Meandering Musings

True. My little monster can always be called with Whiska Treats (though she just decided to stick her head in my water glass and I'm not particularly amused. :)

From:

fenderlove.livejournal.com

Yes. I guess there's nothing that can help it, but it's so frustrating to be accused of all manner of things that are very hyperbolic and ridiculous (in my case, I was once accused of hating people with psychiatric problems because I didn't excuse a particular main character's destructive behavior).

From:

fenchurche.livejournal.com

There's an Arlo and Janice comic strip where Arlo is waking up one morning, blearily looking for the water glass at his bedside and, spying the cat face down in it, asks "That's the first time you've done that, right?"

I actually clipped it out of the paper when it ran, because I'd had the same thing happen to me with our cat Cymry when she was a kitten. Only she liked to dip her paws into things and lick the water off. A *much* worse thing to discover. I started keeping a water bottle with a lid next to the bed, much to her annoyance.

From:

I can understand being invested enough in a character to be hurt by criticism of the character. I do. But there's just no way for everyone to feel the exact same way about everything a character does. And when we start talking about what is subtextural there is simply no way that everyone is going to feel the same way because we aren't all going to be reading the same subtext. That's why it's subtext and not text. (And with the comics, hell, people don't even agree on what's happened that constitutes actual text much less what's left unspoken or open to interpretation. Most of the time we're swimming in ill-defined gray area.)

Edited Date: 2011-01-04 05:05 am (UTC)

From:

I have one of those carafes with a cup lid next to the bed... and still end up with water bottles. :)

From:

fenderlove.livejournal.com

Totally agree on all counts, which is probably why one of my pet peeves in any fandom is people who want to tell you that you watched a show "wrong" or that you read a book "wrong" as though it is impossible for them to understand that a different opinion even exists. The strange tides that fandom brings, I suppose. XD

From:

spikewriter

Truer words were never spoken.

From:

Heh. Your icon reminds me of a cartoon I read once.

Dog says: They feed me, they house me, they dote on me... they must be God!

Cat says: They feed me, they house me, they dote on me... I must be God! :)

Edited Date: 2011-01-04 05:22 am (UTC)

From:

rebcake.livejournal.com

Heh. Nope. I have no idea what you mean. At all. We love all our children equally and without reservation at all times. Except Dave. That guy's a dick. (As the icon says.)

I don't suppose it helps to hear that whatever you said that set the thing off, I (for one) probably agree with you? I really don't know the context, I'm just saying that you are, on the whole, usually correct in your thinking. Because it so often aligns with mine, of course!

Consensus conshensus. Variety, darling, is so much spicier!

From:

Yup. Usually it leads me to a deeper inspection of what the writer intended because most things can be read any number of ways, even if it's stated text. With main characters in most works, I'm usually supposed sympathize with them or 'get' them even if I don't agree with their beliefs.

Assuming I know what this is about, though, the writers have gone out of their way to trash certain characters, not just in action but by having their actions directly contrasted to their former selves and by others. I don't believe we are supposed to get or sympathize with them. It can't be taken as a given what they'd really think or feel--even if they're putting up a front--is in any way in line with how their previous incarnation would have thought or felt.

From:

Sweetie, if you're anything like me, you could be accused of Buffy-bashing -- depending on whether they know you or not :(

From:

: This is why is why I *always* read what you have to say :/

From:

I'm just wary of reading too much into the negative space, especially since the positive space is so muddled and muddied. If the plot doesn't make sense (and in the comics, I really don't think that it does make much sense) then I'm honestly at a loss to how to read the negative space or what's intended by it. I don't know what's intended by the text half of the time.

(I truly want to have a slightly confident grasp of what choices and to what degree those choices were theirs and to what degree were they being played like marionettes. This isn't an idle question. If we don't really understand that [and I think Dark Horse in text and in PR has been quite dodgy about it] then how can we speculate what's intended? Whether it was their own motivation or their victimization is, for me, pretty pivotal in divining what it might mean. And I know various people are pretty set in one direction or another in regards to this question, but I don't feel equiped to have that sort of certainty, leaving me to default to WYSIWYG).

From:

then how can we speculate what's intended

I agree. And with that, how can a character come back from it? It's impossible to gauge just what you're supposed to take from it.

Given everything that's come before, I don't think a reading can be too negative because they've done away with everything that says we shouldn't read it negatively. The only positive I can see is extrapolated from the show--No, she wouldn't behave that way. But they've shown over and over and over again that this is apparently not the same person as that, so you can't just assume it isn't WYSIWYG because that's what it's been from the first issue.

From:

ubi4soft.livejournal.com

All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.

*sigh

It's just life in fandom.

From:

ms-scarletibis.livejournal.com

I really don't know the context, I'm just saying that you are, on the whole, usually correct in your thinking. Because it so often aligns with mine, of course!

What she said.

And that being said...what'd I miss? I feel like I may be on some sort of comic friend filter, for I've seen nothing (on LJ).

From:

quinara

Yes, actually (though I think it's usually a different character to you)... Sometimes it is a toss-up as to which is harder out of writing fic and simply being in fandom. Sigh!

From:

ubi4soft.livejournal.com

Not on LJ, here http://buffyforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17207&page=7

From:

ms-scarletibis.livejournal.com

Thank you muchly :D

And...wow, okay.

<--knows some fandom folks who have been clinically depressed, and didn't agree with Buffy's depiction in s6 as just depression.

From:

shapinglight

Same old, same old. You didn't characterb-bash. I wish people wouldn't insist on conflating saying the comics are bad and Buffy has been written badly in them with saying Buffy's a horrible person.

From:

flake-sake.livejournal.com

Ugh, well I think due to the writing in the comics being so crappy that there is no real way to defend comic!Buffy, since it's so flat and unreal a character that it's impossible to follow her trail of thought.

So for defense fault has to be found with the critic...

From:

Right back at ya! :)

Edited Date: 2011-01-04 04:04 pm (UTC)

From:

knows some fandom folks who have been clinically depressed, and didn't agree with Buffy's depiction in s6 as just depression

The Buffy depression thing becomes a somewhat thorny issue, because yes. She was depressed and that has its own characteristics. On the other hand it doesn't divorce her actions from her characterization. Different people with depression make different choices. Her individual choices and reactions are still part of her individual characterization. I feel that all of her choices can't be exclusively filed under "it was the depression..."

But, the depression storyline meant a lot to some viewers and when it becomes the subject of debate, it can be a difficult one to wrestle with without stepping on toes.

Edited Date: 2011-01-04 05:20 pm (UTC)

From:

I just went back and read the post that originated this discussion -- so far from bashing -- I don't see how someone could mistake it for such.

From:

next_to_normal

Only she liked to dip her paws into things and lick the water off.

Haha, Chelsea does that, too! Except she tries to stick her head in first, and when that doesn't fit, she uses her paw.

I'm just worried that she takes after my cousin's cat and one day I'll find her with her head stuck in a wine glass!

From:

I do understand that if we feel highly connected to or personally sympatico with a character that criticism of the character can sometimes feel like a personal attack or bashing. But I think that fandom must leave room for criticism of writing and characterization. If those things are equated to 'character bashing' or personal attacks it limits the ability to interact.

And sometimes the urge to defend a character against all criticism has an unintended effect of balkanizing and polarizing positions.

For example, relating it to the Buffyforums thread, a response about Giant Dawn was to point to the fact that Dawn cheated. I know it was meant as a defense of Buffy's reaction. But, while I did bring up the issue, it wasn't a huge issue for me. It was relatively incidental.

However, if we now begin arguing over whether Dawn deserved to have her situation ignored... Well, if we make that the debate issue, it's going to lead me to focus on it. It becomes a bigger issue for the simple reason that we've now placed it in the foreground and focused in on it. And then we'll end up with my arguing that Dawn is being abused by her ex and whether or not she cheated A) doesn't mean it's okay to abuse her B) leads me to think there may be a bit of slut-shaming involved to say that she 'deserved' to be essentially be abused because she cheated (which I think may be an unintended result of taking the position that because she cheated it's okay to be somewhat dismissive of what was done for her) C) And besides, Dawn is Buffy's sister. Her sister's well-being should trump unknown cuckholded guy.

So, while, when I mentioned this instance of Buffy dismissing Dawn's situation in beginning of the comic, it wasn't a huge thing for me in the overall scope of things. It was just something cited as an example. However, the more we narrow the parameter of the debate to examining that particular instance, the bigger that particular incident grows in relation to the scope of the debate... and when that incident becomes the primary debate field, there's not a lot of upside for me to work with. I don't have positives to balance what I think was wrong there. And if we're really going to narrow in and debate that, I'm going to fall fairly heavily on the side that it should be sis before strangers and it's not okay for any guy to take revenge on some girl's body because she cheated. I don't see condoning that. And... that's going to come off as being far more critical of Buffy than if we had maintained a larger scope for debate.

Debates sometimes lead you down ever narrower dead end canyons, and when you have very little room to maneuver, there isn't much space left to negotiate before finding yourself on opposing sides... even if it's very little distance separating you.

Edited Date: 2011-01-04 05:12 pm (UTC)

From:

The link was my response to having had a quote of mine copied over there (friendlily -- made that word up, just wanted to clarify that the quoting was done with good intention). My initial quote was brief but basically said that I seriously hoped that in issue 40 Buffy looked beyond the end of her nose to recognize the collateral damage and how the events of Season 8 damaged folks that aren't her (or hers).

Since it was a line lifted and not my posting, I thought it best if I clarified what I actually meant rather than simply have people over there speculating what I meant by it... That doesn't seem to have helped, however. And I'm now becoming a bit miffed over the ways it's being meta-mischaracterized.

Edited Date: 2011-01-04 08:14 pm (UTC)

From:

Well, admittedly, I don't think she's Princess Mary Sunshine. But that doesn't mean that I think she's Attila either.

From:

I've got a rather large glass that I often use in the evening for water while I watch TV and every now and I again I hear the cat snuffling and turn around to find her with virtually the upper half of her body in it!

From:

mollivanders.livejournal.com

ugh, I'm sorry hon :( fandom's rather notorious in its merciless attack on anything it doesn't agree with. and no matter how much discussion or context you try to give, you're still a villain.

greener pastures :)

From:

Consensus conshensus. Variety, darling, is so much spicier

Heh. If we all agreed what would we have to talk about?

From:

Honestly, the comics tend to look like a bit of a Whedon lark to me. I have a hard time actually believing that he really thought through a lot of this stuff. Then again, he has done some hinky plotting before, so maybe he did think really hard. (I'm not sure whether that's an even more discouraging thought, though).

From:

I can't imagine why anyone would call you a Buffy-basher.

From:

It's just life in fandom

This is true. :)

From:

Both have their frustrations, that's for certain.

From:

I'm not bothered by being disagreed with, I tend to be more frustrated when I think what I said is being misunderstood or mischaracterized. If I'm the bad guy, I want it to be for stuff I actually said and meant, y'know?

From:

I'm working on my thoughts about what he might actually be trying to say with all this. It's pretty offensive, but it seems to survive the scrutiny I throw at it. And it sort of fits Joss...

From:

Well, Joss does tend to love the theme of "oh the burden of being special and talented..."

From:

I'm thinking more of his pregnancy issues coming to the fore. This thing doesn't have much to do with the characters as it is a diatribe about sexuality.

From:

Well, when you dig around in issues about heterosexual sex and females giving birth, the Whedonverse gets scary really fast.

From: