(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

[discordiana.livejournal.com]

Oh wait, the masochistic isn't meant to be sexual?

[godspoodle.livejournal.com]

There's bits of it where she does mean it sexually, but that's only in the shippy essays and the 'why Kirk is important to BDSM folks' which I thought you may be interested in since you did relate him to that. But in the context of the show/Spock/general, yeah, she didn't mean sexually. She just meant, ummm he's very much a glutton for punishment. I think people associate that trait with a personality type (sub, sad & whiny, pathetic, whatever) that isn't Kirk's, which is where people may get confused, and that's her point, I think (he's inspiring for her partly 'cause he's an example of a healthy/pretty dominant/strong character who nevertheless gets beat up on a lot and then puts himself clearly into more situations like that). I honestly don't think it *is* sexual, but he's clearly (even in the movie) getting something out of being beat up even if he hurts people in the fights. I'd even say it's more about him hurting than hurting others, like maybe a drinking/forgetting/escape (entertainment??) type thing.

[discordiana.livejournal.com]

This hurts, Reena.

[godspoodle.livejournal.com]

I'm just... describing my understanding of what she said? She was like, 'in a lot of BDSM writing, the characters are sad/pathetic, but Jim seems to represent what I see as a kink-friendly character who bucks that trend'. I actually don't see him as an especially kinky/BDSM-related character? But if you wanted to see it that way, you could? I don't know? Sorry. I actually didn't fully read that particular essay before I linked you, since there are so many and I grabbed a few semi-random links, haha. ^^;;

[discordiana.livejournal.com]

The whole "topping IRL and bottoming in the bedroom" isn't exactly a new thing. In fact right now it's more a cliche than anything else in fandom.

Oh you're going to become a bottom Kirk fangirl, I can just see it.

You even quoted the movie! Like, maybe he gets into fights because he's aggressive? Also, for the most part he got into fights because people beat him up because they were crazy Romulans or emotionally compromised Vulcans whose ship he had to steal.

[godspoodle.livejournal.com]

I think-- my honest opinion-- in the movie he got into fights *partly* 'cause he was aggressive and had all this bleed-over unused energy, but it *was* unhealthy-- he was obviously wasting time, avoiding reality, etc, which Pike called him on. I also think *on some level* he enjoyed the sheer physical release of getting all beat up, and the rush of adrenaline/endorphins, sort of like any intense/extreme sport. To me this isn't related to bottoming, the way I meant it personally.

Suspecting me of becoming a bottom!Kirk fangirl is uncalled for and possibly a bit paranoid, haha. I think if you had to push in either direction, you'd have to say he's a top. But I don't think he has enough power issues sexually/otherwise where he'd *have* to top. Like Harry had to top partly 'cause he wouldn't let Malfoy bottom and it was an expression of power, say. But Kirk is in balance with his power (at least in TOS) and doesn't have much to prove, so in my mind he's just open-minded with a toppy default. TOS!Kirk and movie!Kirk are pretty different in that sense 'cause movie!Kirk has plenty of raw/unresolved power/ego issues and he does have something to prove. And I only meant the bar fights; this sense that he got into lots of stupid fights before Starfleet basically 'cause he was a delinquent. That was sooort of a shout-out (I thought?) to the constant beatings Kirk got in TOS. And it's not like there weren't plot reasons, generally, but honestly, half the time in TOS they were *seriously* flimsy reasons, like aliens would pick Kirk and only Kirk to torture, and he'd literally be hanging there by his wrists and whipped prettily but not too hard... it was silly. I personally never even paid much attention to this, you must understand; to me, it doesn't really matter-- I don't think it's a big enough aspect of his character/the series to bother about. Regardless, though, that writer's point wasn't that he was 'toppy IRL' because it was *as a captain* that he got into these situations where people whipped him prettily and/or he let Spock be mean to him/etc, haha. Anyway, if indeed this was the bulk of her insight into the characters, I'd never even bring it up. To me it's a non-issue; I definitely don't see Jim bottoming in the *subby* sense just 'cause he obviously doesn't like giving power away. But this doesn't mean he himself hoards it. He's independent-cooperative, which is... hard to stereotype. :))

[discordiana.livejournal.com]

Sorry if that came across as an insult, I meant it to be flippant.

so in my mind he's just open-minded with a toppy default Me too, but as I said other times I'm not interested at all in debating this, my whole thing was a response to yet another claim that he's A Bottom From Canon. I wasn't countering with my own analysis that he's a totes top, or even that he has no issues (though, how do they make him a bottom? And the aliens thing seems a bit silly -- the aliens are kidnapping him, and we make conclusions on his choices?)