rivkat: Dean reading (dean reading)
rivkat ([personal profile] rivkat) wrote2014-07-08 09:52 am

SV and nonfiction

So it seems I'm writing a SV story in which your soulmate's name is written on your skin. Clark/Lex of course. Any suggestions for what should be in it? I have a few ideas, but I seek further inspiration.

Evan Wright, Generation Kill: A depressing book about men who mainly joined the Marines because they think it’ll make them men, or don’t have anything more promising to do, and end up going to war in Iraq. The war they go to is dumb, though they don’t care about the whys; they’re both wastefully oversupplied and tragically short on a few crucial things (including batteries for the night vision goggles that can be the difference between life and death). They’re glancingly led and mostly lost in the fog of war, once the war starts. They kill, and sometimes they know they killed civilians and sometimes they just hope it was hostiles, and they tell themselves it’s us or them. It’s just layer on layer of pointless, bloody waste.

Samantha Power, A Problem from Hell: Genocide and America’s lack of response to it from the Turks killing the Kurds onwards (with not much about the Holocaust—while it’s the point of comparison, it’s also almost unaddressable on its own terms in this book). Power argues that American policy has in fact been a success, in that American policy has been to ignore genocides whenever possible. She documents that the same arguments always pop up—we don’t know for sure what’s going on, we couldn’t do anything anyway, if we intervened we’d make it worse—and argues that in many cases more aggressive policies could have done some good. That’s the weakest part of the book, in part because there’s so little evidence of any strong power taking military or military-lite action and actually stopping a genocide. (For some instances, she argues, economic threats could’ve worked, or even un-carried-out threats of military action, but again she doesn’t have much to go on.) As a catalog of unredressed atrocities treated as problems of political management, it’s depressing in a completely different way than Generation Kill, although that book possibly works as an argument against her proposal for more aggressive actions.

Katherine Larsen & Lynn S. Zubernis, Fangasm: Supernatural Fangirls: It took me a while to read this, because of my own intense and unresolved issues surrounding fan-actor contact; it’s a very personal account of the journey to admit one’s fandom; stop or at least limit the shame that women often feel for liking something for ourselves; and also set appropriate boundaries on conduct related to a show produced by other human beings who might seem knowable and even known to thousands of strangers, but have lives of their own. Fangasm is fundamentally about the difficulties of managing relationships that are only metaphorically “negotiated,” and in fact are created out of constant bumping up against one another with not enough repeat players on the fan side (at least). It’s all culture and norms, except no one really agrees on what the culture or norms are. The authors are very positive about fangirl desires, while also acknowledging the dark side of any human community; this all made it impossible for them to write the “official” book they thought they were writing for a while. They offer a pretty biting criticism of “TPTB’s” attempts to control fannish engagement: “Never mind that they are in the business of selling passion and sex and desire. Never mind that they cast impossibly pretty people in their television shows and films. Never mind that they often mount (yeah, pun intended there) over-the-top ad campaigns that emphasize sexual subtext over plot. They don’t seem to have a problem with any of this, but they do seem to have a problem with fans acknowledging it, indulging in it, and celebrating it.”

Especially just after rewatching The Real Ghostbusters and the humiliating treatment of female fans, I was left less forgiving of the “creative” side of the show’s production than the authors are—they’re extremely positive about the good nature of everyone they meet and interview, which I have no doubt is true, but they don’t discuss the thoughts of writers/showrunners other than Kripke and they touch on issues of race and homosexuality but not gender as such. Instead, they endorse the narrative that TPTB forced Bela and Ruby on the creative team, which helped account for the negative reaction to those characters from fandom. Yeah, but misogyny also played a role (and I apply that judgment to the creative team and to fandom), and I wished the authors had addressed that more, though they do focus a lot on the internalized misogyny/devaluing of women’s interests that is related to fannish shame.
vodou_blue: kokeshi green (Default)

[personal profile] vodou_blue 2014-07-08 09:23 pm (UTC)(link)
I really appreciate you posting your thoughts on Fangasm. I've been hemming and hawing about whether I want it or not, so I'm grateful to hear people's thoughts on it.
starlady: Raven on a MacBook (Default)

[personal profile] starlady 2014-07-09 12:20 am (UTC)(link)
I've taught the Power book twice in history of human rights classes. I think the most convincing case is Rwanda--if the U.S., or somebody, had shot out the radio station, it seems quite clear that the violence would have been much less almost immediately. Her other case studies aren't so clear-cut.

What I like about the book is that, if you read it carefully, you can see just how precarious the line between genocide and not-genocide is, and again, the Rwanda case is probably the clearest: when it came to it, people put down their machetes just as readily as they picked them up. I also like that the book demolishes the idea that genocide is unpredictable, inevitable, and/or a result of historical tensions: Power shows that these ideas are all just wrong.
starlady: Raven on a MacBook (Default)

[personal profile] starlady 2014-07-09 12:47 am (UTC)(link)
There's part of me that thinks that Iraq doesn't necessarily fit the paradigm, because it was an intervention without any reason for it. But otoh, does that matter in the end?
kinetikatrue: (Default)

[personal profile] kinetikatrue 2014-07-09 05:23 am (UTC)(link)
So, I guess one of the big questions is: do Kryptonians get soul-mate names? Is it actually a transhumanoid thing? Or just an Earth humans thing? Or an activated by being on Earth and exposed to Earth's environment thing? And what if you could have a place rather than a person as your name?

Clark not having a name and hiding that fact would be the obvious choice with him (or only having a name when exposed to Kryptonite; that could also be fun) - as, I feel, would Lex having a name, but repudiating it, though him having Kal-El rather than Clark could also be a thing (particularly if it were written in the Kryptonian alphabet).

Basically, how much trope bending do you want to do, here? I could probably toss out stuff like this all day and night. *g*