That's it for me

[dolorosa_12]

I tend not to rant very much about things that make me angry on the internet, especially fandom-related. What's the point, really? But you'd think, with all the fandom fail around (fandom's attitude to what is and isn't rape makes me so angry I start hyperventilating; the endemic racism; the fact that Glee is lauded for its 'diversity' by allowing characters of colour, differently-abled and non-heterosexual characters to dance around in the background and sing back-up songs) that I'd find something that would provoke my wordy ire.

But no, it was Star Wars slash that inspired this post.

karenmiller is an Australian fantasy writer who also writes tie-in novels for Star Wars. She had this to say about people reading gay subtext into her novels.

My response, which I also wrote in comments to her blog, is here.

I haven't read your Star Wars novels. I have seen the original trilogy and the prequel trilogy, but there my engagement with Star Wars ends. I am also not a fanfiction writer, and I only read it occasionally. My fannish participation consists of reading/watching/listening to canonical material, discussing it with other fans, reading and writing reviews and commentary, and reading the blogs of its writers (like your own blog). I come to your blog mainly for the discussions of issues related to publishing and writing. I say this not because I believe that my way of being a fan is better than the fanfic-writing or -reading way - it's not, it's just a way that suits me - but because I don't want there to be any misunderstanding about the reason why I am saying what I'm about to say.

I must say that I respectfully disagree with you.

Firstly, you are using a self-serving, inaccurate definition of slash fiction. You write that slash fiction is 'the reconstructing of canon characters so that straight male characters are involved sexually and/or romantically. I don't see it as a valid interpretation of the text, I see it as an imposition of an external agenda.'. But slash fiction simply means a story where the pairing(s) or relationship(s) within it are same-sex. That is, when Ron Cowen (one of the writers for US Queer As Folk), for example, writes an episode about the canonically gay Brian and Justin, he is writing slash fiction. (True, the term is normally associated only with fanfiction, but it can be applied by extension to original fiction as it simply means writing about a same-sex relationship.)

Secondly, how far do you extend your belief in authorial control? I must say I disagree with your assertion that 'You won't catch me saying it's okay for the reader to over-rule the author as to their intent or their meaning or their position on anything to do with the story. [...] I know there's a school of thought out there that says there is no definitive truth, that no story is objectively true, that everything is open to subjective interpretation. I do not subscribe to that philosophy.'

A writer writes a story with certain intentions, but once the story is out of the author's hands, he or she has no control over how readers interpret it. Readers will bring their own individual beliefs and experiences into their interpretations, making their reaction to the book quite personal. A couple of examples will serve to suffice.

George Orwell's book Animal Farm is often viewed by those with more right-wing political beliefs as being an allegorical condemnation of communism in all forms. Left-wingers, on the other hand, interpret it as Orwell's disillusionment with Soviet communism, not a loss of faith in communism itself. Orwell may have intended one interpretation more than the other, but that didn't stop his readers bringing their own beliefs into their reading and coming up with two very different interpretations of what his book was about.

Here's another example: Sarah Rees Brennan's (main female) character Mae in her The Demon's Lexicon series. A lot of readers disliked Mae, saying she was 'a Mary Sue', 'too perfect' and so on. A lot of readers loved Mae, saying she was a powerful, resourceful teenage girl. The funny thing was, supporters of both viewpoints were using the same events in Rees Brennan's book to support their arguments. That is, they read the same source material and drew startlingly different conclusions. Rees Brennan responded to the debate herself.

The final (and most important) problem I had with your argument is that you seem to be saying that straight is the default sexual preference, that characters are straight until proven otherwise. Correct me if I'm wrong (I have only seen the six films, after all) but in the case of Obi-Wan, he has no romantic or sexual relationships within canon, heterosexual or otherwise. Assuming, therefore, that he is straight is incredibly heteronormative and actually quite offensive.

It is for this reason that I am no longer going to be following your blog. As an author, you have the right to write whatever you want, but you do not have the right to dictate how your readers interpret it. I appreciate that you're responding more to people who are ascribing interpretations to your texts that you did not intend, NOT telling readers how to interpret your texts, but in the course of doing so, you expressed some beliefs with which I am profoundly uncomfortable.

So, in conclusion, it is with great glee and fervour that I ask all Star Wars ficcers on my flist to write multiple fics where Anakin and Obi-Wan are, to quote Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett, 'gayer than a treeful of monkeys on nitrous oxide'.

EDITED TO ADD: And, she's deleted and disabled all comments on that post. So it's all right to criticise fans from on high, but criticism of her is not allowed. Sick to death of oversensitive authors. You said something homophobic, and you were called on it. Deal with it like an adult.

GAY SON OF EDIT: I unfortunately didn't manage to copy-paste/get screencaps of her responses to most of the comments, but I did copy a few of the most cringe-worthy into my Twitter if anyone wants to see her put her foot in her mouth some more.

GAY SON OF EDIT'S BOYFRIEND:
And now, she's responded by adding a note to her welcome post:
'But here's an important note: on occasion I will express a personal opinion. It may very well be an opinion with which you don't agree. I'm fine with that. I don't expect anyone to agree with me, nor do I expect anyone to alter a viewpoint to rub along comfortably with mine. But here's what I won't accept -- name-calling, vilification, aggression, hostility or any kind of trollish behaviour simply because you don't agree with me.'

Not really sure anything I said was name-calling or vilification (I said her views were heteronormative and offensive, and I said several times that I disagreed with her). Hostile, no. Stridently disagreeing, yes.

I really need to let this go.

ADOPTED CHILD OF GAY SON OF EDIT
I should add that she appears to have unscreened comments on the original post. I suspect I'm the one she views as not carrying on the discussion in a respectful manner, and I'm sorry she feels that way. But I'm grateful that the comments have been restored, as people have been telling me all day how upset they were that their discussion was hidden.

I should also add that since late last night, she's been discussing her post with many commenters and defending her position. When I went to bed, there were about 100 comments scattered across two posts, and Miller was replying to every single one. While I'm still not entirely happy with every single thing she's said, and I don't think she's adequately explained any of the more cringe-worthy comments she made (including the idea that she views people as default heterosexual - saying 'I don't really think about the sexuality of characters') but I do think that since she unfroze comments on the original post, she's been much better at realising that yes, there may have been some things she could've expressed better.

Thanks to all of you for continuing the discussion here until we were able to go back to her blog. I'm going to be doing one follow-up post some time later today, and then I think it will be time to retire my ranting on this particular matter.

Comments

[soapyhermit.livejournal.com]

Heh, good point about Obi-Wan not actually appearing to have any canonical "sexuality". He could be anything. If you think he's gay, then what in the text proves (or in the film, which is hte only reference point I have) otherwise?

Bloody heteronormity.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Exactly. It was when karenmiller responded to a comment (since deleted) saying 'if you don't know the sexuality of characters, what do you assume it is?' with, essentially, 'Well, I'm straight, so I assume everyone else is, lol' that I pretty much lost it. How can she say such things and not realise what it looks like?