![[personal profile]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
i have been doing SO GOOD at ignoring metafandom, but finally have been seduced back by whispers of another STOP ANALYZING THINGS WITH WORDS THAT MEAN PEOPLE ONCE SAID TO ME kerfuffle, and so it is! yes, we literary-theory nerds are a vicious and savage lot, with our subtext and interpretation and criticism. of course, fandom as LJ currently knows it wouldn't EXIST without those things, but some people had their feelings hurt in college so we must cease our foolishness posthaste.
OH OH OR, my second favorite argument for why using the techniques of academia on your show or book or other fics is WRONG AND BAD AND MEAN, which is: sometimes people have really outright idiotic opinions about my stories that are contrary to fact and basic common sense, but MEAN ACADEMICS say the author is always wrong about everything so I'm going to go eat worms and YOU'LL ALL MISS ME WHEN I'M GONE, DAMMIT. (the logic here seems to be, "you say the author isn't always a font of ineffable unquestionable Truth? then obviously you think those people who claim Jane Eyre is a Communist tract with a thrilling space-opera subplot about talking badgers are CORRECT! YOU ADMITTED IT, NO TAKE-BACKS, NAH NAH NAH.")
okay, i lied, that's my first favorite, the "my professors used those words to hurt me! those are hurting words!" argument is second. a very close second.
(SERIOUSLY. YOU GUYS. WTF. THESE ARE ARGUMENTS I AM ACTUALLY SEEING MADE. well, the worms were only implied.)
everything--EVERYTHING--is available to be analyzed, criticized, turned upside down and shaken briskly, and/or rewritten sideways. and nobody's required to do any of that if they don't enjoy it. or they can analyze and criticize my analysis/criticism, and then I will make posts like this because .
IN SHORT, just because some assholes use academia-talk as a tool to be assholes doesn't mean that all academics are assholes, although it does mean this sentence says 'assholes' too much.
OH OH OR, my second favorite argument for why using the techniques of academia on your show or book or other fics is WRONG AND BAD AND MEAN, which is: sometimes people have really outright idiotic opinions about my stories that are contrary to fact and basic common sense, but MEAN ACADEMICS say the author is always wrong about everything so I'm going to go eat worms and YOU'LL ALL MISS ME WHEN I'M GONE, DAMMIT. (the logic here seems to be, "you say the author isn't always a font of ineffable unquestionable Truth? then obviously you think those people who claim Jane Eyre is a Communist tract with a thrilling space-opera subplot about talking badgers are CORRECT! YOU ADMITTED IT, NO TAKE-BACKS, NAH NAH NAH.")
okay, i lied, that's my first favorite, the "my professors used those words to hurt me! those are hurting words!" argument is second. a very close second.
(SERIOUSLY. YOU GUYS. WTF. THESE ARE ARGUMENTS I AM ACTUALLY SEEING MADE. well, the worms were only implied.)
everything--EVERYTHING--is available to be analyzed, criticized, turned upside down and shaken briskly, and/or rewritten sideways. and nobody's required to do any of that if they don't enjoy it. or they can analyze and criticize my analysis/criticism, and then I will make posts like this because .
IN SHORT, just because some assholes use academia-talk as a tool to be assholes doesn't mean that all academics are assholes, although it does mean this sentence says 'assholes' too much.
