Why no Harry Potter, eh?

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

So I looked at ONTD's "Ten of the most Epidemically Overrated Books," and was incensed to find that books like On the Road and The Great Gatsby made the list but the Harry Potter series didn't (though at least the Twilight series did). I mean really, Harry Potter is the epitome of an overrated book series, given that there are people seriously making the point that it's so deep and meaningful and needs to be read in AP English classes. Never mind that it's a children's book series!

Well, these were the people who said that a bunch of authors besides Rowling disliked the idea of fanfiction without bothering to consider WHY they might feel that way (specifically, that Rowling is the only one who's all that fandom savvy because she's modern in a way that the others aren't). Maybe they just think Rowling is their darling author too, and you can't say anything bad about her.

Comments

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

Because as a regular in the Pokemon fandom I see similar complaints about the fans being jerkasses to one another. It seems like there are some fandoms that attract that kind of bad publicity and others that don't. Do you think it's the size of the fandom? Or the fact that there are so many kids in the fandom who might not always be mature? Or is it a combination, or something else entirely?

As a longtime member of the Sherlock Holmes fandom, I just don't get this. This kind of vicious infighting is almost nonexistent in that fandom. Some fans believe Holmes slept with Irene Adler, others (like me) don't, but I've never seen anybody personally attack anyone else over believing that. And despite the overwhelming evidence Holmes and Watson were straight, there are still shippers who pair them. They even have their own websites (Cox & Co. being one) where they post sexually explicit fanfic about their "secret love." Most fans consider that arrant nonsense, but they don't rip off anybody's head over it.

Of course, the SH fandom attracts only the highly intelligent and well-educated. (I am referring to fans of the original stories, not those hideous trashworks by that King person. Those books attract HP level dimwits. I always say those are SH books for people who aren't smart enough to be real SH fans.) Highly intelligent and educated people seem to be less aggressive and hellbent on proving their points than the general population anyway. IOW, they find it much easier and less threatening to discuss contrary ideas than most people. A lot of them actually consider it entertaining to explore way out ideas.

The rabid canon whores of the HP fandom do seem to be less intelligent than the questioners. For example, I needed a dose of rank stupidity a few months ago, so I looked at dedfromsnake. One of the members had ripped into the post I made about the AU scenario of Tom Riddle being a spiritually-developed social reformer. This um, person--I'm trying really hard not to call names here--insisted that I had called JKR both an American and a Tea Partier. Not just once, but multiple times! Never mind that I've never said that even once, and I'll pay $50 US cash money to anyone who can prove I have. Never mind there was no reference at all to JKR in that entire post. Not one person in that entire forum said, "Um, what are you talking about? She's never said anything like that. There's certainly nothing like that in this post you're citing." Nope. They all eagerly jumped on the bandwagon, trying to outdo each other in talking about how stupid, mean, and crazy I am. Anyone who lacks (1) such basic reading comprehension skills and (2) the ability to think independently is clearly of inferior intellect. That's not a personal attack; it's a statement of fact.

TBC

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/One of the members had ripped into the post I made about the AU scenario of Tom Riddle being a spiritually-developed social reformer. This um, person--I'm trying really hard not to call names here--insisted that I had called JKR both an American and a Tea Partier./

Seriously? I remember your post and I don't remember you mentioning JKR at all. The only American that you talked about was an American evangelist. And I don't know how on earth one could gather that you were calling JKR an American - and a Tea Partier at that! How did an AU hypothetical about Tom Riddle turn into an assumption about JKR's nationality and political affiliation? (To be honest, I'm surprised that you weren't accused of being a blind Tom Riddle/Voldemort fangirl for suggesting what would have happened if he had been a good person. )

By the way, are the members of dedfromsnake the same people who were members of HMS STFU?

[kahran042]

I'm pretty sure that they are.

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

Seriously? I remember your post and I don't remember you mentioning JKR at all.

That's because I didn't. Unlike them, you have good reading comprehension.

How did an AU hypothetical about Tom Riddle turn into an assumption about JKR's nationality and political affiliation?

I don't get that either, unless one assumes that any reference to an American evangelical must necessarily refer to the Tea Party. (The book I quoted was published in 2003, several years before the TP existed. And I made it clear the minister was quite liberal in his views.) Even so, I don't know where they fit JKR in there, unless one assumes that any reference to her books must necessarily refer to her, also.

(To be honest, I'm surprised that you weren't accused of being a blind Tom Riddle/Voldemort fangirl for suggesting what would have happened if he had been a good person. )

I kind of was. A few of them kept squealing, "But Voldemort is a bad guy! It says that right in the books! How can she not get that?" Never mind that I'd made it clear that I did get that, and I was proposing an AU scenario. Again, poor reading comprehension.

By the way, are the members of dedfromsnake the same people who were members of HMS STFU?

Yes. That's the forum they started to keep their idiocy going after they closed STFU out of embarrassment at getting hoist with their own petard.

[oryx_leucoryx]

after they closed STFU out of embarrassment at getting hoist with their own petard

What was that about? (Only the short version, if possible.)

So does this mean Severus fans are the greatest threat to Rowlingbots? I thought STFU was against all unorthodox interpretations and ships.

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/So does this mean Severus fans are the greatest threat to Rowlingbots? I thought STFU was against all unorthodox interpretations and ships./

Maybe they think that the belief that Severus is a hero is an unorthodox interpretation? *shrugs*

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

Given that people apply the "Draco in Leather Pants" trope to Snape on TVTropes (for the record, "Draco in Leather Pants" specifically refers to overlooking or ignoring the evil deeds of a VILLAIN), I'd say that might just be right.

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/I kind of was. A few of them kept squealing, "But Voldemort is a bad guy! It says that right in the books! How can she not get that?" Never mind that I'd made it clear that I did get that, and I was proposing an AU scenario./

Maybe they see Voldemort as so evil that there's no chance that he could ever be good, not even in an AU scenario. Or they feel that such a scenario undermines Voldemort's role as villain.

/Yes. That's the forum they started to keep their idiocy going after they closed STFU out of embarrassment at getting hoist with their own petard./

What exactly happened? (Unlike Oryx, I don't mind a long version of the events) I'm not that familiar with HMS STFU, so I don't know why or how they closed.

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

Maybe they see Voldemort as so evil that there's no chance that he could ever be good, not even in an AU scenario. Or they feel that such a scenario undermines Voldemort's role as villain.

Yeah, I guess, like people who get upset if you point out that Hitler was horribly abused, and that played a role in turning him into a monster. It doesn't excuse his evilness by any means, but the point of researching people like that is to figure out why they turned out that way, so you can find ways to prevent it in the future. But people who think in strictly black-or-white (i.e., extremely childish and unsubtle) terms seem to believe that any reference to a villain being not villainous, even if its clearly an AU, is some kind of denial of their villainy. Of course, if Voldemort weren't such a lame villain, it wouldn't be so easy to undermine him.

I know I talk a lot about Warriors, but they handled this so much better regarding their major villain, Tigerclaw. He's never been depicted as "born irredeemably evil." Instead, he was shown as a smart, strong-willed kitten who was abandoned by his father in a particularly shameful way, and who came under the influence of a bad mentor, who encouraged his worst tendencies. Nobody in the Warriors fandom has suggested that makes him an inferior villain, or suggested it's wrong to have sympathy for him. Even his creators have written positive things about him. No only that, on the official site, there are threads for fans who rave about how great he is, and talk about how much they hate the major series hero, Fireheart. Those fans are not attacked by rabid canon whores, unlike HP. Warriors fans are like the SH fans in that way.

Hmmm. I guess that means Warriors fans are smarter than HP fans. Hah!

TBC

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

All I can tell you about why the STFU closed is what they put in their last mod post, which is quoted below in its entirety.

Dear the_hms_stfu members,

This comm has been running for a long time - we've been on JF since September 2005, and were on LJ before that. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince had just come out, and canon deniers were wanking up a storm. Gradually that died down, but the Snapewives were there to pick up the slack.

For a while, though, we've been running on empty. J. K. Rowling gave us the last piece of the canon in 2007, apart from little bits in interviews and the Scottish Book (and who knows when that's going to be published). The crazy shippers have dispersed or locked down, and the Snapewife fervor has been replaced by a kind of forced-but-determined refusal to make any sense. Gone are the days of total batshit insanity and really memorable wank.

And recently we've had a few wanks of our own. Kind of serious ones, too, that have gotten us on unfunny_fandom and made us look bad. That plus the unexceptional nature of what tends to get posted here has made us reconsider the future of this comm. We have decided that the_hms_stfu has had a good run, but it is time for it to close. There will be no new posts here, and you will have to go to dedfromsnake for your Snapewank fix.

Yours,

the mods

(ETA: Thanks for your kind words, you guys. We'll always have Paris!)

What that says to me is, (1) we don't have as many outlets for our mean-spirited ridicule any more, so things are getting boring, and (2) we've been embarrassed by having our fellow piranhas turn on us. Since we can dish it out but can't take it, we're shutting down.

Of course, DFS doesn't just concentrate on Snape-related stuff; it operates the same as STFU, so they can't even be honest and consistent about that.

They're really a pathetic bunch, not worthy of contempt, just sad head-shaking--kind of like Tush Limbo calling women who use birth-control pills sluts.

[harpsi-fizz.livejournal.com]

Alright, I'm going to Google to get more of the story, but if you could direct me to posts on the subject, please do. I'm very, very happy to hear that they've closed, and I'm joyfully dancing here. They were needlessly rude to their fellow fans and reading these two parts

recently we've had a few wanks of our own. Kind of serious ones, too, that have gotten us on unfunny_fandom and made us look bad
(Note: I'm sorry, but you people go into shires like Portkey, specific places where fans go to be left alone and enjoy themselves, and you raid their forums to mock them? You are bad. It's one thing if it's a public pan-fandom forum, but when you go to a place like Portkey, you're legit looking for things that will make you angry. That is inexcusably bullying and I defy you to state one reason why it's ok to do that. You can't. You're wrong. You are bullying and you know it and you know in your hearts that you were 100% in the wrong.)

For a while, though, we've been running on empty.

I think it serves them right. That's just what they deserve. Hah. How does it feel now, HMS? Not so much fun to be on the other side, is it? I hope while it was happening you thought about how you treated other people.

What, BTW, is The Scottish Book? Is that Book 7? Did they not like it? If they didn't, then that's hilarious and I have no sympathy. Again, they deserve everything they got. All the bad feelings they generated they got fed right back to them and I'm not one bit sorry.

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

There's also an HP wank blog that seems to be tracking our blog just to make fun of us. I don't know if they're the same people, though.

[harpsi-fizz.livejournal.com]

If so, I hope they read this comment.

To be honest, at this point, everyone on LJ has sated themselves and realized that what Suzy Q down the street ships has no impact on what they ship. LJ-Potter has (finally) largely grown up adopted the "ship and let ship" mentality.

Other sites with users who don't have to worry about being held accountable for what they say still have pockets of infants with "wah he made a face at me!" mentality. I don't know what blog you're talking about, and I don't want to know. They aren't fans of the book, whoever they are. Real fans don't get all bent out of shape over someone saying something "mean" about their book. Real fans don't waste their time looking for people who say "I don't like this about this book". Real fans can't be threatened by someone else's dislike of the series itself. Real fans spend their time immersed in the thing itself, not in the activity of other people.

(I hope this doesn't sound scold-y; I mean it to sound reassuring) Let's not spend any more of our word space on insecure people like that, because they literally have nothing to do with Harry Potter. They have to do with watching other people watch Harry Potter. We are enjoying the books our way, and nothing they say can change or undo that.

[oryx_leucoryx]

The Scottish Book was Rowling's nickname for the promised (or threatened :) encyclopedia. Currently no longer on the table.

[harpsi-fizz.livejournal.com]

I guess some people would be all "baw" about what you said, but your endorsement of the original series made me kinda want to read it. I love stories where there's no sexual/romantic storyline (like "Three Men in a Boat" by Jerome K Jerome). I've really cooled off to shipping for some reason. The only thing that makes me hesitate is the "overwhelming evidence Holmes and Watson were straight" part, because it makes me antsy about a possible love-line. I guess it's unrealistic of me to hope for a totally asexual-aromantic storyline, but I do, and it makes me sad.

(I am referring to fans of the original stories, not those hideous trashworks by that King person. Those books attract HP level dimwits. I always say those are SH books for people who aren't smart enough to be real SH fans.)
I have no idea what you're talking about and can't comment fairly, but I thiiiiink I know what you mean. Shippable material seems, to me, to be brainless. All coupling things to me read as gratuitous stuff shoehorned in (when I write that, "The Austere Academy" always comes to mind; I am not exaggerating when I say that until I read that book, I didn't understand what is meant by "insulting to the audience's intelligence". I legitimately felt it). I know that's not fair, but that's just how I personally see it. I'm picky, I know. I've been ruined by fandom. I indulged in the sweets of shipping for too many years and now can only digest couples that look like "good friends who occasionally kiss".

(Sorry for the tl;dr rant)