From Fanlore
Jump to: navigation, search

About the reference that Livia deleted and that Lim put back in -- I have to agree with Livia. I read that post and there's nothing in it that says it's talking about Toft's story; the body of the post is written to look like it's talking about trends in SGA fic, and no one in the comments mentions Toft's name or the story title. The only reason I know it was talking about Toft's story is because it was listed as a reference about Toft's story, which is a little tautological. So I'm taking it back out, for that specific reason. --Arduinna 17:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

/me laughs omg. Okay, guys, have it your way. For the curious reader, the link that is being constantly taken out is this public entry by harriet_spy where a number of people have an interesting discussion on a McShep story which is "this week's widely-recced story" where Teyla is cast as "the domestic help" and "the author is English". Of course these are in no way references to String Theory, that week's widely recced McShep fic by an English author where Teyla is cast as Rodney's assistant. Absolutely. (It's also a particularly interesting link because it turns up a full six months before the bulk of the discussions on race in fandom and shows that these conversations were happening for some time before the whole thing blew up in March/April 2007.) Lim 18:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)lim
It's an interesting post and discussion, and I think it should definitely be linked on the Race And Fandom page, I'm just saying -- as someone who doesn't follow lj-based fandom, "this week's widely recced story" doesn't mean anything to me. Neither does "the author is English" or "Teyla is domestic help" -- I don't know Toft or her nationality, and I don't know the story, and Toft's page doesn't describe the story except to say it created controversy. (The title makes it look like it's about quantum physics, to me, even with the "au" attached to it.) And harriet_spy specifically stated in the comments that she didn't intend this to be about any one story, but a trend. Basically, I think this only works as a reference for people who already know exactly what it's referring to, which is why I took it out. --Arduinna 18:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
So you took out the link, which you did not read, because you don't see how it relates to a story...which you have not read. I'm not gonna put the link back in because I don't think it's very important, but I find that to be a bad argument; I can't lie. Lim 19:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)lim
FWIW, to me it was also obvious that the post referred to String Theory. Maybe as part of something more general, but at the very least the argument fits also for that story, so even if it was meant as a general criticism, the post would still criticize Teyla's role in that story too, as one example anyway.--Ratcreature 19:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Not to mention that, in the comments, they point out that Rodney, John, and Zelenka are in an orchestra! But it is a 'complete' coincidence. :p --Emma 18:26, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, the real clincher of it being nothing to do with String Theory, for me anyway, is the comment that goes through Teyla's appearances, in the story-that-is-totally-not-String-Theory, scene by scene. :D Lim 18:49, 22 November 2008 (UTC)lim
I didn't read all the comments; I read the post, skimmed down to the point where someone said "what story? (this week's most recced)" and harriet_spy replied "I seriously don't want to turn this post into a referendum on that story, especially as it's really by far not the worst offender in this category, and I was setting out to make a general point, not pick on one particular example." From there I just searched for "Toft" and "String Theory" on the page to see if anyone else had made it explicit, and no one had. (As I said above to Lim, to me the title looks like it's about quantum physics; it would never have occurred to me to look for the word "orchestra", or to connect that to "String Theory".) I don't doubt you guys at all that it's about the story, but with harriet_spy specifically saying she didn't intend it to be about that one story, and everything so vague... it's just not a great reference, to me. I just don't think that someone looking up a reference should have to hunt around and make inferences about it, when there's another reference out there that clearly names the author. --Arduinna 18:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Arduinna, I totally understand your response -- and in the name of PPOV I'm going to put the link back in; I'll add an annotation in the reference so it's a little less confusing. I think this is an important part of the, er, history of the story, despite its inaccessibility to non-LJ fandom people. (PS unrelatedly, but while we're threading, can I link your essay about how LJ frustrates you to the LJ issues page? I know it's from 2005 but it worked wonders for explaining the concept to me.) --Emma 19:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
The amended cite works fine for me! The context really helps. And good lord, you must be one of maybe two people to ever read that essay. Sure, you can link it -- it's public. :) (And I'm glad it helped explain the concept for you.) --Arduinna 19:28, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean to cause trouble when I removed the link-- I just thought there were better examples of posts that were actually, specifcially referring to Toft's story somewhere besides other people bringing it up in the comments. I agree with Lim, actually, that it is significant and interesting that it shows up so much earlier than the other discussions.

I am, however, going to edit out "a reference to String Theory is what the author had in mind," and move the footnote to reference "part of a larger conversation" -- because unless someone here is a time-travelling mind-reader, "she was specifically thinking about String Theory when she made the post" is not accurate. Believe me, I could name *many* extremely popular stories which, at that time, fit into the general trend harriet_spy was describing, stories in which .... we get the ritual "X could never have liked Z" paragraph, or Z turns out to be so very, very enlightened that all she's interested in is forwarding the romance of X and Y, or she's miraculously shoved out of the way by the plot in some way that doesn't even make sense. Yes, Mary Ellen (thank you, Mary Ellen) comes in and starts discussion String Theory as a specific example, but that doesn't mean the post wasn't about the *general trend*. -- Liviapenn 23:57, 22 November 2008 (UTC)