distortions in relationships in LOTR

[Marileangorifurnimaluim]

I think I can safely speak for most slashfans when I say that I don't honestly believe that they were lovers -- but what if they were? It's simply the "what-if?" aspect that we enjoy.

Yes. How would that work in such a prudish and conservative society? How would they react? If they even knew. I did research into attitudes towards homosexuality before the creation of the term, as I believe Tolkien's world wouldn't even consider the possibility.

Historically, it turned out that among the upper classes it was considered an "eccentricity," and was only gossiped about behind closed doors. People of lower classes had a much rougher time, as they had less control over their destinies.

In sense it was freer, as people were more innocent and didn't notice obvious signs. It was viewed (if known at all) not as a classification of people, but as something unusual about that one individual.

Also, the lines were more blurred, because without the concept "gay," there wasn't the worry, "Oh no, if I hug a man I must be gay." So back then, lines were crossed, and there wasn't the emotional turmoil of redefining oneself based on one or another incident. I was surprised to find that it was viewed as a 'boys will be boys' sort of thing -- up until adulthood. Then one had obligations to the family. The social expectations were the main issue. One would never "come out" to ones family because one didn't talk about *ahem* 'the birds and the bees.' The answer to such a confession would be: "You come of age on such and such date. We've arranged a marriage with such and so. We realise you are in your tweens and sowing a few wild oats, but it is past time for you to be responsible. We expect grandchildren within the year."

The roles in society and family expectations become very complex. Then, with class distinctions, you have the power imbalance between someone of a wealthy class and someone whose family is poor: how can one keep the friendship from being destroyed in the process? Would there be a choice to end this to preserve the friendship? What is the internal impact of crossing so many lines?

Sorry, didn't mean to run on there.

I mean, why not create your own characters and slash them?

--Evisse

Evisse, that's the argument usually used to dismiss all fanfiction. "Why not just write your own characters?" I think any writer's jaw would go slack at that sentiment.

That said, of course I do.

- Maril

[Evisse the Blue]

Evisse, that's the argument usually used to dismiss all fanfiction.

I have yet to see how this argument can be used to dismiss fanfic that's within cannon limits, e.g. missing scene fics, vignettes, character musings, etc. Those kind of writings develop the characters' depth within the limits imposed by the original writer and they can be really challenging and fun.

[Encaitare]

Indeed they are, Evisse! It's tons of fun to expand on a story while staying within the lines on canon and it's great practice for a writer -- but you can only do that for so long.

And I have decided if we made our own characters and "slashed" them... then it wouldn't be slash, it would be canon.

[Morsul the Dark]

I dont think these distortions come from the book they coome from the baski cartoon if you watch that movie It comes out very badly and sounds far worse than it is

[Marileangorifurnimaluim]

And I have decided if we made our own characters and "slashed" them... then it wouldn't be slash, it would be canon.

- Encaitare

Good point! You are quite correct.

I have yet to see how this argument can be used to dismiss fanfic that's within cannon limits, e.g. missing scene fics, vignettes, character musings, etc.

- Evisse

Fairly simply actually. They say "why not write your own original stories?" The implication being that the author should have written something else.

There was a famous story that was called "puerile," and endlessly picked apart by critics who felt the writer ought to have written something, anything else. Yes, it had a high tone; yes, it had some writerly merit. But the subject matter itself was unworthy of such elegant treatment.

It was defended by another author, who felt that these critics should not apply their own agendas and opinons of the subject, but instead consider the work as an artistic whole. He completely changed the attitude towards the "puerile" work in question.

The "puerile" subject that so offended critics: Dragons

The work in question: Beowulf

The defender: J. R. R. Tolkien

We study it today because of his understanding of what it is to be writer (not to mention his understanding of dragons ).

If Tolkien made the point that to be a truly relevant criticism, stories should be considered in reference to themselves, shouldn't we respect that? Isn't that, in itself, canon? If we are building on the intentions of the author?

We have a conundrum. We want to use established canon as a yardstick for fanfiction. Yet the 'canon' of Tolkien's own writings on literary criticism void the entire canon debate. Beowulf cannot be properly appreciated in reference to the 'canon' of established Greek epic tradition. Fanfiction, slash or otherwise, cannot be properly appreciated in reference to the 'canon' of the Lord of the Rings. According to Tolkien, you cannot say "it has no value" because it doesn't fit this or that slot of canon (Greek or LotR).

I must note that I have never heard such a sentiment "why didn't you write something different?" from an author. An author may like or dislike a particular work, but they never seem to say it should not have been written. I suspect Tolkien, too, valued the right to write what he will.

- Maril

[Evisse the Blue]

I'm sorry, I don't think I understand:

Beowulf cannot be properly appreciated in reference to the 'canon' of established Greek epic tradition.

Beowulf is not to Greek mythology what LOTR fanfic is to LOTR. The characters in Beowulf are original characters, from an Anglo-saxon background, totally different from the gods and heroes of Ancient Greece.

Fanfiction, slash or otherwise, cannot be properly appreciated in reference to the 'canon' of the Lord of the Rings.

Yet you see how I might have a certain difficulty in judging it as an artistic whole in itself, and not think along the lines of 'Aragorn would never do that. It's part of the essence of the character." There's that little problem of the characters already being very familiar to me and the fact that I know them to act in a certain way, which gets in the way of the story being appreciated for what it is, with no reference to canon.

[Encaitare]

Evisse said...

Yet you see how I might have a certain difficulty in judging it as an artistic whole in itself, and not think along the lines of 'Aragorn would never do that. It's part of the essence of the character." There's that little problem of the characters already being very familiar to me and the fact that I know them to act in a certain way, which gets in the way of the story being appreciated for what it is, with no reference to canon.

Yup, and that's part of the challenge of writing AU or slash fiction. You want to try and keep everyone as in character as possible while still making a bit of a stretch. If the character is not acting like himself/herself at all, then it's usually a poorly written story and just a sloppy job on the author's part. I personally don't mind a little out-of-character-ness from time to time as long as the story is done well. But for example, a slashfic with Aragorn after he has sworn himself to Arwen is not exactly my cup of tea... however IMHO a "pre-Arwen" fic would be acceptable. See what I mean?

[Sapphire_Flame]

Homosexual relationships have no place in LotR. Period. I can understand how people would still write them for the "what-if" aspect, but that doesn't keep me from feeling that those types of stories are extremely inappropriate. Go slash another fandom. Or keep those stories on a slash-only site, where the more canonical fans don't have to look at them.

I think that slashing a story is, to a degree, like 'Sueing it. You make the characters act completely OOC to conform to your little idea or "storyline". Some people do this worse than others. Considering how swiftly people are ready to absolutely crucify a 'Sue story really makes you wonder why some of these same people turn right around and support slash fics, as they're written with something of the same principle. Just the slash aspect makes it 'Sue a bit, but, as with any writing, a lot of it hangs on the author's skill. You have well-written slash, and poorly written, grammatical-and-spelling-nightmare slash. But, of course, you also have well-written canon following stories and poorly written ones. Some people, sadly, have a hard time with writing mechanics and basic story formatting.

I don't believe homosexual relationships to be appropriate in any way. I'm not a homophobe; and I believe that people are free to make their own choices. But homosexuality contradicts nature. Why? Because what is the purpose of it? To get off, to avoid discomfort caused by consorting with the opposite sex, to be "different"; take your pick. The reason people have sexual feelings is to, basically, continue the human race. Yes, it feels good; no one would do it if it didn't. Homosexuality removes those feelings onto something else, making them become useless and unnatural.

The morality of same-sex relationships is not the point of this post; there are as many opinions on the matter as there are humans to voice them.

My point is this: Tolkien's work is set on a higher intellectual plane than most things. Some people, failing to grasp the subtle messages about these higher matters, subconsciously feel the need to add in their own interpretation of events and emotions to simplify the text and bring the work down to their level. Thus come the slash fics. Those canon-minded of us can ascend to the plane and see what Tolkien really meant, instead of imposing warped ethics onto his work, dragging it down into the gutters where so many people's minds reside. I'm not presuming to be better than anyone. It just seems to me that dragging down what you don't understand to a baser level is a sign of immaturity; it means you cannot push your own intellectual limits to achieve access to a higher level. You may just be happy where you are, and that's fine. But is it really so much trouble to try to enlighten yourself just a little, to realize that just because a small group does somthing it must be "normal" and unwaveringly accepted. As Tolkien fans, I thought you would have more sense than that.

It takes more effort to climb out of a hole than to drag someone down with you. Frankly, I'm sure none of us want to be stuck at the bottom of a hole, no matter how much company we have.

Abedithon le,

~ Saphy ~