(no subject)

[dreamwitch]

I am a horrible lazy no-good person. Ugh, finals week, uuuuugh. It really wouldn't be so bad, except I should've done transcription of a bunch of voice-recorded interviews weeks ago and put it off, and guess what, it takes FOREVER and I think I'm even slower 'cause I'm always listening to things 4-5 times to get it super-perfect/correct and I can't help it. What concerns me here is that it's like, representative (in theory) of anything that wouldn't come 'naturally' straight out of my head, like your average English paper does: this can only be done by sweating it out, and guess what, it's the thing that might've cost me this quarter, easy as pie. I'm not too thrilled with my performance re: the transcription issue. I mean, what performance? Though I already handed in the paper, I only wrote it based on maybe 8% of the whole of transcription I was supposed to do. :/ So now I've got two more nights to finish the other 92% and I've a headache and want to sleep. :/ Sigh.

Even more hilarious is the idea of 'self evaluations' that are supposed to be super-positive about yourself. I mean, um. How am I supposed to do *that*. :/


As usual, though, when it's exactly the wrong time, I've experienced a rebirth in my fannish self, thanks to discordiana (...who ships K/B), hehe. Nu!Kirk/nu!Spock epics (recs if you have any?), pls, with a side-order of annoyance and discord. ♥. But really I can't *blame* anything on that. It just was... convenient. Also, I've realized breaks are absolutely the *wrong* thing for me. I mean, small 3-4 day/long weekend breaks? Yeah. Week-long breaks just before the final push of the whole quarter? Just long enough to get me out of the groove of actually working. Not cool.


I've also realized bookshop was right when I was complaining madly about HP and how much I hated fandom & wanted to leave (hahaha IT WAS 2005 AHAHAHAHAAHHA). Even more hilariously, I know I've been saying that since '04, maybe even '03. Anyway, Aja said that basically fandom's the one who won't leave me even if I stop talking to everyone, basically, 'cause it's a pov/method, and it's truuuue. It's funny 'cause I basically hate 'fandom' 45-75% the time, but I definitely absolutely love it 25% of the time.

We were talking in class earlier about how academic lit study never really addresses emotional response, and how people, y'know, actually relate to literature. No duh. We were also talking about how different and deeply enriched one's understanding of any text becomes upon discussion in a community of readers vs one's own solitary perception upon reading, and no matter how a class tries to emulate such a community through discussion, the bottom line is that we can never be fandom, where people are there because they want to engage, they're invested, and they genuinely have something to contribute-- it matters to them already, or they wouldn't be there. In class, so many people are just taking up space, or don't care/connect to the some of the work at all. For a person who loves discussing literature (like myself) and is most comfortable, in the end, on the emotional-response level first and analytical meta second (like myself), while an English class may be fun and challenging, fandom is my absolute ideal environment, except when it's not, y'know, haha, since there's the rabid anti-meta faction, and then in the meta faction there's the rabid anti-canon faction, and rarely do the twain ever meet, etc.

At many points in the class, I was thinking about how this or that related to fandom and/or was relevant, and it sucked to not be able to share that with fandom. A lot of times people complained about something (in the current state of social interaction with texts/media) that fandom 'fixes' or answers, when they thought there was only entropy & decline. Basically, I think fandom is in fact one of the most fascinating and encouraging and positive aspects of the glut of brainless monstrosity that is modern pop culture. I used to think it only made sense to 'outgrow' fandom at one point, but you know what, it would be really sad if I did. It really would be.

Comments

[godspoodle.livejournal.com]

I didn't mean TOS wasn't special; I just meant it was plenty cheesy (to the point where some eps are kinda painful to watch). But the philosophy behind the show is absolutely solid in my mind, of course.... I mean, hopefully. I did build my almost my whole worldview around it, ages 13-17, so hopefully it wasn't a *complete* waste of time. ^^;

Aand she really does have solid insights into both Kirk and Spock, like I said, if you just keep to the character essays. It's not like 'Jim must be masochistic' is her main point in describing him, that's just a throw-away sentence. In many ways, taking it in a certain way, you can't really argue with it; he courts situations that leave him bruised and battered, and it's a running joke in fandom that Kirk has to have his shirt off and/or get hurt like, every (other) ep. Aaaand Spock really is frequently a bastard, though that's not her main point in her main essay (http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/spock10.htm) about him either, buuut I can't help but focus on things I find humorous so I accept I make things I genuinely like sound either over the top or ridiculous many times.

[discordiana.livejournal.com]

he courts situations that leave him bruised and battered

But isn't he the Captain? And isn't he action-oriented? And seeks confrontations? And has a huge ego?

OK, I must stop doing this before I have a more solid understanding of the source but uuuuh, I really hate "my kink is canon!!!" theories and have a knee-jerk adverse reaction. Especially w/ Kirk I suspect after such a long exposure to horrorific fanfic.

However, I will also skip on the essays until that day comes.

[godspoodle.livejournal.com]

I'm sort of 'eh' on that take on Kirk, but like I said, that's a minor/throw-away point of the essays actually about Kirk the character. But it makes sense to watch all the series before reading meta/commentary, of course. :)

I agree that he's action oriented/etc, but if you compare him to Picard and Sisko and so on, he's different. He really is ridiculously brash and he gets beat up like, 1000000x more times in canon than any other Trek captain (or any of his crew). I think it's actually questionable to say he *seeks* confrontations, which is part of the interesting thing the essay(s) covered (esp. the myth-busting one), and his ego is tricky as well (he has one, but it doesn't get in his way as much as you might think). In some ways, say, Spock's ego is an issue a lot more often. I just think for whatever reason, the writers of TOS went WAAAY over the top in making woobie suffer... or whatever equivalent. He just... he gets captured all the time, and it just gets ridiculous. In a way, saying he's got a thing for it (even unconsciously) just explains/justifies what is essentially sort of a silly/over-the-top aspect of the show (and similarly an attempt to justify some of the harder-to-square aspects of his relationship with Spock). I honestly don't think it's *extremely* shippy/biased, but it's an extrapolation you don't have to accept; like I said, it's not the major aspect of her essay, though, but I see where it makes sense to keep it for later.

[discordiana.livejournal.com]

I suppose Bones is a 100% canon submissive because he's a codependent self-hating alcoholic who is into the whole sacrifying himself for others thing and following and supporting and nurturing his one true Captain friend.

[godspoodle.livejournal.com]

I don't know... do you mean TOS? You'd have to back that up with canon examples, my friend, the whole 'sacrificing himself' thing. He *really* doesn't like away-missions, fighting, dealing with Spock, or in fact following orders without grumbling and insubordination. :) It'd be interesting to read TOS!McCoy meta. I definitely think the relationship isn't near so close as in the movie; if anything, I'd say McCoy's the sane/easy-going one for all his neurosis. It's an odd balance; he's always basically the voice of common sense (if grumpily offered). So he rarely does anything super-heroic or anything. It's Jim (or Spock) generally rushing head-first into self-sacrifice/danger; Bones seems lots more laid-back/subtle about it, sort of being like, 'ok calm down and sit still or I'll hypo you straight in the nuts' or something. He's got a secret drollness to him, hahaha. Bones & Scotty are basically the normalizing backbone to the extremities of service/valor that are represented by Jim and Spock; in their different ways (flesh vs machine) they keep the ship actually *running*.

Jim and Spock are definitely co-dependent in TOS (especially by the time the movies roll around), but Bones? He's pretty grounded. He's really good friends with Jim but calls him on his shit, he can't stand Spock and *always* calls him on his shit but secretly is sympathetic (when it counts); he tells Jim what the limits are & is there to patch him up when he ignores his advice and overshoots himself (again). It's hard for me to associate 'nurture' with someone *as* brusque/gruff as Bones, unless being a great doctor automatically = nurture...? He's supportive, but like, it's not in the over-the-top way you can say Jim can be 'supportive' to Spock, where he makes these huge gestures and 'I'll do anything for you, including get Court Martialled', etc. I can see how Bones is a sub archetype? But. I guess I think of it mostly as some undiscovered country. In some ways, Spock too is a sub archetype (if you can get through his barriers; I mean, Bones just has different barriers). You can make an argument for Spock being 100% devoted/codependent/sacrificing himself for others (he has this whole saying 'the good of the many outweighs the needs of the few-- or the one', and I just can't picture McCoy saying that, 'cause as a doctor he's pretty much all about individual lives). Anyway, now I want to watch some eps with McCoy in mind. :)

[discordiana.livejournal.com]

Reena, I think you missed the point.

Anyway, about the self-sacrifice, I dunno, I keep hearing people talk about how altruistic and generous he is. So are they inventing? Weren't there a couple episodes where he sacrificed himself for Kirk and/or Spock? I will try to dig up the links.

He definitely gives me a neurotic vibe in the movie, and he's anxious a lot in TOS as well.

[godspoodle.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, he's altruistic and generous, for sure. Self-sacrificing/supportive seems slightly different in context/subtext, but altruistic-- for sure. He's probably the most *empathetic*/truly 'human' character in some ways, but he's also got that common sense/gruffness thing and he's no Great Big Hero in the typical sense of heroics. But he's 100% generous. Just, if Bones sacrificed himself once, Jim and/or Spock did it like 100 times; that wasn't his role in the narrative, mostly, I think; it was to keep things running so that neither Jim not Spock's sacrifices actually became permanent. :> And yes, he's always anxious. :)

[discordiana.livejournal.com]

Yes, I wasn't really arguing he's a superhero or that K & S aren't more superheroic.