I'm not trying to prove I'm right so much as question things and try to understand, I guess...? So in this way I wouldn't call anything I've said an 'argument' meant to convince ('cause in that case I'd have to do actual research, heh).
Well, I hope my own opinions and viewpoint are of use to you.
Well, it's slash if said same-sex relationship (written well/IC or not) was intended to be a commentary on some pre-existing text. Then yeah, it's slash. Basically, if it's a fanfic :>
In my experience, yeah, that's the common view and the definition I generally see.
Ah, but the common view is changing, which is what the original post seemed to be about. I've seen a number of slash authors point to "original slash" they have written or are in the process of writing, and I've seen slash readers follow the links, read, and rec the stories using the terminology "original slash." Therefore, if you base your own usage of the term slash on the common view, then it seems that we only need wait until a certain number of slash authors are writing original slash, and a certain number of slash readers referring to it as such, before you too start using the term.
Myself, I've found it handy to start using it now and beat the rush.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Part 1
Date: 2004-11-20 06:36 pm (UTC)Except even in "just a story," there's plot logic and character logic and you can take what you know of human behavior and extrapolate pretty well on the parts that aren't made explicit in the framework of the story (and there are always such parts). I have no idea if you're a writer or not, but I tend to think that there are parts of characters' lives which are conducted "off the page," and part of the reason I think this is because, as a writer, I know all kinds of things about my characters that never make it into a story explicitly, yet are certainly there informing what my characters do say and do "on the page."
I didn't mean there was low/non-existent sexual subtext-- just low/non-existent sexual text or since actuality-- since one couldn't measure the amount of subtext, and if you wanted, you could imagine they're dying for each other even if they hated each other (...I know I have).
Then perhaps you should not have said "non-sexual subtext." Perhaps you should have said "non-sexual text."
However, I'm not saying that they're creating something out of nothing-- to them it's not nothing. I think I'm saying the act of slashing is subjective, because after all, you can't have 'objective' fanfic or you'd have 'text'-- some sort of authority.
Okay, when you say "non-sexual subtext?" You're saying something out of nothing. Now you're saying that's not what you meant to say, but it's what you did say, and therefore it's what I was responding to.
I don't know if I'm (trying to) make unexamined assumptions-- and my views aren't set in stone or anything. I'm pretty interested in what 'slash' entails to the point where I've been following meta discussions on it for years now. So it's kind of 'what I've picked up' mixed in with my own opinion on it. I'm not trying to prove I'm right so much as question things and try to understand, I guess...? So in this way I wouldn't call anything I've said an 'argument' meant to convince ('cause in that case I'd have to do actual research, heh).
Well, I hope my own opinions and viewpoint are of use to you.
Well, it's slash if said same-sex relationship (written well/IC or not) was intended to be a commentary on some pre-existing text. Then yeah, it's slash. Basically, if it's a fanfic :>
In my experience, yeah, that's the common view and the definition I generally see.
Ah, but the common view is changing, which is what the original post seemed to be about. I've seen a number of slash authors point to "original slash" they have written or are in the process of writing, and I've seen slash readers follow the links, read, and rec the stories using the terminology "original slash." Therefore, if you base your own usage of the term slash on the common view, then it seems that we only need wait until a certain number of slash authors are writing original slash, and a certain number of slash readers referring to it as such, before you too start using the term.
Myself, I've found it handy to start using it now and beat the rush.