Talk:History of Slash Fandom

From Fanlore
Jump to: navigation, search

Interesting quote about one zine fan's perspective of slash as "underground" phenomenon:

When Starsky/Hutch slash came into the picture things became much more secretive and exclusive. Certain persons turned in S/H material to TPTB, and there were negative consequences. That’s when slash truly went underground and I’m sure that’s when the mentoring process began and came into its own. And that, along with George Lucas’ edicts, was also the beginning of the fannish paranoia of being ‘outed’. (Individual people, of course, have always had specific individual reasons for privacy.)[1]

--æþel 23:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Could someone explain why in the page's history section a lot of the previous edits are crossed out? Thanks, --KTJ (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I think it was a name/identity revision/protection thing? Yeah?--MPH (talk) 20:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Question Re deletions

I am feeling a bit slow today, so apologies if this is obvious. This example (a direct quote) was removed.

One example of how hard it is to draw a line between "slash" and "gen" is this review of the 1980 gen zine, Enter-comm #2:
It is beautifully put-together, with a certain slant towards K/S relationship stories, though not X or even R-rated, and is obviously done with a great deal of love... 'Difference That is No Difference' is the third in a series of stories by Sue Stuart which started in one of the Gropes. The premise: what would have happened to Kirk and Spock if Kirk had been forced to stay in Janice Lester's body? If one is able to suspend belief (something that is often quite necessary in K/S oriented stories), the idea works very well. Source: a review of Enter-comm #2 from a fan in Universal Translator #5

Direct quotes with specific examples are generally preferable to uncited/general statements, so am I missing something? Even if not all fans agree with the premise the quote is supporting, PPOV?MeeDee (talk) 19:38, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Never mind, I *am* slow. I see what we've done: My only suggestion is to put a link to the page next to the discussion of how the term has been used in the 1970s. MeeDee (talk) 20:15, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
OK, did it! Thank you. --KTJ (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)