#why would i be outraged that weird content exists on the internet | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

nightswithkookmin · 4 years ago

Text

TAE TELLS: JIKOOK

It's taken me days to get round to making this blog post- commenting on another Jikooker's analysis.

Now y'all don't need me to provide a tall list on all the reasons that this a bad bad idea for me. Lol.

Been there. Done that. Doesn't end too well.

Mi nar wan treble wif gudt piipel.

But I also don't want to shy away from the conversation; whether or not Tae is good at keeping Jikook's secret. Whether that is a tell. If it is, does that mean all the times he's 'exposed' Jikook were wrong analysis etc.

Let me start off by saying, I totally admire this content creator. I don't have a particular favorite Video creator- most of my go to YouTube jikook content creators are Spanish speaking content creators, Karmy and a few Iarmy- a lot of whom have disappeared off of the surface of the internet over the years.

These days I watch just about anyone that shows up on my recommendation or home feed. Used to leave comments and what not but I've refrained from that due to privacy issues and prefer to share my thoughts on my blog instead.

Haven't seen a lot of her analysis, but hands down agree with a lot of the analysis she's made in the few I've binge watched so far- thanks to y'all who recommended her to me.

I think for the most part she knows what the fuxk she is doing. She definitely knows what she is talking about in her videos and I like that. I admire that.

I don't disagree with anything I've seen so far on her channel. Especially her thoughts on Kook. Fearless Kook. Absolutely love those.

I think she could have taken time to flesh out her theory on this whole 'Tae is good at keeping Jikook's secret' bit cos it seems that's what causing the stir? I don't know.

'If Tae is good at keeping people's secrets then there is no way he could have exposed Jikook blah blah blah'

Sigh.

Tuktukkers will jump on anything to invalidate Jikook. Sigh. Sigh.

I can't put words in her mouth, but I don't think she was interpreting Jimin's words to mean that Tae is good at keeping others' secrets and so cannot 'expose' Jikook like we been saying in this part of stan land.

And if she did mean it like that then I'm afraid I'd have to humbly disagree.

My understanding of Jimin's assertion that Tae is good at keeping a straight face when it comes to others' secret is that, he meant Tae has a strong poker face and it's hard to tell when he is lying or telling the truth sometimes.

That's all Jimin was saying. In my opinion.

Which honestly, it's truth. Tae is such an actor. A talented one at that. I mean have you been watching Run episodes?! Ayayaya.

I won't play Russian roulette with him cos imma end up with bullets in my head.

Play Texas hold'em with him at your own risk.

I mean he is the king of blank expressions in BTS. Isn't that why RM describes him as 4D?

He's only what, honed that- should we call it skills, since debut! He's become a master at it. Add his impeccable acting skills to it and its kaboom.

His blank expressions to me sometimes seem like a coping mechanism, if you will. And often times, he deliberately induces it to mask his feelings- when someone says something he finds annoying or something he is uncomfortable with.

A typical example is when JK read 'Tae Kook' in the comments during their VLive and he pretended he didn't know what the fuxk JK was talking about- prompting JK to explain to him that that was their ship name yadda yadda. Insert skull head.

Now we all know HE KNOWS TAE KOOK.

I saw a lot of jokers running around teasing Tuktukkers with the whole "look, your bias don't know y'all ship exists bye'

Listen, I'd join in on the joke- nothing makes me happy than jokers pulling some tuktukker legs but just as long as we all know and agree that's not true.

They all know of their ships.

They've known since the beginning.

They know everything.

When he said get out of your imagination I don't think it was because he had no ideas what homegal was going on about on Weverse.

Tae has many tells. When he exchanges awkward looks with RM or Jimin when Jikook or JK does something outrageous that's a tell.

When he passive aggressively smirks after revealing a detail on the whereabouts of Jimin at 1am that's equally a tell.

The slight head tilt when he says Jk don't want Jimin to come that's equally a tell.

He is very observant.

He loves to observe Jikook when they are up in their shenanigans. In my opinion. So when he is quietly looking at Jikook, observing them with no expression on his face that's equally a tell.

JK is not the only one always watching JM.

I mean he was stood right behind Jimin when he and JK were taking turns staring at eachother while Joonie was busy being eloquent. Tae saw all of that but didn't react to it.

In the recent OT7 VLive when Jimin called Jk too big or something Tae was right behind them and as I pointed out in my analysis on that, he looked away almost as soon as JK turned to look at him- JK was conscious of Tae and he knew Tae was looking at them through the viewfinder.

Sometimes he feels compelled to call them out on it too like he did in the dynamite MV when he blurted out, let's not look in the cameras when JK and Jikook were about to do their weird eye fucking absolutely gay stuff that they be doing from time to time.

All these are tells. To me at least. And I think in her video she was simply pointing out yet another tell of Taes- his blank expressions around Jikook in certain moments.

Having a poker face is one thing, having a blank expression is another.

Like I said his poker face is deliberate. He turns that on in various situations ranging from mild to not so serious circumstances like keeping others from finding out he is a mafia in a game etc.

His blank expressions are often times involuntary. His resting face. Sometimes I don't even think he realises he's blanked out.

When he don't know what to do with himself he blanks out. It's similar to how JK intensely focuses on Jimin when he doesn't know what to do with himself on set or when the cameras are rolling.

When he isn't intensely focusing on Jimin he becomes fidgety or sometimes does some really weird expressions that have popularly become various memes under the heading Jungshook.

It's not just Tae. It's not just Jimin. They all have their tells and go to expressions when they don't know what to do with themselves on camera.

Tae has a strong poker face, he is a master of blank expressions, and he is notoriously one of the most passive aggressive members in BTS.

Any of these can be tells depending on the context and situation.

-As long as we are able to distinguish between these moments and expressions I suppose.

His expression when Jikook were narrating the rain fight for example would be a blank expression and not a poker face in my opinion- a poker face is a deliberate state of induced expressionless demeanor.

Yes he had a blank expression. But I don't think that that was deliberate. That's just his go to resting face when he is not active in a moment most times.

I found his comment, 'that was a long time ago' much more telling that he knew about the rain fight and that expression of embarrassment he had on later equally said that he knew and thought Jikook were being gay unprovoked.

But that is my thought process.

I gotta respect hers too. It's valid.

Him going blank dead silence when Jimin said he loved waking up to see JK's face was more of that 'awkward, can't believe JM just did that shook moments' he gets around Jikook from time to time when they do something very shocking and gay.

I'd be lying if I said I understood what she was driving at with that bit in her video but I don't totally disagree with that.

By her stating that, I don't think she implied the opposite of it. Nor did Jimin by his statement.

Tae has a good poker face don't necessarily mean he is good at keeping secrets. I think it is much more nuanced than that.

I mean he is good at keeping your secret until he misses his best friend and soulmate then it's 'JK don't want Jimin to come' 🤺🤺🤺

Sometimes I wish Jimin were a triplet so I can slipt him between Tae, JK and RM. Suga and Hobi don't mind sharing him with the others and it seems Jin only wants his mirror so... Lmho.

And yes, Tae does give Jikook away from time to time- blank face or not.

I hope this helps??

Signed,

GOLDY

72 notes · View notes

tired-fandom-ndn · 3 years ago

Note

One thing I’ve wondered for a long time is why do you think the culture of fandom on tumblr shifted so much? Like in 2012-2013 fandom on here was generally “cringy” and annoying but ultimately harmless Superwholock fangirls but now it’s literal children sending death threats and gore over ships. Not to say shipping wars haven’t been brutal in the past, but it was obviously never for the reasons they are now. Even media consumption in general. What do you think happened?

I think it's a combination of different things tbh. A lot of people want to blame younger fans for getting into fandom, but that's complete bullshit.

The biggest factors I think are just the shifts in how social media works now, the combination of Facebook completely decimating existing rules about internet safety and privacy and Twitter being designed specifically to encourage outrage and limited responses over actual discussions.

Tumblr has a weird culture stemming from both those issues, with the expectation of sharing personal information freely (name, gender, sexuality, age, ethnicity, race, etc) AND getting attention by generating outrage and emotional responses. Tumblr's design always makes it a lot easier to end up in really insular and extreme circles, I hate the term "echo chamber" because of how it's misused so much but it really does describe a big chunk of tumblr, while also being perfectly designed to make it EXTREMELY easy to harass people.

I also don't think we can ignore the place that creators and corporations have had in this shift. Fandom used to be something that creators either hated or ignored or only indulged at cons, but pretty recently, there's been a huge swing with the rise of social media and now fandom has become one of the main ways that creators and corporations and networks advertise their content. Shipping wars, harassment campaigns, and general fandom bullshit means trending tags and news articles and attention. The more outrage and discussions there are in a fandom, no matter how bad, the better it is for companies trying to make money. Creators and networks use social media to deliberately generate outrage these days and everyone falls for it hook, line, and sinker.

Honestly though, beyond that, there's just so many factors at play that go way beyond fandom and would require taking a long, hard look at social shifts to really understand. Trying to pin down just one cause, as if this is a simple issue that is only a fandom problem, won't actually get us anywhere.

#anonymous

11 notes · View notes

whoovesnassistant · 4 years ago

Text

A Hello, A Thank You, And A Brain Dump.

Dear PwPP team,

I am a recent fan, and I am quite an odd one. I am a lover of everything Doctor Who, so much so I have memorized everything about the Doctor and his interactions during the 2005 revival. Yet since I have watched basically all the doctor who media I had access to (Excluding the most recent season because it does not interest me in the slightest, no offence to 13’s actor) I was without any Doctor Who content that actually interested me.

Well until I made a discovery. You see, when I was moving to a new house, I found a figure I did not remember owning. It looked like a My Little Pony version of Doctor number 10. It fascinated me because It was officially licensed! So, I went down a rabbit hole, and found a whole new Doctor Who community, lost to YouTube, or even, Internet time entirely.

That’s a little bit of a dramatization, but the point still stands that I discovered something that a lot of people forgot. The thing is, I know nothing about the My Little Pony area of fandoms, but I found this new world of Doctor Who so fascinating. Not only that, but it was a whole community!

It was intoxicating! Doctors that I’d never dream of! And actually seeing the doctor see something he truly did not know! But most of all… people who understood what made Doctor Who, Doctor Who.

I’m not a My Little Pony fan, not in the slightest, but as a Doctor who fan, your series is beyond stellar! I know when people understand Doctor Who or not, and you all did know on a level I don’t even thing some real Doctor Who show writers do! Also, your adaptation of the doctor feels so real, it is just stellar!

So, now I have to thank you, all of you. You gave me hope about the future of Doctor who will be bright and full of life! You let me see a new world of story telling. I never saw audio plays used like a legitimate series to such effectiveness and its truly brilliant and has inspired me to try to work on something similar, in due time.

Yet, lastly, thank you so much for the pure, utter joy your work emanates. Yet again, I’m only a Doctor Who fan, but this series has genuinely gave me more enjoyment that some Doctor Who episodes. It is just, raw, stupid, enjoyable, and oh so timey-wimy fun! Even with some real Doctor Who-esc dark/sad moments that makes it feel like I’m listening to a real BBC and Hasbro collaboration!

In fact, the work of your team gave me a Idea for a episode I just couldn’t keep in my head. I know you most likely have plans for all the future audio plays, but I am a story teller through and through, so consider the last part of this letter like a pitch. Yet again, I’m not trying to be entitled and be like “Here’s my idea, Now make it!”, no I literally have no other living soul to share this idea with and its killing me.

Now if I had to title it, it would be a two part play called “Turn Timer” and “Pestering Past”. “Turn Timer” would start with the Tardis crew just bumbling around in time and space. Maybe heading from or to an adventure. Yet when the Tardis enters modern times, it gets thrown off course due to a temporal blackhole (Or something?) making the Tardis materialize in front of a mansion that should not exist, that stands right dead center in the Evergreen Forest (if I got it wrong don’t kill me). The master of the house would be a unicorn named Turn Timer, and would be letting any travelers stay.

Yet when the Doctor reluctantly stays in a room, they discover that some of the travelers have been seeing a hairless ape-like creature attacking residence, even Turn Timer who would have been attacked, saying that they just popped up a few months ago and he’s been trying to cover it up for business.

Soon, after the Doctor and Tick Tock (Sorry but I have to say this here, that name did NOT age well) go off without Derpy who does not quite trust Turn Timer because…. well I made the name reverse Time Turner for a reason. Yet both the Doctor and Tick Tock does not notice the clearly weird name, so that means duel plot! Yay!

Eventually the smart duo would figure out that these creatures are just human like Autons. Yet, since humans, or even humanoids, don’t exist in this universe, this is extremely odd (at least I think, I still know jack about My Little Pony). Also Imagine this would lead into some funny jokes about how the Doctor needs to explain what the hell a human is, and I just imagine Tick Tock confused Autons being exactly like humans and not just modeled by them.

Meanwhile, Derpy would be grilling Turn Timer (Also again, only a Doctor Who fan but I can just imagine the Donna theme here and it makes me smile) and I Imagine that 70% of this second plot would be jokes. Until before the Auton realization, where Turn Timer makes the mistake of saying Doctor instead of Time Turner (Which I assume he would sign in as) and would be forced to knock out Derpy. Now, after they figure out the Autons are Autons, and the jokes are done, I’m guessing that Turn Timer would project some sort of communication hologram or magic thingy to the Doctor so they can have an exchange that goes along like this.

TuTi “Hello Doctor! Sorry but i did not expect for your assistant to be able to see past my perception field.”

Doc “ What did you do to Derpy Turn Timer?”

TiTo “and what perception field?”

TuTi “ Oh don’t be daft, Doctor! I swear ever since you regenerated you have become so thick! you can’t even see what is so clearly obvious! You only know one person who would know the correct configuration for a humanoid Auton, and be smart enough to do it! ”

Doc, in his serious voice, “ Who are you?”

TuTi, Outraged “Don’t act like you don’t know! We are best friends! The bestest of friends that have ever existed. Long before you started taking your pets onto your Tardis. You know deep down, and you are running away from it! Like you ran away from your universe! Our Universe! I am tired of seeing your adventures in this world like you did not live in another.”

TiTo “Who are you then?”

Doc, still serious “Don’t humor him”

TuTi “ Oh Doctor….Can’t even ask your own questions anymore can you? How far you have fallen from what you once were. You once could snap your fingers and make army’s turn and run away. Now you can’t even keep your pets (Companions) on a tight enough leash anymore.”

Doc “ Wait, fingers? how did you-”

TuTi “Oh now you are getting it. Finally, we are getting back the Doctor that counts. My Doctor, The Oncoming Storm! The Great Exterminator! The Destroyer of Skaro! And lastly, The Timelord Victorious!”

Doc panicked and angered yelling (Probably) “Who are you?”

TuTi “ Finally…. Well… I am the master of the house.. the Master! Of the house.”

That is where “Turn Timer” would end and go into “Pestering Past”, which would pick up with the Master finishing his evil monolog and him and Derpy being in some sort of cave with the Masters Tardis being rigged as a paradox machine. Derpy would probably be in some sort of status field but still being able to interact with the Master.

I am sure they would discuss why the Master was so obsessed with getting the Doctor to recognize him. The fact that in the Doctor Who universe, The Master was so utterly empty without his “Best Friend” he could not stand to exist in a world without him, So he tracked the Doctor down, even through different universes just so he could have fun with his “Best Friend”.

Also probably telling Derpy more about the Doctor than he has. And most likely telling stories about when the Doctor was very angry, and why he is the last of the timelords. I thought this would be a very interesting thing to pop up later on, a Derpy is wondering if the Doctor is worth being around if they could do such a thing then turn around and say its horrid.

On the topside, I’m imagining the Doctor more scared and upset than seen in your audio plays. The fact that he came to a whole new universe, a place to make a new start and have less weight to carry, has been shattered by probably the only person that could have followed him. And to make it worse, it was someone who knows almost as much as the Doctor without his self control, and knowledge of his past life.

When the Doctor and the New Master meet face to face, I imagine it would be a battle of chaotic personalities on each side. Also, In my characterization of the Master, I think he would be sarcastically energetic to counteract the Doctors normal energetic craziness. Also, for the hell of it, let’s make the Master obsessed with pegasi instead of unicorns because narrative symbolism.

Lastly, we would learn that creatures that don’t belong in the world of My Little Pony (Cybermen and Terror are my best examples) where caused by the Masters Paradox machine. This gives a reason why they appeared and connects things in a neat little bow. Also gives a reason for Tick Tock to be mad too, due to the fact that the Master indirectly fueled the war he lost his family and time period for.

And that’s all I have. I don’t know how it would end except I think the Master would snatch Derpys Tardis key to use it to make something to keep tabs on the Tardis crew.

I’m sorry that half of this thank you and appreciation letter was more about my ideas than how I adore yours. Everyone on the PwPP crew to me is absolutely stellar! You all have made something truly amazing from a Doctor Who story telling standpoint. Lastly, please have fun making your audio plays or whatever you go on to do. It breaks my heart watching people create and have no fun in it.

With love and appreciation,

Raven.

We’re happy this show has brought you plenty of Doctor Who entertainment, even if you’re not an MLP fan. It’s always fun to learn about people who are generally a fan of one but not the other, who are still big fans of our series.

We aren’t really taking any ideas since we have a solid outline of what the rest of the episodes will be, and we can’t really reveal what characters might be appearing later. Your idea was a fun take on the Master though, perhaps consider writing a fanfic, as I’m sure people would enjoy it and we’ll be willing to post fanfics here.

#long post #submission

35 notes · View notes

princecharmingtobe · 5 years ago

Text

Rai tries to explain the furry fandom for non-furries for the 24963569356586th time because I have no life~

I’m sure I’m preaching to the choir posting this here, I just still often see people in the general internet being confused about or flat out wrong about what furries are and why we like the things we like. So here I go again, taking my frustrations out by making a long-winded tumblr post about it. But hey, if you’re confused by furries or know someone who is, maybe this will help idfk

Just be warned I am an ADHD motherfucker and there will be about 10x more words than necessary.

To start, What Are Furries?

Furries are simply self-identified fans of anthropomorphic animal characters.That is, a character that is an animal, but with many human characteristics. This can include speaking human language, human-like facial expressions, walking upright in a human-like way, wearing clothes, etc. Examples of anthropomorphic (or anthro for short) characters include Bugs Bunny, Mickey Mouse, Sonic the Hedgehog, Disney’s animated Robin Hood, Zootopia, and Beastars. All things in which the “animal” characters behave and express themselves like humans. Even movies like The Lion King and Balto have what would be considered “antho” characters, due to their capacity for human thought, speech, and facial expressions, though they would be in a subcategory often referred to as “feral” or sometimes “non-morphic” in which the character still moves and behaves largely like an animal.

So to reiterate, a furry is simply a self-proclaimed fan of anthro animal characters.

Why Anthro Animals?

I mean the obvious answer is, because it’s fun. It can be really fun and get one’s creative juices flowing trying to figure out how to blend human and animal characteristics. It’s an animal that moves and acts like a human. In what ways is it like a person, and what ways is it still an animal? Popular media like Zootopia and Beastars address that question as major plot points and worldbuilding elements. But it can also be fun to think about just when creating your own characters. And aside from just figuring out how to blend characteristics, the animal aspects of a character can offer more options of expression. Ears can perk up, droop, or fold back, tails can wag, lash, or tuck between legs, growling, hissing, etc. People often use expressions comparing human behavior and emotions to animals. You ever find yourself so happy or exited you think “If I was a dog my tail would be wagging!”

And aside from being an interesting concept to think about, sometimes it’s just aesthetically pleasing.

What is a “fursona”?

Fursona is short for “furry persona”. A BIG BIG part of the fandom is original characters. If you look at a furry art website you might see some art of Judy Hops, Legoshi, Sonic, etc. But mostly you’ll see original characters. They tend to be the main focus of the fandom. Because all the things mentioned above are fun to play with, and the fandom is big on creativity and self-expression. And what good is self-expression if you don’t use it to express... yourself? A fursona is an anthro animal representation of oneself. Basically “Me, but an [animal].” These can be an accurate representation of oneself (example: someone who is short and meek and skittish might make a mouse fursona) or a more idealized version of who you want to be (example: same short meek skittish person might instead make a lion fursona because they wish they could be more confident, strong, and outgoing). Some people even make multiple fursonas to represent different aspects of themselves (Think Thomas Sanders’ “Sanders Sides” but with fur). In the fandom, your fursona is also often how you represent yourself to others. In real life there are aspects of your appearance you can’t control, or that can be very hard to control. Your height, weight, bone structure, etc. But online as a furry, you can look like anything you want. This is also a very attractive concept to trans folk and queer people in general, which may explain why there’s such a high percentage of queer furries compared to the general population.

What is a Fursuit and Why do People Wear Them?

A fursuit is simply a costume made to look like a furry character. it is pretty much no different from cosplaying comic, anime, or video game characters, except that most of the time fursuits are of original characters instead of pre-existing ones. People wear them for fun and self-expression, just like any other costume. They differ from mascot suits in that they tend to be of higher quality, and more form-fitting and expressive. Fake furries are usually pretty easy to spot on TV because they usually end up in cheap Easter bunny costumes.

While “fursuiters” are often the “face” of the fandom to outsiders, most furries don’t actually own a fursuit. They are expensive, cumbersome, take work to maintain, and don’t always play nice with certain health conditions and phobias. I personally am apprehensive about getting one because I worry I’ll have difficulty breathing, and I easily overheat. Others simply don’t see the appeal of dressing up.

Do Furries Think They Are Animals?

Generally speaking: No. People often mix up furries with a subset of otherkin known as Therians. Otherkin are people who believe themselves to be in some way non-human, usually spiritually or mentally a non-human creature. Therians in particular believe themselves to be in some way a non-human animal. Furries are on the other hand, as I said, just fans of anthro characters. While there are likely furries who are also therians, most are not.

People who approach furry conventions to yell “You know you’re not really an animal!” at the fursuiters is about the equivalent of going to an anime convention and shouting “You know you’re not really Naruto!” at the cosplayers.

Is Being a Furry a Big Part of a Person’s Life?

It varies, just like any other fandom. Take anime for example. Some people just watch it and maybe talk to their friends about it and that’s it. Others might go online to view fanart and read fanfic, even go to conventions. And some people fill every aspect of their life that they can with it, filling their home with merch, getting tattoos, even building careers like being a youtuber around it. The same goes for furries. For some people it never goes beyond consuming media and art, while for others it plays a big part in their day to day life.

Is it a Sex Thing? (VERY ADULT AND SENSITIVE CONTENT BELOW THIS POINT)

I won’t beat around the bush here. There IS a sexual side to the fandom, just like any other fandom. Any anime, comic, video game, TV show, book, there is a sexual side to its fandom. Furries are no different. Just like it’s easy to find anime porn, it’s easy to find furry porn. People be making porn, idk what to tell you.

“Isn’t that zoophilia?”

Some people seem to feel that way about it, but no, not really. The thing that differentiates furry porn from watching two dogs hump at the park is that the characters are anthro. They think and express themselves like people, and fans relate to them as they would with human characters.

This

is in no way the same as this

“Do people have sex in fursuits?”

Generally, no, for various reasons. 1. They are expensive and take work to maintain and keep clean, and you don’t want to get various fluids on them. 2. They can be cumbersome and get really hot and stuffy, not ideal. 3. They just aren’t made for it. They don’t usually offer access to ones’ genitals, and thus having sex in them would be rather difficult.

There ARE some people who will get suits specially made for having sex in, with holes in all the necessary places, but you’re not likely to see those out in public. Generally if you see someone walking around in public in a fursuit, you can rest assured it’s probably not been used for sex.

“Ugh but that’s weird!”

I mean, people dress up and roleplay characters during sex all the time. Is dressing up as Krystal the Fox all that different from dressing up as Harley Quinn? And anyway, what does it matter to you what consenting adults get up to in the privacy of their own bedroom? Maybe don’t think too hard about other peoples’ sex lives.

And despite the availability of furry porn, it is not all there is to the fandom, and not everyone participates in that part of it. Heck, there are a lot of minors in the fandom, I was a tween when I was introduced to it, and the only times I was exposed to porn was when haters would “raid” our forums and spam it at us while calling US perverts, all the while being told “Hey, there are kids here!” But no we’re totally the sex-crazed perverts here right?

“I’ve Heard About Furries Who Are Bad People”

Yeah, you probably have. It’s a big fandom and inevitably some of the people in it will do bad things. Again, it’s the same for every fandom. You take any percentage of the human population, you’re going to get a few bad ones. Actual zoophiles, pedophiles, rapists, abusers. If they exist in the general population they’re going to exist in the fandom. But generally when their actions are brought to light they are driven out of our spaces, as with most fandom spaces. No group is perfect and without its bad eggs, but most of us work to keep our spaces safe.

In the end, people looking at a group from the outside tend to only see the loudest, weirdest, most outrageous members, and assume that’s what the whole group is.

5 notes · View notes

fanficcritiques · 5 years ago

Text

‘My Inner Life’ - Fanfic Commentary Part 1

Sometime in the late 90′s, early 00′s, the internet was graced with a Legend of Zelda fanfic that would become the stuff of infamous legend. A fanfic largely serving the purpose of the author’s wish fulfillment indulgence, its reputation of having contained things like “tiger sex” and a possible watersports kink continue to precede it even to this day, some 20-odd years later.

As with a lot of online fan media and history, this story has long captured my attention and imagination. It’s difficult to say why exactly, as I don’t believe there is anything in this story that makes it especially unique in today’s landscape of fics, nor is there anything I find especially outrageous (at least by modern day standards). I suspect it’s due to the fact that said fic actually has a lot of potential and, therefore, becomes a draw for inspiration in its own way.

Recently I chose to revisit this fic, somewhat in the spirit of ‘MSTing’ (a sort of commentary style that endeavors to be mocking in the spirit of humor). However, I wanted to approach this commentary with a more balanced view, no derisiveness, and overall, as if I was leaving editor’s notes for how the story might be improved. I believe we’ve moved past the era of making fun of fan works and insulting their creators, and for good reason, but I don’t think that means we can’t continue to study and comment on them.

Before I continue on with the commentary I wanted to make it clear that this story has a special place in my heart, that I have endeavored to show both respect and consideration for the work itself and the author behind it in the notes I’ve made along the way. I realize there are elements of the ridiculous about this fic, but my goal is to show respect in my constructive criticism and I would appreciate that anyone who comments along does the same.

I want to also add that I haven’t focused too much on spelling, grammar, or general construction errors this time around. This commentary focuses more on the plot, characterization, dialogue, things of that nature.

So, without further ado...My Inner Life Part 1, prologue and author’s notes. My commentary is in italics and parentheses.

Author’s notes: Hello. Thanks for choosing to read my story. As you might know I have become a major Zelda fan in the last year. Ever since I played OoT I have grown a fond interest in Link. I started to notice that after I got really into it, I found that I have a strange gift. A gift to Lucid Dream. I started having dreams about Hyrule, and about Link. In a Lucid Dream you can control your dreams. The dreams became very real, kinda like a second life, and almost every night I would have another. Starting from where the last left off. Even to this day I still have them. I find that they help me get through life. I know this may sound queer, but for me the dreams sure help me out. I have shared this story with many other people and so far all has liked it. Now as you read this it is told from my perspective or first person view.

(Some people choose to criticize LinksQueen for not understanding what lucid dreaming is, but given my own research, I think she’s actually right; lucid dreaming is, simply, an awareness while dreaming that one is, in fact, dreaming, and may be able to gain some control over the events that take place. It’s entirely possible she could return to her subconscious every night and make up this story as she went along. However, my theory has always been that some measure of self awareness dictated she needed to have a scapegoat of sorts to explain away the weirdness of what happens in this story. With the blame of a ‘dream’ -albeit one she can control- being to blame for what goes on here, responsibility falls from her shoulders. No, it doesn’t particularly make sense, but I feel that’s probably where she was coming from)

You will find that it is very detailed since I remember it all very clearly to this day. The story takes place after OoT. Nothing after that ever happens. No Majora's Mask. No LttP, or even Oracle of Ages and Seasons. And there is no love relation between Link and Zelda, Link and Ruto, Link and Malon or Link and Saria. Because of my feelings about Link, the person that he gets involved with in this story is myself or actually is my persona. A persona is for those of you who need to know, a representation of ones personality, or in dictionary terms is, (Persona) n. In biology, same as person. So for all you future readers, this story is based on Jenna, a char that is a representation of my personality.

(Again, she’s gotten a lot of flack over the years for this note of choosing to ignore Link’s possible chemistry with the flanking female characters, but I don’t think this is worth criticizing her for. It’s her fanfic, she has the right to disregard, rewrite what she pleases. Why else does fanfic exist if not for that purpose? I also don’t think it’s worth coming after her for writing herself a self-insert, wish fulfillment fantasy character to live vicariously through. Fanfic exists for a reason. It’s more...how this placeholder is written that deserves some amount of further inspection, but we’ll get to that in a moment)

But if you think this might be too queer then you shouldn't read this. THIS IS NOT THE TYPE OF STORY FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT DISLIKE, OR CANNOT HANDLE SUCH MATERAL AS THE CONTEXT OF THIS STORY. But if you seriously believe you can handle the content of this story, then read on. If your squeamish about sex, then you should not read this, since this story is a REAL LEMON and there is a lot of that, heavily detailed. (Between Link and I that is) Especially during the bonding ceremony. There is also some blood content and strong adult language. So if that’s too much then you should turn back now.

(Responsible and thoughtful of her to put warnings, though I do believe she should’ve also warned for the slight watersports kink that happens in said Bonding Ceremony. It might have saved her some trouble along the road, anyway, as it wouldn’t have come as an interesting surprise to the reader in later chapters. Maybe she didn’t want to spoil it? But anyway, I’m putting one now; urine drinking happens- and no, I’m not being intentionally judgmental about it, I know there are real, consenting adults out there who enjoy that sort of play and as long as one is being safe I don’t think it deserves any ridiculing, but it IS the sort of thing that I would consider ‘not everyone’s cup of tea’ and worth warning about in advance)

Now I have not finished it as of yet. I have to catch up, since the last dream I had was just after Link and I had the blessing ceremony for our twins.(Our 3rd and 4th kids) Right now there is about 100-150 pgs worth. I'm expecting it to reach at least 300-350 probably even more. I will try to up date as often as possible. I hope that some of you like this. I do not mind sharing it. But please understand that this is very PRECIOUS to me, as well as Link. So like I said, if the content of this story sounds, too queer to you, TURN BACK NOW! But to all who wish to continue, happy reading. Thanks,

~*~ Link’s Queen ~*~

Rated R for strong adult language, sex, violence and blood content.

AGAIN AS A FINAL WARNING: THIS STORY CONTAINS HEAVY SEX, ABULT LANGUAGE AND TALKS ABOUT MY PERSONAL ENCOUNTER WITH LINK. THIS STORY IS BASED ON DREAMS, DREAMS ABOUT MY LIFE WITH HIM. IF YOU FIND THE CONTENT OF THIS STORY TO BE OFFENSEVE, QUEER, OR PLAIN OUT OFF THE WALL, THEN DO NOT READ ON!!!!!!! I HAVE GOTTEN WAY TO MANY FLAMES ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THIS STORY WHEN I HAVE PLACED SEVERAL WARNINGS!!!! I WILL NOT ACCECPT ANY MORE FLAMES, RAMBLINGS, CUSSING OR EXCESSIVE LASHING OUT ABOUT THE CHAR JENNA, OR REVIEWS ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THIS STORY, EXCESSIVE LASHING OUT, VICIOUS ATTACKS AGAINST MY PERSONALITY, OR NON-MATURE CONSTRUCTIVE CRITISIM!!! ANY REVIEWS SUBMITTED THAT DO NOT FOLLOW THE ABOUVE GUIDLINES, WILL BE DELETED IMMEDIATELY! THESE WARNINGS ARE NOT THERE TO LOOK PRETTY, THE AUTHORS PLACE WARNINGS FOR A REASON!!! IT IS TO TELL YOU WHAT THE CONTENT OF THE STORY IS SO THAT IF THE READER FINDS THE CONTENT OF THE STORY OFFENSIVE, THEY WILL NOT READ ON!!! MANY AUTHORS HAVE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT UNWANTED, EXCESSIVE, VIOLENT AND JUST PLAIN NASTY REVIEWS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED BY READERS ABOUT THEIR STORIES, CAUSING FANFICTION TO GRANT AUTHORS THE ABILITY TO DELETE UNWANTED REVIEWS AND BLOCK CERTAIN READERS!! I WILL SAY THIS FOR MYSELF AND FOR ALL AUTHORS ON FANFICTION. NO AUTHOR TWISTS YOUR ARM OR HOLDS YOU AT GUN POINT OR FORCES YOU IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM TO READ THEIR STORIES!! ALL READERS HAVE THE RIGHT NOT TO READ A CERTAIN STORY!!! IT IS YOUR RESOPONSIBILITY TO READ THE WARNINGS AND DECIDE FOR YOUSELF IF THE CONTENT OF THE STORY IS OFFENSIVE TO YOU, AND TO MAKE THE CHOICE TO READ ON OR NOT!!! AND IT ALSO IS THE READERS RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY ON HOW THEY HANDLE THENSELVES WHEN LEAVING A REVIEW FOR AN AUTHOR!! LEAVING A REVIEW THAT IS VIOLENT IN NATURE ONLY MAKES YOU THE READER LOOK BAD, AND IS VERY IMMATURE. IF ALL US HERE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ADULTS, WELL THEN, LETS CONDUCTIVE OURSELVES LIKE ADULTS AND NOT LIKE LITTLE KIDS! I ONLY EXPECT THE VIOLENT LASHING OUT AND VICIOUS ATTACKS TO COME FROM TEENANGERS, NOT ADULTS! IF YOU PEOPLE REALLY ARE ADULTS THAT ARE CONDUCTING YOURSELVES IN THE MANORS I DECRIBED ABOVE, YOU PEOPLE REALLY ARE SCARING ME!

IT’S A DAMN SHAME TO KNOW THAT THERE ARE ADULTS OUT THERE WHO CANNOT CONDUCTIVE THEMSELVES IN THE SIMPLEST MANORS THEIR PARENTS HAVE TAUGHT THEM! ALSO LEAVING MALICIOUS REVIEWS IS ALSO A SIGN OF LOW SELF-ESTEEM. IF ALL YOU PEOPLE KNOW HOW DO IS ATTACK SOMEONE VICIOUSLY, IT’S A SIGN OF SELFISHNESS AND NO RESPECT FOR ONES-SELF! I SUGGEST TO ALL READERS WHO ARE THINKING ABOUT LEAVING A MALICIOUS REVIEW FOR ME, PLEASE GET A HOBBY AND LEARN TO CONTROL YOUR ANGER, BECAUSE YOUR ONLY HURTING YOURSELF, NOT ME! ALSO LEAVING A NASTY REVIEW ONLY MAKES YOU LOOK STUPID, NOT ME!

I FIND IT VERY RIDICULOUS THAT I HAD TO LEAVE A WARNING THIS LONG, BUT IT IS BECAUSE OF THE VERY IMMATURE READERS THAT HAVE SUBMITTED NASTY CHILDISH REVIEWS!

AGAIN, PLEASE READ THE ABOVE CONTEXT BEFORE READING ON!!!!

(It’s at this point that Link’s Queen obviously reached the end of her patience with scathing reviews and felt her only line of defense was putting yet another note about the content of the story, albeit a rather didactic one...entirely in caps lock. But I get it, I do, and I think she does have a good point in that the plot and themes of the story are made clear from the outset -apart from the watersports, mind, but I already addressed that- and that there is nothing about this particular fanfic that warrants cruelty in the comments. Of course, this was published during a less conscientious time for the internet, a time when I also was in the infancy of my writing and received reviews of similar ilk lmao. It still doesn’t make it okay, nor does it make any of the threats or insults that came after okay either, but that’s kind of why I’m writing this commentary now)

Furthermore, I have realized that this story needs some heavy grammar corrections, and that the plot needs some work. Also under the advisement of my friend who had just recently completed two literature classes, has stated the reasons why people had classified Jenna as a “Mary Sue” char and labeled her as “flat”. She has come to the conclusion that most people do not know or understand Jenna’s history, so she has advised me to create an origin story to explain about her history before she met Link. That way she will become more rounded and give people a reason to care about her. It was never in my intentions to create Jenna as a “Mary Sue” char or to make her conceited, because I’m not really like that. Jenna is a persona char, one that resembles my personality while this story is being told from her perspective. This story is not something that I pulled out of my head like my drawings, it came from my dreams. So I understand that revising this story is going to be hard work and will take time. Since this story is being told in the exact, or close to exact order it happened in the dreams, changing how fast Link and Jenna marry isn’t going to be easy. Even changing how fast they have sex and revising the Lemon parts also won’t be so easy to do. But I’m currently in the process of revising this story, also I have received a college grammar book from my friend and I will be investing in a Beta-Reader. I’m also considering taking to literature classes at JC to help boost my writing skills. But now I say this, if you people, the reviewers really have the intentions to help me, them please do it positively and like a mature adult. I’m telling you that it is a proven fact that negative motivation NEVER motivates someone to change. It never has and it never will. I’m pretty sure your parents have taught you that people only respond to positive motivation and not negative.

(We’ll start with the beginning of this paragraph. I don’t think the issue with Jenna, as a character, was ever that she was conceited. In fact, she might have been more well-rounded and interesting if she had been conceited; moreover, I think the weakness in her as an OC is that she doesn’t really have much of a personality to speak of at all. Jenna is defined by her relationship with Link, some attributes that are thrown out as afterthoughts within the dialogue and have no real bearing on the plot (at some point she is characterized as “spiritual” though we are never given any evidence, before or after, that correlates to her being a particularly spiritual person at all). She is a traveling merchant when the story begins, though that fails to carry over anything worth noting. She’s an orphan and has been without her parents for a good bit of her childhood- again, this fails to provide any character attributes, issues or consequences at all, much less anything that affects the story in any real way apart from giving her some sympathy from the King and leading him to more or less adopt her, at least when she’s in Hyrule. A backstory means very little if it has no effect on the development of the plot or character.

She also mentions the dreams here again, cementing my aforementioned theory in the line “this story is not something that I pulled out of my head like my drawings, it came from my dreams” as dreams, here, are being used as an excuse for why the story is the way it is and why it cannot, apparently, be easily changed. But again, I would assert that the main issue is not really in how fast Link and Jenna have sex and get married, but rather in the lack of character Jenna has, the lack of insight given to the reader about why Link and Jenna like each other, why that lead to them falling in love. I understand that this story is wish fulfillment first and foremost and in such a fantasy story it’s a given that the placeholder character will win the heart of their affections, but not providing any real relationship growth or insight can leave readers feeling out in the cold, so to speak. We don’t know Jenna as a character, we don’t know why she and Link should fall in love so completely. We need to see it.

But anyway, good on her at the time for wanting to better herself with further education, I hope she was able to achieve that.)

I’m not close-minded, I NEVER have been. I have always been open to other people’s thoughts and opinions, its when its done in an inappropriate manner that I turn my nose at it and look away. People have to understand that when you’re an adult, you need to conduct yourself like one and learn how to address other people like one. You cannot just act childish when you come across something that you DO NOT approve of, you’re only making yourself look bad and that can affect you later on in life. Acting childish and ranting and raving is something I’d expect a little kid would do when he doesn’t get his way. When an adult acts childish over stupid things, that’s looked down upon, and considered to be unhealthy. I have seen far too many reviews left for me where the reviewers are just ranting and raving like little kids over this story because they do not like it. It is only making them look stupid and is very unhealthy. I fear that these people have some serious emotional problems if they get that upset over a story. People in control of their emotions and have also obtained some sort of common sense, NEVER let little things get them all riled up. It is very sad when one that is supposed to be an adult, cannot handle them like one. I was NEVER angry with the reviewers not liking the story, it’s how they handled themselves when leaving me the reviews. Getting riled up, ranting and raving, screaming and spitting nails over this story is what has caused me to get upset, not the fact that they didn’t like it.

Also as a side note, I NEVER physically hurt ANYONE with this story. I got one reviewer that said. “Oh God please stop writing, your hurting everyone.” Now I want to know where I physically touched that person. I want to know how I’m twisting anyone’s arms to read this. I have never done anything of the sort in any way, shape or form and I DO NOT appreciate being accused of that! If you’re emotionally hurt over this, its your fault not mine. I’m sorry if it did, but I have placed several warnings describing the content of this story and if you know what it contains and you do not like this type of material, then why are you reading it? I do not appreciate getting accused for other people’s actions. It is your choice as the reader to read the content of this story and it is not my fault if it upsets you when you knew from the gecko what it contained. So please DO NOT flame me about it.

I also feel like a schoolteacher teaching a bunch of little kids. And I find that this really wasn’t necessary and shouldn’t have had to come to this, but it is very hard when your reviewers have forgotten how to conduct themselves like adults.

If you honestly think that being malicious is a good thing and that you’re not wrong in doing so, well then your blinded by your own selfish pride. People with common sense learn how to take responsibility for themselves and are able to admit when their wrong. I have found that many of the reviewers that have left me malicious reviews honestly believe that its appropriate behavior for an adult. When it really is that they are too self-absorbed in themselves to admit their wrong. Again that results from selfish pride. One to scared to admit in front of others that they just might be wrong. Also, how can any of you hold any right to call Jenna conceited when in reality, your contradicting yourself by being conceited as well? Being conceited is again selfish pride and being self-absorbed. And yes, it is and always will be a fact that most of the reviewers have been conceited and very contradictive. Please DO NOT leave me a review that only contradicts what you are trying to preach. You should in reality, take your own advice.

Again I find it very ridiculous that this had to be as long as it is, but it is due to the fact that people not conducting themselves appropriately. Also if I do receive any more malicious reviews, with screaming, spitting nails or ranting and raving over this story because you do not like it then are to self-absorbed to admit that acting like that is wrong, well then you have proven my point! All of this is very self-explanatory!

Now PLEASE DO NOT READ ON if you DO NOT plan on leaving me a review appropriately!

(She more or less repeats points she already made here, but again, I agree. The summary and numerous warnings should have clued people in to the fact that this was going to be a fantasy, wish fulfillment, placeholder type story and to expect the kind of thing that goes on therein. It also shouldn’t have given anyone free reign to be cruel or leave threatening reviews, etc)

Prologue

Dreams come in many forms. Some good, some bad, some very realistic, even ones that feels very real. A dream may come to us from happy events, or even stem from bad events in our lives. Some come to us as a pleasure dream and some come as nightmares. Some become vague memories after time, while some stay very rich in our minds. This is a story about a dream that I had. A dream that became more dreams. A dream that would end one night then resumes the next. It became like a second life. Ever since I became a Zelda fan, I grew an interest in Link. I thought of him as the perfect man. One that you could not find of this world. I thought of him as a man that should have been. The more that he attracted my attention the more I became more attracted to him. I felt like there was a connection between him and me. Then he became a part of me, and after that I fell deeply in love with him.

I know that may sound queer to you but love is a mysterious thing and should not be taken lightly. Love is a very strong emotion, an emotion that should be treasured. Love comes from the heart, but when it takes hold, it’s got you. I quite don't understand it myself, but I do know that when I first laid my eyes upon Link I fell in love with him. My heart just told me it was right. Told me he was the one, the one I had been searching for. Ever since then I have felt that it was destiny that has brought me to him. Even in my mind it feels the same. I don't consider myself any different from anyone else. Though I have love for someone that is not really there, he will always remain very real to me inside my heart and in my mind. Even to this day I still love him. He has kept me very happy. He has made me happy when I was sad. He has made me feel stronger about myself. He has even taken care of me in ways that no one else can. Even though I have feelings for him, I'm not any different from the rest of you. I will always hold him close to me in my heart. He is still on my mind and I still have dreams. The connection stills remains strong, and the dreams very real.

I lived an entire life with Link in Hyrule. All stemming from a series of dreams. Dreams that I want to have. Dreams that I make happen. From the first day I met him, to the birth of our first child, to even the days when Link and I prepared our family in the event that Gannon should return. This book is based on my inner life. A second life lived in a far away land in another time line in another dimension. A tale of love, passion, despair and hope. I enjoyed my inner life. I looked forward to going to sleep to it every night. And I look forward to ones that will come, because LOVE WILL NEVER DIE.

(Again, this is one of the points of the story that the writer gets a lot of flack for, but I think it’s pretty harmless to project on a fictional character and use their likeness to fill a sense of loneliness. Nothing wrong with it, and I’m not here to judge. I think we all probably did something similar at a point in our lives- I used to privately pretend Legolas was my boyfriend when I was like 10 or 11, so yknow, glass houses!!!)

#my inner life #linksqueen #jenna silverblade #legend of zelda

3 notes · View notes

make-it-mavis · 6 years ago

Text

Ghost Towns

Wreck-it Ralph/Ralph Breaks the Internet AU 2010 words Characters: Make-it Mavis (the narrator, who describes Vanellope, Ralph, Turbo, Felix, and implies Maribo, @nijimarii‘s OC) Content warnings: Major character death, cruel words, non-graphic descriptions of violence and mild blood

Premise: Make-it Mavis was sentenced to cabinet arrest in Fix-it Felix Jr. for life after living under disguise in Sugar Rush with Turbo for fifteen years. Too tired and heartbroken for any more villainy, she resigned herself to living out the rest of her days with her cousin in a relatively dormant state. That is, until acts of carelessness in 2018 lead to Sugar Rush being unplugged, and her vengeful outrage reawakens something terrible. She recounts her actions in one final letter to the man she loved and lost.

>Fanfic title is a reference to this song<

22/11/2018

4:53 AM

Hey.

So… it’s been a while since I did one of these, huh. Hope you haven’t found some way to be pissed about that. I like singing to you better, but I don’t know if you could hear me from down here. Not that you could read this letter, either, but… just let me forget I’m talking to myself for a few minutes. I just miss you so damn much. I wish you were here with me -- I’ve never felt so lost and alone in my life.

I’m not sure where to begin explaining where I am and how I got here. It’s so unreal. It’s fantastic and horrifying all at once. It’s like an arcade that goes on forever in all directions, but with thousands upon thousands of games inside it, bunched up in clusters and stacked into massive towers. There are sprites out here, but they’re not sprites. Gamers, but not gamers. We always wondered what the world outside Litwak’s Fun Center must be like, and… I think this is it. I think the very Devs themselves live out here.

I guess that means I made it out. I’ve been dreaming of this since I was plugged in. My lifelong dream… doesn’t feel like a dream right now. Unless it’s some buff-induced trip.

As I write this, I’m nowhere good. They call it the “Dark Web.” It’s dark, it smells, and its cramped. The only colors around are from the “colorful” characters that stalk around down here, and I mean that in the most metaphorical sense. It’s like the arcade’s reject horror game enemies came down here to nest in their own filth. I hate it down here, but I can’t seem to leave. There’s a whole lot of world up there that I don’t feel ready to face.

The thing is… I can never go back to the arcade now.

I did something. I had to do it, but no one back at the arcade would understand that. I’m sure you would have, if you heard why. So I’ll tell you why.

Sugar Rush was unplugged.

Yeah. The remaining cabinet’s wheel broke in half. Litwak pulled the plug right away. Not all the candy citizens made it out. I can barely stand to think about the ones we lost. So many of my performers, all the animals, even that special kid of mine… gone.

All the big racers made it out, at least. I wanted so badly to be with my kids and find a way to make them smile, even just to see them again, but you can imagine why I wasn’t allowed to. Instead, Felix and his wife elected to adopt them. My kids. Our kids. Cramped up in a tiny apartment, no cars, in a game without a track. No way to race. No way to follow their code. Thinking of them going through the same code withdrawal that you did just breaks my heart. They don’t deserve that. They didn’t deserve any of this.

And guess whose fault it was.

Guess who didn’t even CARE.

Six freakin’ years was all it took for the rotten little glitch to decide she was bored of Sugar Rush. After fifteen years of wanting nothing more than to race on its track. She had no freakin’ concept of the gift that kingdom was. No idea what an honor it is to rule over it. You and I worked so hard, risked our freakin’ lives for Sugar Rush, and even after the invasion of 2012 that unmasked me and literally killed you, what does she do? She bitches and moans and whines until that insecure, selfish, nine-foot dumbass of hers game-jumps to literally punch a detour into the ground so Princess President wouldn’t be bummed out.

She had a choice to make, there. She could have realized that as the game’s leader, she had a responsibility to keep it safe, even more than any other racer. She could have finished the race and waited until the arcade closed to go try out Wreck-it’s new track. She could have done the absolute bare minimum to protect the game that she was so lucky to have.

No.

She defied the gamer and drove off course. In-game.

She had our entire world in her hands. My one real home. Everything left in the world that I loved.

And she killed it.

Out of boredom. With no remorse for the lives she ruined, for all the lives that didn’t make it out. All she wanted to do was cry about not being able to race anymore. That alone was motivation for her and her lumbering dumbass friend to run off into the internet on some impossible quest to give her back what she never deserved in the first place.

But… I followed them.

I convinced Surge to let me into the internet if I promised to never come back. Have it be my exile that gave me freedom and gave the arcade safety. It was an easy promise to make. There’s nothing left for me in the arcade. I was locked up in a game I never loved, with sprites who never loved me. I never had any visitors. I had no purpose. I had no… you. My memories and a good view of Sugar Rush were all I had. Even through my rage over what Wreck-it and the glitch had done to you, to me, to our world… the one thing I could hold onto was the fact that Sugar Rush was still standing, and someone was looking after it. That was the only thing keeping me from wringing the little glitch’s neck. Sugar Rush needed her.

With that gone… nothing was stopping me anymore.

So I did what I had to do. I left what remained of my world behind. I came to this insane internet world. I tracked those two down.

I made them pay for what they did.

The fight wasn’t easy. It wasn’t quick and quiet like it was with King Candy. It was an ugly mess. There was screaming, there was crying, there were short chases, there were chunks of metal and building parts hurled at me. But in the end, I won. I had them both trapped under my thumb, so much that I could have slit both their throats and went on my way. But they didn't deserve that. They deserved so much worse, and in their last moments, I made sure they knew why. While she was still alive to hear it, someone had to hold Von Schweetz accountable for what she'd done. Just once.

And Wreck-it… back in 2012, he tore my whole life away from me. He killed the man I'd loved for thirty years. He gave my home to a child who could not care for it, then came back to help her destroy it.

In my head, I'd already sentenced him to death six years ago. But for him, I could think of no punishment more fitting than to kill her first.

Like we should have done twenty years ago.

So, here I am now… finally free of their poison. I'm sitting alone in a dark alley, splattered with blood, processing it all. It’s barely been a few hours since I did it. I can only tell because most of the little “sites” down here have clocks… otherwise, it feels like time’s stood still. Like reality’s just taking too long to load. It’s not that I’m freaked out by what I’ve done. Not at all. I expected to feel something, but… I kinda don't. I’d known Wreck-it my whole life. We were coworkers. We used to go for drinks at Tapper's and rag on Gene together. But as I carved into him, felt the spray of his blood, watched the life leave his eyes… he was a stranger to me. I felt nothing. I felt like I was finally taking care of a chore that had been on my to-do list for too long. I’m not sure what that says about me, but I don’t really care. Good or bad isn't real anymore. They deserved to die, and I killed them. I'm not sorry for that.

I’m not sure why I’m hiding down here. There’s no way anyone could find me in the internet, even if I was implicated, which I won’t be. I killed them in a pretty badass-looking racing game, and their bodies glitched away. There was only one witness -- some weird little sprite that I convinced to help me find them. I kinda liked her, so I didn't kill her. But she won’t be telling anyone anytime soon. I made sure of that.

Maybe the sprites back at Litwak’s will make assumptions when Wreck-it and Von Schweetz don’t come back, since it’s no secret that I’ve hated them for years. Maybe. Fix-it Felix Jr. will be unplugged for sure, and I think that's my one regret. Felix doesn't deserve to lose his game. He's the last living sprite who still loves me… but the whole world loves him. He'll be okay. He’s got his wife, the Nicelanders, and the entire arcade to support him. I just hope he looks after the kids. I miss those sweet little monsters.

Sugar Rush will be wheeled away out the door and out of existence. And as far as the arcade’s concerned, I’ll be going with it. I feel like that's only fitting. That was the world I truly belonged in. If my world is leaving the arcade forever, then… I am too. Just like I always dreamed.

It's just that I always pictured you coming with me. The fact that you're not here right now feels so wrong, it hurts.

I don’t know where I’m gonna go or what I’m gonna do after this. Right now, all I can think about is you. Because I found the weirdest thing down here. The site just across the way… is called “Turbo Torrent.” And I don’t know why or how, but… their sign has a picture of your face. I guess some people outside the arcade really do still remember you. I hope you know that, wherever you are. You gotta know that you're remembered. I wonder if they remember what you did. Some of them must have told their friends what happened to Roadblasters, right? I'll probably never know why, but that’s definitely your face… and that’s what inspired me to write to you again. Even in this grimey, dank place, I feel weirdly close to you in the light of that sign. Like I was supposed to come here.

Maybe that’s why I’m having trouble leaving.

Wherever I end up going, I’ll be thinking of you. It’s gonna be an adventure for me, but those were always better with you. I think we could have done well in the internet. Never a dull moment, hardly any walls to hold us back. I’m sure you would have found a way to be the center of attention, even in a place that goes on forever. I miss the way you’d bring a room to life when you entered it. I miss everything about you, even the annoying parts.

I guess what I’m saying is, I’m leaving everything I knew about the world behind, but in whatever way I can, I’m taking you with me. I promised I’d never forget you, and I meant it. So if any part of you really is still with me, get ready for a whole new life we never expected. I'm going to wander this world until I finally burn out. I don't know what's out there, but I know deep in my heart that nothing will ever be the same again. No more Easter Egg. No more yanks from a joystick. No more shouting, “We Can Make It!” And that’s all well and good, because we didn’t, in the end.

But I will.

I miss you, sugar. I’ll love you ‘til my last conscious thought.

Pinky promise.

-- Cherry Bomb

#wreck it ralph #ralph breaks the internet #wreck it ralph 2 #make it mavis #turbo #fanfiction #fanfic #angst #keeps naming fics after radical face songs #i swear i'll write something happy soon #murder au just wouldnt leave my head

19 notes · View notes

myfriendpokey · 7 years ago

Text

flat pak

i went to now play this last weekend and had a good time! there was a flatgames room, and a panel, and the latter made me think about some nightmarish circumstance where someone was questioning me about what the point of these things was. the three posts below are all pseudo-answers i sketched out.

1. i like how sexless videogames are, and how bad at representing humanity in general, i like that even hyperviolent games have this wistfulness about them, as if the only way they can grasp the human body is as it comes apart - in some provisional, stateless shape contained in but seperate from the game systems, a ghost, like those mysteriously elaborate and collisionless death animations the enemies in old shooters got before dissolving into goo. or as if they hoped the exuberance of their own approach was enough to break the carapace of the format and let something, anything, seep in from the outside....

the little guys in videogames are a gentler convention, but they're always on the verge of the same dissolution - the sketchiest of outlines, of features, a ball, a shape, with eyes and feet. like drawing yourself with your eyes closed - the crudest and most temporary kind of projection or self-fashioning. staring nervously and chomping as it waddles through the maze, eating things, breaking apart instantly when it bumps into someone, and given an equally temporary name such as walky or go-go. i love this dorkiness, this daydream of the body as a soap-bubble, so alienated that the slightest recognition feels like intimacy.

2. flatgames are 'flat' in the sense of projecting a multi-level videogame hierarchy into a single plane; the archetypical flatgame gesture is being able to walk across the textboxes. rather than systems they represent collections - collections of effects treated as independent of the wider process they'd ordinarily portray, which can then be grouped and moved around seperate from that process. so it's a personal, subjective format in the sense that the new groupings sort of mirror the groupings produced when various external effects are flattened into single moments of subjective experience, of memory. but it's also a personal format just because it's easy to use - because in many circumstances it's easier to just drag and drop text around rather than create a universal system that handles when and how it'll be displayed, as in all those unity horror games that have gui elements just sort of hanging around in space for you to bump into. and i think this is something that kind of grinds interestingly against the idea of videogames as inherently systematic, inherently good at portraying systems - like, in what way are they systematic when it's become easier NOT to be systematic? at what point do those "systematic" features become a mannerism, while the very easiness of bad game design means it starts to cleave more rigorously to the contours of actual material life and practice, to the way we really use computers rather than the ways we'd like to use them?

this is not to say systems don't exist. but their relationship with even the most system-y videogames is weird - to what extent are these games exploring a system rather than expressing a sense of systematicity, an aesthetics of system not dissimilar to those of puzzles, criticism, and the mystery novel? on one hand we know that a lot of systemic elements are hand-tweaked by developers in order to feel less jarring to our impression of the whole (dice rolls being the most common) - on the other we know from previous twitter threads about exactly these kinds of "cheats" that they can outrage players who learn they exist. which suggests it's not any specific quality or experience associated with a game system but the idea of systematicity itself that's being sold -- as indeed with the famous "100 hours of gameplay" tag, which does not express a type of content so much as a promise that this content has been regulated and formatted in ways which allow it to be sold in this very matter-of-fact way. the idea of systematicity as a deliberately conveyed aesthetic impression feels worth investigating, particularly given ten million youtube videos with names like "gun-shot teen DESTROYED with Logic" and "univeral reason under attack: why braingeniousmasculinist should be unbanned from club penguin" - evidently the impression of sanguine impersonality and indifference to the merely "personal" is a highly popular and profitable one online....

in a more material sense, too, we can query this systematicity. a videogame with handdrawn paper graphics is obviously not "de-mystifying" the process of making games, since the physical object had to be digitalised and cleaned up and imported and processed before it could be used. one of the stranger things in videogames is that naivete is a technological affordance - i can use crude handdrawn graphics because the computer has enough memory not to force me to compress it all into 8x8 sprites (unless i really want it to, as with deliberately limited bespoke engines). but at the same time it really is de-mystifying, because it emphasises the extent to which game development takes place at the intersection between multiple different areas of digital technology (not to mention human labour). 3d model textures can be paintings or photographs or heavily treated, processed combinations of the two - the photographs or paintings used can be original or purchased from various weird economies of commercial asset packs - the artistic coordination of those assets can take place over skype or similar with the reference of multiple other digital image files, scavenged from online to give an idea of the total look. i don't mean to suggest that these multiple intersections are so complex that they cease to be "systematic" - but i do think that grasping it as a real system also means coming to terms with the ways in which it can be structurally unsystemisable, like fredric jameson's description of globalization as "untotalizable totality". when the most important features of the discrete operations of a computer are that they take place at a scale and speed no human can replicate, recasting exactly those operation into a human scale can confuse more than it clears up [much like this post].

thinking about videogames more generally as revolving around not an inherent systematicity but rather an image of / desire for the same, around that imagination of systematicity which is bound up with consumer technology as a whole. i feel like at each moment in history this systematicity has some privileged form of social identification associated with it: i've lost count of the pulpy books i've read which had some villainous saint-just analogue, maybe one obsessed with clocks or measuring things, who imposes some cruel and rigid revolutionary "system" on the basically warm and laissez-faire vassals below... system as political imposition. but medieval writers might have connected the same sense of systematicity more immediately with that of the kingdom of god, with the underlying structure which makes those warm laissez-faire moments possible to begin with. sometimes system appears in media as bureaucracy and ritual, sometimes it's as a challenge to bureaucracy and ritual, galileo's "and yet it moves" or those movies where someone comes up with a brilliant new way to win sports matches or sell sub-prime mortgages against all the prevailing wisdom. on the basis of this extremely rough idea, what could we imagine being the privileged form that systematicity appears in the everyday today? not capitalism or high finance, which while systematic can also be too broad or naturalised to appear so in this immediate way... not politics, not the internet. but maybe ON the internet, and for me "system" appears most visibly online in the question of personal information and how it's tracked. all those notifications of websites using cookies clicked through, terms and amendments to terms scrolled past, online shopping histories suddenly reoccuring by ads for the same products you looked at appearing in the background of another site - all these are re-impositions, re-appearances of systemicity through the vague fugue of internet experience. and which pop up in the more public sphere as an ominous black site, with the full scope or implications sealed away behind byzantine layers of corporate procedure and nondisclosure. the sense of system here is one of intransigence, blockage - it's divorced from the idea that knowing the system would give one the power to change it, because here the system is exactly what makes that knowledge impossible in the first place. maybe that sense of the failure of systemic knowledge is connected to the world depicted in flatgames, in which that knowledge no longer exists - niall moody's "the craigallen fire" contains historical information and real places, but the words hang eerily across the digital picture as if unsure how to relate to it, as if coming from a long way away. but the movement away from representational systematicity is a move towards material systemicness, in the clarity and concreteness with which flatgames approach their own practice, so maybe we should consider this withdrawal as strategic - as an effort to build new systems, rather than being pulled into the daydream of the old.

3. part of the pleasure, for me, in making flatgames, was the sense of feeling able to postpone indefinitely some kind of mechanical reckoning - the feeling of being able to use pacing and visual structure to ward off the dread that any minute now i'd have to settle down and make a real game. in a weird way it connects to what i enjoy about very fussy, technical games - grinding in an rpg means deferring the point at which you actually have to begin playing the rpg, both in the sense of being challenged and in the sense of actually having to sit down and learn all the systems, just as savescumming your way through megaman 3 is to giddily skate around the dread prospect of actually playing megaman 3. there is no point where you have to work out what happens if you die or walk off the map, there is no point where you have to say to the player "okay, you have to focus now". the horror of paying attention and the joy of not having to! a moment of those moralist rituals held in temporary suspense, as if time itself has frozen and you're free to walk among it, underneath paused mechanisms that would ordinarily be crushing you... and the awareness of that suspense somehow makes your own delicacy greater, as if one of the machines you wandered through was your own life, and you could hover precariously inside it... a soap bubble, the merest bug-eyed phantom, newly christened something like walky or go-go....

[image credits - street fighter iii: second impact - pippols - space fantasy zone - marchen veil - bandits 9)

#flatgames #writing #vg.#pippols

35 notes · View notes

jamesstegall · 3 years ago

Text

How digital beauty filters perpetuate colorism

When Lise was a young teenager in Georgia, her classmates bullied her relentlessly. She had moved with her family from Haiti a few years earlier, and she didn’t fit in with the other students. They teased her about her accent, claimed she “smelled weird,” and criticized the food she ate. But most often they would attack her with remarks about her dark complexion. Sometimes teachers would send her home from school because she couldn’t stop crying. “I remember going home and I would take those copper wire things that you scrub dishes with,” she says. “I would go to the bathroom and I would take my mom’s bleach cream and scrub my skin with it.”

And it wasn’t just white classmates. Black students harassed her too—for being an outsider, for being too different. She remembers them asking, “Why is she so dark?”

Just when she thought it couldn’t get worse, the phone in her palm became an endless stream of pictures of beautiful, lighter-skinned women getting dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of likes and affirming comments. She slowly began to notice that the world wanted parts of her—like her curves and her lips—but not things like her dark skin or her hair. Not her whole self, all together.

As she struggled to cope with the abuse, Lise convinced herself that the darkness of her skin was to blame. And social media platforms and the visual culture of the internet suggested the same thing.

Even among those closest to her, the undesirability of her darkness was reinforced. She grew to realize that her mom, aunts, and friends all used the skin-lightening creams she’d borrowed after school, many of which contain toxins and even carcinogens. It was confusing: her community fought hard against racism, but some of the prejudice she experienced came from Black people themselves.

And social media was just making it worse.

The prejudice Lise experienced—colorism—has a long history, driven by European ideals of beauty that associate lighter skin with purity and wealth, darker tones with sin and poverty. Though related to racism, it’s distinct in that it can affect people regardless of their race, and can have different effects on people of the same background.

Colorism exists in many countries. In India, people with darker skin were traditionally ranked lower in the caste system. In China, light skin is linked to beauty and nobility. In the US, not only Black people face colorism; white Italian or Greek people with darker skin can experience it too. Historically, when African-Americans were enslaved, those with lighter skin were often given more domestic tasks where those with darker skin were more likely to work in the fields.

These prejudices have been part of the social and media landscape for a long time, but the advent of digital images and Photoshop created new ways for colorism to manifest. In June 1994, notoriously, Newsweek and Time both ran cover images of O.J. Simpson’s mug shot during his murder trial—but on Time’s cover, his skin was markedly darker. The difference sparked outrage: Time had darkened the image in what the magazine’s photo illustrator claimed was an attempt to evoke a more “dramatic tone”. But the editing reflected that the darker the man, the more criminal the American public assumes him to be.

This association has very real consequences. A 2011 study from Villanova University found a direct link between the severity of sentences for 12,000 incarcerated women and the darkness of their complexion.

And today, thanks to the prevalence of selfies and face filters, digital colorism has spread. With Snapchat, Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook a part of billions of people’s everyday lives, many of us find that people see far more pictures of us than ever before. But there are biases built into these systems. At a basic level, the imaging chips found in most personal cameras have pre-set ranges for skin tones, making it technically impossible to accurately capture the real variety of complexions.

Over 200 million people use Snapchat Lenses every day, some of them to lighten their skin tone. Other filters and automatic enhancing features can do the same on Instagram and TikTok.

And the images that do get taken are often subject to alteration. Snapchat reports that over 200 million people use its filter product, Lenses, every day. Some of them use it to lighten their skin tone; other filters and automatic enhancing features can do the same on Instagram and TikTok. Photo technologies and image filters can do this in ways that are almost imperceptible. Meanwhile, social media algorithms reinforce the popularity of people with lighter skin to the detriment of those with darker skin. Just this week, Twitter’s image-cropping algorithm was found to prefer faces that are lighter, thinner, and younger.

Selfie-esteem

We’ve reported before on the ways in which digital technologies are narrowing beauty standards. The phenomenon has led to the concept of the “Instagram face,” a particular look that’s easily accessible through the proliferation of editing tools. Photos reflecting this look, with a small nose, big eyes, and fuller lips, attract more comments and likes, leading recommendation algorithms to prioritize them. We also interviewed researchers who say beauty ideals are narrowing even more dramatically and quickly than they expected—with especially profound effects on the way young girls, in particular, see themselves and shape their identity.

But it could be particularly catastrophic for women with darker complexions, says Ronald Hall, a professor at Michigan State University and an expert on colorism. As more European looks are increasingly held up as an ideal, “these young girls imitate these behaviors, and those who are super dark-complected see no way out,” he says. “Those are the ones who are most at risk for harming themselves.”

That harm can involve bleaching or other risky body treatments: the skin-lightening industry has grown rapidly and is now worth more than $8 billion worldwide each year. But beyond physical risks, researchers and activists have also begun documenting troubling emotional and psychological effects of online colorism.

Amy Niu researches selfie-editing behavior as part of her PhD in psychology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. In 2019, she conducted a study to determine the effect of beauty filters on self-image for American and Chinese women. She took pictures of 325 college-aged women and, without telling them, applied a filter to some photos. She then surveyed the women to measure their emotions and self-esteem when they saw edited or unedited photos. Her results, which have not yet been published, found that Chinese women viewing edited photos felt better about themselves, while American women (87% of whom were white) felt about the same whether their photos were edited or not.

Niu believes that the results show there are huge differences between cultures when it comes to “beauty standards and how susceptible people are to those beauty filters.” She adds, “Technology companies are realizing it, and they are making different versions [of their filters] to tailor to the needs of different groups of people.”

This has some very obvious manifestations. Niu, a Chinese woman living in America, uses both TikTok and Douyin, the Chinese version (both are made by the same company, and share many of the same features, although not the same content.) The two apps both have “beautify” modes, but they are different: Chinese users are given more extreme smoothing and complexion lightening effects.

She says the differences don’t just reflect cultural beauty standards—they perpetuate them. White Americans tend to prefer filters that make their skin tanner, teeth whiter, and eyelashes longer, while Chinese women prefer filters that make their skin lighter.

Niu worries that the vast proliferation of filtered images is making beauty standards more uniform over time, especially for Chinese women. “In China, the beauty standard is more homogeneous,” she says, adding that the filters “erase lots of differences to our faces” and reinforce one particular look.

“It’s really bad”

Amira Adawe has observed the same dynamic in the way young girls of color use filters on social media. Adawe is the founder and executive director of Beautywell, a Minnesota-based nonprofit aimed at combating colorism and skin-lightening practices. The organization runs programs to educate young girls of color about online safety, healthy digital behaviors, and the dangers of physical skin lightening.

Adawe says she often has to inform the girls in her workshops that their skin is being lightened by social media filters. “They think it’s normal. They’re like, ‘Oh, this is not skin lightening, Amira. This is just a filter,’” she says. “A lot of these young girls use these filters and think, ‘Oh my God, I look beautiful.’”

“They think it’s normal… [but] it’s contributing to this notion that you’re not beautiful enough.”

Amira Adawe, Beautywell

It’s so easy to do—with a few clicks, users can make their appearance more similar to everyone else’s ideal—that many young women end up assuming a lighter-skinned identity online. This makes it easier to find acceptance in the digital world, but it can also make it harder for them to identify with their real complexion.

When Adawe explains how using a face filter can be part of a cycle of colorism, she is often met with resistance. The filters have become essential to the way some girls see themselves.

“It’s really bad.” she says. “And it’s contributing to this notion that you’re not beautiful enough.”

And it’s complicated regardless of your skin tone.

Halle, a single biracial woman in her mid-20s, thinks a lot about her own racial identity. She says most people would use the term “ambiguous” to describe her appearance. “I have whiter features,” she says. “My skin complexion is lighter than some other mixed-race girls’, and my hair is less curly.” She also used to be a regular user of dating apps. And from conversations with her friends who have darker complexions, she realized that her experience on dating apps was very different from theirs.

“Quite candidly, we compare matches and number of matches,” she says. “That is where I started to realize: wait a minute, there’s something going on here. My friends who identify as Black or Afro-Latina don’t get as many matches.”

It’s already known that beauty-scoring algorithms, which rank the attractiveness of images, give higher scores to whiter women. In March, we reported on how the world’s largest face recognition company, Face++, sells a racially biased beauty scoring algorithm that it markets to digital platforms, and online dating sites in particular.

Halle says her experience on these apps reflects the wider world, too. “This is deeply rooted in racism, colorism, and everything that’s happening in our society,” she says. The experience became so frustrating for her that she deleted all her dating apps. MIT Technology Review has reached out to many dating sites to ask whether they use beauty-scoring algorithms for matches, but none will confirm or deny.

Even if they do not use systems like Face++, however, they do use recommendation algorithms to learn user preferences over time. And this is another way that colorism and bias can creep in and be perpetuated.

Recommendations based on user preferences often reflect the biases of the world—in this case, the diversity problems that have long been apparent in media and modeling. Those biases have in turn shaped the world of online influencers, so that many of the most popular images are, by default, of people with lighter skin. An algorithm that interprets your behavior inside such a filter bubble might assume that you dislike people with darker skin. And it gets worse: recommendation algorithms are also known to have an anchoring effect, in which their output reinforces users’ unconscious biases and can even change their preferences over time.

Meanwhile, platforms including TikTok have been accused of intentionally “shadow-banning” content from some Black creators, especially those discussing the Black Lives Matter movement or racism in general. That diminishes their reach, and the cycle reinforces itself further. (In a statement, a TikTok spokesperson said “We unequivocally do not moderate content or accounts on the basis of race.”)

Michigan State’s Ronald Hall says he’s “extremely worried” about the impact on women of color in particular: “Women of color are constantly bombarded with these messages that you gotta be light in order to be attractive.”

Adawe, meanwhile, thinks the only solution is an all-out ban on filters that lighten faces. She says she has emailed Snapchat asking for just that. “Social media companies keep [creating] filters because the demand is so high,” she says. “But to me, I think they’re promoting colorism, whether they realize it and whether it’s intentional or not.”

A spokesperson for Snap told MIT Technology Review, “Our goal is to build products that are fully inclusive of all Snapchatters, and we’ve put in place a number of processes and initiatives to help us do that. Our guidelines for all Snapchatters—which also apply to Lens submissions—prohibit discrimination and the promotion of stereotypes, and we have an extensive review process in place for Lenses, which includes testing them on a wide range of skin tones.”

The company says it is partnering with experts for advice, and earlier this year it launched an initiative to build an “inclusive camera”, which is meant to be better at capturing a broader range of skin tones.

A completely different lens

Lise, who now lives in Minnesota, struggled with the effects of colorism for a long time. She went to therapy, watched endless YouTube tutorials on photo editing, and even bought a $600 camera that she hoped would make her look less dark in photos. Eventually she came to realize how harmful it had been.

“Now I just view everyone’s social media page with a completely different lens,” she says.

Today, she’s a new mom: when we spoke via Zoom, I was greeted by her cooing and wiggling baby. I was delighted, but Lise apologized profusely while she adjusted the lens.

She says she wants to see more raw photos online that show beautiful women who look like her. She no longer edits her skin color in photos, and she tries hard to stop the negative thoughts in her head, though it can be hard. “Oh, I’ll be darned if I see someone saying anything to a beautiful dark-skinned woman,” she says. “I don’t care if it’s online, I don’t care if it’s in person—I’m going to call you out. I just can’t be quiet about it anymore, but it’s taken years. I’m going to be more conscious about what I’m teaching my son.”

from MIT Technology Review https://ift.tt/2VSqjPh via IFTTT

#IFTTT #MIT Technology Review

0 notes

academiablogs · 7 years ago

Text

Banning Books and Virtuous Outrage: A Defense of Reading Widely

(Image source) A fissure has formed in the book community as of late, and over a topic we don’t often assign to the average bookworm: censorship. Reviewers have grown more passionate about defending diverse books and criticizing common racial/LGBT pitfalls that less diverse authors fall into. This was a great, purposeful movement,... until it became a weapon. Popular reviewers and bloggers began leading hunts after writers and books they deemed ‘problematic’, full of 1-star reviews and call-out blogs. Readers were told not to buy, or read, or even speak positively of books the community found troubling or questionable. This ‘problematic’ label now ranges from actual poor representation to lead characters who simply don’t align with upstanding morals/beliefs- it’s even been directed at book before they’ve released in ARC. This aslso came a very anti-classic novel movement, aiming to snub the patriarchal roots of fiction found in the likes of Hemingway and Updike. The lines have been drawn, and many people have come out with criticism over the movement. Likewise, there are authors, agents, and reviewers that defend the movement’s core idea is being upheld.

The image that comes to mind for community censorship is not usually a group of awkward bookish teens, but the conservative Midwestern housewife, storming into her son’s school after she’s discovered the many uses of N-word in To Kill a Mockingbird, or all the course language and scary content of Bridge to Terabithia. This happens every year, after all. It’s a culture of church pamphlets that scare parents away from Harry Potter and Golden Compass, or whispered fear of why someone won’t read Kurt Vonnegut.

(Chick Tracts, famous for also calling out the evil of Dungeons and Dragons). Community censorship isn’t new, but do we actually serve progressive writing and diverse works with it? Are works of the past, or difficult topics, now impossible to broach in this ‘more sensitive’ era?

Doubtful. If the aforementioned books can survive controversy, then so will many of the recent troublemakers. If a book stirs something in the world, chances are it’s worth reading- if only to see why it stirred up said reaction. If the combatants of problematic books meant to taper down interest, it failed with novels like Carve The Mark, The Black Witch, and All The Crooked Saints, all of which sold brilliantly. And that’s not to say these books are immune to criticism; indeed, we should discuss the ideas behind a bigoted character taking a lead role, or a white author writing outside of their race or culture. We should discuss the pitfalls and merits to these kinds of books, but the key word is “discuss”: not “banish.”

If we’re truly being supportive of diversity, we have to learn to critique without bashing. We also have to read older works with an understanding of what is historical, and therefore may not age well by our standards. Most of all, we need to remember that authors are just people (albeit weird people) who do not usually mean to attack in their portrayals or narratives. I suspect internet culture buries this etiquette in the face of personal opinion and virtue signaling, but I still find it exists.

Fostering this mindset is so important these days, simply because one of the biggest issues in censorship is that people simply refuse to read widely enough. Like the man who never leaves his small American hometown, limited reading makes a limited reader. Yes, there’s a lack of proper representation in popular fiction, a selection of books that makes up about 0.11111111% of what books you can buy. There are scores of incredible indie and less well promoted books, written by authors from all walks of life, about characters and stories from all over the world. These books not only deserve your reviews, but the market will continue to have a hard time changing until people make an effort to positively support these kinds of books and buy them. Be the change you wish to see realized.

(My favorite YA novel from 2017, The Gentlemen’s Guide to Vice and Virtue, features a bisexual main character, his biracial boyfriend, and an incredible adventure that they go on together. Go read it). The same goes for your experience with classic fiction. You can’t just disregard the eras past fully, where Oscar Wilde and Virginia Woolf, notable LGBT authors, reside. Or how about Jane Austen, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, and Christina Rossetti, incredibly feminist voices of their day? Shakespeare himself explored complex themes with race, homosexuality, and gender roles in an era we often don’t associate with progressive anything.

Are these old works flawless in their pursuits? No, and many of them are marked with their era’s views, and the same will happen with the works of the 21st century. In Shakespeare’s time, readers found Chaucer unreadable, troubled, and dated. A hundred years from now, groups of scholars will study our scores of YA books and chat box novels, and students will scoff that these works: “how dated! How problematic! Why would they even think this way?”

There are few paths to a perfect, truly “unproblematic” book- and why would we want our characters perfect and unbiased anyway? Humanity is flawed, people are messy and sometimes wrong. When we have characters that are the same way, it allows an audience to reflect on that wrongness through the lens of fiction. Old books also allow us a glimpse a past and an understanding of it, so that we might do better. That should be the purpose of the hard, controversial, and downright upsetting.

If we are never challenged, then we never truly reflect. And I suppose that’s a good question to ask one’s self: if a book or character stirs anger in my soul- if I feel the need to hide away from it, what exactly am I hiding from? What truth do we see, looking back at us from those pages?

#books #booklr #the black witch #community #blog #banned books #oscar wilde #jane austen #ya

24 notes · View notes

thekillerssluts · 7 years ago

Photo

Arcade Fire’s Win Butler Responds to Criticism of the Band’s Much-Maligned, ‘Misunderstood’ Everything Now Rollout

Ever since Arcade Fire roared out of Montreal in 2004 with the release of its instant-classic debut album, Funeral, the band has built a critically and popularly successful career as purveyors of emotionally earnest, musically galvanizing rock. So it struck some observers as a little discordant when, in advance of its recent Everything Now album, the band undertook a decidedly un-earnest prerelease campaign, flooding the internet for a brief time with, among other things, satirical music criticism, bogus marketing tie-ins, and fake-news stories.

The critical response to the campaign was not kind, and the album, too, was met with some of the toughest reviews of the band’s career. Front man Win Butler has suggested that skeptical critics — of both the promotional high jinks and the album itself — may be missing the point. For the first time in its career, a band with an undeniable gift for connection seems, both intentionally and not, to have crossed a lot of wires. Speaking from the tour bus on the way to a concert in Boston, Butler explained the thinking behind the Everything Now campaign, and his reaction to what he sees as the confusion surrounding the album.

I’ve seen you refer to the Everything Now campaign as an “experiment.” So what was the purpose of that experiment? And now from the vantage point of seeing the album out in the world for a few weeks, do you think the experiment was successful? A big question for us was “How do you release a record post–Donald Trump?” Since we were making a record called Everything Now, and it would be coming out after that election, it felt like a real moment to try and address subjects like fake news and how the media works. The other part of it is that when you make a record in this modern context, it instantly gets refracted in the media. There’s all this side content, this trail that follows everything. So we thought that maybe we’d just make all that content, as opposed to just making the art. That stuff was going to get made anyway, so why not make it ourselves?

Those are sort of more practical explanations. What ideas and theories were you testing? It’s a little bit like when you go to the doctor and they put dye in your bloodstream — we just wanted to see where fake-news articles about the band would go. The media is built for clicks now, and we were trying to see firsthand how it all works. I feel like I now understand on a much deeper level why Trump got elected. Negativity is what travels. So we learned more about how the internet functions, and how it’s an insane feedback loop. It’s like, we just played a show in London that was one of the best shows we’ve ever played there. It was honestly so fucking exciting. And at the show we sold a T-shirt where we put an ironic Everything Now logo on top of Kylie Jenner’s face. It was visually punk as hell. We knew doing that would get a lot of press pickup but every single news outlet in the world covered it. Somehow there’s a story in that, but there’s not really a story in Band Is Really Amazing at Music and Plays a Live Show and People Cry Because It’s So Beautiful. So it was really interesting to us to see what got picked up about Arcade Fire. That idea plays into what we were doing as well: We were providing the ammunition for people who wanted to write negative things about the band: Here you go! Here’s something to be outraged about!

Is it possible, just on a personal level, that you give too much emotional weight to negative coverage of the band? What you just said about providing ammunition makes it seem like Everything Now was being released with a preemptive feeling of defensiveness. But I think it’s fair to say that, on balance, Arcade Fire have been hugely successful with critics and audiences. I understand that criticism. The success we’ve had is one in a million. But there’s an overall level of meanness online — I think it was worth pointing out the disingenuousness of that stuff. I remember when Lana Del Rey played Saturday Night Live. Say what you will about her, but she’s a real fucking artist, and the media reaction to that performance was like people were trying to ruin her career. Did they really want to ruin this person? Or did that stance play better online? Like I said, so much of it seems very disingenuous. And I’m not just talking shit about music journalists now. I know how lucky the band has been. But publications are tightening their belts and people have to churn out more stuff, and the media landscape has changed — it’s turned into a fucking meat grinder. The Everything Now campaign was happening in the context of all that and coming out of an election where we essentially elected Mussolini as president of the United States. It would’ve been hard for us to just be like, “So this is our new record!” I wouldn’t know how to not try and address what’s going on in the world.

Did the marketing campaign negatively color how people heard the new music? I don’t know. I think some things were misunderstood. From my perspective, the album is musically one of the best things we’ve ever done. It’s also one of the most earnest. People have called it a cynical record, but I don’t think any honest attempt to listen to the music really supports that reading. So it’s hard for me to square that with the negative reception —which hasn’t been the case in Europe, where they took the campaign much differently. Obviously the French are not going to have as much of a problem understanding a meta news campaign; you don’t have to explain any of this to a French journalist. Everything we’ve done has been pretty obvious if you read past the headlines of the stories, which is something else we’ve learned people don’t really do. The other reality of it, for me, is that fans are enjoying the album and listening to it. So again, it’s hard to square what’s been written about Everything Now with my experience of Everything Now.

I can’t imagine there was a lot of backslapping and handshaking after you guys saw that fake-news stories you put out were picked up as real. Has it been at all emotionally satisfying to test your idea that the media is broken? It wasn’t triumphant, but these aren’t exactly triumphant times. We’re not in a particularly feel-good mood. It’s extremely dire and extremely dark right now. When things are this shitty, sometimes nihilism is a good response. It’s like the punk-rock movement in the U.K.— the Sex Pistols cursing on TV. It’s not overtly political, but in the context of the politics of those times, it’s just “fuck this fucking shit.” We weren’t excited about making people feel weird. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t a valid thing to do.

It seems like you have a clear sense of your intentions for the Everything Now campaign. Does other people’s being less clear suggest that maybe the band’s execution wasn’t as sharp as it could’ve been? Or that maybe the tone was coming off more snide than you’d hoped? Maybe there was a certain amount of naïveté on our behalf about how things would be received. I guess at the very core of it, we were hoping that, at least among our fans, we could contribute to a conversation about thinking about what you read, not taking things at face value, critical thinking. Maybe certain parts of that got away from us.

Like what? The thing that really got away from us in the most fascinating way was when we played a show in Brooklyn. There was this kind of big story about how we demanded there be a dress code, which was completely false and was something that could’ve been corroborated by a simple phone call or email to our publicist. But instead of that, there was this sea of outrage: “How dare they do this!” There was even an article written in Canada slagging the band about the dress code after it was clear that we had nothing to do with any dress code. A journalist writing about something after it was proven fake was not something we’d anticipated happening. But I can’t say I was surprised, because that’s where the culture’s at now. Fake news becomes something that real news has to respond to. It’s totally insane. From my perspective though, the Everything Now fake-news campaign lasted about a week and a half, and let a lot of people know that there was a new Arcade Fire album coming out. So I’m not really sweating a lot of this.

Does the response to the campaign — and what I imagine was the difficulty of putting it together — make you at all want to go the Radiohead route and basically just let the music do all the talking from now on? We only did something like five interviews for Reflektor. This is by far the longest interview I’ve given for this album.

Maybe you didn’t give a lot of interviews for Reflektor, but you promoted it with a special on network TV. The band wasn’t exactly shy about letting people know it had an album out. But the thing is, it’s bad to me when a record comes out and people are like, “Oh my god the new Radiohead record! Yes!” — then it’s gone the next day. It might as well not have existed. Remember when Radiohead played the MTV Beach House for Pablo Honey? You watch that video and you can tell the band was in hell. That was some stupid-ass shit, but you know what? That’s where I learned about Radiohead. They suffered through that, but they did it because they wanted people to hear their music. Before OK Computer, they toured the U.S. opening for Alanis Morrissette — most British bands weren’t doing stuff like that, but Radiohead wanted Americans to know about their music. Now, 20 years later, they’re still here. We want people to hear our music too. I don’t think we’d go out and open for Taylor Swift, but we want people to hear our music, too.

Would you have done anything differently with the rollout? Or put another way, has any of the critical feedback you’ve gotten rang true? Any criticism anybody else has had of the band — I’ve already had my own way, way harsher criticisms. Honestly, we’re talking about two weeks in the lifespan of this album. You listen to some of the albums Leonard Cohen made in the ’80s, and they have cheesiest-sounding keyboards, but those are such essential records. They’ve stood the test of time. If the songs are good enough and interesting enough, the music lasts. Time will tell if Everything Now holds up — everything else is ephemeral. And if ultimately the biggest regret of my career is that some people think maybe we made a misstep with an album rollout, I can certainly live with that.

#Arcade Fire #Win Butler #interview #Everything Now

43 notes · View notes

ark-of-eden · 7 years ago

Text

Thoughts on the Function of Art?

(R:) I didn't want to append this to that big thread about censorship, questionable story content, and authorial intent because I am a Small Person who just consumes things and I was pretty sure that I can't actually add anything useful to the discussion. But I'm still stuck on it a little, so here is a thing that I'm putting behind a readmore in case everyone is fucking tired of the whole censorship debate.

tl;dr: Riss is old and grew up in an environment that was not exactly info-rich when it came to controversial issues. Riss is clumsily attempting to tape this and that together for some reason, possibly just to get it out of the brain. (This ultimately turned into a long fucking story about my early life that doesn't really go anywhere. It's just a long fucking story.)(**ALERT: This includes discussions of stereotypes, slurs, and fetishization.)

People in that thread pointed out the weird over-reliance on interrogating an author about what exactly they meant by writing certain content and that authorial intent should be a yardstick for whether certain content is edifying (and deserving of existence) or not. Other people wisely pointed out that every consumer will inevitably interpret every creation through the lens of their own experience and come up with a different take on what the piece is "saying" about whatever it depicts.

Back when I was very young, there was no way to directly contact any sort of creator. Novels had small text somewhere that mentioned how to send snailmail to the author C/O the publishing company, but naturally there could be no expectation that an author would ever actually write you back. Direct contact with creators was usually in the context of them being guests at a con or signing or gallery showing, which was sort of like seeing a band play live. Every other exposure to them was one-way or indirect, through their work or news articles or possibly from hearing a radio interview or watching a TV program about them, if they were important enough. This was pre-widespread-Internet, so nobody had blogs; some big-name people had fanclubs that mailed out regular newsletters, but the vast majority of creators had nothing but their content in circulation.

I guess that the point of saying all of that is just to illustrate that the present-day situation in which creators have public social media accounts that one can just drop into and toss opinions and questions about intent at them is...kind of a luxury, in my experience? For writers of "classics," there might be printed articles or essays in which they went on about their intent or process, but for creators who weren't popular while they were alive, historians have to go mining for diaries or letters to even get an idea of what sort of person they were, much less what they meant when they wrote that one scene from that one novel that was Kind Of Problematic.

And that was a tangent leading around to a perspective about creative work in general that I heard very early on and took to heart when it came to consuming media. I read somewhere that the point of creating something was to produce a response or emotion in the consumer. Any response. The creation was meant to be a catalyst for newness or change in the viewer, even if the response was something like anger, fear, or disgust. The worst possible response to a creation was dull indifference, because it had failed to do anything at all to the consumer.

I saw supporting evidence for this perspective in a lot of media. Bands built up weird, elaborate Aesthetics purely to draw attention to their songs, not because they were demonstrating some deeply-held belief system. (I've lost track of how many CDs I saw from bands who made dark music about cruelty, despair, and the emptiness of the universe and yet, in tiny liner-note text, poured out flowery squee about how they thanked the loving Lord God and Jesus Christ for blessing them with their musical careers.) Artists who talked to other artists about their craft admitted that they often made the art they did just because they wanted to make it for no special reason, but they fabricated deep-sounding bullshit to attach to it so that collectors would buy the thing just for the story that went with it.

A piece that kept getting talked about over and over back then was Piss Christ, which was literally a large glass jar full of urine that had a crucifix floating in it. Large sections of society were fucking outraged that this thing even existed, that galleries dared to let it darken their doorways, that the artist was even depraved enough to think up such a thing. I don't recall what the artist herself (I think it was a she) said about why she made it, but what was clear to me was that she had succeeded at the goal of art like an absolute champion. Nobody could look at that piece without having some kind of intense response, and whole groups of educated people were compelled to spill out their opinions and argue about it. Piss Christ was Successful Art, the thing that every piece of art wished that it could be. It didn't matter that most of the responses were negative. Apart from making it, the artist did nothing to encourage all the discussions prompted by the art's existence. People used it as a springboard for debates about What Is Art Really, the empty veneration of religious iconography, public obscenity, and all sorts of other things, entirely on their own.

Granted, there were clear downsides to not having instant access to people's creative narratives and backgrounds, or to the greater community of consumers. There were panels discussing themes in modern writing at cons and sometimes a nearby book club where people could rec things and talk about good and bad aspects to whatever they were reading, but if you weren't in a position to have either of those things? There wasn't a lot to do but chat with any reader buddies you might have or actually trust marketing. This book is a NYT Bestseller and has its own special display in Borders? Well, must be a well-written book with quality content, or else it wouldn't have that kind of backing, right? (I was such a trusting little idiot back then, seriously.) So this was when all those toxic norms of casual misogyny, racism, and queer villainization went unchallenged in a lot of places and was just The Way Things Are.

My family moved around to many parts of the US while I was young and I swear I never heard people anywhere bothering to have a discussion about the trend of weak female characters or how POC cultures kept getting reduced to exotic window dressing. There was a sense that those kinds of intellectual topics were the sort of thing that academics did in far-off Academic Country, where they only read classic literature and went over word-by-word symbolism with ever finer combs. I'm no quality literature historian, but I imagine that those kinds of thematic conversations probably got louder as widescale communication got easier, such that a person could throw out into the aether, "Is it just me, or is the only time when cultural elements from Asian, Middle Eastern, Native American, or African civilizations turn up in mainstream lit is when they need 'exotic savage foreigners'?" and people would be able to chorus back, "OMFG THANK YOU I thought I was the only one bothered by that!!" (I mean, advancements in communication helped every minority find other people like themselves, which is why the Internet is part of real life and a genuinely precious resource to isolated odd folk who are forced to live in places that are hostile to them. You no longer have to live your entire life being the only lonely freak instance of your kind in the entire universe.)

So I recognize the shitty situation of having mainstream marketers telling people which stories were good and which story elements were admirable without also having access to Discourse that would challenge those norms. I remember just accepting that girls would hardly ever be able to be heroes the way boys could be, and that people from far-away cultures were always primitive and backward but in fascinating ways. Nothing in my daily life countered anything that I read. Discussions that I found online much later in life caused me to rethink the trends in everything that I'd read as a kid and see it all with fresh eyes so that I could realign my opinions. It's vital to have discourse and challenge happening alongside creation so that we don't have generations of people absorbing shitty norms that are supported by fiction and not realizing that there are even alternative ways of seeing things.

But there's still that issue, in my mind, of a good creation being one that creates ripples far outside of itself by prompting any kind of response in the consumer. Which is, I guess, why it seems fine to me that Problematic things exist and that people encounter them even if they come away hating those things. The encounter with that thing can make a person think about their own perceptions and experiences, and it can prompt conversations about was learned from that encounter - the why of the result and what it means. Obviously, the same can be done with media that makes a person happy or comforted, and that ends up in Discourse because people end up comparing their experiences and questioning whether the people who are happy/comforted are correct to feel that way about the media.

(Bonus Tangent: it's never possible to be incorrectly upset/offended, only incorrectly happy, strangely. Because telling people that they are not allowed to be upset about something is controlling and aggressive, but telling people that they're wrong to enjoy something is...I'm not finding any positive result. It's shaming, which is a response used to exert social control over others. Talking about whether or not casting shame on total strangers leads to the desired result is something that even I don't want to take the space to talk about. I'm one of those who considers emotion to be out of a person's control. Emotion precedes action. What's important, IMO, is what action a person takes regardless of what emotions they might have, because it's possible to choose actions. Telling a person that they're not allowed to feel a certain way is an attack based on something that a person can't actually control. Whenever I see antis saying things like "no one should ever enjoy this content," I wonder how people are supposed to casually shut off their enjoyment. Can the antis shut off their outrage with a flip of a switch, since it's just an emotion too? Attempting to reprogram a person's emotional or motivational palette leads to things like conversion therapy, which has a high rate of failure/relapse and tends to traumatize people into other mental deformities. That's why it's far more useful to focus on responses to emotion instead of emotion itself. People with uncontrollable emotional responses - such as phobias or fetishes, say - can learn adaptive actions faster than they can unlearn emotional responses.)

This was a hugely roundabout way of saying that I really think that bad media or problematic media are still important. They can prompt discussion and introspection, as mentioned, but, IME, even a shitty representation of a concept can put cracks in a person's worldview and make it possible for them to be open to better ideas in the same vein later on.

For instance, I had that strict mainstream heteronormative upbringing. The only thing I knew about queer people for a huge part of my life was that they needed to be pitied because they were going to hell, and the closest thing to a trans person that I knew about was that Crying Game trap drag queen concept where the sinister man in a dress seduced honest straight men with borrowed feminine wiles. (I literally did not know that transgender people were actually real until after I was 20, which is one reason why I am such a massive late trans bloomer.) I also had that strict gender role upbringing in which there were certain things that a person must and must not do in order to be "proper."

Back when I first got on the Internet and started interacting with fandoms, genderswap fics were popular in my circle. Often, it was basically the same plot as the source material, but you'd switch everybody to the opposite binary gender and then, based on the assumption that men and women think and do things in slightly different ways, the plot would usually derail from canon because the genderswapped characters wouldn't do the same things that they canonically did. It was just one of many common fanfic thought exercises.

Looking back, reading genderswap fics was something that started eroding the strict worldview that I'd inherited. The "men and women just naturally do things differently" was enough in line with traditional gender roles that it passed by my defenses, but the swapped cast of just about everything ended up with lots of strong, heroic women and the occasional male sidekick. Further, writers tended to use the "women are more socially/emotionally intelligent than men" stereotype to correct shitty things that male characters did in canon because, if they were women, they'd be too smart and perceptive to do whatever stupid thing they did and everything would have happened differently. Nowadays, there's formal discussion about the lack of strong female characters in mainstream fiction, but in fandom, female writers just fixed the problem directly with genderswap so all the interesting, powerful people could be women and the guys could be useless arm candy for once. It was a way of reclaiming importance and power when canon media didn't give women much else to work with.

(I became aware while ago that Discourse is informing people that genderswap fics are hugely offensive to trans people. Now, I've described my crappy upbringing, but as a trans person, I don't understand this at all. I get that the "opposite gender" swap upholds the gender binary, but the issue is offense against trans people, not against genderqueer or nonbinary people. I seriously don't get why I should be offended? Is it because the genderswap doesn't include actual RL transgender experiences, as if the entire cast were realistically transitioning as a plot element? Genderswap is not acceptable unless it specifically includes things like "this is the story of how Cloud Strife got her testicles removed and enjoyed growing breast buds thanks to HRT"?? Maybe I'm an idiot, but those are two distinctly different story concepts and both have merit. o_o)

Later on, I became aware of people who were preoccupied with stories and fantasies of fantastical gender transformation, usually male to female. Some stereotypical male character would get injected with an alien serum or zapped by a fairy's wand or something and he would immediately metamorphose into a woman. There was often a disturbingly rapey element to these stories, like the boy wouldn't want to be transformed and was horrified while he was changing, but after he settled into the woman-shape or had sex as a woman after changing, he realized that he loved it and felt so much better that way. The stories were mostly just short repeats of this exact same situation, written by different authors with slightly different details, and this group never seemed to get tired of them.

Eventually, I learned that most of the people in the core of this group identified as trans women, but they lived in circumstances where they weren't permitted any female expression or had lost hope of ever transitioning. They fixated on transformation fic as a way to soothe the pain of living. Looking back, the noncon/dubcon themes that kept appearing in the fics made sense as a way of indirectly satisfying the powerful social forces that were demanding masculinity of them. The male characters were trying hard to stay male, fighting back against the transformation; they were clearly performing all the do not want signals expected of men threatened with feminization. They fought the good fight, but the enemy overpowered them! Womanhood was forced upon them! It was totally unexpected that they enjoyed being a girl after all, but because their maleness had been aggressively destroyed, they were free to stop performing resistance and love themselves.

But you can find fetish material like this in a lot of places, without any context as to the intent of the creator. (And I'd argue that it counts as a fetish if you crave it as necessary somehow, regardless of whether or not you're jacking/jilling to it.) Some people would write the same kind of stories for forced feminization as a type of humiliation. Among furries, transformation fetish material seems to add an extra angle of growing into new power and strength by a change into some larger, more magnificent creature in addition to changes involving sexual characteristics.

Further into the fantasy fetish scene is smut involving dickgirls/cuntboys. Those terms are inherently objectifying and fetishizing; the focus is entirely on the genitals and how a person has the "wrong" ones for their body. Understandably, this is where trans people get turned into dehumanized kink fuel, and real life "tranny chasers" exist who try to weasel into relationships with trans people just to have an embodiment of their fetish.

Artists seem to be slowly getting better with at least giving a nod to real trans people when tagging this sort of art, but (likely to get the most search hits) usually it's just "transwoman/man" alongside "dickgirl/cuntboy." And the art, at least, is clearly designed as fap fuel, so it's not like changing the label makes the content more respectful to the real humans it resembles.

Fetish art with that sort of name shouldn't be uplifting or encouraging because it makes trans people into objects, I know. But I enjoy it when I see it not because it gets me hot in itself, but because I feel heartened when I see sexy art of, essentially, trans people who have not had any genital surgery. I'm fortunate in that I don't have the worst soul-crushing dysphoria surrounding my (still XX factory standard) genitals, but I know a lot of trans people get seriously torn up about theirs and worry that they'll never be truly attractive to others because their genitals are "wrong." While it's possible to find humiliation art online of people with all kinds of body configurations, I tend not to (YMMV again) find much that seems to be specifically shaming or hating on characters who have trans genitals specifically because they are wrong/ugly/queer/etc. They're just participating in enthusiastic hot sex like all the other characters. Sometimes they're literally just standing around looking sexy, like any other badly-posed pinup. But when they're in the mix of whatever smut they're depicted in, they're objects of desire with their own sexual power, unashamed and equal to the others, and the other characters find them attractive and are clearly really excited to be doing whatever they're doing with that hot trans character.

And this response is very problematic, I know, because smut of trans characters that's designed to satisfy fetishes actually does lead to cis stalkers who want trans partners as living sex toys. And art of pre/non-op trans people being sexually liberated and desirable might end up being nearly indistinguishable from most of the fetish art I've seen, apart from lacking the objectifying dickgirl/cuntboy label. I hate seeing those terms in art tags, but the art itself makes me happy. Not even aroused, just happy to see characters who are essentially pre/non-op trans people being desired and enjoying themselves. When you've lived your life believing that you're ugly and unlovable, seeing people similar to yourself in those kinds of situations is a Band-Aid on an old, deep wound. I wish someone would look at me that way. I wish someone wanted to touch me that way. And even if you can't have that for yourself, you can at least look at art where similar people can, and even if those trans people are imaginary six-breasted purple foxtaurs, you can still feel like at least there are trans people somewhere in the galaxy who are free and happy and desirable. It's the same as those trans girls who spent years telling each other the same MTF transformation story over and over and over even though it was pure fantasy. They needed periodic inoculations of that fiction to keep themselves afloat when they believed that they could never have the reality.

That's why, to return to my earlier point and to the points that the people in that big thread probably said better than I have, I don't want bad media to go away. Even gross White Man Story For White Menfolk fiction can at least prompt discussion and response and might have little bits in it that made someone out there think of something in a way that they haven't before. Even depictions of minorities that are pretty clearly designed to be shallow fetish fuel might be a lifeline to some isolated person to whom that shitty depiction is the most positive representation of their identity that they've ever seen. You'd hope that they'd quickly be able to find better ones, but beggars can't be choosers, and if that shitty depiction hadn't existed then they might never have had the chance or the knowledge that different views were possible. You just can't know what people see and think when they consume a particular piece of media. They bring so much of their own context into the experience.

That's why I wish people would focus on action instead of on vague, catastrophizing speculations about intent or potential or who has a "right" to create or consume certain things. There are at least a couple of stories floating around about female fic writers who regularly wrote m/m smut, but who, IRL, opposed same-sex marriage and disowned their queer relatives. IMO, that's how you can tell who is making objectifying content - by whether they treat actual, living representations of minorities/fetishes like frivolous entertainment. I would bet that those IRL-anti-queer fic writers wrote things that were indistinguishable from the general mass of fanfic, which was why other fandom people were shocked to discover their IRL actions. People create things for all sorts of different reasons, not because ther creations are a clear window into their innermost motivations. You just can't know what's in a person's head, no matter what sort of things they create.

And I've literally spent hours writing this and sort of vaguely editing it paragraph by paragraph, so I'm going to post this now and release myself from childhood memory hell. Ultimately, that reblogged thread still said all of this better, but I just had a compulsion to LET ME SING YOU THE SONG OF MY PEOPLE FOR TEN FUCKING PAGES. :P

And oh hey, I was so caught up in time-warping back to the 80's and early 90's that I forgot that Wikipedia existed, so here's their page on Piss Christ. Turns out the artist was male. Says it was only a photo?? Lies!! I distinctly remember seeing the goddamn gross jar of pee!! Because human memory is a reliable, unalterable record!! (Okay, I've clearly gone on too long here. I apologize to the whole internet in advance.)

#fetishization #queer #early life experiences #slurs #queer fetishization #fandom politics #not even sure what to tag this as so just sort of be generally cautious

1 note · View note

missnotsocool96tm · 7 years ago

Photo

[Edit: Since my opinion is apparently too controversial for some, I will repost my thoughts here. That being said precede with CAUTION. All photos/gifs used in double spaces will be a the top) {WARNING: This will be a long post that will get explicit at times. You have been warned.} Let me take a moment to address something that had come into my attention yesterday amongst the good news of BTS performing at the AMAs. This is not something I want ARMYs to focus on or to make a big deal of, but it is something that needs to be brought into light, made aware of, and given a deep reflection on. On Twitter there was backlash from some ARMYs against a verified account from a female rapper known as Cupakke for a sexualized comment she made towards Jeon Jungkook of BTS. Cupcakke has since stated due to the backlash on her Twitter and Instagram she will be taking a break. It's unclear if she'll be off social media for a while or if she plans to deactivate her accounts. As of right now her accounts are all still up but she has renamed her Twitter name from "Marilyn MonHoe" to "gone for good". Now before I voice my thoughts on this matter, let it make it clear that I have checked both sides. In fact, I knew about Cupcakke and listened to her before I listened to BTS. While I can't say I'm a big fan of her music, I do respect what she does with her music and her as an artist. That being said, here is what you need to know about Cupcakke. Elizabeth Eden Harris, mostly known professionally as Cupcakke, is an American rapper from Chicago, Illinois. She begun her career by releasing material through the Internet back in 2012. Her brand of music is associated with a mix of hip hop and dirty rap. Cupcakke is very blunt in her music and is confident in her sexuality, which is evident in her song, Deepthroat, which was the first song I ever heard from her. Despite her overly sexual persona, she does bring up important messages in her songs. Whether it be about relationship heartbreaks in Tit For Tat, protesting about racist cops in Picking Cotton, or addressing sexual assault and anti-predatory behavior in Pedophile, Cupcakke is a lot more than her persona leads you to think. She's very caring of her fans, going as far as to send money through PayPal towards a fan who got kicked out of an abusive household and offered another fan a place to stay after they admitted they were homeless because their mother kicked them out for being gay. Looking at her Twitter account as much as I could in the last 2 days, it seems clear that she may have been an ARMY and most likely a Jungkook Stan. She has retweeted the AMAsxBTS announcement tweet and admitted her excitement over it. She has retweeted something another ARMY has said in that a "Cupcakke x BTS collaboration would be legendary". This would imply that Cupcakke agrees with this statement and is up for that to happen. She has also tweeted that she has heard Jungkook's cover of Nothing Like Us and admitted she cried hearing it. She says he has a great voice. Now the issue here that got to a lot of ARMYs, specifically Jungkook stans, was when Cupcakke tweeted that she wanted to suck off Jungkook and had tagged their Twitter account. I don't know how true this is because I can't find the actual tweet aside from screenshots others has posted about it. Cupcakke has made sexual implications in her tweets regarding Jungkook in passing before. I've read all the ones I could find and none of them struck me as going "too far". They were suppose to be taken as jokes and nothing too serious. Some ARMYs have claimed that Cupcakke has also DMed them something inappropriate, which is unlikely as they would have to have also be following Cupcakke in order for her to DM them in the first place. Though even if she did manage to DM without them following her back, it's pretty clear that BTS doesn't read comments, especially explicit ones. I hear that apparently Jungkook has stated in the past that he feels uncomfortable with explicit sexual comments made towards him, which is why he no longer reads SNS comments, YouTube comments, ect. I don't know how true this statement is either, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did get uncomfortable from it. Many have come to the defense of saying that Jungkook is an adult and isn't a child. While this is true, that doesn't stop the fact that he most likely finds these comments uncomfortable. Imagine someone you don't know making sexual comments about you or wanting to do things to your body or wanting you to do things to them. After a while, it would start to get uncomfortable. However... If she was truly bothersome or stepped out of line in anyway, she could simply be blocked or muted. Then there's the issue over her tagging them. Personally, I don't think that's okay. Unless you are close with that person or have had a decent amount of interaction with each other in the past online or offline, I don't believe it's necessary to tag someone a tweet with sexual implications. I have tagged people that I have followed before. Artists that I admire, actors that I liked, and/or YouTubers that I watched religiously. While I have said some weird things in the past, I made sure to never say anything sexual or something I believed they would find offense when I tagged them. I doubted they would even see my tweets and it was rare when the person I tagged would respond back. Still, I looked up to these people and had too much respect to want to give them an off first impression of me. Perhaps that's just how I am. Obviously Cupcakke and I are two different species when it comes to how we want social media to view us. I'm a bit cautious on Twitter in terms of what I want to say, what I want to like, and who I want to follow, while Cupcakke doesn't seem to care about any of it. She speaks her mind and is unbothered for the most part even if you disagree with what she had to say. While that's the case, she still cares a lot at the end of the day considering how she responded to the backlash and inevitably admitted that ARMYs don't have to worry about her anymore and thus changed her Twitter name to "gone for good". A handful of Jungkook stans apparently sent a bunch of death threats and DMed or private messaged a lot of harmful sayings to Cupcakke on her Instagram and Twitter. This lead to her changing her Twitter name and claiming that "this fandom (ARMYS) is disturbing". Now I doubt her demographic would have converted into ARMYs but there are ARMYs that like Cupcakke and the fact that the fandom got generalized like that based on the actions of a few is disappointing, especially when not even a week has passed since the announcement of the Love Myself campaign BTS had made with UNICEF towards the #ENDViolence charity project. The whole point about this campaign was to spread love, positivity, and help others. Taehyung stated at the conference on the day of revealing the project that he had witnessed a lot of close friends and fellow students get bullied and abused at school and how over the years conditions have worsened. This project was suppose to help with bullying and cyber bullying as well. What Jungkook stans did to Cupcakke was cyberbullying at its finest. I get why they were upset and I understand that if the roles where reversed, if Jungkook was the one sending sexually implied tweets towards Cupcakke or towards someone like Camilla Cambello, like Ariana Grande, or like Selena Gomez, there would be an outrage and full on #JungkookIsOverParty trending everywhere. In this instance both parties are at fault here. Cupcakke shouldn't have tagged BTS. She can continue to say whatever she wants about them, but she doesn't have to tag them. At the same time, ARMYs and Jungkook stans should not have sent death threats. It goes completely against what BTS would want and it makes the whole fandom look bad to outsiders, which isn't good considering BTS is about to make their biggest debut in US history three Sunday's from now and things like this can jeopardize everything in terms of fandom growth. There's something I also need to point out admin all of this. The hypocrisy of it all. As I mentioned before, I read the explicit tweets she made about Jungkook and the tweets she tagged BTS in. I didn't find them to be any different then what I've read from other ARMYs sexualizing our own boys. Now I ask, why was it a problem for Cupcakke to sexualize Jungkook in a similar way other Jungkook stans have done? Keep in mind Cupcakke is a Jungkook stan as well. I'm well aware that not all Jungkook stans or ARMYs are like this. While all the members are attractive, there are some ARMYs who simply don't get sexually attracted to them or get caught up in romantic infatuated feelings. So instead of saying Jungkook stans from now on I'll refer to them as Jungkook extreme stans. As we're on this subject, I will admit I am at fault for having done this as well. Seeing Blood, Sweat, and Tears for the first time, while fully aware this music video would most likely be sexual, it was very easy for me to sexualize some of the members. As time passed, I eventually saw there was more to them than just being a pretty face. They had talent, they were charismatic, and they were a bunch of goofballs. It was that side that attracted me more into joining this fandom than their "sexy/rude" side. This didn't stop me from reading Wattpad smut though. I've read a lot of BTS Wattpad smuts/reactions/imagines. A lot of them were really good and a lot of them were really bad. Then I discovered AMBW as a thing that existed. It stands for Asian Men and Black Women. I was obsessed with reading these stories and smuts for three days straight, mostly because it was easier for me to relate to and a lot of the stereotype-ish content involved to exaggerate the blackness of the character were somewhat funny to me. That being said it was pretty clear that these type of stories were very fetishizing and could border being offense, not all of them but still a lot for someone to make a Wattpad story in response to the issues within Kpop AMBW smut stories and stories in general like this: https://www.wattpad.com/392970689-ambw-probs-%E2%9C%A8-welcome-%E2%9C%A8 I've seen each member portrayed as many questionable things and Jungkook has almost always been the role of the international playboy or a jerk. Once again I question how Cupcakke's comments were any different than what I've seen extreme Jungkook stans and other extreme ARMYs have said in sexualizing their bias or other members. Here are a few recent tweets I found discussing it. (Which you can view from the top) One more thing I'd like to add. Both Cupcakke and Jungkook are 20 years old being born in 1997 respectfully. * * * So... Let me get this straight. They're both the same of legal age, they're both adults who are in an industry where they tend to sexualize themselves, and Cupcakke appears to stan Jungkook as she hasn't mention any other member aside from him. For a while I couldn't really pinpoint what was the exact issue here. Yes the whole tagging situation wasn't cool but did it warrant her to receive death threats? No, that couldn't be it. Then it unfortunately dawned on me. Did it have to do with race? I don't want to be "that" person, but I couldn't think of any other explanation. Many Jungkook stans have said similar things that Cupcakke has said, even times 10. Yet, when Cupcakke did it, they all suddenly grew a moral standing and expressed "their disgust" over her behavior. It's not the first time I've noticed this happening. I found an AHL version of Boy in Luv that I never knew existed before. The video wasn't as choreographed as the Korean music video, which is why I prefer it better, however the AHL version wasn't too bad either. The comments on the other hand kept saying the girls were "too old for the boys" and that the video was "too cringey" to watch. Okay on one hand, let's be real, Jungkook would totally go for noonas but that's just my opinion. On another hand, while the whole AHL experience was a bit cringey and those comments could have been reflecting on the behind the scenes of that music video, which is indeed hilarious and cringey to watch due to a swarm of second hand embarrassment cruising by left and right, I couldn't help but feel it was also partially because of the girls used in the video. BTS can have nothing but Korean girls in their music videos and nobody bats an eye, but as soon as someone of color is placed in the spotlight, or in this case, a position in which BTS are suppose to be infatuated with them, it's suddenly cringey to watch. I heard that even during the RM and Wale collaboration, some ARMYs were already dismissing the idea and even went as far as to refer to Wale as the "N" word, saying things like "keep this (explicit word) away from rapmon". Now, I wasn't here when this collab occurred so I can't say for sure how many ARMYs did this or if it was simply just the same type of ARMYs who also told Jimin he needed to lose more weight and that they only cared about his abs. I wouldn't be surprised either way. Back at the BBMAS, before I fully acknowledged that BTS was even a thing, I read somewhere on Instagram from an ARMY who screenshot another ARMY saying things on Twitter like "we should protect our boys from these women. They're too innocent to be exposed to this". I don't know if this was commented towards Halsey or a different female artist/celebrity, but it was definitely a response to how this female was dressed in front of BTS. The ARMY who screenshot the tweet stated that they didn't believe in what the other ARMY had to say and called bull on BTS needing protection and being innocent. I agreed then as a non-ARMY and I agree now as an ARMY. ~~~~~~~ BTS are seven grown men in their early to mid twenties. They are capable of holding conversations with women and will flirt if necessary and given the opportunity. We as a fandom need to stop the mentality of needing to "protect them" from "certain people" and "certain women". We need to quit babying them as they're not little kids. Cupcakke comments would have been a lot worse if she made them while Jungkook was underaged, but he's not. Even so, he was already being sexualized while he was still underaged by other ARMYs. There is a clear double standard here that needs to be addressed and thought about. As black person, I understand that people who look like me will always be put down, dismissed, and mocked. I understand that I'm not desirable to certain men and that most cultures still stigmatize people like me whether intentionally or not. Just because I understand it doesn't make it okay, nor does it make me accept it. I know for a fact that one blog post or 500 blog posts won't change something that's already deeply engrained in a conservative country like Korea. However, I do hope to shed light on an issue I've noticed that's been crawling about underneath us but we've blissfully ignored it, whether by choice or pure ignorance.

1 note · View note

unmistakably · 7 years ago

Text

In 2017, Jenna Maroney Is 30 Rock's Most Relevant Character

Ali Goldstein

News that the cult favorite 30 Rock left Netflix this month sparked a series of frantic reactions on certain corners of the internet. 30 Rock Is Leaving Netflix and People Are Furious wrote the Daily Beast. The New York Times offered 5 Things to Cook While Watching 30 Rock Before It Leaves Netflix. Last week's subsequent announcement that it was moving to Hulu mitigated the loss, although the switch in streaming platform also changes how effortless it is to watch a show usually experienced on a loop. Created by Tina Fey, 30 Rock, which aired on NBC from 2006 to 2013, revolved around an SNL-like variety show. With its mile-a-minute joke delivery and irreverent takes on pop culture, it became a critical hit, rejuvenated Alec Baldwin's and Tracy Morgan's careers, and marked Fey's ascent to comedy A-lister.

Netflix does not offer viewer statistics on its shows, but between all the elegiac write-ups and the sad texts from my friends that say they will have to talk to some food about this, I gather that constantly streaming 30 Rock is a common experience. I know I'm not alone in saying that I have forged more than one friendship based on a shared language of deep cuts like the old leather pumpkin or very wool. For me, the threat of losing the constant company of 30 Rock means not getting to spend time with the character that makes me feel like it's okay to be a human woman. I'm talking about Jenna Maroney. Though ever-exasperated eyeroll master Liz Lemon (Fey) has been the source of many viewers' it me moments, the histrionic train wreck Jenna Maroney (Jane Krakowski) is the character who resonates most with me. In the hyperbolic Trump era, it is Jenna's outlandish reactions that feel appropriate. And after a decade of thinking about Liz's self-interested feminism, it is Jenna's relationship to feminist concerns like misogynistic violence and discrimination against gender nonconformity that are most salient today.

Giphy

Liz and Jenna are old friends on the show, each serving as a foil to the other's deeply ingrained hang-ups. Liz is a frowning brunette killjoy; Jenna is all blonde ambition and horse glue. The two are more negative images of each other than opposites, with Jenna's self-aware fakeness cutting through Liz's tone-deaf self-righteousness. Throughout the show's run, Liz's feminism was subject to rigorous debate. Ten years after the show's premiere, essays are still being penned about Liz's feminism and whether it sufficiently registered on the subjective barometer of what a feminist should be. Why Liz Lemon Was The Flawed Feminist We Needed 10 Years Ago & Still Need Today, claimed Bustle in an article from last year. On the Huffington Post, Zeba Blay wrote that 30 Rock, while myopic and dated in its white feminist worldview, also made apparent the need for women who aren't white, straight, and middle-class in comedy.

Watching the show in 2017 is to be frequently confronted with a liberal feminism that considers success to be personal and professional contentment - having it all to yourself. Liz Lemon is the kind of individualist feminist who likes to stick it to the man while playing it safe, who knows that being a woman is the worst because of society, but does not seem concerned with making that society better for anyone else. Liz leaned in - and was rewarded with the G.E. Followship Award. I would have been a Nazi, she muses about her willingness to collaborate with her CEO boss Jack's machinations in spite of her nominal objection to them. In critic Sady Doyle's blog post from 2010, she correctly identified this strain of Liz Lemonism as privileged semi-feminism. Emily Nussbaum, TV writer for the New Yorker, aptly characterizes Liz as a George Costanza more than a Mary Tyler Moore, pushing back against the idea that she should be considered a role model of any sort. But in this post-sheet cake moment, it is harder for me to sit with this shallow feminism.

It's clear that Liz's concerns were meant to be relatable whereas Jenna's were ridiculous. But what about those of us whose lives have taken an odder turn than Liz's has, who are not baby-crazy, who cannot afford to buy our own apartments, and who do not even have the option of settling, even if we wanted to? And those of us for whom feminism helps queer our lives, rather than serving as a belief set that reconciles us toward marriage, motherhood, and the workplace?

Giphy

Early in the series, Jenna's problems are more typical. A struggling actress upstaged on her own show, she deals with a pathological need for attention along with more universal female complaints such as weight gain and ageist beauty standards. Her issues, however, become less normative as the show continues. Instead of revolving around the tragedy of an old crone yearning for the spotlight, her storylines in later seasons consider how to pair love with kink, and the need for attention with the desire to please. Whereas Liz gets to have it all by the end of the show, giving the audience that relates to her the happy ending they ostensibly want, Jenna's life takes a turn for the weird and wonderful. Jenna is so dramatic, she is radically unrelatable; it is difficult to identify with someone who exclaims, Stop being dramatic. That's my thing. And if you steal it from me, I will kill myself, and then you. It is a given on the show that Jenna is unlikeable and not to be taken seriously. Even in Doyle's nuanced critique of Liz, Jenna is written off as a shallow, unstable narcissist. But in 2017, I find Jenna's issues more resonant, her outlandishness a better balm against the outrageous misogynist currently in power.

Jenna spends her adult life dodging death at the hands of dangerous boyfriends, most famously, Mickey Rourke. While Liz's worst (but funniest) ex, Dennis Duffy, constantly threatens into come back in her life with his promise, You'll be back, Jenna's exes are considerably darker. On 30 Rock, when trauma resurfaces, it is always treated as a moment of wild comedy. Other main characters on the show have moments of unearthing repressed trauma and are somewhat better off after talking it out. Jenna, however, never has her breakthrough on the couch, not because she is too shallow to bury anything deep, but perhaps because she does not repress that much. Her asides about her own traumas have the horrifying buoyancy of a woman who walks away with a stride of pride. You should have killed me when you had the chance, she sneers about Rourke. Violent exes are her specialty, including but not limited to O.J. Simpson, a mob boss, and a sniper who would never shoot her because he was afraid of his own mother - there is perhaps no greater kiss-off for an ex. It is fitting that the rom-com Jenna was supposed to star in, Take My Hand, gets turned into a torture-porn flick. Jenna is a final girl in her own right. And that's why it is all the more satisfying when she finds The One.

Will Forte (left) and Jane Krakowski as Paul L'astnam and Jenna Maroney

Courtesy of NBC

In the end, Jenna's secret weapon - her sexuality - allows her to become a more self-actualized person by the end of the series. When she finally finds love, it is with someone who shares her profession, the female impersonator and performer Paul L'astnam, played by Will Forte, a both decent and perverse person (#RelationshipGoals). The campiness with which Jenna always approached gender is perfectly complemented by Paul's drag performance of her.

On the surface, her relationship with Paul exists merely to make two obvious points: Jenna is a narcissist, and gender is absurd. This reminds me of a remark of Fey's during her sheet cake manifesto: You know what a drag queen still is? A 6'4 black man. Drag laughs in the face of the idea that who you really are exists under the makeup and clothes. I've struggled with whether or not Paul as a character hints at suspicion toward nonbinary identity. Am I laughing at the small-mindedness of those who would mock Paul? Or is his character a wink of acknowledgment at those who think, Oh brother, people sure do take this stuff too far? Even if I can't shake the feeling that this line was written with an eyeroll at such a nonconforming identity, it is to Forte's credit that the character is played with such earnest compassion, joyful in his expression of how he identifies as gender dysmorphic bi-genitalia pansexual (pronounced sex-u-AL). As someone who regards gender both as a category that tries to exclude me from normalcy and, paradoxically, a playground with no rules, Jenna and Paul's relationship might be the most relatable on the show.

Sexuality, let alone complicated sexuality, so seldom gets an open-hearted and curious treatment in any rom-com plotline. Together, Jenna and Paul figure out not only how to make it work, but how to make it weird and keep it that way. Though they initially struggle to define what their normal might look like, they settle on a deliciously campy parody of heterosexual couples getting surprise married and going to Bed Bath & Beyond. Eventually, she has a coming-out of sorts and stands in her own truth in front of the Wool Council to let them know that her relationship with Paul is also based on love and warmth. And chafed skin.

As the series progresses, Jenna learns not only how to feel but also how to express her emotions. For a woman who was taught to identify sadness through flash cards, she makes incredible strides by the end of the series. She accepts Paul's need to dress as another woman (Cher) and even turns down his televised marriage proposal - her dream - to compromise with his needs for intimacy. But she's still our girl. Don't interrupt, she says to Liz during a reconciliation. The pill that lets me feel emotion is gonna wear off soon. The moment is again played for laughs, but as someone who takes pills like that, I can relate.

We have a clear enough picture of what Liz Lemon feminism looks like. The Liz Lemon of today wears a Nasty Woman T-shirt; Jenna sells them on her website, Jennas-Side.com, profits going to benefit a scholarship in her name at the Royal Tampa Academy of Dramatic Tricks. Liz Lemon keeps her maiden name and would point out the sexism behind the term maiden. When Jenna and Paul marry, he takes her first and last name - good praxis! If there could be such a thing as Jenna Maroney feminism, it would be queer, unruly, and untraditional, and it would not define itself in relation to normative benchmarks of adult life like marriage or children. But I don't want to reclaim Jenna as a feminist antihero. She is a hero for those of us who are fatigued with the question of whether a pop culture figure is a feminist.

Whereas Liz sees the patriarchy as her personal stumbling block, Jenna, who truly suffers at the hands of men, seems blithely unaware that she exists within it. It's not so much that Jenna is a feminist figure; it's more that she becomes proudly anti-heteronormative. She is at turns both delusional and self-aware enough to know that prettiness is a facade, and that portion control and exercise won't heal a broken heart. 30 Rock excels when it treats gender as a performance of the absurd, and perhaps I watch it again and again for this absurdity. I am not a Jenna Maroney, because no one but Jenna can be a Jenna. But I do see myself in her. Not so much, however, that I would steal her thunder. You cannot steal her thunder. Her whole life is thunder.

Natalie Adler has a PhD in Comparative Literature and works in disability advocacy. She is currently writing a novel on obsessive thinking and feminist disillusionment.

0 notes