I don't think that lumping everything in one category makes that category meaningless, but I do think that it oversimplifies and tries to make connections between two things which are either tenuous or non - existent. I mean, you could say that everything anybody does creatively is driven by a buried sex drive, but that would be ignoring a whole range of possible motivations for the creative act, in my opinion.
Well, it wouldn't be ignoring them so much as reducing them to really being about a buried sex drive. I think the sex drive way of looking at it is silly and not really useful, but it's self-consistent and doesn't seem to contradict reality. (How could it? It's ultimately tautologous.)
Also, I don't think RPF has a source text in the same way other media fandoms do. Those fandoms operate of sources that were created by one or more people as explicitly fictional, while RPF builds off real life events to a greater or lesser extent.
Well, RPF is about real (for a given social construction of "real"; Buffy Summers won't be found in any SoCal phonebook) people and FPF is about fictional people. While that distinction can be problematized, I'm not really about to disagree with that claim; it's pretty much part of the definition of what RPF and FPF are.
The main thing I can parse your comment as saying something that goes beyond that is that RPF source texts, in addition to being "real," lack intentionality; they're not created. That premise I would argue with; since I do think that our decisions we make in the "real world" are parts of deliberately fabricated constructions, even when we are with the people with whom we are the most comfortable.
no subject
Well, it wouldn't be ignoring them so much as reducing them to really being about a buried sex drive. I think the sex drive way of looking at it is silly and not really useful, but it's self-consistent and doesn't seem to contradict reality. (How could it? It's ultimately tautologous.)
Also, I don't think RPF has a source text in the same way other media fandoms do. Those fandoms operate of sources that were created by one or more people as explicitly fictional, while RPF builds off real life events to a greater or lesser extent.
Well, RPF is about real (for a given social construction of "real"; Buffy Summers won't be found in any SoCal phonebook) people and FPF is about fictional people. While that distinction can be problematized, I'm not really about to disagree with that claim; it's pretty much part of the definition of what RPF and FPF are.
The main thing I can parse your comment as saying something that goes beyond that is that RPF source texts, in addition to being "real," lack intentionality; they're not created. That premise I would argue with; since I do think that our decisions we make in the "real world" are parts of deliberately fabricated constructions, even when we are with the people with whom we are the most comfortable.