next_to_normal (
next_to_normal) wrote2010-05-28 10:29 am
Entry tags:
Another meme
Snagged from
urania_calliope.
Check my fandoms, my favorite characters, the pairings I like the most, my kinks, my fictional crushes, anything. Now, in a friendly and possibly teasing way, point out the obvious and not so obvious trends or fetishes you see in my tastes. Maybe I'm nuts for all vampire stories, or have a thing for men who smoke, or I'm fond of the tsundere archetype, or I'm into rival slash. Let's point out all of those you've noticed I tend to squee about during our friendship.
Check my fandoms, my favorite characters, the pairings I like the most, my kinks, my fictional crushes, anything. Now, in a friendly and possibly teasing way, point out the obvious and not so obvious trends or fetishes you see in my tastes. Maybe I'm nuts for all vampire stories, or have a thing for men who smoke, or I'm fond of the tsundere archetype, or I'm into rival slash. Let's point out all of those you've noticed I tend to squee about during our friendship.
no subject
It's all about Power for you.
You seem attracted towards stories involving powerful people whose duties and responsibilities tend towards a very large - if not global - scale. If a romantic entanglement involves shifting power dynamics on a larger-than-life stage, then the romance itself becomes more all the more illicit and dangerous, since the relationship could be seen as a distraction from the more pressing matter of saving the city/ nation/ planet/ universe. The higher the stakes, the hotter the URST. The hotter the URST, the bigger the thirst. The bigger the thirst, the louder the burst.
Also, characters who occupy positions power have depths and inner conflicts that mere mortals don't, meaning that they often have to betray one part of themselves to service another part. This inner conflict makes the love or passion more meaningful and the consequences more devastating. It helps if the couple is playing on opposite sides. It doesn't mean that they necessarily need to be "enemies," but they should at least have to cope with conflicts of interest in the larger Power Game they are playing.
You also seem to like it when the relationship is frowned upon, or even forbidden, amongst the others in their Power Circle/ sphere of influence. When you combine that with end-of-the-world-i-ness, the romance deepens in ways that it couldn't if you just had, say, Carly the Cougar sinking her claws into Paulie the Pool Boy. They need each other in ways that aren't just carnal, and other people need them too.
This all adds up to Grand Romance, out of the old greco-roman and eastern dynastic traditions. Shakespeare took this ball and ran with it in some of his plays, allowing for tribal feuds, royal treachery, etc. I think that during the Victorian era this idea probably waned a bit, with authors framing their romances on a smaller stage among characters that maybe had influence within their society circles, but not so much upon world events. Their personal happiness may have depended on the outcomes of these stories, but not their lives or the fate of empires. While you appreciate these works for what they are, you also find them a bit dull and their romances a bit on the flat side. For you, Love has more in common with The End of the World than it does with sanguine letters penned in earnest from Ms. Mayfeathers to Mr. Hawkingsworth.
Also, if the story haz explojuns, you can dig it.
Am I close?
no subject
You seem attracted towards stories involving powerful people whose duties and responsibilities tend towards a very large - if not global - scale.
Yes, this is true. BtVS, AtS, The West Wing, BSG, Chuck, and 24 are all very different, but they do have that one thing in common. On the other hand, I also love stories where the stakes are much smaller and more personal - Veronica Mars, Mad Men, and especially FNL.
I feel like you've emphasized the role of romance a lot more than I do - which is probably because you know me mostly from my most shippy fandom, but outside of Spike/Buffy and Logan/Veronica, I'm not really a big shipper. I do love relationships of all stripes - but family and friends are just as important to me as romantic entanglements.
For you, Love has more in common with The End of the World than it does with sanguine letters penned in earnest from Ms. Mayfeathers to Mr. Hawkingsworth.
This is very true. I find that the couples I am most passionate about tend to have epic romances (lives ruined, bloodshed), and they do both happen to be "enemies" that couldn't resist the sinister attraction. On the other hand, I also love couples like the Bartlets or the Taylors, who are happily married, and the joy comes from watching them work together as a team. Although they encounter conflicts in their relationship, these conflicts only strengthen their love for each other. I hate will-they-won't-they bullshit with a passion.
Also, if the story haz explojuns, you can dig it.
Haha, I dunno. I don't mind explosions, and in the right setting, I quite enjoy them, but explosions alone aren't enough to win me over.
no subject
Well, yeah. I'm sure there's a lot more to it. I'm not a fan of romance at all, unless it's Grand Romance. For me, that doesn't mean that the scale has to be epic, but that the stakes have to be very high. Lives hanging in the balance, apocalypses looming, etc.
See, this is why I insist you rent "Heathers." It is essentially BTVS minus the vamps. It has star-crossed lovers from opposite sides of the battlefield, tons of snarky angst, a mounting body count, good and evil and the sticky grey areas in-between, etc. The character of Veronica is basically a "pre-Buffy" Buffy, and her love interest J.D. manages to out-Spike Spike. I'm sure you will love it.
no subject
I have it! I have it! I rented it from Netflix. Will report back.
no subject
You like Buffy. Girl power cool. Rise up from bad stuff. Ra ra.
no subject