On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, Travis Butler wrote:

3.) Given 1.) and 2.), we all might take _very_ different things away from 
the story and characters contained within the Ranma series.

This is reasonable so far.

4.) Given 3.), there is no ONE RIGHT interpretation of Ranma, and its 
characters.

But here things start to go on shaky ground...

5.) Given 4.), it is *impossible* to create Ranma characters and plots 
which are truly "Wrong" (with a capital W).

And here, the argument goes completely off the track. 

Yes, people can certainly have many different views and interpretations 
of the events in Ranma, or any other fictional story. But those views are 
all derived from an explicit *and objective* core -- the events 
themselves, as they are shown in the series.

	...and what the hell does *objective* mean?  If we accept that I 
see the world in a very different way, then wouldn't it also follow that 
I would read Ranma (or anything else) in a very different way?  Why is it 
that there *has* to be one True way to read this stuff?  Why is it that 
I have to accomplish the same damned things in my works that other 
people seem to accomplish again... and again ... and again ... in theirs?  

Views that directly contradict the events in the series are likely to be 
rejected out-of-hand. Views that are "highly improbable" (for lack of a 
better term) explanations of the events of the series are probably going 
to be rejected, unless they are explained/justified and not just pushed 
out in front of the readers.

	In my mind, the question really is why things have to be spelled 
out in such blunt, obvious terms?  Maybe an author _wants_ to try 
something unorthodox.  75% of what I see appearing on this list seems to 
be tired rehashing of the same ideas, flimsily repackaged in trapping 
which seem to tend more towards mediocrity than anything else.  
	
	At least in my works, I *intentionally* left out a lot of salient 
details.  I *like* the idea of leaving the reader to fill in the blanks.  
If you'd like, you can think of it as a form of minimalism.

	This is all sort of distressing.  A few authors have *tried* to do 
something different, and the response has been one of shock and dismay.  
Then again, I think this ends up being the highest praise of all.  I'd 
much rather see people on this list actually wrangling with their own 
perceptions of these series, and the works written about them, than 
engaging in megabyte after megabyte of this *pout pout* *fart fart* 
spam nonsense (which, IMHO, is far worse for one than sparsely written 
fanfics).

For example: Kasumi is shown in the manga/anime to be bright, cheerful, 
domestic, and unfazed by/oblivious to just about all of the wierd 
goings-on at the dojo. An author can certainly try to explain the reasons 
*why* she acts this way, and he could also create his own events that 
would [change/show a different side of] her personality -- "Smoke and 
Mirrors" is an excellent example of both. But if the author shows her 
flying into violent rages, without doing something to explain *why*, then 
the story fails -- it directly contradicts her behavior as seen in the 
series, where she doesn't have violent outbursts.

	Wow... So we now have Truth _and_ Failure as rubrics to which to write. 
A fanfic has some single, determinate goal to reach for it to be 
_Successful_?  
	
	Geez.. I wish someone had given me the program before I got on the 
bus.   And here *I* was thinking that the point was coming up with 
something *new*, *interesting* and *engaging*.  Gosh...

CHL