lierdumoa: (Default)
So I got caught up reading GoT comment threads on [livejournal.com profile] ohnotheydidnt. I know, I know, why do I do this myself?

Anyway, I read some interesting fan viewpoints on the Daenerys/Drogo scenes in the first two episodes.

WARNING: Discussion of Non-Consensual Sex )


In conclusion, having watched two episodes, I don't think this show is particularly misogynist. It could perhaps be considered gratuitously graphic, but then, so was Germinal. I do think it's pretty racist, but that's a discussion for another day.
lierdumoa: (subversive)
Regarding the J2 Big Bang Haiti-fail, and specifically the subject addressed in whynot's reaction post.


I don't feel there's anything I need to say about [livejournal.com profile] gatorgrrrl that hasn't already been said, but I would like to put my two cents towards certain responders to the wank, specifically those who said:
"If this has taught me anything, you shouldn't even try to write POC."
"Yup. This is definitely what I've taken away from the whole clusterfuck."

...and similar comments in that vein.


People don't find themselves at the center of epic race wanks by accident. Racist people find themselves at the center of epic race wanks because they did something preposterously racist.

People who are not racist are not afraid of being called racist. They are not afraid 1) because it is very unlikely to happen and 2) because on the off chance they are wrongly accused of being racist, they can remain secure in the knowledge that hardly anyone is taking their accuser(s) seriously.



Men do not find themselves a the center of epic rape scandals by accident. Rapists find themselves at the center of epic race scandals because they treat women heinously.

Men who do not have a rape mentality are not afraid of being called rapists. They are not afraid 1) because it is very unlikely to happen and 2) because on the off chance they are wrongly accused of being rapists, they can remain secure in the knowledge that even genuine rape victims are often not taken seriously.



People cannot catch homosexuality as though it were a contagion. Closeted homophobes are afraid of "catching gay" because they are themselves gay and hope to suppress their gay urges with obvious overcompensation.

People who are not closeted homophobes are not afraid of being called/becoming gay. They are not afraid 1) because it is very unlikely to happen and 2) because on the off chance they are wrongly assumed to be gay/discover heretofore latent homosexual urges, they are and shall remain secure in their own identity and masculinity.


No seriously. Give me another. I can do this all night.


ETA: And as [livejournal.com profile] amazonziti wisely points out in my comment thread: "They are not afraid 3) because if it turns out it's true that they have said or done something hurtful, they will be more interested in assuaging the hurt and changing their behavior than in indulging their own feelings."

Because of course we all say/do stupid hurtful shit from time to time, but (I like to believe) most of us are willing to admit to our mistakes and apologize for and learn from them, and thus manage to avoid doing anything so offensive/heinous/appalling as to start a browser crashing internet wank.
lierdumoa: (Default)
So the popular fannish opinion seems to be that Adam Lambert was robbed of his victory. In fact, I think many fans don't even consider it to be an opinion. Everyone I've come across who had anything to say on the matter assumes that Adam was the superior artist, regardless of the viewer's personal style preference.

I ... respectfully disagree.

allow me to elaborate )
 
lierdumoa: (pirate)
Oh my god, I love this movie. And yeah, I love the Johnny Depp, and the Orlando Bloom, and Kiera Knightley is hot like burning. The special effects aren't bad either. But mostly, and this actually surprised me—I love this movie for the meta.

Read more... )

Update

Mar. 30th, 2007 03:08 am
lierdumoa: (subversive)
In regards to that whole wank thing, I just want to thank [livejournal.com profile] liviapenn for being the grown-up and saying everything I meant to say with grace and tact. Frankly, I was just not having a "be the grown-up" day and I'm grateful there were other people around to pick up the slack.

I invite anyone who wishes to defriend me to do so, if they have not already. I invite anyone who wishes for me to defriend them, take them off my instant messenger buddy list, etc. to tell me so in this post. Comments will be screened for everyone's privacy.



In other news, 5718 words written thus far in 3x17 "Sunday" coda. And I fail at outlines. Fic now looks like it will be anywhere from 8500-9500 words by the time it's done.

Musings

Jul. 17th, 2006 07:02 pm
lierdumoa: (Rodney thinking)
I have a lot of personal philosophies when it comes to shows. One of them came up yesterday. I was at [livejournal.com profile] morgandawn's house and someone made a comment about the bad science in SGA.

My response was, "Really? SGA's better about their pseudoscience than most shows I've seen provided Joe Flanigan isn't writing the episode. I mean their biology could use some work, but really their physics is...oh. You were talking about the anthropology. See, when you call it a science, I get all confused."

I am so Rodney McKay deep in my soul.

But that's the subject for another post.



Here's my personal philosophy. Bad science only hurts me if I let it. I don't let it. Because otherwise it would hurt me all the time and I'd stop being a sci-fi fan altogether. I've learned to call magic when I see it. I've learned to understand my show's writers.

Honestly I see pretty much all the anthropology in SGA as a giant shoutout to classic Trek. The Genii are a perfect example. Here's an alien race that's 60 years behind us technologically. And it's eeeeevil! Let's make their uniforms look just like the Germans' in WWII! I mean really, the entire show is a giant shoutout. Hey, it's like they took the title Star Trek and replaced "Trek" with "Gate" -- GET IT?!? GET IT?!?

::cough::

Take the large, chunky holes in BSG's anthropology. Interstellar space travel. Field medicine and surgical techniques circa 2006. Gene sequencing machine engineered by Gaius Baltar, Jack of all sciences, master of...all, apparently. Field medicine and surgical techniques circa 2006. I mean, that would make sense in, say, SGA if there were a planet working really hard on weapons technology but not bothering to develop their medecine because hey! Everyone dies by wraith! Trying to put equal focus on medicine would be a waste of resources. But BSG has no such circumstances. There's no good reason why they would be so advanced in one field and so stunted in another.

Unless magic is at work.

Or better yet, fate. A path of societal development foretold by the gods, SO SAY WE ALL.

See? Now I feel better. God works in mysterious ways. Magic explains all. I keep my sanity. I'm not getting mad at a show for failing to be meticulous about something that is clearly not one of the writers' priorities.



At the beginning of SGA the creators tried to get military approval for their show. The military told them they'd need to get rid of John Sheppard's hair. The creators decided John's hair was more important.

And thank goodness for that.

The next time someone holds a gun wrong or salutes wrong or whatever, I'm just going to picture John in a crew cut and count my blessings.
lierdumoa: (getting washed out by your light)
A conversation I had earlier this week got me thinking about the darker themes SGA has been exploring in season 2 and changes in character behavior, particularly Elizabeth Weir. This then got me thinking about her characterization in general.

Some less charitable fan opinions I've come across regarding Weir include 1) that she is badly written as a leader by writers whose only known examples of women in leadership positions were their kindergarten teachers, 2) that she is presented as merely competent at her job, putting her in poor contrast to her male counterparts, who are all excellent at their jobs, 3) corollary to both 1 and 2, that she simply hasn't shown enough talent as a leader or a diplomat to justify her having achieved the position of head of the Atlantis expedition.

I'm somewhat inclined to agree with 1 -- many of her lines, I think, could be better written. I'd be willing to argue with 2, but that's a subject for another post. As to 3, I don't care to debate whether Elizabeth is a good diplomat or leader. I will, however, argue that her skill as a diplomat or leader, on the whole, has very little bearing on her having achieved her position as head of the Atlantis expedition.

She doesn't need to be the best diplomat in two galaxies because she knows how to find advantages in the situation surrounding a debate, rather than the debate itself. She doesn't need to be the principal authority figure for every single person under her leadership because she knows how to delegate power. Where others would deal directly, she slides in through the back door. Elizabeth is not head of Atlantis for her outstanding performance as a diplomat and leader, but rather for her brilliance as a politician.

And she is a brilliant politician.

spoiler cut )
lierdumoa: (hm?)
I had this epiphany tonight about an aspect of my writing.


I can't just throw in pseudoscience. I have to rationalize it in my head first. And then I have to explain it somehow within the fic. This isn't particularly apparent in the fic I've written thus far, or rather, it's not particularly apparent in the fic that I've written and posted publicly.

But take my fic Mutability, for example. I know how the device that turned Rodney into a woman works, in my head. I've rationalized the demolecularization and storage of excess mass that enables him to be smaller as a woman than as a man and tied this in with why the device needs to be keyed to a particular user before it can be activated. I've rationalized in my head what exactly the device is for and how that relates to what it did to Rodney. I've partially rationalized the level of advancement of the device and how it fits in with the timeline of Ancient inventions. See, it's newer than the Stargate technology, since it does things related to what we've seen in other pieces of Ancient technology, only it's a lot smaller.

I haven't rationalized it quite as much as I want to because the whole subject is rather farfetched, but suffice it to say I've put a ridiculous amount of thought into this. It's, like, compulsive behavior for me. I haven't had the opportunity to write any of this in yet. First Rodney needs to figure out how it works within the context of the story, since he's going to be the one doing all the explaining. There's going to be a bunch of exposition on this in my next chapter that I'm going to try to squish in without boring you all out of your minds.


It's a thing.

The thought of writing technology into a fic without first coming up with at least a somewhat logical explanation of how it works actually hurts my brain. This doesn't come from any particular need I have to write accurate science. Hell, I love fantasy just as much as I love sci-fi if not more.

Possibly I feel obligated because I can. SGA is one of the few fandoms where writing semi-plausible pseudoscience doesn't force me to dismiss large chunks of canon. ::cough::Smallville::cough:: SGA is fairly consistent when it comes to physics. Even the theoretical physics isn't totally arbitrary -- clearly someone on the writing staff read The Elegant Universe or some other "string theory for dummies" publication to help with at least most of the SGA episodes. [Note: We are going to ignore the physics of the stargate itself, since the whole "only discrete units" thing and the "one way except for radio waves" thing is really all SG-1's fault, and their physics is in general much shadier than SGA's. Also, any episodes written by Joe Flanigan.] They're not talking out of their asses quite as much as I'd expect. I feel kind of obligated to maintain a physics standard within my own stories.

The biology in the show is a little bit iffier. I mean, what did Carson use to make that retrovirus -- ebola? But even that I can sort of rationalize because, okay, he was a government doctor with high security clearance, therefore probably had access to a lot of highly virulent genetically engineered designer viruses. We're not going to talk about the whole "Duet" two minds in one body thing. We're just not.

The anthropology on SGA is MAGICK with a K. End of story.


Most writers can come up with plausible pseudoscience. Only a few will actually feel the need to explain why it is plausible and tie up every single loose end. Off the top of my head, the only authors in SGA I can think of who do this are [livejournal.com profile] astolat and [livejournal.com profile] justabi.

Though really, it's not like the reader cares 99.9% of the time whether or not it is explained. If a random Ancient Device makes Rodney psychic, who really gives a fuck how it works? Hell, I don't give a fuck. I love that fic. I've read it, like, six times.


I totally have a point.

I started thinking about this because of the contest down at [livejournal.com profile] undermistletoe for guessing which author wrote which fic. Pseudoscience isn't something people usually use when trying to identify writing style. But if, say, one writer were trying to imitate another writer's style in order to confuse and misdirect readers, it's one of the harder things to fake.

Hmmmm.

Dec. 13th, 2005 10:17 pm
lierdumoa: (grim!Rodney)
I have realized that I hate being in the car when my cousin drives. She is a discourteous driver. small rant to follow )

So, I'm amused to discover that my [livejournal.com profile] undermistletoe fic and "Grace Under Pressure" are inexplicably spoilers )
lierdumoa: (gryffindor!Sheppard)
I love my show because I have *faith* -- or perhaps it is because I lack sanity. Either way.

Beware of spoilers.

Wherein there is SQUEE )

And then CRACK )

And then META )

And then more SQUEE )

And also CRACK )

Hey look, more META )

But back to the CRACK )
lierdumoa: (gryffindor!Sheppard)
Sci-Fi tv in the past has been know first and foremost for it's plot driven nature. Sci-Fi = adventure. We expect big long fascinating storylines, and the emotional arcs are either intrinsically tied in with the plot arcs (in a good show) or pushed to the wayside so that all attention is focused on the plot arcs (in a mediocre/bad show).

SGA, on the other hand, is not focused on plot. It's focused on character. In it you find emotional arcs that far more closely resemble those in shows like Numb3rs or House. These characters are not the epic sort of figures you find in most sci-fi shows. They're not the heroes from SG-1. They're not the wacky escaped convicts from Farscape and they're certainly not John Crichton. They're not quite average, but as with network tv dramas they're still pretty close to the kind of people you've encountered in everyday life.

Especially if you spend a lot of your everyday life in fandom, because at least half of the main characters are geeks.

The entire premise of the show is that a bunch of overachievers told the government "We want to go on a dangerous, potentially one-way adventure" and the government replied, "Well...we guess we can spare you." As you can imagine, this principal difference in premise makes SGA not your average sci-fi.

Read more... )

Profile

lierdumoa: (Default)
lierdumoa

June 2012

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
1718 1920212223
24252627282930

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 30th, 2017 06:41 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios