Those were the days, my friend...

Finished my queer_fest Babylon 5 story last night; it's off to be beta'd, but the posting date isn't until June 1st, so there's no hurry. Going back to the B5verse once in a while, and in this case specifically to the Centauri, with Vir at the center of it, feels like getting back into very comfortable worn slippers. Though due to the prompt I was actually able to do something with the Centauri that I hadn't done before, so - old slippers with new soles? (And now I'm nearly at Londo's dancing metaphor from s1, Great Maker, as he would say.) Anyway, the other reason why writing it, delving back into the B5 verse felt so great is that it was and as far as I know still is blessedly free of shipper wars. Of course, no sooner have I written this that I expect someone to tell me that I'm wrong about this and that I totally missed the epic battles between Susan/Talia and Susan/Marcus shippers, or the mighty war between John/Delenn and Delenn/Lennier shippers, due to not hanging out in the Ivanova or Minbari centric corners of fandom enough in my Centauri and Narn centric fannish life, but - I really don't think that's how B5 fandom spent its time, back in the day, or spends its time now.

(Every time I feel like growling "a pox on romance and our cultural obsession with it that poisons storylines and fannish discourse", though, I remind myself that I'm not immune, that there are romances both textual and subtextual I was/am rooting for and enjoy(ed), and that some of these are probably just as annoying or incomprehensible in their attraction to other people.)

(I will say that I remain eternally grateful Londo was not played by a hot young actor but the divine and decidedly middle aged, plumb and not at all pretty Peter Jurasik. It meant the "omg why so mean to the hottie!?!? Death score what death score?!? Must pair him with *insert character also played by young and attractive actor*!!" crowd stayed away from what is still my favourite fall and redemption storyline on tv.)

****

With two movies about to be released and a third finished with an uncertain release date, Joss Whedon seems to get interviewed basically everywhere you turn. Now love him, hate him or remain utterly indifferent, but one advantage the man has is being eminently quotable (not many writers who can write witty dialogue are also able to make it up on the spot, so I'm suitably impressed). My favourite quote from the current crop of interviews is probably:

Q: You've been said to encourage fanfiction. How do you feel about scholarship about your work and the fact that academics tend to delve quite deeply into it, perhaps to the point of publishing interpretations you did not intend?

A: All worthy work is open to interpretations the author did not intend. Art isn't your pet -- it's your kid. It grows up and talks back to you.

He's always been consistent about this, which makes the "Let's take *character X*/*show universe Y* from the evil/incompetent Whedon" or "Joss needs to learn fannish interpretation is so superior" posts feel a bit like teenagers casting themselves as daring and rebellious when their parents, far from forbidding them to go out, are in fact encouraging them to stay up until dawn and make their own experiences. It's not something inherent or original to Whedonverse fandoms, of course, but something I've observed everywhere, though not every creator or people-in-charge-of-fannish-source-copyrights are as laid back about fannish discourse. And nothing feeds the fannish sense of outraged moral superiority so much as a creator/author/person-in-charge-of-copyright who gets possessive/protective of their characters (and extremer cases is silly enough to get into arguments with reviewers on message boards, looking at you, Aaron Sorkin). They are the man, we are the true, far better artists and interpreters of *insert character/fannish source*, and, that golden stalwart of posts, "should just shut up".

****

Speaking of interactions between fannish interpretations and their source, in the last few days a tumblr containing hilarious fictional Hillary Clinton texts has been linked all over the internet. With the results that Hillary Clinton saw it as well, made a submission of her own and invited the two fan creators to meet her. Which they did. It occurs to me that if the online media are anything to go buy (always a qualified if), Hillary in the years of the Obama presidency has ended up as the most popular (living) Democrat politician. Which I don't think would have happened had she won the primaries and become President (not least because a sitting President even in a best case scenario is bound to disappoint some expectations of their electorate), but there it is. Not a bad note to go out on, if she really retires after her current term.

The spirit of 1776: rooting for the other team

So, James Boswell, whom I may have mentioned once or twice, was an 18th century man who really wanted to be liked. He also was a Tory. And yet, when it came to the American Revolution, his sympathies were were with the Revolutionaries throughout. Granted, he was Scottish, but it wasn't exactly a popular view to root for the Colonials in Scotland, either, and several preachers declared it was everyone's duty to pray for the King's troops and pray for the Americans' demise, which caused the religious and very anxious about it Boswell to switch churches to go to for a while at one point.

Have some diary entries:

Friday 8 November 1776: I had this day read an extraordinary Gazette with accounts of the King's troops having taken New York. I regretted it.

Thursday 12 December 1776: This was the fast appointed by the King to pray for success to his arms against the Americans. I paid no regard to it, but studied a confused cause and dicatated part of a paper upon it. At five I went by appointment to tea and cards at the Hon. Alexander Gordon's. MacLaurin was there. I maintained that it was shocking in a nation to pray to GOD for success in destroying another nation.

Sunday 5 January 1777: Heard Dr. Webster at the Tolbooth Church in the forenoon, and Warden of the Canongate in teh afternoon, imagining Mr. Walker was to preach. Was shocked with his praying against the Americans.

Sunday 16 February 1777: Heard Dr. Webster in the forenoon. Dined with him at my father's. He mentioned the success of his Majesty's arms today in his prayer in such a manner as hurt me, and I thought I should not hear him again while the war in America continued.

Sunday 1 March 1778: As Lord North had now brought in bills for conciliation with the Americans, our clergy who were for the violent measures could no longer pray in a hostile strain. So I went to hear Dr. Blair, from whose ministry I had absented myself for more than a year. I heard him again with much relish.

Don't be too hasty, Boswell. For:

Saturday 25 December 1779: Lay longer in bed than usual. (...) The town was illuminated on account of the news of a victory in Georgia over Count d'Estaing and the Americans. It gave me no pleasure, for I considered that it would only encourage a longer continuance of the ruinous war.

Thursday 3 February 1780: This was a fast by Proclamation. As I was dubious whether the Americans were not in the right to insist on independence, I did not go to church.

Friday 30 November 1781: The account of Lord Cornwallis's surrender came today. It pleased me much as I trusted it would at length put an end to the American war.

Saturday 1 December 1781: Restrained my joy on Lord Cornwallis's surrender, not to give offence. But it inspireted me, in so much that though for some time I had been quite lazy in the morning, relaxed and unable to rise, I this day sprung up. I supped at my father's. I was a little heated with wine. He had his old republican humour, reading the King's speech: 'What a clattering's this - my forces! I think he might have said OURS.