a fool's musings

Fool, said my muse to me, look in thy heart and write...

Warning: Adult Content achromatic unfinished fic graveyard recs journal new stuff recent stuff my back pages January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002 February 2002 January 2002 December 2001 November 2001 the five Ws, or, all about me profile e-mail victoria my livejournal the original P&R comments current mood: "pathological and unbalanced" Items of Interest People LiveJournal folks Baraita bishclone claritylit Jintian Kat Allison Kit Mason metablog mix-tapes Neil Gaiman Nestra Sarah T. Seema Shrift Sundry Mourning zendom Music Walk On - U2 Thunder Road - Bruce Springsteen If I Can't Change Your Mind - Sugar Sick of Myself - Matthew Sweet Town Called Malice - The Jam One - U2 The Space Between - DMB Books Lord of the Rings Catch-22 The Neely Trilogy Absalom! Absalom! Possession: A Romance Foucault's Pendulum Dreamhouse LA Confidential I Capture the Castle Sandman Waking the Moon Shows Angel Buffy the Vampire Slayer (in reruns) Alias West Wing The Simpsons webrings < ? fanfiction ! > < ? writers ! > diaryreviews.diaryland.com NYC Bloggers Comments by Haloscan.com all links, if I haven't screwed up somehow, should open in a new browser window

11.11.02 - 2:11 a.m. Nor Ever Chaste - final Since I got ambitious and I don't have to work tomorrow, Nor Ever Chaste is posted and uploaded. For those of you wondering, the title and summary come from the poem Batter My Heart by John Donne. Batter My Heart by John Donne Batter my heart, three-person'd God, for you As yet but knock, breathe, shine, and seek to mend; That I may rise and stand, o'erthrow me, and bend Your force to break, blow, burn, and make me new. I, like an usurp'd town to another due, Labor to admit you, but oh, to no end; Reason, your viceroy in me, me should defend, But is captiv'd, and proves weak or untrue. Yet dearly I love you, and would be lov'd fain, But am betroth'd unto your enemy; Divorce me, untie or break that knot again, Take me to you, imprison me, for I, Except you enthrall me, never shall be free, Nor ever chaste, except you ravish me. Yes, I know it's a religious poem, a poem about the poet's relationship with God. I realize I've written incest. If I'm going to hell, I may as well go for a sheep as a lamb, right? *eg* Anyhow, I love that poem. Not quite as much as A Canonization, or A Valediction Forbidding Mourning, but still, a damn fine work of verse. ~victoria link [current mood: accomplished] [current music: silence] [random quote: \"God is greater than that we can imagine. Therefore, God exists.\" Frank Pembleton, quoting St. Anselm, HLotS] ~*~ 11.10.02 - 11:47 p.m. Flowers in the Attic, much? Alias thoughts up in the LJ, along with one or two Angel and Sopranos spoilers. The Knicks lost in overtime. The Garden stank of stale beer. Let us not speak of it. So anyhow, over in the LJ, Mara wrote: I find it intriguing that one of the most (if not the most) prolific Logan/Rogue shippers also sees Simon/River as a couple. I think this may point to where the difference in our perceptions lies. I saw Logan/Rogue as growing friendship or father/daughter, while you saw romance. I see Simon/River as brother/sister, while you see romance (or at least sexual tension, I don't know which until you finish the story). Except I don't see romance with Simon/River. I see wrongness of the Flowers in the Attic variety. Very intriguing, very blatant, and very, very wrong. But definitely of a sexual nature. Mara again: IMHO, Simon loves his sister, they were close playmates as children, and she's now the only thing he's got that reminds him of the life they once led. She's really the only thing he's got, period. I agree there was tension between the two actors, and I think that's what saved those bits from becoming bad, but it didn't feel like sexual tension to me. Oh, but come on! I have an older brother, whom I love and who loves me. But he has never, ever, EVER knelt in front of me as I fed him berries with my fingers. Nor has he ever claimed that I'm everything to him (or vice versa). That's usually a claim made toward a lover or spouse, or possibly a child. Their interaction, as far as I'm concerned, crossed over from sibling-like into loverlike in this episode, starting with the way he stared at her while she was dancing. Yes, he was overjoyed to see her happy and doing something she loved, but there was ... more to it, to my eye. The tension was definitely of a sexual nature. A bad, wrong sexual nature. And since it's a Joss Whedon show, I wouldn't be at all surprised if it were supposed to be read that way. Joss has said in interviews that all the relationships on Buffy are romantic, and I wouldn't be surprised if that carries over onto his other shows, and well... the feeding of fruit from one person to another is *always* fraught with sexual symbolism, imo. It's like snakes and apples and trees, you know? And then the on his knees and well, she was using her fingers and... not one scene that I've seen (and I haven't seen all the episodes) featuring Mal/Inara or Kaylee/Simon has had that kind of tension. Zoe and Wash are adorably cute together, and hot, but since they're together, there's no UST, obviously. The scenes where Simon declares that River is everything, where he's willing to be burned at the stake for her and then with her -- that screams more than just brotherly devotion to me. I think it's possible that with them being all they have, that feelings that would normally have an outlet elsewhere became tangled up with their need to stick together, to not trust anyone else, with him to protect and her to have someone stable and trustworthy and *safe* after everything she went through, someone she knows and loves... So I don't think it's sexy or romantic and I don't think I'll be writing romantic comedies about Simon/River, but I do thing there's a vibe between them that should be explored, and I do think that we're intended to see it as such, or Joss wouldn't have had it written that way, nor would the director directed it that way, nor the actors played it that way. Because I was not the only one who saw it. *g* Just peruse my friends page. Hell, I described the berry feeding scene without embellishment to a friend last night, and she was like, "Flowers in the Attic, much?" *eg* The thing is, again, on a Joss Whedon show, nothing is ever just on the surface. In Bad Girls, was Faith drawing a heart with a stake through it to tell Buffy they needed to go slay vampires? Sure. Was she also making a pass at Buffy? It's entirely possible. There are people who will argue it either way, but it's *there*, much as the Simon/River scenes were in this past episode. With Logan/Rogue, it's canonical that she at least has a crush on him, and not outside the realm of possibility that he may one day return those feelings, as he obviously cares for her deeply, after such a short period of time. I didn't read it as brotherly or fatherly, but as two people who had been isolated coming together and learning to care, and that they definitely had a connection - she's the first person he's let in in a long time, and she's obviously got a crush on him that may grow into something more. Plus, they had hot, hot chemistry onscreen. Obviously mileage varies, but I really don't think there's really much similarity between the two relationships. ~victoria link [current mood: talkative] [current music: Kiss Off - Violent Femmes] [random quote: You can all just kiss off into the air behind my back I can see them stare they'll hurt me bad but I won't mind they&#] ~*~ 11.10.02 - 12:21 a.m. SuperJill's birthday Why is it I never feel drunk and sleepy until I leave the bar? It was certainly nice only have to go three stops on the subway, though, to get home. I was so tempted to take my shoes off during the long, long walk home from the subway, but I didn't. Two avenues and four blocks when you really have to pee is a long walk. Trust me. I must have had 7 or 8 Absolut and grapefruit juices, but I could only taste the vodka in the last two. Also ate a lovely dinner of battered and fried chicked with buttermilk gravy and [boxed] mashed potatoes. Despite being boxed instead of real, they were good. And chocolate ice cream cake posing as Mississippi mudcake for dessert. It was SuperJill's birthday night out. It was fun. I met her online friends. Heh. It's nice to know I'm not the only one with online friends in my own offline circle of friends. It made me long for another NYC fan contingent get together. Viridian? Mely? Cassandra? Becky? If any of you are reading this, we should do a fall get-together. Obviously, no one loved my S/R dirty wrongness. Sigh. I know there's something not right about the story, but I can't put my finger on what it is. And for those of you playing at home, no, incest is not the answer. Sleeeeep.... Knicks game tomorrow. Joy. I know they're going to lose. Sigh. And hey, I can still code with a buzz on. Good to know. ~victoria link [current mood: drunk] [current music: nothing] [random quote: work is the curse of the drinking classes. ~Oscar Wilde] ~*~ 11.09.02 - 4:04 p.m. Nor Ever Chaste v.1 So yeah. Simon/River. Dirty bad wrongness that's practically textual. Unbetaed. I'm not quite happy with it, but I need to think some more. Nor Ever Chaste When they return to the ship, he can't stop touching her. He looks over the preacher, and talks to the captain, but every inch of his skin prickles with the need to get back to her, to make sure she's within his line of sight, always. They eat with the rest of the crew, and he feels more comfortable, though his sense of wariness is increased. They left him, left River, without a qualm, and that betrayal isn't completely assuaged by the captain's assurance that he is part of the crew. He goes to find her, after checking on Book, and she's humming the reel she'd danced to earlier when he gets back to her room. "Hush, now," he says, enfolding her in his arms. She turns into him, stilled by his presence. "Simon," she says, her fingers brushing his lips softly. He can still taste the sweetness of the hodgeberries on her skin. "Daddy isn't coming for us." "No." "I'm not a witch," she whispers fiercely, pressing her body against him, her head fitting perfectly into the crook of his neck. "I know." He holds her, breathing her in, smoke and sweet berries, the scent of childhood, long-gone. After a moment, he says, "Let's get you cleaned up." He eases her dress off her shoulders, and she lets him. The slim perfection of her body, unmarred by any sign of what they did to her mind, makes him catch his breath. As she shimmies out of her shorts, he reminds himself that he's a doctor, he's seen hundreds of naked bodies and hers is no different. But he has given up everything for her, to keep her safe and with him, and though he knows it's wrong, his heart lifts and his body responds to her presence. Gently, he soaps her with the sponge. He kneels before her, a supplicant before a goddess. Her hands rest on his shoulders for balance. Her head is thrown back, body arched as he touches her. "You're not broken," he tells her. "You're strong. Brave. Beautiful." Her breath hitches as he leans forward to press kisses to her belly, rubbing his cheek against the warm, wet skin. She shivers, her fingers clutching at his shoulders. He finishes washing her, but he can't let go. He caresses her, slick, wet fingers on slick, wet skin, reassuring her with his touch that she is safe, that they're together. "Oh, Simon," she says, and he's not sure if she's scolding or urging him on. His heart aches in his chest. He came so close to losing her today, and she is the only thing he has left, the only thing worth dying for. They are tied together, fated, and he can't regret any of the choices he's made, what he's given up, to save her, to keep her in his life. Even this, which he knows is wrong. It's just one more way of keeping her with him, keeping her safe. Because she's his sister. His lover. His life. He slides his tongue along the sensitive flesh on the inside of her thigh, fingers slipping into the tangled thatch of dark hair between her legs to coax her to release. After this, she'll be calm and sleepy. She won't wander, won't scream, won't have nightmares tonight, despite the horror of the day. She whimpers and keens and her body shudders against his hand. For the moment, he can forget his parents, his training, forget everything in his training that tells him this is wrong. For the moment, they're just Simon and River bringing each other joy. She slumps against him, boneless and sated. He pats her dry and leads her to bed, pulling the covers over her and dropping a kiss on her forehead. He hopes she dreams of dancing. end ^^^ Comments and suggestions always welcome. ~victoria link [current mood: naughty] [current music: Stuck In a Moment You Can't Get Out Of - u2] [random quote: Take me to you, imprison me, for I, Except you enthrall me, never shall be free, Nor ever chaste, except you ravish me.] ~*~ 11.08.02 - 9:48 p.m. it's gotta be the shoes I want these shoes in, oh, three or four different colors, including black, brown, olive, red and blue. Firefly thoughts up in the LJ Edited to add linkage. ~victoria link [current mood: greedy] [current music: Sober - Tool] [random quote: Yossarian would live forever or die trying.] ~*~ 11.08.02 - 2:33 p.m. author participation; authorial privilege? So I'm back from letting them steal a double-dose of my precious platelets. Amazingly enough, I actually feel *less* dizzy now than I did before I went. And chugging that extra-calcium fortified chocolate milk? Best thing I ever did. My lips still tingled after the first two return segments, and my fingers are icy cold, but I didn't get the shivers and shakes like in the past. I didn't even need the big fuzzy blanket, though they offered it. Now I'm back, after 2 1/2 hours, some oreos and apple juice. I have a bagel and a slice of chocolate mousse cake for lunch, G. is gone for the day, I may be meeting M, J, V and Mo for dinner tonight, and it's a three day weekend... Life is pretty good. As for fannish things: A while ago, there was a discussion in Pumpkin's LJ on responding to criticism. (My comments are in green - italics for the original post, and then just plain text for new stuff; Pumpkin's comments are in orange, of course) I wrote: I'm of two minds about this. One, yeah, of course the author should defend herself....except that all too often, it comes off as defensive and devolves to ad hominems without any actual discussion of the text taking place. And it makes me uncomfortable as both a writer and a person offering critique to see a writer becoming defensive. Pumpkin responded: /me nods -- yes, I see what you're getting at. But at the same time, by calling it 'defending herself' we're already using "defensive" terms. She could be explaining her choices, asking for clarification, etc. This is true. Apparently I've got the attitude so ingrained in my mind that it's going to go badly that I automatically use language that casts it in defensive terms. I certainly don't like that idea, so I'll try to be more thoughtful in my responses, first of all. Because, yes, the author could be asking the reader to clarify her questions or to explain in more depth why something did or didn't work for her (the reader). She could also be explaining her choices, but that's where I get a little... uncomfortable. Because shouldn't the *story* explain the choices? I mean, to come from my own writing, you can look at some of my AUs and go, "WTF? Rogue as a *hooker*? How is that even *possible*? And *why*?" And if I did my job right, the answers are all in the story (well in this case, stories, as it's a series*.) Or to take the case of one short story, "Logan is shooting heroin and smoking crack**? WTF?" And again, I like to think that within the story, that characterization is both explained and justified as a reasonable extrapolation of Logan as we know him from the movie (not even taking into account comics canon). So while yes, I explain my choices to my betas, once the story is done (if any story is every truly *done*, because I've gone back months later and edited/revised things that bothered me), so perhaps I should say, once a story is posted, I don't know that I should be explaining things, unless I failed utterly to get the point across. Which is, of course, entirely possible. More me: However, intelligent criticism should be answered in kind. I think perhaps that it's best done in private, because lists have a tendency to become polarized (either for or against the author and either way, it gets ugly for somebody). On the other hand, a story should speak for itself. If I've done my job as a writer, I shouldn't have to explain my choices. It should be self-evident from the text. (<- ah, me repeating myself. Lovely.) Do I like hearing what a writer was thinking when she made some of the choices she made? As a fellow writer, yes, I find it fascinating. As a reader... not so much. It's like having a song explained by the singer. Suddenly it's not *my* song anymore, to interpret and apply to my life, filtered through my experiences as I please. Suddenly, I'm being told, well, Symbol X meant Y and the story isn't about Lex's triumph over his own demons but about his response to Lionel's systematic sexual abuse of him... and well, I'm not sure I like having someone else's view imposed over my own. Of course, that's assuming that the author's interpretation is privileged over the readers', and many times readers do that automatically, i.e., "she wrote it, she must know what it means." Even though I know, as a writer, that that's not so, I still fall into that trap sometimes as a reader. Pumpkin responded: And there's probably a lot of readers that feel that way as well. Still is it fair to penalise the writer because of it? No, it's not, but I don't know that the writers are being *penalized*, necessarily. It just seems to me that a writer should stay out of the public discussion of her work at least initially, and certainly if the readers are *not* asking questions and *not* asking for her participation. Because adding the writer in changes the conversation, regardless of anyone's good intentions. I mean, we can sit and discuss a book like Catch-22, both praise it and savage it, because 1. Joseph Heller was never going to join our conversation, and 2. He's dead now, so even if he were, he couldn't now. *g* Whereas fans... There's definitely an anti-intellectual bent in some areas of fandom, most notably in fanfic, regarding the critiquing of fan-written stories. (Note: this is no doubt in large part due to the strain of anti-intellectualism that runs deep in America, from whence many fans hail.) The first argument is, "We're just doing this for fun, no one expects to write a Nobel-prize winning bit of literature" and the second argument is, "We're just writing porn about pretty people from cheesy genre television shows", both of which are fallacious. I mean, yes, they're both true, but neither reason in and of itself should be used as a rationale for *not* critiquing the writing of someone who wants to be taken seriously *as a writer*. Or even, really, someone who doesn't. Because any time someone posts a story, there is the expectation that it will be read and that the author wants feedback (as evidenced by that little "Feedback: Please send" note at the top. It's a rare fanfic posted to a list that *doesn't* have that note or some variation on it, so don't even try to tell me that the expectation of audience response is not implicit in the act of posting to a list), and well, critique is legitimate feedback, despite some people's desire to never have to face a mixed or negative response to their work. Critique is for the author; review is for the readers. I think that's where I'm tripping up. Yes, an author needs to read and respond to critique when it's offered in the spirit of helpfulness, constructive crit etc. I'm far more wary of authors showing up where someone has reviewed a fic for the readers (as in on a recs list or webpage), because that's *not* an appropriate forum, in my opinion, for that type of discussion. That's like having Stephen Spielberg show up on Ebert and Not-Siskel's show to complain that they didn't like the ending of AI (did they? I don't even know. I'm pulling this example out of my ass) and didn't they understand that he was just doing it for fun, and they're sucking all the fun out of it for him by saying that the ending wasn't tight or didn't suit the story or whatever. Let's say that instead of being a fan on a newsgroup, I was a TV critic for even a small newspaper who wrote that the surprise ending of "Enemies" was hackwork at its worst (which I truly believe, btw. Line for argument forms to the right). I would be stunned if Doug Petrie (David Fury?) wrote a letter to the editor to refute that. It's just a standard thing that television episodes and books and movies and music and plays and ballets and operas get reviewed. Why isn't it par for the course for fanfiction? Or why are only positive reviews welcome? I mean, let's face it, nobody *wants* a bad review, but it *is* a service to the reader when the critic says, "God, don't spend $10/$18/$75 on that movie/cd/play" and it's the same service when someone says, "Don't waste 10/20/75 minutes on that fanfic, because it'll just piss you off" (though of course, in more diplomatic terms). And while none of us are Joss Whedon, I can think of a few fanfic writers who give Petrie (or Fury *g*) a run for his money. And I don't think the author really has any business going after the reviewer in public. An email asking, "Why did you say this?" or "But that's not at all what I meant" would be appropriate, but I personally don't think an author should get involved unless specifically asked when it comes to review-type situations. Does that make sense, without me contradicting myself too much? Writers are, of course, free to do what they will. I just think it's better for both the writer and the readers if the writer stays (publicly) fray-adjacent during the initial discussion of her work. *Off the Corner **Chasing the Blast ~victoria link [current mood: weird] [current music: The Rose - Bette Midler] [random quote: it's the soul afraid of dying that never learns to live] ~*~ 11.08.02 - 1:10 a.m. Art! Art for me! Here's the gorgeous cover Hope made me for The Lies We Tell Ourselves: Isn't it beautiful? Thanks again, Hope! Have I mentioned I love it when people make art for me? Love. It. Sigh. I wish I had graphics skills. I just spent a couple hours making new icons that I won't use to go with all the other icons that I don't use, because I'm attached to the ones I've got. And it's hard to find pics of Gina Torres from Firefly. Harder than I expected, anyway. I'm so unmotivated, writing-wise. Nothing I've opened up has called to me, except maybe "Liar's Poker." I have to see if I can slip back into that purply style. It's not my usual style, nor my usual cup of tea as a reader, but for some reason, for that story, I really like. *And* I think it works. I reread the thing for the first time in weeks today, and got a little ache in my chest, which rarely happens when I reread my own work, and usually if it does happen, it's only long after the story is finished, and I can forget that I wrote it. So there's that. And possibly the Snapefic. And Wesleyfic. I have lots of stuff brewing, but I'm just curiously apathetic about it all right now. I think it's the hangover from making it into fandom_wank after being shut out for so long. I just had to type this whole thing over. Grrr... Stupid diaryland not caching the entry as you write it. I hate that. ::deep breath:: ::looks at Clive Owen pics some more:: Whew. That's better. Bed now. ~victoria link [current mood: happy, yet sleepy] [current music: nothing] [random quote: I don't know if it's art, but I know what I like] ~*~ 11.07.02 - 10:13 a.m. Hobbes, and not Calvin Okay, last week I answered last week's Friday Five question: Do you think people are basically good? this way: I think people have the capacity to do great good and great evil within them. I think that fear and selfishness can lead to people doing wrong or bad things, and that fear and selfishness are far more the natural state of humanity And I'm going to expound on that today, because the more I ride the bus, the more I see how not-good, yet not *evil* people are. Yeah, you'd have thought I'd have noticed that on the subway, but the subway is all about survival, keeping your head down and making it through the ride. The bus is more relaxed. And also handicapped accessible. See, New York is not a very accessible city. Trust me, as someone who used to measure hotels for ADA compliance for a living, NYC is way down the scale as far as being accessible. But the buses are. Most city buses these days have lifts and foldup seats so people in wheelchairs and scooters can ride. And maybe having worked two years in a rehab hospital and ten overall in non-profit (the last two with people with MS), I'm more used to people in wheelchairs and scooters. I don't generally notice, y'know? (Oh god, Chatty Coworker is chatting. Gah. <- proof* of my thesis, which is yet to come.) But since I've been riding the bus to work, I have noticed how people get all teeth-sucky and eye-rolly whenever there's a delay so the person with the mobility aid can get on the bus. And that annoys me. Because you know what? People in scooters and wheelchairs need to get to work too. So you're five minutes later than you thought you'd be. Suck it up. We won't even get into my contention that people have no freaking clue how to ride the bus, and that when there's four feet of space on your left and 20 people on your right, moving down might be a wise option. Ahem. Anyhow, this morning the guy in the scooter was actually someone I used to work with - we were office neighbors, in fact - so I had a nice chat with him, but it shits me to see people so visibly annoyed at the slight delay. You know, if I really, really had to pee or I had a sick child, or I was in labor, maybe I'd be upset. Otherwise, not only is it rude and insensitive, it's just asinine. Oh yeah, I'm sure Stephen (and everyone else using a mobility aid) is just thrilled that he needs a scooter to get to and from work, and that he's taking a perverse joy in delaying you on your way. What. the fuck. ever. So yeah, this just crystallizes my belief (and I'm sure it's been named for one of the Big Philosophers, but it's too early in the morning, and I'm not caffeinated) that people aren't good or bad. They're selfish. We're selfish. If doing the right thing, the good thing, rewards us, we do that. But if it doesn't, we don't. I'm not saying that people are evil or that it's not possible for someone - anyone - to on occasion do the right or good thing (and right and good are not always the same thing, remember) with little or no personal reward. Obviously, it happens quite a bit, though I'd say that true altruism is... a myth. Virtue is its own reward, after all, and there's some truth in that. So anyway, yeah, I'm thinking that it's very Hobbesian? Is that the guy? "the life of man, [is] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." If people aren't motivated by selfishness, they're motivated by fear. How many people would do something they consider 'wrong' if they knew they weren't going to get caught? That fear of being caught, exposed, ridiculed or punished is all that stops them (us). I include myself in that category. There are some things I just think are wrong and wouldn't do, and others that I don't do because I fear either societal response or actual punishment. Do people rise above these tendencies? Sure, every day. But not many do so consistently, I would guess. So good and evil aren't really the right words for the majority of people. Self-motivated or other-motivated would be better (and again, with other-motivated, like altruism, it's really hard to untangle all the different threads of why someone does something for someone else. Because it's 'the right thing'? Or because doing what they perceive as the right thin makes them feel good? Brings them the approval of their friends and neighbors? Because they have a secret quid pro quo mindset?), with the actions themselves characterized as good or evil. Like I said, my background isn't in philosophy, and I remember dozing through Marcus Aurelius and Kant in college, so I'm sure that this is all said, and in much more convoluted, jargony terms, by some philosopher, as well as Freud and any number of other psychological bigwigs. But my way is easier to understand. *snerk* And now that I'm all depressed, I'll go. *proof in that she has no clue that her chatting annoys me as I'm trying to write this, because her world is all about her, and proof in that I'm annoyed at being interrupted, because my world is all about me. Luckily, the social niceties have been drilled into me, so I can smile and nod and not look *too* annoyed, but I do not have a poker face, and while "I think it, I say it" may not be true of me anymore (the rudiments of tact have also been drilled into me, and after 32 years, they've started actually taking hold), "I feel it, it shows up on my face" is still true. Sigh. ~victoria link [current mood: philosophical] [current music: Head Like a Hole - NIN] [random quote: 'Cause if he ever saw it, it was through these eyes of mine And if he ever suffered it was me who did his crying] ~*~ 11.07.02 - 12:54 a.m. the wrath from the thing West Wing thoughts up in the LJ My bed is coming next Thursday. Woohoo! Did not get to the big parents essay like I wanted to. Had actual work to do, and did some online christmas shopping. *and* ::preens:: got mentioned in fandom_wank, which has long been a goal of mine. For I rule the world in darkness and cruelty! Muahahahaha-hack-cough-wheeze-ha... Here's my Evil Overlord icon: Hee! Speaking of icons, here's my wishlist: Cordykini, from the ep where she's in the commercial Clive Owen Gina Torres Toby, with the "and the wrath from the thing" quote Prick Daddy Luthor - well, I have a few icons of him. I should just put 'em back into rotation. Crap. I know there's another one, but I can't think of it. A girl one. But which girl? Oh, I know - I wanted to do another of Rogue with "Do That Girl" on it, or one of Faith (since Faith is the DO That Girl. She was built to Do That. *g*). ~victoria link [current mood: sleepy] [current music: Elderly Woman... - Pearl Jam] [random quote: hearts and thoughts they fade, fade away...] ~*~ 11.06.02 - 12:21 p.m. beginning to answer comments Okies, various things: not writing today. Today is devoted to trying to answer comments both from here and in LJ. Also, parents and WB shows, or rather, parents and Buffy and Smallville. Essay on the subject percolating. Yes. As for the election, do you think I can move to Canada? I know I didn't vote (not because of lack of desire, but because of bureaucratic idiocy), so generally I shouldn't complain, but waaaah... I wish Jed Bartlet were real. There is much good talk about Lineage on my friends list, so hie thee thither and read. And now, onto comments: Naomi wrote, in regard to the watchfic: Anyway, keep writing already. I'm happy to report that I got the big beta email back from DD today, and that Jen and Meg have both said they'd try to look it over soon, so that's moving along. It still needs a lot of work (believe me, you can tell it's been a long time since I wrote anything more than 2000 words) because of the whole 'rushing the ending' thing, but it's moving. On the subject of Xander Harris, Hero-at-Large, Maveness wrote: But I have always been a Clark Kent/Superman girl. And I actually think it ties in nicely with what you said about Xander. With Clark, yeah they can't kill him (unless somebody has a green glowy rock), but there's the added psychological trauma of knowing that many, many people *want* to kill you. And yet he's still driven to save lives. And while physically he's invulnerable, there's a mental vulnerability - questioning if people like him for him, having feelings like everyone else butconstantly having to question whether he has the right or not to share his burdens with others. I've always been drawn to the way the story always has him keep on going. He doesn't stop helping others. No matter how much he gives, as painful as it may be and as draining on him mentally, he still gives his all. This is true, but (not to take anything away from Clark Kent), I think it's true of most heroes. Buffy doesn't want to share her burdens. She worries that she's endangering the people she loves, or even just people she'd like to be friends with. Same with Batman, Spiderman, etc. The emotional vulnerability is definitely there for Clark, especially as he's an alien, so he really is all alone in the world in the way that say, Xander, never quite can be, but I think that Xander in particular has other emotional/psychological issues, stemming from his view of himself as the Zeppo or buttmonkey (not helped by the writers on that one), his belief that he'll never be worthy, never be a hero *when he already is and has been many times over*, that he'll turn into his father, etc. So yeah, all interesting heroes have that tension, but I guess I just tend to give more weight to the actions of someone who knows that what they do can (and probably will someday) kill them, but does it anyway, even while yammering and fearful. Xander is only cowardly when it comes to his own safety. He won't protect himself, believing he deserves others' abuse and contempt (hence my feeling that he and Angel are far more similar that they are different. Possibly now that Spike's all soul-having, he'll revert to that type of attitude, since William seemed to have it as well), but he will go to the mat for his friends, and more importantly, for people he doesn't know. Obviously, I'm a huge Xanderista, and mileage varies. *G* TaraLJC wrote, on the same topic: I have always been a Xander fan (and Cordy, prior to her sainthood) for exactly that reason. Buffy and Angel got picked for their teams. Xander and Cordy (prior to visions) stepped up and chose, and they did so without superpowers. The stakes have always been higher for them. I actually had a whole scene about this in the never-to-be-finished, languishing-on-my-hard-drive Eight Days. You know, sweets, there's nothing stopping you from taking that scene, polishing it up, and making it a fic of its own. I'm a sucker for those kinds of, "We do it because we have to. If we don't, who will?" kinds of stories, where we see how much the characters hate the way their lives are because of the death and danger and destruction, but they know that it has to be done, and then they go on to tell why, in a world with a Slayer or a Superman, they as Ordinary Joe or Jane, still feel the need to do it. But that could just be me. *g* I guess that's all for now. ~victoria link [current mood: chatty] [current music: Losing My Religion - REM] [random quote: \"My whole life just flashed before my eyes... I gotta get me a life.\" Xander Harris, BtVS] ~*~ previous - next DiaryLand Disclaimer: Reading this diary is not required by law. If you do not like or agree with the contents herein, or find them to be offensive on more than one occasion, please go elsewhere and don't come back. Management is not responsible for any adverse reactions to content within. The painting is "Boreas" by John William Waterhouse. Again, not a muse, but I like her. She suits the color scheme. The quote is from Sir Philip Sidney. This site is best viewed with IE4+ | 1024x768 | true color | verdana | tables