In this case though, I was referring to continuity between the series and fic, which is I think the "evidence" used to argue that certain fics from the get-go are not in the spirit or whatnot of LnC.
I think that it's more than just the continuity with the series that can be used as evidence. For me, what also matters is evidence from the fic itself. There has to be a consistency within the story itself. I'm not sure we disagree on this point, though.
If some major aspect (notice my avoidance of the word 'canon'
) of the series is to be changed, then I do think the author has to make that change plausible within the context of what we saw in the series. Otherwise it's difficult to call on my "willing suspension of disblelief" - having done that for the super-powers business, it's difficult for me to go further in that regard:) But it may not be for others.
But surely there has to be more to a fic to warrant the label "L & C" fic than just the use of the characters from the show? Were it as wide open as that, then I'm guessing that most Smallville fanfics would also qualify as L & C fic. The only exception would be those stories which focus on Chloe, and even then, it could be argued that such a story would be a crossover.
Clearly, there is much of L & C that is open to interpretation, but surely there is something intrinsic that makes L & C, well, L& C, and not say Smallville or SR or...?
Evidence from the story to argue about how an author feels about Lois or Clark in a story based on how they are written dismisses the creative process. It's like a literary argument where everything is ascribed to the author's biography. Such a thing assumes the writing in question is blatantly derivative instead of something purposely arranged and worked on.
I'm not sure I'm following this argument. How is deconstructing a story dismissing the creative process? Sometimes what and how an author writes is indicative of how the writer subconscioulsy thinks about some issues. For example, is anyone going to argue that Ian Fleming was a feminist? Or that there are not examples of anti-semitism in Dorothy Sayers' novels? I'm not sure that this is ascribing an attitude to the author's biography - the evidence is in the actual text.
At any rate I'm not sure that the "creative process" is always completely independent of a writer's values and attitudes. I don't think it's possible. Probably literature would be pretty boring if it were possible.
I do believe that a writer's values subconsciously shape what they write. I've been accused in private e-mails of writing a Lois who is too independent, not submissive enough to Clark Kent, etc. Now I'd never thought of my interpretation of the character in that way but clearly some people have thought so.
For example, years ago I wrote a story for S6 called "The Last Time I Saw Elvis", a story that hardly anyone ever read except for a few who wrote to tell me that Lois was way too independent, was a lousy mother, and also that I'd written Martha as way too independent. But I really thought I was writing those characters in a way that was consistent with what had been in the series.
Nevertheless, I have claimed to be a feminist and so it wouldn't be surprising to see that reflected in what I've written, whether it be Lois or Clark or Martha. etc as well as how I watched the show itself.
Anyway, I'm not too confident I'm following your argument here, Alycone, and I may have misinterpreted what you were getting at. Are you suggesting that we should never compare or reference what we saw in the series to what we read in fanfics?
Like I said before what you look for is your interpretation of Lois and Clark in fics.
Yes, I've never claimed otherwise. I suspect we all do that.
As soon as anyone starts a comment with "This is so like Lois and Clark..." that's what is happening.
c.
