This topic came up talking to [livejournal.com profile] cathexys and I'd love to hear what all the slash readers/writers on my flist think about it. Basically, it was a question about the idea of "original slash," meaning slash about original characters and whether that could actually be called slash. My first answer was obviously not--slash implies fanfic, of course. Not only that, but it implies some difference from the text. Thus: Chandler/Joey=slash because they are both straight in canon (sadly, these two were the first male couple I could come up with where I felt comfortable really saying their sexuality was established in canon-I tossed out a lot of others I was going to put there). Will/Bran=slash because as 12-year-olds their sexuality has not been defined and we're filling in a blank. Blaise/Theodore=slash because they are names in the text and we’re filling in the rest. However, Brian/Justin=/=because they are gay in canon. At least that's how I do it.



Because it struck me that I can easily imagine reading a fic about two original characters that read to me as slash despite not having a source text. Similarly, I suspect one might be able to read a Brian/Justin fic and consider it slash too--saying, "This author took a gay romance and turned it into slash!" I think anybody familiar with slash would understand what was meant by that criticism, whether or not they could articulate it: does it mean Brian and Justin have become wimpified? Too emotional? Feminized? Does Brian suddenly not want to sleep around? Does Justin suddenly need children? Is one of them pregnant? Things like that.

But what would it really mean? Would it just be bad characterization? Because one could characterize them badly in many ways. I think part of it--not all, but part--would literally come from an author supplying a slash factor that isn't there in canon. That is, almost writing *as if* Brian and Justin exist in a primarily straight canon and have been made gay only here, in the story. Sure everyone else is/has been made gay too, but then that's not unusual in slash. What I mean to say, I guess, is that rather than taking the direct route and writing gay Brian and Justin as seen on the US QAF, a writer (and I'm speaking hypothetically here, not criticizing any writer of B/J because I haven't read any QAF fic) could go through the motions of slash: create a phantom Brian and Justin to which she relates as she would straight men, make *them* gay and write the slash from there. I don't think this is something the writer would be aware of doing--I can't imagine a slash writer sitting down to think about what the characters would be like straight. Why bother? I rather think that the act of slashing could become so natural you wouldn't have to think about it. You would just miss it if it weren't there. I described it to [livejournal.com profile] cathexys as it being a bit like you and your naked partner dressing up just so that you could take each other's clothes off.

You could do this with original characters too. I know some writers on my flist have described their original fic as "slashy" (which is different from slash, but since they're the ones making it slashy, perhaps there's a little slashing going on there as well). I know I often wind up thinking about slash when I write, despite the fact that most of the characters I write for are about ten or eleven (hey, so were Will and Bran and all of Harry’s class at Hogwarts!). I don’t slash them, but it makes me think of their relationship from non-sexual slashy angles-yes, they do exist, imo. So I think it seems almost natural for slash writers to have gotten to the point where they/we can slash without the need of a straight source text. We all carry a phantom source text, in a way, that adds tension or a foundation to a story without anyone knowing where that tension came from. Perhaps, I thought, years from now there might be a real recognizable tradition in early 21st century lit (particularly amongst female writers?) that actually came from slash. Students would have to study the history of it to see where it originally came from, though they might interpret it a different way themselves.

For instance, look at Frodo and Sam. A while ago I read The Great War and Modern Memory and the author had a whole section on homoeroticism in WWI literature--a section some, apparently, found offensive. But his point was really interesting, especially for anyone interested in slash. Essentially what he described was a huge hurt/no-comfort narrative running throughout war literature: beautiful and beloved young man dies in the arms of the narrator. I believe the author pointed out that while there was tons of homoeroticism (it was completely common for commanders to find favorites in the prettiest youths under their command), homosexuality was quite rare. It wasn’t homosexuality as we understand it today it was...something else. That may sound like a sort of prissy denial, I don’t think it is. After all, don't we see something similar in slash after all? The homoerotic/homosexual meaning something else besides the recreation of what we call homosexuality in real life? Clearly it is something else, or else there wouldn’t be an ongoing discussion of just how much slash should or shouldn’t mirror real life gay men.

LOTR doesn't go too over the top with that imagery, but we all know there's a bit of it there, which is why people nowadays ask whether Frodo and Sam are gay, or Sam is, since he's the one usually waxing rhapsodic.;-) While I don't think they are, there are a lot of ways of disagreeing with that proposition that annoy me. One of those is, "I hug my friends all the time! Like when we see each other at the mall, even! You can hug your friend without being gaaaaayyy!" And that bugs me because yes, hugging your friend doesn't make you gay, but Frodo and Sam are not hugging like you and your friends. A modern reader who raises an eyebrow at Sam's affection does not have to be being stupid or childish or puerile, because come on, Sam's affection is written in a way that modern writing reserves for romance. He is physically attracted to Frodo literally, just not (necessarily) sexually. Nowadays, though, men are not physically attracted to each other, period, so you can't blame someone for reading certain passages that way. You can blame them even less when you get a load of this WW1 literary tradition, which is pretty damned slashy! It reads differently to us today, perhaps, than it did to contemporary readers of the time because modern readers don't make the same associations with it. They don't just "get it" the way perhaps others in the past might have.

So I wonder if slash writers might affect literature the same way. Think about it: you'd have a writer who is perhaps used to taking canonically straight or unresolved characters and having them interact sexually with people of their own gender--interact in many different ways, too: angrily, sweetly, lovingly, humorously, tediously. Now you've got that writer doing original fic. Still interested in male characters (as perhaps many slash writers/readers are-I know I am), s/he might easily dip into his/her slash experience to write them. Nowadays that would probably play as slashy to anyone reading, whether or not they knew the word slash, because we understand and are familiar with the culture of which slash is a part. But perhaps in the future that same text would be looked at differently; people might see other things in that tension besides the sexuality of it, particularly if (*crosses fingers*) by then homosexuality has become seen as just a normal part of human life.

Would slash-influenced original work come across as simply prudish homoeroticism? Just as the more subtle and complex things Tolkien was saying with Frodo and Sam sometimes get reduced to just, "Just shag already!" Or would the complexities become *more* clear because after all, it isn't just sex it's often got other gender and intimacy issues among other things. I mean, there's a lot of slash that's PWP, but this hypothetical original writing would presumably not be porn, and when there's no actual sex in the story slash writers tend to get really intense about the friendships involved. Plus, it seems like it would be hard to look at several slashy texts with completely different tones (funny, angry, light, heavy, violent), and think they were all only about sex.

Err, so I wonder how any of the slash writers on my flist feel about slash and original writing. Do you all feel it influences it? How do you incorporate it into your original fic, be your original characters straight of gay?
Tags:

From: [identity profile] ginzai.livejournal.com


Hm... As a writer of self-proclaimed slashy original works, your entry intrigued me. I think that there's is still a wide variation on what people call "slash", despite how firm your own convictions on the term may be. What I mean is... I grew into reading slash fic from anime, and perhaps that's influenced my opinion. To me, slash isn't homosexual or homoerotic fanfic regarding canonically straight characters. Slash is simply stories that involve bi or gay characters, or that heavily feature homosexual or homoerotic themes.

It simplifies things quite a bit. It means that I'm just as comfortable calling a Robin Hood/Will Scarlett fic slash as I am calling Harry/Draco slash. The same goes for canonically gay pairings. I equally use slash both in and out of fanfic, but then I refer to both fanfic and original fic as "fic," for "fiction."

Fic is fic to me; something that is of particular interest, I think, is how many fanfic conventions come out when fanfic writers try their hands at original stories. Online stories are written in a considerably different way than printed text. Often it seems that online original work is written for impact per chapter, whereas printed books tend to have more emphasis on the story arc itself, the plot and keeping things smooth. I'd elaborate, but I'm running late to go get a kid from daycare. ^_^

Argh. In short, slash = homosexual or homoerotic themes in a work of fiction. The characters can be canonically gay, they can be canonically straight, they can be canonically attracted to watermelons, it doesn't matter.

But out of curiousity, why do people have a problem with turning canonically gay characters straight? we turn canonically - or assumed canonically - straight characters gay all the time. When I read, it's for the characters and their relationships with other characters, not because a man is boinking another man.

I think I'd make more sense if I wasn't typing at 70 WPM trying to get this out. Ack. Late!
ext_841: (Default)

From: [identity profile] cathexys.livejournal.com


ha...i was waiting for anime folks to jump in...b/c yaoi puts yet another spin on the issue altogether, doesn't it? thanks on emphasing the conventions too!!!
ext_6866: (Hmmmm..)

From: [identity profile] sistermagpie.livejournal.com


Hm... As a writer of self-proclaimed slashy original works, your entry intrigued me. I think that there's is still a wide variation on what people call "slash", despite how firm your own convictions on the term may be.

I think you're totally right. Especially since while I know there are plenty of people who define it just the way you have here, and that you and I probably mostly agree on what slash is (like, if you gave me a story and said it was slash chances are I would agree), there's also even that other whole grey area of how sexual does it have to be? In other words, "What of pre-slash?" that strange warning that basically tells you what's going to happen to the characters after the story?

I hadn't thought of it until now, but it just occurred to me since as I said above I'm somebody who I think has been slashing since I was very small--long before I knew the word and long before I hit puberty. Back then it was probably more about the angst and the passion or whatever between the male characters I would get attached to. So sex didn't even have to come into it, literally!

But out of curiousity, why do people have a problem with turning canonically gay characters straight?

That's a good question and I suspect it's a politically correct thing--there are fewer gay characters so it's considered either poaching or perhaps homophobic because you're trying to "fix" the character and make them "normal," which is not to say you ARE doing that, but I'll bet you might be accused of it.
ext_841: (Default)

From: [identity profile] cathexys.livejournal.com


though i've seen a couple of interesting fics where justin or brian had a couple of one offs with a CC (i remember one where brian got daphne pregnant)...i don't think we'd ever turn them straight, but i could see a shimmer of bi-ness somewhere :-)
ext_6866: (Hmmmm..)

From: [identity profile] sistermagpie.livejournal.com


That's a very good point-I think bi-ness is probably fine, particularly for threesomes where the female character is sort of facilitating the slash.

Also I realized I should say that what I did when I was young wasn't completely a-sexual or non-sexual. It was, I guess, pre-sexual.:-) It had a child's sexuality to it so wasn't completely gen.

From: [identity profile] executrix.livejournal.com


And not just pre-slash but clean slash--i.e., the story is about or includes as characters a same-sex couple, but in the diagesis they blow stuff up or catch criminals or colonize a new planet or fight Voldemort or discover the cause and cure of an epidemic...but they don't have "on-screen" sex.

From: [identity profile] ginzai.livejournal.com


Argh. This is what I get for posting at the last minute and not checking over my words... I really didn't make much sense, for which I apologize. ^^;

I really liked what Reenka said before about the need for two levels of a relationship, one for the slash and the other just to be there, a platonic connection between characters. But then, I look for that in all of the stories I read, and I think one of the major things that annoys me is to create a story where that connection simply doesn't exist. I wonder if that's why it's easier to slash fanfic characters than it is to create a plausible (and enjoyable for the reader) homosexual couple. With original fic, so many writers ignore that crucial in-between stage and jump immediately to getting the characters in bed or in love. It annoys me with fanfic and it will make me simply stop reading an original story. You've *got* to have that other layer to the relationship or its meaningless. Not love, but lust.

Anyway.

I tend to view preslash as author intended UST. *g* Specifically, author intended UST that will, eventually, go somewhere. Even if that somewhere is never actually written, it's implied that in the future of the characters, they'll eventually hook up.

Back then it was probably more about the angst and the passion or whatever between the male characters I would get attached to.

*This* I completely understand. I was the same way and still am; I enjoy reading about character relationships. It doesn't have to be sexual in the slightest for it to be enjoyable. It's the intensity of those relationships that make them all the more fun to read about, though likewise easy to slash. Hm.. But I like that sort of intensity in *all* of my character relationships, which is why certain pairings pop out at me more than others, het *or* slash.

You're probably right about the politially correctness of not hetting canonically gay characters. I suppose it could also be based on how few there are; gay characters in mainstream media are pretty rare.

From: [identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_rp_zeal_/


I think that there's is still a wide variation on what people call "slash", despite how firm your own convictions on the term may be.

ITA. I first came into fandom through doujinshi, which is the Japanese term for 'fanzine', and to think it took me well more than a year to find out that doujinshican be het or gen ^^;;; Anyway, when slash first began to boom on internet back in 98? Or was it 97? The common (mis)conception then was that slash is but "Westerners's way of terming yaoi", which of course makes no real sense to those who truly understand what yaoi stands for- but that's another debate.

Anyway, I no longer am sure about what 'slash' originally stood for, but if you tell me today a story is slash then this is what I would expect of it: a story that features two (or more) male characters being involved romantically with one another. Whether or not there is sex and if so how much and how kinky would be told by its rating. If you tell me it's a piece of 'gay literature', then I would imagine something other than romance is being dealt with, most likely RL gay issues or the concepts about being gay? That's basically how I differentiate between the two 'genres'...

From: [identity profile] yourpoison.livejournal.com


So what would you call a fanfic that has same-sex characters that are shown to be together (but aren't in the source), but the story is about a straight couple (which may or may not be together in the source), not their romance but their quest to defeat an Evil Wizard?

Or, what about a fanfic (let's define that: a story that heavily borrows setting and characters from an original source, in this case Harry Potter) that's centered around two boys who're not together-- or even apparently known to one another-- in canon, and they're already together at the start of the fic, so it's not a get-together romance, and the fic itself is a mystery? All right, I'm talking about [livejournal.com profile] ajhalluk's `Lust Over Pendle'. Draco & Neville got together off-screen, and the fic is definitely set in the HP universe-- cannot be seen as 'normal' literature by any means-- and it's not -about- Draco & Neville being together. I think it has sex, though. Neither is it 'about' being gay-- it just has two same-sex characters (who might be bi, actually) together in a sexual/romantic/committed partnership.

I mean, most people see it as slash. In fact, enough slashfics aren't romance & are instead mysteries or slice-of-life fics or comedies-- I've written plenty of slash comedies myself, only there to amuse. Like, I remember this one fic where the 'joke' was that Harry wanted Draco and he bantered with Ron about it a lot. Was that a romance? Was it slash? Of course it was slash, but it wasn't a romance (that is, no one was 'involved' romantically with anyone-- I'm not even sure if full-on sex occurred), that's for sure, and neither was it gay literature by any stretch of the imagination.

Anyway, I just think it doesn't make sense to combine all the fics that are out there under the label of 'slash' unless you have a semi-precise yet non-exclusive definition. 'Fanfic which has same-sex characters paired together' seems to work best as far as I can see.

From: [identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_rp_zeal_/


Oh! Maybe I shouldn't have said "features", change it to "contains" :P

So what would you call a fanfic that has same-sex characters that are shown to be together (but aren't in the source), but the story is about a straight couple (which may or may not be together in the source), not their romance but their quest to defeat an Evil Wizard?

Slash/Het/Adventure.

Was that a romance? Was it slash? Of course it was slash, but it wasn't a romance

You can always put 'Other' in the fic category section, I guess?

From: [identity profile] yourpoison.livejournal.com


Ahahah you've read a lot of fics on Fiction Alley, haven't you? 'Cause that's the only place I remember seeing 'slash' as a category of fic. I think this all gets back to me not thinking you have to 'warn' for slash-- and thusly if it's romance, it's romance whether it's het or slash. I mean, I'd 'warn' about pairings, but not slash in general. But then it's a personal pet peeve.

Anyway, I think I was just saying you could easily say it's 'romance' or 'adventure' or 'comedy/adventure/romance' without including slash anywhere in there. (Like, what if it was a romance of a het couple that had a same-sex subtext that never became a romance?) You could sort of say "hints of H/D" for instance-- that's what they'd do in anime fandoms-- but there's no reason to say it's same-sex romance even though it's 'slashy'. Er. Or something.

From: [identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_rp_zeal_/


Ha! I don't see it (categorising something under slash) as 'warning' but more as 'soliciting', that prolly why I don't find it a somewhat negative thing. There are an amazing lot of people who only go for fics with m/m sex (or NC-17 or incest or...) after all, it's doing them mercy telling them upfront if the story contains what they look for :P

Like, what if it was a romance of a het couple that had a same-sex subtext that never became a romance?

Then you call it het, and burn anyone who dares to criticise the story's same-sex subtext alive *g* Speaking of nowadays "boy's" anime, there's a fine line between slashy and "fake slash" or otherwisely known as fucking with slashers' heads which is just plain evil. Jump for example resembles giant cigarette companies with unspeakable tarket market more than anything else now imho.

From: [identity profile] ginzai.livejournal.com


I applaud your personal pet peeve as it's one of my own. Romance is romance, and if you're tossing together two random characters for the flash value of the pairing, and not backing it up at all in the plot and character development, then it's not going to be worth reading. And, to me, that goes for both het and same-sex couples.

In regards to pairings that have undertones, say of H/D, but don't actually develop into a relationship proper, I'd simply call that subtext and be done with it.

From: [identity profile] ginzai.livejournal.com


*g* Ah, yaoi... When one thinks about how that term came to be, one cannot help but be amused. XD I'm one of those anime fans who was utterly astounded to realize that people considered slash as being so different from yaoi (or more precisely, the modern definition of 'yaoi', which seems to be anything from sweet shonen ai that's more hand holding than anything else to graphic, NC-17 full on yaoi).

"Slash" as a term first came about in the Star Trek fandom in the seventies and was used because of how people wrote the names of the characters involved. Kirk/Spock, stuff like that. I don't think it ever had the anime implications of seme and uke though, which is almost a shame. I miss knowing the seme and the uke in slash fandoms, not so much for caring who does what in sex, but because I like knowing who pursues whom. But that all goes back to what I consider to be in-character or not. ^_^

From: [identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_rp_zeal_/


Oh. Oh. Duh. I've heard about the Star Trek story before, more than once actually, why the heck did I forget -_-;;;

I miss knowing the seme and the uke in slash fandoms

I kind of miss that too, and actually, I dare say the majority of fics one would consider IC in the end are the ones with the same seme/uke sequence as the reader desires. Because most fanfic writers associate a character's 'position' on bed with his personality elsewhere... and it's not really a good thing. I do have read great H/D fics in which Draco is or 'takes turns to be' seme and are perfectly IC in my eyes, and I truly admire those authors. For breaking the cursed link between character personality and seme/uke position I mean :P
.

Profile

sistermagpie: Classic magpie (Default)
sistermagpie

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags