Oshun: You are also welcome. And you are welcome also to speak out here whenever you’d like, no matter how peripherally related to the topic at hand. I know you well enough not to interpret your replies as rants directed at me. (Unless I’m deserving … in which case, rant away! ) You know (I hope!) how much I agree with you here. In my own study of the texts, and now in writing about them, I have come to the conclusion that the term “canon” in the Tolkien fandom is almost meaningless. I hope that more people eventually come to accept that idea and to stop hiding behind it to deflect criticism of their personal tastes.

Ah, thank you for that comment. I very much agree, especially in regards to my recent (very frustrated) LJ post about the terrible term “nonslash”. I’m still pondering why it infiltrated fandom so much and what this obsession of gen-ficcers with teh slash is supposed to mean.

To summarize what I think is going on: The “apples” that Marta and I are bringing to this discussion is an attempt to understand how canon is used and perceived and argued by people in fandom. The “oranges” that you are bringing is an enjoyment of fiction that has nothing to do with that. Am I correct here?

I do think that they’re separate entities and, for me, they’re really separate roles–both of which I enjoy–in fandom. I love writing and reading Tolkien-based stories, and I agree absolutely that they must stand or fall on their own independent of how one defends one’s “canon.” That, for me, is completely separate from discussions such as these, which appeal to my desire to understand human behavior in the fandom community. They really satisfy different desires for me … or, I don’t go into reading (or writing!) stories with such analysis as this in mind. I agree with your earlier statement that the story must come first, and it does.

However, I also have an interest in human behavior that is independent of my interest in the texts as an artist.

I replied to your last comment yesterday on Marta’s post, but it got lost when my Internet shut down. So I will attempt to reconstruct my reply as faithfully as possible here.

But I don’t think anyone who doesn’t like the way I approach my stories is ever going to be convinced by how well I can defend my use of canon. I think the people who get all upset and bent out of shape over what other people write are not going to be convinced by any defense that anyone else can make, however logical or brilliant.

I agree with you here, especially if you’re speaking of the people who I’m thinking of. I think that the worst of the froth-at-the-mouth “canatics” don’t base their so-called “canon” on logical analysis of the texts at all; it is based more on a combination of personal morality, social influence, and wishful thinking. These people–like any fanatics–are not going to be swayed by anything resembling logic because their opinions weren’t formed by anything resembling logic. I’m done even bothering with these people; posts like this are not addressed to them and, although they are as welcome to comment as anyone, I don’t think we’d have much to say to each other before long.

However, I don’t think that fandom is a neat dichotomy of froth-at-the-mouth canatics and happy-go-lucky “heretics” who will accept anything that is well-reasoned. In fact, I think that a lot of intolerance in fandom has nothing to do with the actual beliefs of the person expressing the intolerance but with social influence. There are certain corners of fandom that have made intolerance a major part of their identity. I’m thinking specifically of those that are vehement in their dislike of slash and certain AUs (tenth walker, “Mary Sue”). And, being human nature, to endear themselves to certain people and fit in with certain communities, I think that people often take to repeating certain ideas without pausing to give much consideration to how they really feel about those ideas.

I am actually (sadly) a perfect example of this. I was, once upon a time, a very intolerant reader. I had a narrow set of “canon compliant” interests that didn’t include slash or AU or anything too “out there.” Now we both know that I am not an intolerant person in real life; I was merely mimicking what I thought were the “right” things to say based on what I had observed about the community where I found myself. That’s unfortunate but evidence, I suppose, that I am human.

Of course, these things changed over time, and my views of fandom came more in line with my beliefs in real life. How? Well, I met people–like my first SWG co-mod Uli/ford_of_bruinen–who wrote things that went beyond my “comfort level” at the time; in reading their work, my tastes expanded beyond the narrow confines into which I had forced them. This is what you expressed in your comment on Marta’s post. However, I was also directly challenged on some of my misguided beliefs; Juno, in particular, never shied from making me stop and think about why I liked or disliked what I did. Because I am a logical person, my beliefs were open to being shaped by what I saw as her superior logic.

So I think that some people are receptive to having their opinions shaped via discussions on canon. Or maybe I’m just a pie-eyed optimist. 8^)

Although I think you and Marta actually have quite different perspectives, I think the two of you might have more in common with one another, than I have with either of you about why I care about the discussion and what it means to me. One further note that I left on Marta’s LJ, that kind of summarizes the perspective I bring to discussions of canon is the following:

“I would love it everyone felt comfortable to just let everyone else write and enjoy what they enjoy. I personally have never had any desire to write for a tiny, niche audience. But I don’t think anyone who doesn’t like the way I approach my stories is ever going to be convinced by how well I can defend my use of canon. I think the people who get all upset and bent out of shape over what other people write are not going to be convinced by any defense that anyone else can make, however logical or brilliant.

Possibly, and I have seen this happen, time and time again, their ability to appreciate a broader range of stories can be influenced slowly over time by recommendations of different types of stories from people they trust or accidentally stumbling on a story and reading it and finding it is not what they assumed it would be, but not by analytical articles on the question of what are the different possible (legitimate?) uses of canon.”

Generally, when I have heard people begin talking about canon, what they usually mean, is I don’t like what you write and I don’t think it’s a legitimate use of canon either! I have seen other writers dismiss the whole dispute with a note in a story summary: “If Tolkien read this, he would roll over in his grave.” Well, unfortunately, I can’t take that attitude either, because I put a strong emphasis on canon research in writing my stories and expect a fair amount of canon knowledge for a reader to fully appreciate them. Tolkien probably would roll over in his grave if he read my work, but he ought not. He ought to be flattered that his life work is taken so seriously and studied in such detail.

You know that I would love the threatened op-ed piece! I’m looking forward to it!

I, personally, do not consider your stories and what I know of your verse as AU, although I’m less familiar than I’d like to be with The Elendimir, so I’m basing this conclusion more on The Apprentice and its related stories. And, of course, this is coming from a fellow “heretic.” I leave the judgment of “AU,” of course, to each author. But I am through with declaring BtLoR as an AU, much less AMC (as I was encouraged to do when I first started posting it and sometimes did on individual chapters), much less saying that slash is “just another form of AU,” as I also, shamefully, used to do. (In my defense, I was trying to diffuse some of the vitriol that genre was receiving from people who, otherwise, were more than happy to tolerate AU.)

Marta: I still hope that you’ll write that essay. I don’t think that I have the only way–much less the correct way!–of looking at it. I also think that there is a lot of room for how different interpretations are received and treated in fandom, which I didn’t even touch on.

Oshun: I suspect that a lot of people don’t need to think of it in such explicit terms and expected my share of eyerolls for this piece. (I’m actually pretty surprised at the amount of interest this topic and this post, in particular, has generated, considering that picking apart how we write fanfic is probably less important to people than actually writing it and simply going with the story or, in the other camp, refusing anything of a particular type and defending that avoidance as “taste.”)

I think that the discussion tends to be defensive for the same reason that a lot of discussions in fandom are defensive: They often have years of hurt and anger brewing behind them. I’m thinking particularly of Juno’s essay that I linked that was the result of something like four years of disparagement about what she was writing. And the comments on that post show that others who write the opposite of what Juno does–very canon-compliant–have been treated just as hurtfully by AU authors.

I’ve been fairly lucky. I’ve had a measure of comments from people who didn’t know what they were talking about or had the imaginative capacities of rocks; these are easy to dismiss. Unfortunately, I think stupidity also tends to occur in direct proportion to tenacity. I’ve been advised to label different stories as AU; I think Juno may have advised me to label AMC as AU once upon a time in order to deflect criticism from canatics who simply couldn’t/wouldn’t understand how I arrived at my ideas. I do wonder if and how her advice would change almost four years later! But as far as a thorough trouncing of what I choose to write, I’ve seen very little, but I know it goes on, and it has been directed at some of my friends, so I suppose that I am a bit defensive on their behalf.

However, my main interest–as with many things “fannish”–is in the social aspects of fandom: How people receive one kind of story over another, i.e. my example about how the Maedhros/Fingon pairing and Maedhros & Fingon friendship fics rely on the same textual details and just draw different conclusions … yet we both know that one is more despised than the other and wont to have an “AU” label placed upon it. In order to begin to understand that, I needed to understand how the texts are used to develop canon.

Personally, I’m willing to buy anything in a story … the author just has to sell me on it. So I’m with you on “never say never”; I’ve found that, when I do, I’m eating crow before long.

“I have read both of your versions a few times and I can’t say I prefer one over the other, although Dawn goes into a lot more detail. I find the entire discussion more than a bit defensive. I think I could personally qualify by almost anyone’s standards as somewhat of a canon nerd when it comes to knowledge. But to quantify and breakdown in minute detail and label the ways in which one might handle canon, when one fills the gaps, departs, or varies doesn’t really appeal to me.

I do strongly agree with you that I also read fanfiction because I have a passion for the original, so it had better be in evidence for me to enjoy a story. Blatant ignorance or flagrant disregard for the canon in a story generally leaves me cold. (But, never say never: I could name a couple of entertaining writers of pure movieverse whose stories I have greatly enjoyed.)

I find more often than not that the term AU is used incorrectly and with a tone of disparagement. I particularly dislike my own work being called AU by people who have not studied all of the possible canon extensively and would be unable to defend their position on what they might see as my departures.

My impulse is that people should loosen up. Your story is its own defense, or not, as the case may be. Bottom line: know what you are changing before you change it. I do footnote if I change a date, detail of geography, or similar hard facts, and cringe from fanon cliches. But when it comes to filling gaps in my own work, the reader should beware. I won’t defend what I put there.

An example I cited to you [Marta] once earlier this year is that I love your OTP Boromir/Theodred. But, personally, I am not at all sure they would necessarily have ever met. My attitude is knock yourself out. They’re fascinating together and nothing in canon contradicts it. It’s not AU.

(Don’t even bring up “Of the Laws and Customs Among the Eldar.” It’s been beaten to death. Numerous writers have elegantly proven that it does not say what most fanfic writers think it says–an example of wishful thinking on the part its defenders–and further is purported by Tolkien to have been written by an unreliable source, who did not have first-hand knowledge.)

One last point, Tolkien’s unwritten intentions, personal attitudes and beliefs, or assumptions thereof on the part of readers, are not canon. “