this week's linky linky

[baratron]

One of these days, when I have Copious Free Time, I'm going to go back through my journal and completely redo my lj memories, indexing everything I've ever written. I'll separate out all the linky bits and make that a weblog which you'll be able to view through my web site. However, before that, I have a thesis to write and several important things on my things-to-do list which have sat there for a long time, so who knows when this will happen?

Anyway, here's (some more) links for the week:
An Open Letter to PC Game Developers. Link of the day on User Friendly. Some interesting points are raised.

John Lewis's in Addams Family shocker. Amusing. From the ever-cute matthewp.

The Extreme Teen Bible. Serious, not a parody. I believe the only applicable phrase for the flash animation is "Oh my God!". Seen in a very brief scan of j00j's LJ: I will need to look at all her other links sometime.

RestrictedSection.org (a site featuring "adult" Harry Potter fanfics) gets threatened by JK Rowling's lawyer. More info here and here. I'm just reading and watching for the moment, as I try to avoid commenting before I have all the facts. It looks like the concern is only with fanfic that features explicit sex, but it could well set a precedent.

Comments

[johnckirk.livejournal.com]

I see John Lewis have now moved that cleaver to a different section - the link still leads to it, but it's not categorised as "baby toys" on the left. Maybe they noticed the suspiciously high number of hits on that page :)

"The Extreme Teen Bible" is rather cringe-worthy ("Genesis is a bottom-line, this-is-how-it-is, no-sugercoating kind of book"). Comes across as trying too hard, to my mind, but then again I'm not the target audience...

The crackdown on porno-fanfic doesn't really bother me, but that's primarily because I never read it. I would have to side with the author's right to restrict how her characters get used - the simplest solution is for the fanfic authors to stick to stuff that's now in the public domain. I'm sure there must be a Mowgli/Baloo bestiality fanfic out there somewhere... On the plus side, there's now a release date set for the new Harry Potter novel (21st June), so that can be pre-ordered from Amazon.

[baratron.livejournal.com]

I take umbrage at your phrasing "porno-fanfic", but not enough to get into an argument. As I said, my main concern is (a) that it sets a precedent and (b) that people may completely over-react. I don't really understand the US cinema ratings system anyway - as I have argued before in another place, categorising something as "PG-13" is not helpful to anyone who is not American. Although I can assume it is equivalent to our 12 rating, I have no idea whether the same sorts of things are included in it. To over-generalise for a moment, US censors allow kids to see violence way beyond what I would consider reasonable, and get uptight about any hint of sex - which for some bizarre reason includes nudity. If you've seen the film "Mrs Brown" with Judi Dench and Billy Connolly, there is a scene where Billy Connolly runs naked into the sea to swim. It is about as erotic as a used sock - it is not meant to be involved with sex in any way, but rather showing the sort of person that John Brown was - a hardy Scotsman used to cold & so on. But the US censors went insane about it, because there was a bare bottom. Shocking!

Anyway, yes - completely over-reacting. Like I said, not understanding the "NC-17" rating, I'm not sure if I've even read fanfic that explicit. I have a feeling that "R" (which in the UK is the rating given to explicit pornography which is only allowed to be sold in licensed sex shops) is actually below NC-17 in the US. My concern is that people will go mad and make a scene, and in return JKR or her lawyers or Warner Brothers will turn round and say "Right, we were quite happy with existing fanfic which didn't involve explicit sex, but now we want it all removed". Fanfic, including slash fiction, has been around at least since Star Trek in the 60s, and it would set the most enormous precedent.

Also, if we took what you said literally - only stuff that's currently in the public domain, that would mean writing stories about the HP characters only up to the age of 14. The vast majority of fanfic takes place when they are at least in sixth form, if not adulthood. If I wanted to read about a bunch of young teenagers, I'd read the original books. It's much more interesting to see how they might grow in their magical powers and how their personalities would develop as they become older - the romantic side of it isn't even the main point of interest for me.

So I disagree. I think it is a very important development which could have wide-ranging implications.

[johnckirk.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I didn't quite follow the rating system either - I would have guessed that "R"="18", whereas "NC-17"="younger than 18", but presumably not from this context.

On the public domain front, I actually had something different in mind. There's a comic I read at the moment called "Fables", which has Snow White & co in modern day New York. The key point there is that the comic can use characters from the Jungle Book, because the copyright on that has expired, i.e. it is in the public domain. Whereas they can't use Aslan, since that character is still protected (so they used a completely different "great lion" instead...). So, from a legal point of view, the safest option is for fanfic writers to avoid Harry Potter, since it is so recent, but I realise that this solution wouldn't appeal to many people.

For what it's worth, I agree with your point about the future projections of the characters, which is something I liked in those two Maya stories I read ("Draco the bouncing rat" and "Underwater Light"). And although I don't read a lot of fanfic (generally only if something's been pointed out to me as being specifically worth reading), it would be a shame to see those stories go. All I'm really saying is that if it's a choice between what I'd like and what the original author would like, then I'll defer to her wishes.

On the issue of slash, it's possible that I'm not understanding the term correctly. At first I thought it meant "stuff with sex scenes", then more recently I thought it meant "stuff with homosexual pairings" (if I'm still allowed to use the h-word). As with most things, I don't mind these if they're done well, but from what I've seen they're generally done badly, typically involving mutilating the original characters beyond recognition. (Fictitious example - "Ginny Weasley's defining characteristic so far has been that she's in love with Harry, so clearly it makes sense for her to have a lesbian fling with Hermione!")

Terminology

[baratron.livejournal.com]

"Underwater Light" is an absolutely classic example of the sort of slash fiction I like. Lots of long, lingering glances - everyone but the principals realising what's going on. I find that far more erotic than explicit descriptions of bodily parts and fluids, which is why I insist there is a distinction between erotica and porn. I like erotica, but porn is if anything a turn-off. If the word "cum" is involved in something spelled like that, you can guarantee I won't like it. (As an aside, there is a chain of restaurants in south east London called "Cummin' Up", and the name always makes me shudder. This is unfortunate, as there is one almost opposite Tim & Peter's new house.)

Anyway, yes, slash fiction refers particularly to "stories involving homosexual pairings", and usually only to gay male pairings. Slash may involve explicit sex, but often doesn't: looks and thoughts are usually more important. The term is sometimes used for heterosexual or lesbian stories too, but this is not so common and (some argue) it is not correct. "Femslash" is sometimes used for lesbian pairings.

The word "slash" comes from the way in which stories are described in shorthand. Harry/Draco implies a romantic and/or sexual pairing between Harry and Draco, Gollum/Dobby involves a romantic and/or sexual pairing between Gollum and Dobby. And apparently the latter example exists in real life and is not just a figment of my warped imagination. I am too scared to do the Google search myself.

The other terms you see used a lot are the Japanese words "hentai", "yaoi" and "yuli". Hentai is stuff featuring heterosexual sex scenes. Yaoi and yuli are equivalent to slash and femslash, so may or may not involve explicit sex. Sometimes the term "little yaoi" is used to signify that there is only kissing included. Japanese fics usually write the names of the principals separated with an x rather than a slash, so you see things like Squall X Vincent.

Re: Terminology

[damerell.livejournal.com]

"If I like it's erotica and if you like it it's pornography"? Not that there isn't a lot of rubbish out there, but I think it's bad because it's bad, not because it's "pornography".

[and I suspect reserving "hentai" for het fiction is a similar exercise. Many H doujinshi are yuri in nature, albeit for the benefit of a male audience (but then, yaoi is done for the benefit of a female audience.)]

Which reminds me, do you have/want a copy of our parody fansub of Boku No Sexual Harassment?

[baratron.livejournal.com]

No, I'm not passing any kind of judgement. I have no problem with the existence of porn, as long as the people in it gave full consent. I just think that as there's a difference between erotic writing and more visual media, that it's useful to have two different names for it.

Of course, sex-oriented photography can be described either as erotica or porn, and then often people do assign value judgements. I think that erotica is more arty than sexual and porn is more sexual than arty - a black and white stylised photo would be more likely to be erotica whereas a full-colour glossy photo with glistening bodily fluids would be more likely to be porn, but I'm really not hung up on the wording. I'm just the sort of person who thinks that a long skirt with a slit in it so that you only occasionally see a bit of leg is far more interesting than a short skirt where you can see everything all the time, and thus go for the type of erotic writing and photography where more is implied than described.