gee whillikers ...

[veronica_rich]

I actually really don't like drama. But it seems if you have an opinion on something, you're a magnet for the stuff - and since I share my opinions freely, I guess I should quit bitching and accept it. *G*

Someone whose journal I read posted a link to discussion. So, I rather stupidly reply to the journal I read, not to the original discussion, which I probably should've done instead: I've never been converted to ANYTHING that I knew I didn't like before reading about it, in fanfic or otherwise, a romantic pairing or otherwise. I know my own mind pretty well that way. There are plenty of things in fiction, however, about which I have had no preexisting opinion until I read a story, and then liked it (or disliked it, as the case may be). (My reply does expand beyond pairings and fanfic into general fiction. Perhaps I didn't make it clear I was only talking about fiction.)

Shortly thereafter, another commenter tells me: Well, that must save you a LOT of thinking time. How efficient of you! Form an opinion and close the subject forever. Next!

I wonder why more folks don't operate on your system (which I call 'Mind Rusted Shut')? Oh, I know! Because *they* aren't too lazy or scared or narrow-minded or whatever to re-think their positions in light of new information received. Huh. Go figure. How wishy-washy of them!

I don't believe it's fair to the person who runs the journal I commented in, to have to put up with this there, since it's not aimed at them. So, if Anonymous wants to trot over here and proceed to convince me why I shouldn't have any solid preferences in my fiction-reading, they're welcome to try.

Comments

Gods, but I love this icon

[sirriamnis.livejournal.com]

(My reply does expand beyond pairings and fanfic into general fiction. Perhaps I didn't make it clear I was only talking about fiction.)

Honestly, I don't think it would have mattered. Remember, the intardweb is serious business.

Re: Gods, but I love this icon

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

If it were politics, I could sort of understand the reactionary mindset. Nobody with a brain wants to be closed-minded about that ... though, I will admit there are certain things I don't believe I'd ever change my mind about in that arena, either. But I'm more likely to read differing opinions on things that will affect the world around me, than to spend my free time on a bit of fluff I know I won't enjoy based on something in the summary or warning.

Re: Gods, but I love this icon

[philosophercat.livejournal.com]

I have observed that people react in similar ways to positions in politics, religion and literature. To disagree in any of these areas leads some people to unfortunate reactionary stances. Very defensive and, in fact, extremely narrow-minded.

Re: Gods, but I love this icon

[erinya.livejournal.com]

In my experience, fandom (at least fandom controversy) is very like politics. Polemics, irrational partisanship, refusal or inability to see things from the other side of the fence, mudslinging, an excess of ego...etc. (Including myself in these descriptions, btw. *g*)

[erinya.livejournal.com]

Oi. Anonymous assheads are the lowest internet lifeform. If you don't have the courage to sign your name (or even a pseudonym!) to your bout of asshattery, you should keep it to yourself. (This is my version of "if you don't have anything nice to say"...if you don't have anything nice to say, and you must say something bitchy, you must also be willing to be held accountable.)

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

It's not like anyone but the most dedicated computer geek could track me down in Real Life - why shouldn't I use "Veronica Rich?" I'm still saying what I want with pretty much impunity, with respect to my real reputation or legal record, etc. ...

[philosophercat.livejournal.com]

Touchy, touchy people out there...

And I am very certain that they have no preferences whatsoever. If one loves a work of fiction, there will be specific reasons for this: ex. when I first read Jane Eyre, I was not at all fascinated by the romance, but rather Jane's spiritual strength, and her strength of character in general. She was shy and isolated but managed to be composed and act when others would have caved in. When I see her portrayed as someone who will chuck her principles for some panting and hot sex, well... that irritates me more than other changes (she is decidedly unattractive, but I am resigned to the fact that everything thinks this is just all in Jane's mind *sigh*).

Being open-minded doesn't have anything to do with it. This sort of thinking leads to bad writing and bad criticism. By such an approach any and all works are equally good. I recall one incident when I was editing poetry for publication. I joined the 'oh ye gods, cut this line!' faction over one particularly horrid line (I think it was: 'boxing: it's a game? Yeah, well so's world domination.'). We were accused of not being able to 'handle' the edginess of this brilliant stab against the Man... or something. That we were trying to censor it... No, it's just lousy writing.

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

Being too open-minded can make one's brain leak out, I think. When a reasonable person says they're open-minded, what that means is that they wouldn't burn a person at the stake for thinking differently than they do, and they might even spend some time considering that POV, but it doesn't require that they *comply* with it. That's where some people get confused - they don't consider thinking about something different good enough. It's that you have to change your mind and agree with it, or you're a narrow-minded git.

[venusinchains.livejournal.com]

If I'm reading this correctly, you said you "have never been converted" not you "would never be converted." Anon has no basis for its argument. (As erinya said, anons tend to be the lowest form of "life" on the internet - devoid of intelligence, certainly not worth engaging in on-line dramatics. :-p)

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

No, I've never been converted. I don't suppose I can tell the future, so I might be at some point - it's unlikely, but even miracles occur. *G*

[a-silver-rose.livejournal.com]

Sucker bet "Anonymous" won't show.

- Silver Rose

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

And they didn't. Coward.

[elibad.livejournal.com]

Wow, that is a pretty broad sweeping generalization anon makes. Not to mention the fact that they are making them based upon one comment (conspiracy theories aside) that end up coming across as that against which they rail, judgmental and close-minded.

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

Well, broad sweeping generalizations are the order of the day around LJ ...