InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "This... is my boomstick!"

Willow (the_willow) wrote,
@ 2008-08-20 19:42:00

Entry tags:

#race issues: fandom, fandom: culture, fandom: is, fannish: activity, meta

Watching The Show In Your Head
Discussing Memoirs of a Geisha with tatterpunk@LJ, here, I stumbled into the thought that watching the show in your head has similarities to privilege and how things are ignored or invisible or immediately dismissed when one re-writes the narrative on the fly.

As I stated here I began to wonder if the difference between watching the show you want to see as a fan (in fandom, discussing the source and interacting with it and having that mentality) and watching the show as a 'mundane' is that discussing the source and talking about it brings you moments of realizing just exactly how and where and why you ended up seeing what you wanted to see.

In Memoirs of a Geisha, I saw tropes I loathed and so I chose to interpret them in ways that made me feel more comfortable with the story and that gave the characters more depth. But I suddenly realized there might be no difference in the actions themselves to someone who chooses not to see the racial problems and dynamics of say SGA with Teyla and Ronon, or racial dynamics in any other tv show or book/fandom property.

When brought up in discussion I can tell you why I chose to see something in a particular way. But while watching it, I don't think I was at all consciously aware of what I was doing. I was so wrapped up in the music and the costumes and the cinematography that I didn't want to have shallow stereotypes ruin things, so I changed my view. I ignored things and created my own fannish reality. If I wrote a review analyzing Memoirs, for example, I'm not sure if I'd have written about the movie I wanted to watch, or the movie I actually did watch. And I wonder if it's only in fandom that someone would understand what I did and understand that my interpretation was my reactions to the things that bothered me and thus were an acknowledgement those things existed.

So I'm suddenly confused about how my re-writing of the story acknowledges what's wrong with it vs how someone else who watched what they wanted to see, might have been blinded by privilege.

Is it privilege to re-write like that?

Is this precisely what infuriates me about the fans who watch SGA for example and see Ronon the MoC Fantasy Fodder and completely miss or dismiss valid notes on racism, colonialism and manifest destiny?

I admit that slash is an example of re-writing thing on the fly. You watch the show and you see subtext and you fill in backstory even if you never write it out as fic (perhaps you postulate in a meta post). But the point is you filter your experience. Is my anger at the fans who dismiss my and others complaints about the hurtful aspects of some shows, as turbulent as it is because I'm already aware they have an ability to filter their experience and I'm angry that they don't consider using my filter?

I'd probably be writing a much less hesitant post if I could figure out the right words to describe this moment of confusilation (it's like illumination, but with confusion)

ETA: Pt 2 (I'm not sure why Metafandom listed it under an SGA tag. But I do discuss SGA in part 2, which I only just posted Saturday the 23rd Aug)

(Post a new comment)

the_rck
2008-08-20 08:12 pm UTC (link)

I think there's a big gap between what you're doing and privilege. Privilege comes in when someone watches something, doesn't spot the problems and then, when they're pointed out, denies that they're there because the watcher (or reader or listener or...) didn't spot the problems.

What you're doing is more like looking at possibly contaminated water and knowing that it might make you sick but that it's all you've got. You can boil it. You can add things to make tea. You can try not to think about what's in there and pretend that it's something else. It still comes down to drinking it or going without.

The comparison to water is extreme since most of us won't die without stories, but I think that a need for stories is fairly fundamental in most people and that different individuals have different story needs in the same way that different individuals have different dietary needs. The wrong stories are better than no stories, but anything that brings the story closer to a person's heart makes it more nourishing.

Looking at stories containing toxic elements and tweaking them so as not to get sick is a survival tactic. The hard part is telling when it's a necessary survival technique because those stories are all that's available (or even most of what's available) and when it's harmful because it gets in the way of seeing better stories, of talking about how the stories are harmful, of telling better stories.

Rewriting on the fly can be privilege, but it can also be a survival technique.

Bread and roses.

(Reply to this)

jlh
2008-08-22 11:06 pm UTC (link)

I agree that the place where privilege enters isn't at the moment of rewriting—nearly everyone rewrites the things they watch or read to some extent—but at the denial of other (re)writings, other readings. If someone came into a post you made about Geisha and said, "yes, but look at the stereotypes" would your response be, "What stereotypes?" or "Woe, you are ruining my ability to love the movie", or would it be "Yeah. That's with the not good. But there were other things I loved, and so I chose to see those themes in this other way."

And I'm wondering if this sort of rewriting is actually an expression of not having privilege—you know, writing yourself as a woman/PoC/non-heterosexual into a story of white straight men. The people who don't see the race issues in SGA or other texts aren't rewriting in order to feel comfortable, but not seeing in the first place, which is different.

So I don't see them as the same action, not at all.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

the_willow
2008-08-22 11:14 pm UTC (link)

Heya,

jlh, did I get meta-rounded or meta-fandomed?

I'm actually working on a part two of this, exploring when I can't re-write, to see if I can figure out the mental clicks. But you're right, my response wouldn't be 'What stereotypes' or 'OMG STFU let me watch the show'.

It'd be "I know. I know. But I'm trying ~~to imagine they aren't there~~ not to see them by interpreting things this way so I don't slam my head into the wall."

Something is similar somewhere, I feel like I'll get it if I just poke my brain a little more - I'll figure out why some folk are incapable of making that switch.

Maybe I'm overthinking it (wouldn't be the first time) and it's as simple as 're-writing the story so it doesn't hurt' - > which means I have to know why it hurts - > which means I have to be aware from the beginning - > which means I have to watch WITH my eyes open and THEN ignore/reform, rather than ignoring from the start to avoid that moment of discomfort.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

jlh
2008-08-22 11:23 pm UTC (link)

Meta-fandomed—sorry, I always forget to say! And the following, very off-the-cuff from what you've said:

I think part of why one sometimes can't rewrite might lie in what you said here:

I was so wrapped up in the music and the costumes and the cinematography that I didn't want to have shallow stereotypes ruin things, so I changed my view.

If you're getting something you want, you're willing to work with the other stuff you don't want. Which may mean rewriting.

which means I have to watch WITH my eyes open and THEN ignore/reform, rather than ignoring from the start to avoid that moment of discomfort.

I can understand this as a sort of consciousness goal, but on the other hand I feel that rewriting is useful at least because you can actually enjoy some stuff and live in the universe without wanting to bash everyone's head in. It's like having a limp; you limp because you already hurt your leg and now to avoid feeling that pain all the damn time you walk kinda funny. I'm not sure it's good to feel the pain all the damn time—and the act of limping in and of itself, I think, reminds you that the pain is there to be had.

This is a shallow worry on my part perhaps, that if you "watch WITH [your] eyes open and THEN ignore/reform" what will be worth reforming if you experience the anger up front instead of the let-down/disappointment later, when you've allowed for the pleasure? As opposed to, you know, allowing for the pleasure first, because then at least it's a text that deserves the rewrite?

I'm not sure I've expressed that as well as I might have—it's a cloudy thought because it's a cloudy thing to grapple with overtly!

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

the_willow
2008-08-28 09:50 pm UTC (link)

I get the point you're saying but I think we're differing in that you're discussing re-writing on perhaps a second viewing. And I'm discussing realizing that something is disappointing you in the moment but simultaneously (or close enough to) interpreting things differently so you can continue to enjoy it.

Character: "All women are evil."

Me: Oh crap, here we go again with the - hmm but maybe he meant all the women he's met are evil and if he's going only by his own experiences this makes a shaded point as to what's been going on in his life / and around him.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	(Anonymous) 2008-08-23 04:39 pm UTC (link)
	I agree with the other commenters. Also, this is a really awesome and interesting post. -carmarthen on LJ (Reply to this) (Thread)

	the_willow 2008-08-25 04:31 pm UTC (link)
	Thank you. (Reply to this) (Parent)