But I have to admit that I don't see how the two can be mutually exclusive, how a guy one knows on the internet telling stories isn't always-already a construct too.
I think here what you have, often, is that people lose perspective and think through interacting w/ someone that they know them. This is not true, but the skewed perspective is not limited to the internet. You see it in real world interactions where people misinterpret the level to which they know another person, assume intimate status and close associate when these things do not exist.
I didn't read the OP, just your pull quotes, but I (totally baselessly!) assume that the cognitive dissonance here is probably from the two major ways of viewing rpf: people who write it/negotiate it based on "canon" (here meaning what the celebrities say about themselves/present to the public) and people who write/negotiate based on a loose interpretation of what the celebrity says about themselves, picking and choosing and making up the details as they go along.
The first sort of fan/writers gets very invested in the persona projected by the celebrity because they are using it as on a day to day basis to negotiate their fannishness. The second sort tends to ignore whatever material comes along they dislike.
The first group come to believe that it's *real* and therefore they aren't dealing with constructs, they're dealing with facts. So from the outset any argument between the two camps has failed to define terms and any discussion will always be unresolved.
Oh, your postmodernist views are showing under your skirt! I have the same sort of epistemological views of others myself, so I sympathize.
Ok, on the last pull quote, my take on this this: there are people I know through work that have fanfiction written about them. To me, I cannot read this fanfiction not because I object to it IN ANY WAY because these people are real or immediate to me. I cannot read it because I think the people in question are douches and the fanfiction is ALL WRONG OMG. However, I think that in the case of the OP, she is expressing the sort of sentiment I see in the people who are extremely invested in their rpf characters and their projected images. Those people tend to have a certain construct of ownership of the character where the celebrity and their images have become internalized to them. So when the celebrity then interacts with them, their fantasies of ownership have been validated to a degree and they then claim a certain kind of friendship status which is more valuable to them than fannish status (thus negating an ability to write fic about them).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-01-30 04:48 pm (UTC)I think here what you have, often, is that people lose perspective and think through interacting w/ someone that they know them. This is not true, but the skewed perspective is not limited to the internet. You see it in real world interactions where people misinterpret the level to which they know another person, assume intimate status and close associate when these things do not exist.
I didn't read the OP, just your pull quotes, but I (totally baselessly!) assume that the cognitive dissonance here is probably from the two major ways of viewing rpf: people who write it/negotiate it based on "canon" (here meaning what the celebrities say about themselves/present to the public) and people who write/negotiate based on a loose interpretation of what the celebrity says about themselves, picking and choosing and making up the details as they go along.
The first sort of fan/writers gets very invested in the persona projected by the celebrity because they are using it as on a day to day basis to negotiate their fannishness. The second sort tends to ignore whatever material comes along they dislike.
The first group come to believe that it's *real* and therefore they aren't dealing with constructs, they're dealing with facts. So from the outset any argument between the two camps has failed to define terms and any discussion will always be unresolved.
Oh, your postmodernist views are showing under your skirt! I have the same sort of epistemological views of others myself, so I sympathize.
Ok, on the last pull quote, my take on this this: there are people I know through work that have fanfiction written about them. To me, I cannot read this fanfiction not because I object to it IN ANY WAY because these people are real or immediate to me. I cannot read it because I think the people in question are douches and the fanfiction is ALL WRONG OMG. However, I think that in the case of the OP, she is expressing the sort of sentiment I see in the people who are extremely invested in their rpf characters and their projected images. Those people tend to have a certain construct of ownership of the character where the celebrity and their images have become internalized to them. So when the celebrity then interacts with them, their fantasies of ownership have been validated to a degree and they then claim a certain kind of friendship status which is more valuable to them than fannish status (thus negating an ability to write fic about them).