on scrap-metal fanning
Feb. 18th, 2019 04:28 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
xparrotI’ve seen it argued that “good” doesn’t have to mean “deep” or “meaningful”; nor does “good” have to be “perfect.” That a work of fiction that is light or silly or flawed can still be “good” or “great” -- and this is totally true; I completely agree with this. (And “good” and “great” are subjective anyway, of course; anyone can argue them of anything.)
But sometimes I love things that I think are not good. I love works of fiction that I also think are trash -- and that’s part of why I love them.
When something is good, I want to appreciate it for what it is. The parts that make me depressed or uncomfortable or angry, I have to find ways to explain, to accept, to excuse.
But something I think is trash, that’s the stuff I’m willing to -- joyfully, without hesitation -- to rip apart, to shred into pieces and pull out the parts that I love. To bend and break and melt down and reshape into what I want.
This ship I love came to a terrible end? Oh, that ending sucked -- here, let me write a better one.
That character I love did something awful? Well, that plot twist was stupid -- listen up, I’ll tell you what they should’ve done.
To me, “trash” doesn’t mean “no redeeming features”; nor does it imply one has no taste -- it means “here is an open bin; take what you want and leave the rest.” And I love it for that.
(cross-posted from tumblr)
But sometimes I love things that I think are not good. I love works of fiction that I also think are trash -- and that’s part of why I love them.
When something is good, I want to appreciate it for what it is. The parts that make me depressed or uncomfortable or angry, I have to find ways to explain, to accept, to excuse.
But something I think is trash, that’s the stuff I’m willing to -- joyfully, without hesitation -- to rip apart, to shred into pieces and pull out the parts that I love. To bend and break and melt down and reshape into what I want.
This ship I love came to a terrible end? Oh, that ending sucked -- here, let me write a better one.
That character I love did something awful? Well, that plot twist was stupid -- listen up, I’ll tell you what they should’ve done.
To me, “trash” doesn’t mean “no redeeming features”; nor does it imply one has no taste -- it means “here is an open bin; take what you want and leave the rest.” And I love it for that.
(cross-posted from tumblr)
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 12:47 am (UTC)I think I also tend to focus only on the good/loved parts and either completely nope out and ignore or "fix" the bad stuff, and so I don't have that kind of experience with my own fandoms, no matter how far they are from "great art". Even the stuff I've seen that is objectively not good that I drew enjoyment from I wouldn't think of as trash. What I think of as trash is basically stuff I would never want to watch again, or fan again, and wish didn't exist.
ETA: I also don't consider "scrap-metal" to be trash, which might explain why the idea of scrap-metal fanning and digging through a pile of it to find something neat feels completely different. And of course I do not expect to convince you not to feel the way you do, I'm just providing a different POV :)
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:09 am (UTC)This is pretty much exactly how I feel. Thank you for articulating it for me!
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:10 am (UTC)For me, I like having some word for it, because there are different connotations for me. Sort of, "bad" vs "good" and "quality" vs "trash" are two different axes? Something can be "good trash" or "bad trash."
Would "junk" work better for you? like junk food -- junk food can be delicious or awful; either way no one is going to argue Doritos are gourmet cuisine -- but sometimes you just love eating them anyway...!
I also don't consider "scrap-metal" to be trash, which might explain why the idea of scrap-metal fanning and digging through a pile of it to find something neat feels completely different.
Yeah, but for me, with the shows etc. I'm thinking of, it's not digging through a pile of nifty scrap-metal -- it's digging through a pile of bad stuff that I don't like, that I think is dumb/boring/annoying/whatever -- to pull out the cool things I love. I'm thinking of things like a cop show that 75% of is badly-done cliche plot stuff -- but those 25% of character interaction, DAMN worth it!
Which, not everyone has fandoms like this! But for me, they're fun...
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:26 am (UTC)I feel about it like Sholio describes below? Like, it's not something I would conceive of as terminology to describe anything I was fannish about, even if it was 1% of the thing that made it awesome. I would only describe something as trash that I actively hated and wanted to set on fire. XD
Even 'junk' feels a little too harsh for me personally.
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:53 am (UTC)But if you don't do this, if you find it easier to just completely ignore the parts you don't like, then it doesn't make sense. And feels pointlessly judgmental?
(also, I guess it depends on your personal associations with "trash," whether you think of it as something that should all be burned, or if dumpster-diving at least in theory has some appeal? Like, I think of a trash pile as probably having a lot of stuff that can still be useful, if you take the time to pull it out and do something with it. Have you ever seen WALL-E? and his little pile of treasures? But if trash is purely to be discarded, then the term makes less sense.)
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 02:12 am (UTC)Like there was an anime I watched a long time ago called "Weiss Kreuz" which is about...assassins posing as florists and some telepathic/precog/telekinetic enemies they face. *coughs* It was objectively terrible but damn I loved that fandom. I don't think I've ever really thought of the terrible aspects of it. Assassins as florists? Yep, sign me up, makes total sense to me! That's the universe we're visiting when we're fanning this show! And that's how I feel about all fandoms I fan, no matter how ridiculous.
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 03:53 am (UTC)It was objectively terrible but damn I loved that fandom. -- this is pretty much the exact definition of what I think of "trash." (which doesn't preclude there being objectively good things amidst the terrible -- it's just the terrible is the greater portion. But it's still worth it!)
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:13 am (UTC)But I think part of it is ...
When something is good, I want to appreciate it for what it is. The parts that make me depressed or uncomfortable or angry, I have to find ways to explain, to accept, to excuse.
See, I guess ... I don't really -- well, I was going to say I don't feel the need to do that, but since I do sometimes do that, I'd say that I definitely don't think I feel any more need to do that with something that's "good" than something that's not. I'd more think something that I consider really brilliant just wouldn't have things like that, or at least very few things like that, and I don't really feel the need to explain them away so much as just accept it how it is and maybe talk about it a little bit. Like ... the Wonder Woman movie is a good example of this, because I do think it's a really brilliant movie, but I have also seen criticism that it's ableist in how it deals with the villain's facial scars. I agree with this. I think they're right. But it also doesn't really impact my enjoyment of the movie, which is all about other aspects of it. I don't feel the need to justify it. I don't think it can be justified; they're not wrong! But it's still a good movie!
I think the way I typically deal with this, since most of the canons I fan on are flawed in various ways and sometimes in major ways, is that I just don't want to discuss the flaws, and especially not discuss them in detail. I know they're there. I don't always agree with the criticisms (in fact sometimes I think the critics are flat wrong XD) but when I'm in squee mode on a thing, I just don't want to have those super-critical discussions -- unless it's gently and lovingly taking it apart with someone who also loves it. That's more fun. But even there, it's like ... I know there are flaws. But it's my baby. I don't want to hear about my baby's flaws; I just want to focus on the things about my baby that are sweet and adorable and make me happy.
I tend to fan on things by throwing myself into a pile of feels with a loud "SQUEE!" noise. XD
And it's not precisely that I don't want to talk about my canons analytically because I can go on for 12 paragraphs about the exact significance of the color of a character's tie in episode 92, but what I don't really want to do is analyze in depth everything it did wrong. I have a lot of fun doing that with canons I'm only marginally into, taking them apart and talking about all their good and bad parts, but for stuff I'm really into, I tend to see them through highly selective rose-colored glasses. I know the flaws are there. I just don't really want to dwell on them.
So calling it trash or garbage is kind of like ... does not compute? For me? Because I can really only see the good parts. There might be stuff I want to take apart and write differently, but it's still coming from a place of love. If I could only see the trashy garbage parts, I wouldn't be a fan of it.
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:41 am (UTC)The things I'm thinking of, when I say "trash," I'm not calling them that to call out their flaws, to focus on what's bad. In fact, for me, terming them "trash" is basically doing the opposite of that? It's a shorthand of saying, "Yes, I know this thing is deeply flawed in all manner of ways. It's so flawed that I'm not even going to bother arguing it's good...but there are parts of it I love, look at how much fun it is!"
I don't think everything I love or fan is trash, far from. Nor do I love everything I think of as trash. (and I'd give examples but uhhhh that seems like it would get me into more trouble...?)
The things I am thinking of when I say trash, are canons that have a LOT of stuff that I don't like. Like, whole plotlines I'll fastforward through, whole episodes I'll ignore the existence of. A lot of stuff I (personally, subjectively) feel is badly written, badly executed. But some of these things I love anyway for particular elements that I do like.
...I kind of feel like some of this is changing fandom standards. Like, in the '90s, most of the shows I fell for hardest fannishly were...I'll say it. The Sentinel was a bad show. Its plots were cliche, the acting was so-so at best and awful at worst, its politics were cop-show, it was sexist, etc, etc. But the super-subtext slashy relationship of the lead partners? That was GOLD. Gold, amid trash.
Right now, there are maybe less shows like this -- or maybe there's more pressure to not enjoy shows like this? that you should only be liking quality stuff? But there was something really fun about enjoying The Sentinel, about watching it in breathless fannish wonder for those 5 minutes of character gold, and laughing at the ridiculous stupidity of the rest of it. Those moments felt all the more special -- and it meant that I would just cheerfully fastforward or talk over the rest. I didn't care about most of the show -- just the parts I liked. When I say "trash" that's what I mean.
--and to contrast with another '90s show, I adore Babylon 5, and I will FIGHT if someone calls it trash -- for all its super-dated f/x and sometimes awful guest stars. But those flawed parts I cringe and try to ignore, and focus on all the good stuff. While as something that's trash, I just giggle and grin over the unintentional silliness of it. That's part of the entertainment of it for me.
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:50 am (UTC)That's an interesting way to see it. I think I basically giggle and grin over the unintentional "bad" parts of everything? Like, Avengers for example -- the part where Natasha is talking in "russian" are hilariously bad. The part where her name is 'Romanov' which would NEVER work in a Russian setting unless she was a man (she has to be 'Romanova' if she's female, them's the rules). Those are objectively bad things about an otherwise good movie. But when I think about it, in my head, it's as if those parts don't exist? Someone clearly made a mistake transmitting the ideas to the screen, and the signal I got is scrambled and in reality Natasha speaks perfect Russian and her surname makes sense and in my MCU that's the way things are and I never have to think about them being otherwise? (I adore MCU and don't want to discuss negative aspects, this just seems like a great example for the conversation).
ETA: Like I don't wanna go Plato on you, but it's the difference between the platonic idea of the thing and the instance/execution, almost? Like, in the idea (of a particular show) it's a great thing, and maybe some things aren't perfect in what I'm seeing (on my actual screen) but I don't have to worry about that, because I'll enjoy the parts that did come across well. And I can find the discrepancies between idea and execution funny or cringe-worthy but it's not something I think of as trash.
Whereas if I do think the idea (of a particular show) is terrible, no matter how flawless the execution is, I'm still gonna want to set it on fire?
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 02:28 am (UTC)... OMG, I think you just nailed something I had never thought about, but I think writing the Platonic ideal of a show is EXACTLY what I do. It's the difference between knowing the flaws are there in canon, and happily mocking them/being aware of them (or just ignoring them) but going ahead and writing fanfic as if the Platonic ideal were the actual show itself.
Don't get me wrong here, I don't think it's possible for fanfic to be better than the actual source material. This is the other hill I'll die on. XD The flaws are always still there. But writing from the Platonic ideal version of the show is a pretty good description of what it feels like, and I think that's why talking about the flaws too much when I'm in full-on squee mode is actively detrimental to my squee, because I'm actually SEEING the platonic ideal in my head, more than the flawed version on the screen. So calling my attention to those flaws makes me more aware of them, both in the show and in my writing as well, and blows up the platonic ideal that exists in my head. It's like, "I was really loving writing this fic until YOU STARTED TELLING ME HOW TERRIBLE IT IS." XD I think I need to be able to see the "best parts" version in order to keep up my enthusiasm for what I'm writing. I have to believe that what I'm writing is the Best Thing Ever while I'm working on it, even if I know it's a sort of mental trick that I'm playing on myself, or I lose enthusiasm and my writing mojo goes off a cliff.
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 03:46 am (UTC)And I also do giggle over the unintentional "bad" things in most things I enjoy. I think what makes something "trash" for me is perhaps...quantity?
Like, I'll think of something as "trash" if over 50% of the time I'm watching it, I'm giggling over unintentional stupidity (that's an arbitrary percentage, but you get the idea!)
For me, "good trash" is something that I genuinely love the platonic ideal that exists in my head, but -- in my opinion! -- the execution is so far off from that ideal that I'm mentally rewriting big chunks of it. Often that mean putting way more thought into it than the show creators did -- a lot of what I think of as trash are shows put out quickly on a low budget. They speed through plot points and skip over relationship development but occasionally they hit these moments that just move me.
And the thing is, I often engage with those fandoms somewhat differently than I do things I love that I think are genuinely "good". Like, I'm way less likely to write fic for something I think is amazingly written, because it's hard, I'll feel much more like I have to stay true to canon -- there's so much I love that I want to preserve. It's much more freeing to write fic for a canon I don't have so much respect for, because if I get some details wrong, eh, the canon itself contradicted itself in three places, so here's a fourth way; and killing that character was just stupid, so *poof* she's alive now!
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 02:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-20 12:41 pm (UTC)But to clarify, what I was saying about it being easier to write for canons I don't think are as high quality -- that doesn't have anything to do with whether I want to "fix" them or not? Sometimes my fic is "fixing" but sometimes it's just wanting to explore something more. It's more, if I think a canon is really good, I have a greater desire to be true to it. And that makes it harder to write. Like, I love LotR, but I've only ever written one fic for it -- and I wouldn't do it again, because it was hard, and I felt...inadequate, trying to capture everything I love about it in my writing.
While as a show that I think is fun but also pretty ridiculous and not very well written, I feel a lot more comfortable writing, because I'm reasonably confident I can do as much justice to the chars as the show does itself (if not more, in some cases! :P)
(This isn't always true, mind -- I think the writing of Welcome to Night Vale is quite brilliant and I still wrote a ton of fic for it, and I think it was good for my writing because trying to imitate its tone somewhat pushed me a bit...)
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 02:22 am (UTC)I think for me, it's got something to do with the way that I prefer to focus on the parts I like and terminology like that makes me more aware of the parts I didn't like than I really want to be, if that makes any sense. And I still just ... okay, so, I can learn to roll with different fannish terminology, but the hill I will die on is that I maintain that qualities like "fun" and "joy" are objectively good qualities, and a show that's able to produce those feelings in me is clearly doing something right, even if it's not exactly All That in other areas. No show that can make me love its characters as much as some shows do can possibly be bad because even if parts of it are bad, parts of it are clearly Good as well. Which is why I guess I prefer using terms like dopey-but-fun to describe shows like that.
I totally think you're quite right that general overall quality of TV has gone up a lot over the last 15-20 years. The writing and acting and budgets and set design and all of that is a lot better than it used to be. (Even the stunt work! Vidding MacGyver for Festivids, I kept noticing how obviously the stunt people were definitely not the actors! I ended up leaving out some of the action scenes because it's like "... okay, out of context, you literally cannot tell who that's supposed to be.")
... but I still don't think I'd call it trash? I dunno ... I think it really does just come down to differing terminology and me feeling uncomfortable using a term like that for stuff I like. I think for me, "trash" just ... it feels too judgy, it puts too much of a focus on the bad parts and elides the good parts -- for me. When I say that, it feels like I'm saying there is nothing good about it, there's only bad (even though I understand that it doesn't work that way for you!) and it makes me feel sad for my little shows and want to hug them and treat them nicely. XD
But I get that it's not working that way for you, and I really do appreciate the in-depth explanation; it's helpful at being more okay with people using terminology like that in fandom!
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 04:17 am (UTC)When I say that, it feels like I'm saying there is nothing good about it, there's only bad (even though I understand that it doesn't work that way for you!) and it makes me feel sad for my little shows and want to hug them and treat them nicely.
Awww, yeah, I can see that? For me it's easier because I don't know anyone who actually uses "trash" to describe something they completely don't like -- I only ever hear it used affectionately, or semi-affectionately. And then I do find it a useful shorthand. It also functions as sort of a warning? If I say something is "trash" that means that if you watch it with me, I am going to spend at least 50% of it MST3King the shit out of it and laughing at everything wrong -- and then without warning shouting OMG WATCH WATCH THIS IS THE BEST LOOK AT HOW HE'S ALMOST CRYING BUT SWALLOWING IT BACK. While as if you're someone who only can enjoy something by taking it seriously and ignoring its flaws...it's maybe not a good thing to watch with me? ^^;
the hill I will die on is that I maintain that qualities like "fun" and "joy" are objectively good qualities, and a show that's able to produce those feelings in me is clearly doing something right, even if it's not exactly All That in other areas. No show that can make me love its characters as much as some shows do can possibly be bad because even if parts of it are bad, parts of it are clearly Good as well.
I agree with this, buuuuuut...I think something can have genuinely good qualities and still be overall pretty terrible? Doing something right doesn't necessarily mean doing enough right. Most of the shows I think of as "trash" I would recommend to a limited audience, because they're basically like, okay, these one or two things, if they're what you like, are AMAZING, like, they're just what you want. HOWEVER all these other things are so annoying that unless the good things hit your exact buttons, you are probably going to at best be bored by and at worst hate the show. And I don't want you to hate the show, because I love it, so...
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 05:43 am (UTC)Hee. You know, honestly, I think the metric by which this makes the most sense to me is "how many people would you recommend this to, and how many caveats would you put on it." I don't think there's anything I would just recommend to EVERYONE - I mean, all recs are at least somewhat selective - but there's definitely a sliding scale of things I would recommend to most people I know, perhaps with a caveat or two, and things that I only recommend to a few people if I know they're into one of its tropes and caveats all over the place, and occasionally things that I actively try to talk some people out of watching because OH GOD THEY'RE GOING TO WATCH THIS AND JUDGE ME. XD (Did someone say: Iron Fist.)
(Though to be fair, it's not just quality - there are a few things I rarely recommend to people because they're so intensely personal to me that I can't bear the idea of anyone not liking them and don't even really want to discuss them because my feelings on them are so incredibly ... specific. Agent Carter is like that; I'm not even sure that I actually enjoy discussing it with anyone except a few people because it's just such a heart-fandom for me, in a way that nothing else really is that I've encountered as an adult. A few of my kid-fandoms are like that too. Ironically this means that I'm actually better at getting people into things in inverse proportion to how into them I am. Or at least in direct proportion to my clear-eyed-ness about their flaws - I think I've actually managed to drag more people into Iron Fist with me than anything else I've watched in the last few years, because I COMPLETELY understand if people bounce off it, so I've been just kind of shoving it at people in the understanding that like half of them are probably not going to like it and I'm totally cool with that. At the same time, it slammed like a freight train into my id in a certain way that I don't think anything has done since White Collar.)
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 06:20 am (UTC)HAH. ...but yes. This.
FWIW, not having seen Iron Fist yet, but from everything I've heard, it sounds like what I might call "trash" and mean it in the best of ways. Because basically what I've heard is a lot of people going "ugh it's just terrible" and then a bunch of people going "okay it's terrible BUT it's also fantastic!" and that to me is "trash" in a nutshell. Really iddy things are often trashy -- not always, and a lot of things I really love that I also think are "quality" entertainment also hit my id. But what I think of as "good trash" are mostly things that hit my id hard and...miss everything else? They're the things that I'm kind of embarrassed about liking and yet unabashedly will squee about LOVING THEM SO MUCH.
There's also this funny effect for my "trash" that when it does do something well -- like, a bit of accidentally clever storytelling, or actors who rise way above their material -- I'll be so proud, like, look what my poor dumb show did! so brilliant! isn't that amazing!?
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 02:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:44 am (UTC)Though more than that, it's a way to say "this has bad parts that are part of the fun of it" -- it's not meant to be a comedy, but if I see it as "trash," then this stupid bit of writing becomes, not frustrating, but hilarious!
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:28 am (UTC)Mmmm, dumpster-diving.
no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 01:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 05:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 06:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 06:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 04:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-02-19 04:31 am (UTC)(though calling something a "trash garbage show" is more likely to be meant affectionately than not, in my experience. For a lot of this terminology context is everything!)
no subject
Date: 2019-02-20 12:42 am (UTC)That's generally way I hear those words used for popular culture - the difference between "trashy novels" and "that's just garbage" is big. Shades of meaning. Now that I think of what actually goes into the trash/garbage, I realize I interpret "trash" as broken objects, packaging materials, empty toothpaste tubes, etc., while I interpret "garbage" as anything stinky and likely to rot.
LOL, yes, I would interpret "trash garbage show" as affectionate as well. It's definitely context.