writing

lizardywizard:

fierceawakening:

decepticonfetti:

fierceawakening:

julesdrenages:

lordhellebore:

raccoonhi:

yourshipisfine:

magnusbene:

honestly I don’t even care why ao3 was created, if you defend their policy of not deleting horrible works, or are otherwise completely uncritical/forgiving of their mistakes because “but they’re by fans for fans”, you’re a piece of shit

horrible tropes and abuse have always been a part of fandom and fanworks, but it’s super gross that a bunch of fandom elders (who are most likely at least in their thirties) continue the tradition of citing “don’t like don’t read” as a good enough excuse to write child porn, abuse, rape, sexual slavery, etc. AND they collect thousands of dollars each year to fund this through donations

like. they are literally putting money into abusive content being published on their site. where people of any age, even pre-teens, can access it. for example, I could never report people posting alec/women stuff despite it being homophobic, because it doesn’t violate their terms. I can’t report pretty much anything, because as long as you’re not plagiarizing, it’s all good

yeah, ao3 is great as a concept, but allowing abusive, homophobic, racist, etc. material to be published on your site because “fuck the pc police/moral crusaders” is appalling and fuck ao3 tbh. not to mention they’ve had really disgusting people as members on their board, so it’s pretty obvious what kind of people are in charge of this site

If you do not like AO3′s policies, don’t donate to them, don’t publish your fic there and don’t read fic there.

AO3 was created because people were unhappy with the policies of other websites and fanfiction archives.

If you are unhappy with AO3′s policies, there is nothing stopping you from setting up a fanfic archive of your own where you can decide on the policies. 

As for pre-teens accessing the site and reading porny fic… yeah. They’re gonna do that. And you know whose responsibility that is? Those kids’ parents.

If I post explicit fic on AO3, it is my responsibility to categorise it as mature/explicit, to tag the relationships and to mention in the tags/summary that it contains sex. That’s it. 

The entire reason AO3 was created was to give all those “horrible” fics OP hates a safe place to be posted. Most antis seem to be too young to remember what it was like on LiveJournal. Hell, I’m too young to have been there but fandom elders are well aware of how difficult it was to have fandom communities anywhere after all that Strikethrough nonsense. What antis are doing is literally along the same lines, but worse. Strikethrough targeted the same types of works OP has a problem with, along with plenty of other things we would object to being removed. Instead of doing anything good, it just fucked people over. It literally infringed on their rights- and yes, depicting whatever horribly immoral things you want in fiction is, in fact, a right that everyone has.

So yeah, fuck the moral police. All this movement has ever done was hurt people. AO3 was created to get away from that. And if you don’t want to read something, you don’t even have to fucking see it. There are warnings for a reason. I’m really sorry OP finds it horrible that things they don’t like exist, but they and everyone who thinks like them needs to get over themselves and really think about what good it’ll do. Is it worth stealing resources from people who might need them? Is it worth taking away fiction survivors use to cope? Is it worth denying the fact that many abuse victims learned about their abuse through fiction and taking away future victims’ chance at realizing that the way they’re treated isn’t normal? If the answers to these questions is yes, congratulations, you’re an abysmal excuse for a human being and you’re actually worse than all the ~horrible~ people who write about abuse and other deplorable things. At least the people they’re hurting don’t exist.

how difficult it was to have fandom communities anywhere after all that Strikethrough nonsense. What antis are doing is literally along the same lines 

This. Back in 2007 with Strikethrough (link to the fanlore article here) it was conservative Christians targeting any works they found distasteful, these days it’s young “progressive” people clamouring for precisely the same censoring of fan content in the name of social justice. It’s the same kind of policing, the same conflation of fiction and reality, and although the arguments are different on a superficial level, the reasoning behind them is, in essence the same.

It’s not even a matter of putting things in the perspective of ‘means of coping’/’resources that someone might need to recognize future abuse’ and so on, in my opinion.

They are absolutely valid reasons for keeping those works where they are, of course, I’d never say the contrary.

But the core of the matter here is that I have the right to write whatever the fuck I want, for the sake of fiction, and I have the right to publish my work online, to share it with people who enjoy the same kind of fiction

In a system like AO3, with a very wide range of filters, tags and tools to narrow your access to stories, it is my responsibilty as an author to tag and classify my work sensibly, but what to make of those tags is up to you. I can’t and will not be held accountable for distressing you with a graphic depiction of assault if you willingly opened a one-shot of your otp tagged rape/non-con. 

As for minors stumbling on unsuited content: it’s still not my responsibility. As long as my work is marked as mature, if you kid lie about your age, browse it anyway and get upset over it it’s still not my fucking business. Not when you actively chose to not follow the rules. You wanna complain? I’ll have a talk with your parents, then.

You want a safe, sheltered space to suit your demands? Go build it yourself, or customize the already existing archives to your fancy, because guess what? You can do that.

(sincerely, an author that mostly writes harmless vanilla sex and has far more squicks than kinks)

Anyone who thought I was being weird with the “I think young people fail to understand why free speech is important because they’ve never had their speech targeted” post a few days ago?

Look at this, please.

I just don’t understand this whole attitude of younger fans in fandom telling older fans to GTFO because we’re old™

First off, the people making the book/show/movie/comic your into are also old™. Let’s just get that out of the way. With very few exceptions, the media you consume is made by bonafide adult individuals who will continue to make it while aging because they are human beings and human beings eventually become old™. Like it or not, fan fiction is an art form and like all art it should be allowed to encompass the entire range of human experience (or outside of human experience, for you paranormal enthusiasts, ghost kinksters, robots, and possible extraterrestrials). 

I, for one, find it rather gross that there are some artists out there who use period blood to paint self-portraits. But…they are free to express themselves that way and I wouldn’t dream of trying to stop them from expressing themselves. That’s what freedom of expression is all about! I also do not like the ship Reylo for various reasons, but I’m not going to go out of my way to yell at people for shipping it because it really doesn’t affect me whatsoever.

I’m rambling, but my point is that especially with AO3, their tag system makes it so that you find exactly what you are looking for. So OP, I’m sorry that you went looking for stories with your boy Alec in them and found that some of those stories featured him paired with a lady you don’t like. Maybe next time, if you’re looking for a specific ship with your boy Alec, search for who you ship him with instead of just running a general search for his name. That way you don’t trip up any entries of things that may upset you. Just like, you know…if I’m searching for fics with my main bot the great and glorious Megatron doing the deed with his old flame Optimus Prime in a pre-war time – I, being the savvy person I am, will search for Megatron/Orion Pax instead. 

You understand?

Secondly, there are a hell of a lot of franchises that became popular because people who are old™ like them!! The Anime you watch today wouldn’t have been translated or subbed our distributed in the US if it weren’t for us old™ people making the original imports so popular. Are you a fan of Star Wars or Star Trek or any Marvel/DC movie in existence? 

Those franchises were made popular and continue to exist because old™ people in fandom did fan things and bought stuff and wrote stuff and drew stuff and petitioned for de-cancellation of stuff and organized conventions to enjoy stuff. Your fandom is built on the shoulders of the fans before you, and you have the audacity to stroll in here and say we can’t continue liking it or writing stuff for it because we’re old™

Fuck that shit, I’m writing fic for the rest of eternity. I will continue tapping out fic until the heat death of this universe and when the new one is born from the ashes of the dead one I will through sheer spite generate myself into existence again to continue writing. Why? Because you said I’m too old™ to do so.

Thirdly, I wrote smut of Marik from Yu-Gi-Oh and my OC when I was in high school, set in during the battle city arc. Marik is 16 at that point in time and my OC was 14. You want to tell me I was wrong for exploring my sexuality that way, OP? That I was wrong for writing an abusive relationship? That I was wrong for not shipping Marik/Bakura? That I should have been banned from writing because you may not have liked one particular aspect of it? 

Because that’s what happens, OP. 

You ban a thing for one specific reason, then all the other reasons someone might want to write that thing get caught in the crossfire. Want to ban stories with rape or rape mentions in them? Boom, you’ve now banned people writing for coping purposes. You’ve banned writing canon characters who have had that happen to them in the past. You’ve banned writing OCs that have had that happen to them in the past. You have banned writing about rapists getting their just desserts for being shitheads. You’ve banned writing about Ace Attorney Phoenix Wright successfully prosecuting a rapist. You’ve banned just writing a fic that’s based in an imperfect world like our own where it exists as a thing that can happen. All because you want to prevent a certain type of fic that falls under that category from being posted?

OP, if you ever sat through banned books week at school and wondered how the hell books become banned, it’s people like you.

It’s people like you.

So much this.

If youth who need safe spaces want to create MinorSpace for fic for and by people under 18, go for it.

If these youth want to tell me I am not welcome in fandom spaces created by people who are not minors? GTFO.

Also, where does the line get drawn? I usually see “at underage sexual content”, which… is at least a somewhat clear line even if I don’t agree with it (are we going to ban Lolita? Octavia Butler’s novels?), but homophobia? Abuse? Where do you draw the line on how much is too much – or are you going to be completely zero tolerance?

Because if you are – well, @decepticonfetti already explained what happens. Either you can no longer write about rape or abuse for any reason, even as a way of illustrating the horrors of these things or just for the sake of including the fact that they happen in the world… or you’re relying on the moderators having your exact moral inclinations, only ever banning things that you consider intolerable and making the exact same judgment calls you would on when something is acceptable.

And the truth is, no one can do that but you. There is no universal morality, not at this level of fine-grainedness – likely all of us in this thread can agree Real Life Rape Is Bad, but we clearly have very different opinions on what depictions of it are acceptable. And even people who believe that depicting rape in fiction is Problematic are going to have different places they draw the line.

Which is why “don’t like, don’t read” is a thing. Because at the end of the day, if you only want to see content you consider acceptable, and you want to be able to filter out only content that you’re uncomfortable with – the only tool that’s ever going to get that right is you and your ability to tag filter, or to close a tab, or to use your block button. The world will not perfectly mold itself to your morality, and the sooner you learn that, the better.

I once wrote a fic about a canonical, but extremely glossed over in canon, experience of violation that happened to one of my favourite characters. Because I was angry about it, and because I knew similar things happened all the time in real life, and because writing was and still is my only power against those similar things.

prongsmydeer:

Being a writer can be frustrating sometimes because occasionally you’ll hear a song or a quote or even just have a feeling that inspires a story in your mind but it’s visual in a way that can’t be narrated and you just want to create it but it’s not your medium

lyricwritesprose:

more-legit-gr8er-writing-tips:

andworldbuildingtoo:

bellesolo:

say what you want about woobifying villains, but i think tragic backstories and redemption via love are staples for good reason. we want to believe that people are fundamentally good, just hardened by a harsh world. that suffering earns you a happy ending. because then it means something, then pain isn’t just senseless and futile.

people don’t ‘excuse’ the actions of villains because they just don’t take those actions seriously. i think it’s a kind of projection – we forgive them because we want to forgive ourselves, and we look for the good in them because we want to see that in the world, even in people who have wronged and hurt us. because earth is a goddamn terrifying place if other humans really are evil, if they’re really monsters.

and idk, i just think it’s kind of beautiful that we all want to believe that the scariest mass-murdering motherfucker alive can be brought down by something as pure and innocent as love. that love is the answer, not violence. i don’t think that’s cheap or ‘problematic’ or a bad influence. i think it’s human, and profoundly optimistic in a way that few people are brave enough to be.

The most tragic stories is when somebody attempts what Op has described but ultimately fails. Because some people are sadly beyond ANY redemption no matter how much anyone tries.

I love a good redemption arc and I also love a great tragedy in which a character attempts but fails to redeem another or themselves. Those are all great, perfectly valid stories to write.
What needs to be kept in mind is how you do it.
Your villain may come to realise murdering children is an horrific thing they did and decide they don’t want to do it ever again, but that doesn’t mean they can go around being like “can you stop bringing up that time I murdered children? I’m good now, so really I wasn’t bad then.”
Redemption arc only work because of the sincerity of the remorse felt over evil past actions.

This is why redemption often equals death.  Because when the remorse is sincere enough that the person is willing to die trying to mitigate the harm they’ve caused, then you know you’ve got redemption.

Like anything else, this, too, can be done lazily, but it’s part of our narrative language for a reason.

ravencharm:

I’m sick of people telling writers not to use an idea because it’s “overused” or “not original.”

A huge part of writing is making the idea your own.

Do you want to write about vampires?! THEN FOR GOD’S SAKE, WRITE ABOUT VAMPIRES!

Oh, dystopian futures are overused? PUT YOUR OWN SPIN ON IT!

Guys, don’t let people stomp on your ideas. A story is a bunch of puzzle pieces that everyone has access to – but it’s your choice how you put them together. How you put it together and how you present it makes that idea uniquely yours, even if it’s a familiar concept.

Your idea isn’t lame.

Own it.

Make it yours.

4thelurvofnerds:

blasphemous-lies-and-deceit:

ceruleanbluesart:

agentred5:

reapers-song:

el-hotel-bella-muerte:

herpowerisherown:

purradox:

tomthebluellama:

hellarat:

madmaninachair:

Do you ever memorize a person’s voice? Like you can construct a sentence in your mind that that person’s never said, and yet you hear them say it.

Is that a thing people can do?????????

yea 

there are people that cant do that??????????

We are a chosen few. We have a great power.

It’s called echoic memory

That reminds me…

image

You’re welcome.

Damn you

Man, I love having echoic memory. Once, when I was writing an exam for a psych class, I made my internal monologue sound like Sean Connery. It was infinitely more entertaining.

it really helps when writing fanfiction. The downside is if you’re talking to a person you start mimicking their tone and speech patterns, which can get a little weird

^^^^ If I can’t ‘hear’ them in my head I usually can’t write them. 

Same here!

I must remind myself—

they can’t tell that I didn’t write this bit immediately after that one

the six months where I ignored the manuscript are not visible to the naked eye

the bit where I put my head in my hands and muttered “I have no idea what I’m doing” takes place in the single space between the period and the next capital letter.

As soon as I shove that character in, she has always been there

and someone will probably say that she’s the emotional center

and the book couldn’t have been written without her

and nobody will know that I thought of her three thousand words from the end and scrolled up and shoehorned in a couple of paragraphs near the beginning because, for whatever reason, the story needed an elderly nun

she was almost the cook

and for about ten minutes she was the earnest young village priest

and now she has been there since you started reading.

I am sanding down the places where my editor found splinters

kicking up a fine dust of adjectives and dropped phrases

(Wear a breath mask. Work in a well-ventilated area. Have you seen what excess commas can do to your lungs?)

and eventually it will all be polished to a high shine

and hopefully when someone looks into it

they’ll see their own face reflected back

instead of mine.

Why young-adult fiction is a dangerous fantasy

Why young-adult fiction is a dangerous fantasy

I’ve drafted an outline for a bestselling young adult novel. It features
a transgender school dropout with autism who meets a self-harming
vampire with a heart of gold, hell bent on bringing peace to the world.
Together they embark on a magical quest to find an ancient crystal with
the power to render all weapons useless. Oh, and the protagonist’s
mother makes a living selling legal highs to illegal immigrants.

Annnnnnd that’s where I stopped reading.

shredsandpatches:

engrprof:

ibelieveinthelittletreetopper:

t-eyla:

schmerzerling:

Here’s what’s baffling to me about people who get up in arms about “canon” and use the “it’s not canon” argument to invalidate people’s interpretations of media: canon doesn’t exist

I mean, in so many words. Mostly, what people mean when they say canon is the notion that there’s ONE be-all-end-all ultimate true platonic-form meaning that usurps all other meanings and they have it because they watched the show harder than anyone, and that’s a fucking farce. Yes, there is a source material, and to an extent, that source material limits personal interpretation because it provides a basic framework for analysis. 

But what actually ultimately gives source material value is the way that we as consumers choose to interpret it. And the way we interpret media and take value from it completely depends on our own life experiences, our own circumstances, our own perspectives and personal belief systems. No piece of media will ever be the same to two people. Ever. Ever. Ever. I might disagree with your canon, but I’m never going to invalidate it.

Okay so what I’m trying to say is: if I fucking think Dean is bi and you don’t, who gives a single shit? If we can both argue it, we’re both fucking right. Dean is Schroedinger’s Queer. Deal with it.

Word.

This post also makes me want to bring up something I’ve been wanting to talk about for a while but have been too lazy/ busy to write a post about: as far as media interpretation goes, especially with a TV show that has been on air for eleven years and has gone through several show runners, the so-called creators are no more than fellow consumers, and are therefore included in the Schrödinger’s Paradox of media interpretation.

Think about it for a moment: Jeremy Carver did not think up Dean. Robert Singer did not come up with the character of Sam. Not even Kripke did, not by himself. Dean, Sam and Cas (and everyone else on Supernatural) are characters created in a combined effort of the original show creator, all the writers that have written them over the years, the directors who’ve worked on the episodes, the range of actors that have portrayed them, and a handful of network executives who have recommended or restricted developments in those characters in order to boost ratings.

We all know the author is dead, but when it comes to SPN, the author never existed. Ever since the show aired, there has never been a single one answer to the question “so what’s Dean like”. Which means that a fic that takes the archetype of Dean (the “basic framework” @schmerzerling is talking about) and expresses that character in a way that positively engages the fan audience is just as valid as any episode that airs on the CW. Because seriously, how is Robert Berens joining the writing team in season 9 any different than a fic writer telling their own stories about these characters? They’re both working off the same source material, after all.

Tl;dr canon is a myth, and fandom being transformative is the whole point, so stop looking for “creator” validation and do whatever you want.

Look at these smart people.

Reblogging for “Schrodinger’s queer.”
Also, true, but more importantly, “Schrodinger’s queer.”

I don’t watch SPN, but this a) is applicable across fandoms and b) reminds me of a post a friend of mine made a while back about a pedagogy problem she’s been working on: how to distinguish between what she calls “necessary interpretations” and “plausible interpretations.” Here’s the key section (all bolding is mine):

First of all, there is the necessary interpretation – something
that you absolutely need to get in order to make sense of the work at
all, but you still need some level of interpretative sophistication to
get there.
 For example, in My Last Duchess,
“the speaker is an irrationally jealous control freak who certainly
made his wife’s life miserable, regardless of whether he literally
murdered her or not” is a necessary interpretation; if you don’t get
that out of the text, you aren’t getting the poem.  But many students,
particularly in gen ed classes, do not get that out of the text without
prompting, since the Duke isn’t about to TELL you he’s a control freak.
(Some students do not even get “the speaker’s wife is dead and he’s
showing somebody a picture of her” out of the text; I’m never sure what
to do about those.)  So most of us, in gen ed classes, spend a fair
amount of time explaining HOW the poem shows that this is the case.  In
that sort of situation, you really do need to teach a specific
interpretation, and try to make sure the class is on the same page about
it.

But there’s also the plausible interpretation, one that is clearly grounded in the text, but does not absolutely have
to be the case.  Mutually-contradictory plausible interpretations can
co-exist.
 For example, I could argue that the Duke is so convinced of
his own rightness that he has no idea how much he’s just revealed about
his character, and then suddenly at the end of the poem he does realize
it, and his “Nay, we’ll go / Together down, sir” is a desperate attempt
to keep his listener from ducking out and telling the-Count-his-Master
to break off the marriage negotiations right now.  You, on the other
hand, could argue that he knows exactly how much he’s revealing,
and wants the man to repeat it all to the Count’s fair daughter so she
will know what sort of behavior he expects of his next wife, and what
will happen to her if she doesn’t obey.  We’re both right; or at least
we are if we can find sufficient textual justification for our
respective interpretations.

The post as a whole focuses on the difficulties this distinction can pose when you’re trying to teach texts in a way that simultaneously encourages students to debate plausible interpretations without giving the impression to the class that they are necessary interpretations, but the part about plausible interpretations is pretty much what OP describes. Dean being bi, for instance, isn’t a necessary interpretation in the sense that it isn’t what the story is about, so that the show makes sense whether he is or isn’t, but it is a plausible interpretation that can be supported with evidence from the show.

drinkmasturbatecry:

nudityandnerdery:

the-fandoms-are-valentines:

grandtheftautosanandreas:

Douglas Adams is the best when it comes to describe characters

they need to teach classes on Douglas Adams analogies okay

“He leant tensely against the corridor wall and frowned like a man trying to unbend a corkscrew by telekinesis.”

“Stones, then rocks, then boulders which pranced past him like clumsy puppies, only much, much bigger, much, much harder and heavier, and almost infinitely more likely to kill you if they fell on you.”

“He gazed keenly into the distance and looked as if he would quite like the wind to blow his hair back dramatically at that point, but the wind was busy fooling around with some leaves a little way off.”

“It looked only partly like a spaceship with guidance fins, rocket engines and escape hatches and so on, and a great deal like a small upended Italian bistro.”

“If it was an emotion, it was a totally emotionless one. It was hatred, implacable hatred. It was cold, not like ice is cold, but like a wall is cold. It was impersonal, not as a randomly flung fist in a crowd is impersonal, but like a computer-issued parking summons is impersonal. And it was deadly – again, not like a bullet or a knife is deadly, but like a brick wall across a motorway is deadly.”

And, of course:

“The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don’t.”

the one that will always stay with me is “Arthur Dent was grappling with his consciousness the way one grapples with a lost bar of soap in the bath,” i feel like that was the first time i really understood what you could do with words.