Escapade Con Report, Part 4
Mar. 12th, 2003 06:56 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tenayaSunday morning was the start of another brilliant Oxnard day and the buffet breakfast was deeply appreciated, as was the plentiful seating (always a worry to a perpetually late person.) We skipped the art auction this year as we hadn't bid on anything.
I attended the vid review and found it extremely enlightening and educational. I can
really appreciate these things much better with a second viewing and with the helpful explanations of the docents in charge.
The first panel for me was The Loyalty Kink--Devotion as Aphrodisiac. I hadn't considered this before but it sounded interesting. The mods made lists of popular slash pairings and generally placed them in one of two columns: Loyalty or Enmity. Partners who trust/love each other were in the first column, and pairs that, eh, did not were in the second. Enmity pairs frequently had similar goals but had different strategies on how to achieve them (perpendicular instead of parallel paths.) Enmity pairs frequently respected each other as a worthy adversary/noble enemy. The test of betraying the bonds of loyalty was a popular story theme, but that the betrayal must be personal against the partner rather than just a convenience for the betrayer. The simple testing of the bonds of loyalty did not place the pairing in the enmity column--partner rape was the best example of this. There is also a big following of the redemption fetish for the enmity pairing, redeeming the beloved enemy. A remarkable litmus test was what was more important to the character, ideals/goals/rules or friendship? Enmity pairs had a great deal of intensity to them and it was speculated that slashing these pairings, bringing them over to loyalty, brought that intensity into the relationship, giving them much more sparkage.
My second panel was One True Pairing to Rule Them All--Who says? One of the mods had a theory that fans are either drawn to level of comfort between the characters in a slash pairing or ones that share goals, and they will tend to repeatedly pick the same type of pairing in different fandoms.
The fervor with which OTP fans defended their pairing was thought to be because of the threat that the limited resources of fan output could be diverted elsewhere. That was also the reason that OTP fans tended to attack fans/writers of other pairings, particularly if one of the OTP's character was being used in the rarer pairing. They feared that their pairing would become old hat.
It was generally agreed that the path of OTPness could lead to a serious case of intolerance and narrow-mindedness.
Personally, I find it odd that in HL and SG, the OTP fans *have* 90% of the toys. It seems kind of greedy to work at running off that other 10%. I wonder about fandoms like M7 that have so many pairing possibilities; was there more tolerance to other pairings?
Actually, when I was writing my observations about the Loyalty Kink I got confused and thought the theory that fans would gravitate to the same type of pairing had to do with loyalty vs enmity, which I can see how it happened because the parameters are the same. Even though I cross-pollinated, er, got confused, I had written a bit that I'm still going to include, mainly because I can never leave well enough alone.
One of the mods had a theory that fans usually gravitated to either loyalty or enmity pairings. Someone who liked Blake/Avon, would probably like Clark/Lex and Aragon/Boromir, while those that liked Avon/Vila would probably like Sentinel and Hobbits. Checking over my fandoms I'd have to say that would not hold true for me, but then again, I value friendship over ideals in my favorite characters. Heyes/Curry, Avon/Vila = Loyalty. Duncan/Methos is enmity, right? Methos/Kronos is enmity. Jack/Daniel are loyalty or are they enmity? For the most part they value friendship over goals and trust each other, but then there are moments when it comes right down to it, I think they are both capable of choosing ideals/goals over their friendship as they are both passionate in their strong beliefs. But for 99% of the time, they share goals and have that very comfortable relationship that comes from trusting one another. I heard at the con (and elsewhere) that people would like to know where Mean Jack comes from. Could it be from here? Maybe it's not just to victimize Daniel, but because those fans are drawn to enmity? Or to the test of loyalty kink? And I'm talking about well written, well characterized stories--not bad fic. It's just a theory, a product of a all-nighter.
Hmmm.... I don't know. I'll have to ponder this one for a while.
The last panel was Has Escapade Run Its Course? I've been to all of the Escapades except for 1999 and I think I had taken it for granted. It is a wonderful con and I delight in the purposefully controversial panels, listening to some of the brightest and most eloquent fans debate the hot topics, watching great vids and generally spending a girls weekend out. It was just a given to me that this was the best con out there. I think this panel lit a fire under us all to be more participatory as "appetite is not enough." It also gave Jenn an idea of how much we all valued this con and her efforts, and that Escapade had not jumped the shark. Solutions were ventured to fix some issues.
And I was much relieved that deposits were taken for 2004. Huzzah!
So, this con report is my first effort to turn over a new leaf and be participatory.
I attended the vid review and found it extremely enlightening and educational. I can
really appreciate these things much better with a second viewing and with the helpful explanations of the docents in charge.
The first panel for me was The Loyalty Kink--Devotion as Aphrodisiac. I hadn't considered this before but it sounded interesting. The mods made lists of popular slash pairings and generally placed them in one of two columns: Loyalty or Enmity. Partners who trust/love each other were in the first column, and pairs that, eh, did not were in the second. Enmity pairs frequently had similar goals but had different strategies on how to achieve them (perpendicular instead of parallel paths.) Enmity pairs frequently respected each other as a worthy adversary/noble enemy. The test of betraying the bonds of loyalty was a popular story theme, but that the betrayal must be personal against the partner rather than just a convenience for the betrayer. The simple testing of the bonds of loyalty did not place the pairing in the enmity column--partner rape was the best example of this. There is also a big following of the redemption fetish for the enmity pairing, redeeming the beloved enemy. A remarkable litmus test was what was more important to the character, ideals/goals/rules or friendship? Enmity pairs had a great deal of intensity to them and it was speculated that slashing these pairings, bringing them over to loyalty, brought that intensity into the relationship, giving them much more sparkage.
My second panel was One True Pairing to Rule Them All--Who says? One of the mods had a theory that fans are either drawn to level of comfort between the characters in a slash pairing or ones that share goals, and they will tend to repeatedly pick the same type of pairing in different fandoms.
The fervor with which OTP fans defended their pairing was thought to be because of the threat that the limited resources of fan output could be diverted elsewhere. That was also the reason that OTP fans tended to attack fans/writers of other pairings, particularly if one of the OTP's character was being used in the rarer pairing. They feared that their pairing would become old hat.
It was generally agreed that the path of OTPness could lead to a serious case of intolerance and narrow-mindedness.
Personally, I find it odd that in HL and SG, the OTP fans *have* 90% of the toys. It seems kind of greedy to work at running off that other 10%. I wonder about fandoms like M7 that have so many pairing possibilities; was there more tolerance to other pairings?
Actually, when I was writing my observations about the Loyalty Kink I got confused and thought the theory that fans would gravitate to the same type of pairing had to do with loyalty vs enmity, which I can see how it happened because the parameters are the same. Even though I cross-pollinated, er, got confused, I had written a bit that I'm still going to include, mainly because I can never leave well enough alone.
One of the mods had a theory that fans usually gravitated to either loyalty or enmity pairings. Someone who liked Blake/Avon, would probably like Clark/Lex and Aragon/Boromir, while those that liked Avon/Vila would probably like Sentinel and Hobbits. Checking over my fandoms I'd have to say that would not hold true for me, but then again, I value friendship over ideals in my favorite characters. Heyes/Curry, Avon/Vila = Loyalty. Duncan/Methos is enmity, right? Methos/Kronos is enmity. Jack/Daniel are loyalty or are they enmity? For the most part they value friendship over goals and trust each other, but then there are moments when it comes right down to it, I think they are both capable of choosing ideals/goals over their friendship as they are both passionate in their strong beliefs. But for 99% of the time, they share goals and have that very comfortable relationship that comes from trusting one another. I heard at the con (and elsewhere) that people would like to know where Mean Jack comes from. Could it be from here? Maybe it's not just to victimize Daniel, but because those fans are drawn to enmity? Or to the test of loyalty kink? And I'm talking about well written, well characterized stories--not bad fic. It's just a theory, a product of a all-nighter.
Hmmm.... I don't know. I'll have to ponder this one for a while.
The last panel was Has Escapade Run Its Course? I've been to all of the Escapades except for 1999 and I think I had taken it for granted. It is a wonderful con and I delight in the purposefully controversial panels, listening to some of the brightest and most eloquent fans debate the hot topics, watching great vids and generally spending a girls weekend out. It was just a given to me that this was the best con out there. I think this panel lit a fire under us all to be more participatory as "appetite is not enough." It also gave Jenn an idea of how much we all valued this con and her efforts, and that Escapade had not jumped the shark. Solutions were ventured to fix some issues.
And I was much relieved that deposits were taken for 2004. Huzzah!
So, this con report is my first effort to turn over a new leaf and be participatory.
