At 08:50 PM 5/14/99 GMT, Gary Kleppe wrote:
"Presley H. Cannady" <revprez@MIT.EDU> wrote:
Of course it's subjective. As a reader, I have a right to be subjective.
As a C&Cer, what I'm essentially doing is reporting the way in which I
experienced the fic, and that is by nature subjective. If C&C were
limited to things objective, about all that would be left would be
spelling corrections.
No argument here, since this supports my initial argument.
Does subjectivity mean that the author shouldn't worry about it? That's
up to him. If it were me, I would. What Krista and Reid and I are
telling him is that his cliche characterizations have turned us off from
reading his fic. That's something I would take seriously, and would
certainly want to know about.
It's something I'd take seriously if more than three people complained
about it. Considering the amount of private criticism I receive from
what we call "lurkers" on the FFML as opposed to public AND private
C&C from vocal members of the list, I am compelled from experience
to question whether or not the view you, Krista and Reid hold represents
the view of a good portion of readers on this mailing list. Considering
that the entertainment industry and noted authors do not only target
a fandom but a broad audience with certain interests, I'd hesitate
before accepting the validity of such criticism.
Any variation is acceptable, because you cannot quantifiably prove that
audiences will NOT accept Dagwood renamed as Ranma.
I can prove that one member of the audience wouldn't, namely myself. I
don't need a "quantifiably provable" reason not to like a fic.
Well, of course not. I'm not saying you have to like it, but that's
not what I'm arguing. I'm asking for statistical evidence that the
author's general audience will agree with you. Otherwise, general
sweeping statements about the quality of fanfiction based on certain
elements represent ONLY the view of those who voiced them (and those
who voiced support). Out of 1300 list members, I count 3 explicitly
stated positions that match yours.
I personally try and emulate the entertainment industry when I try
and sell a fanfic to an audience. Consistency with the canon
be damned, I'm looking to attract the broadest possible audience.
If the lowest common denominator is a audience-wide interest in
Dagwood, then I'll write a Ranma 1/2 fanfic that appeals to that
taste. That's an extreme, of course. I write primarily whatever
the hell I want to, but I sell it to my readership by listening
to their comments about my style, my technical accuracy, and my
viewpoints. I have yet to receive overwhelming criticism for my
blatant, purposeful deviations from the canon that go without
even the slightest pretense of explanation.
As far as why audiences might accept some forms of OOC and not others,
Krista and Reid have explained this already. Go and read their posts in
this thread.
I have, and I have replied to Reid's post at least.
What about parody,
the obvious example of where such incredible variations have been
successfully received by their audiences?
Parody is different, because reader expectations are different. However,
parody is irrelevant because the fic in question was NOT a parody.
We fundamentally disagree on the issue of what the general audience
is looking for, so I have to disagree here.
-The Reverend Prez
* * *
+-----------------+-<The Badass Reverend of Funk Prez>---+
| Presley H. | Political Science / Computer Science |
| Cannady II | and Electrical Engineering Undergrad |
|<revprez@mit.edu>| at the Mass. Institute of Technology |
+-----------------+-<Anime Manga Development Group>------+
+ Author of Liars and Dreamers, a Robotech fanfic +
+-------<http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/1731/index.html>-+
| MIDN 4/c A-2-2 SQD, MIT-Harvard-Tufts NROTC Battalion |
|_|"The art of war is of vital importance to the state"|_|