#fanon joke or a valid reading of the text? i can’t tell you what to believe anon but i have my receipts

[huntquinlan]

did sjm ever write that azriel touched himself to the powder elain gifted him or is that a Fanon joke?

dearest anon,

roses are red, violets are blue,

here are some excerpts,

specially picked, just for you:

…

…

a “fanon” joke this may be,

but anon, dear,

i hope you can see,

that 2 + 2 = 4, not 3.

[ouyangzizhensdad]

criticism in fandom circles

someone made a comment on one of my meta post generally deploring a certain state of negativity in the fandom against people for having only consumed cql and for not enjoying certain fanon/headcanons that are not necessarily well supported in canon. I understand where this person is coming from and I do want to say that yes, the sentiment that we should let people enjoy things is totally valid and good--but I feel the growing need to point out that this does not mean that any form of critical engagement with a piece of work or with the fandom is in itself a form of negativity. I think to a degree that the more recent culture of Everyone is Valid has at times turned into “any criticism or forms of disagreement is Negative and Harassment”. While well-meaning, it has imo had a consequence of lowering fan’s shared expectations and the quality of fanworks in general. 

Regarding the more specific point about cql/mdzs: I have no qualms admitting I am part of the people who deplore the fact that fans who have only interacted with cql will impose things from cql unto mdzs. This criticism is not to say that people can’t decide to only watch cql and still take part in a fandom: instead this criticism is trying to highlight that, since cql and mdzs are ultimately such different pieces of work, people in the fandom could do more of an effort to separate fandom discussions that are solely about cql from those about mdzs. For example, I am not personally interested in reading fics based on cql anymore because I struggle to find in them the dynamics I like from the novel: i have tried to exclude the “the untamed” tag on AO3, and yet I still get fics which are clearly based on cql (often explicitly so) in the “mdzs - mxtx” tag. My posts talking about cql/mdzs are also about encouraging people to engage more critically with adaptations, and seeing that a piece of fiction is more than the sum of its parts; that is, that whenever something is taken away, it can end up fundamentally changing the story being told even if many elements remain the same. 

Regarding the ‘let people have their fun’/let’s not be negative part: Of course I can only speak from my standpoint, but my goal has never been to make people feel bad for enjoying fandom the way they do. I don’t comment on people’s post to disagree with them because it would feel a little bit too personal--the only time i respond to an existing post is when i feel like i can add another argument in favour of the discussion rather than to offer a counter-point. But making a post about an idea that is floating around in the fandom, and addressing why this idea might be not well-supported in canon, is not being negative. It is offering a different perspective on something that is widespread and generally unchallenged. To me this is important because some jokes and headcanons can become established fanon, which will result in most fans never thinking twice about them. And with it is taken away the chance of exploring what’s actually there in the text in terms of characterisation or motivations or themes. And again, it’s not the end of the world, but it does cheapen the extent to which we can engage with the piece of work we all share a love for. Providing another perspective, or at least arguments against a headcanon/fanon is not a way to tell people to stop having fun: but perhaps to try to see if they still find it as fun after taking that information into consideration, and whether they might not find an alternative take on a character/situation more compelling in the end.

Also, participating in fandom spaces can teach you a lot about how to understand and analyse media, or to engage on a deeper level with a text. But it can’t do that if we’re afraid of any critical discussions or any criticisms. Criticism is what makes us smarter readers/viewers and better creators. I do agree that there are bad ways of doing it, but ultimately i feel like we’re all richer when there is a healthy environment for critical thinking/constructive criticism in our fandom. I’m a fandom Old, so I remember that people used to be a lot more okay with labeling their fan content as “ooc” or “crack” or “headcanon” when they just wanted to have fun without sticking to the canon. I don’t think it made fandom more negative. Just more transparent.