[meta] there is no such thing as character bashing in well-written fic

[bantha_fodder]

Let us not be wishy-washy. I am sure that each of us can acknowledge having seen a summary or disclaimer attached to a fic that says something similar to, "This fic contains bashing of Character X! If you like Character X, don't read this fic! You have been warned!"

I contest this statement. I would like to suggest that a statement such as this is flawed, for the following reasons (that I bring together to form my hypothesis):

1. You are welcome to dislike or like Character X.
2. If you are writing a fic and within it there are characters disliking Character X, or Character X comes off in situations very poorly (ie, as a bitch) in a way that would be believable in the original text, then this is not character bashing, this is writing your characters correctly.
3. If you are writing a fic and within it you are bashing a character, ie writing the character incorrectly for the sake of being a bitch about that character, then WHY ARE YOU GIVING US YOUR POORLY WRITTEN (and characterised) FANFIC TO READ?

In conclusion, there is no such thing as character bashing in a fic that is actually worth my time.

Discuss.

For extra points, you can bitch about smooshed pairing names. My new least favourite is Burtina.

Comments

[meyerlemon.livejournal.com]

Burtina? I've been staring, but I can't work it out.

[daygloparker.livejournal.com]

Burke/Christina, from Grey's Anatomy. I'm pretty sure?

[bantha-fodder.livejournal.com]

You are correct. UGH. It is just SO UGLY LOOKING.

[pathstotread.livejournal.com]

Burtina? I've seen Burkina. (Not like that's any BETTER, but, you know.) Since we're on GA, I also hate Gizzie (George/Izzie). It just sounds bad.

[bantha-fodder.livejournal.com]

OMG. It sounds PORNOGRAPHIC.

Whyfore are you not in chat?

[pathstotread.livejournal.com]

I've been on my way to bed for an hour or so. *fails* I was watching teevee. So I don't come back in chat because of the vague hope that sometime soon I will be asleep.

[queenofthorns.livejournal.com]

Burkina (Faso) ... I like it. Hee! Um, I don't watch the show, though.

[zorb]

I agree, and I would also like to add that if you are writing a fic that includes Character X and other people, and none of these other people can find any reason to dislike anything about Character X, then you are probably writing a Mary Sue/Gary Stu and should rethink your priorities.

If this characterization is actually in keeping with the canon, then you have my sympathies.

Regarding smooshed names, in general, they are horrid and should not be allowed. Whatever happened to a good, old-fashioned /, people? Smoosh names are only acceptable in a few, specific cases where it is the One True Name. Snarry, for example.

[ataxi.livejournal.com]

What about satire?

[sangerin.livejournal.com]

For the first time ever, I used the phrase "character bashing" in a recent ficathon signup. I said something to the effect that the mod of the ficathon should not give me any requests that say "No Adam bashing", because the way I view Adam would be viewed as Adam bashing by much of the fandom. I think Adam is a misogynistic pig, and I write him that way (although I hope that it comes across subtly, as it does - to my mind - in the show itself). Other parts of the fandom seem to think that Adam is like unto God and can do no wrong.

So, is that character-bashing, a difference in interpretation, or me using the term "character-bashing" as a convenient shorthand for "my interpretation of this character differs from yours (generic) to such an extent that I doubt we'll ever agree"?

The above-discussed fandom is Spooks, by the way. Known in the US as MI-5. Thankfully the fandom has not yet begun (and it is to be hoped, never does) to use portmanteau 'ship labels.

[bantha-fodder.livejournal.com]

I love Spooks. With a passion. Mostly seasons one and two, but I haven't got to four yet.

I guess there's a line, and the problem with my theory is that it creates the question of what is correct characterisation, and what is OOC? And if you can construct that Adam is a misogynistic pig, but still have the other characters view him the same way as they do on the show, then that's not bashing. So I guess it is you using the term as a convenient short hand. Because what you've said is no requests that say "No Adam bashing," because people who make that request clearly could not handle a different view on the characterisation of Adam.

That was sort of round about, but sort of made sense, so.

[sangerin.livejournal.com]

I haven't seen season four yet, either. It hasn't shown in Australia, but then, I don't think it's shown in the US yet, either. Three is when Adam appeared. (Apparently it's been renewed for a fifth season, to show late this year in the UK)

But yes: that's the line - writing my interpretation of the character so that he's still recogniseable as that character. If I wrote Tessa as sweetness and light, it wouldn't make sense. If I wrote Tom as completely and utterly sane, on the inside as well as on the outside... well, that would be a bit out of character, too. *g* (Which reminds me, I have a major Tom-fic I need to write.)

[bantha-fodder.livejournal.com]

They're usually pretty good, but ABC will take forever to air it. I have it on my computer, I just haven't got around to watching it.

TOM. OH TOM. YOU ARSE.

[sangga.livejournal.com]

butting in here.

hullo dearies. i thought adam was a bit of a tosser too until i saw the final ep of the last season shown on ABC which was, um, three, i think? now i understand that he is just A LOVELY MAN, with a DEEP DEEP DEVOTION TO HIS LOVELY WIFEY.

and Tom. ah sigh.

Tom+Tessa+Adam = None of These People are Completely Sane.

that's not character bashing. that's just common sense.

and then we could 'portmanteau' (an excellent term) the label and make them all ATossa whaddya think? catchy?

[sangerin.livejournal.com]

Nope, even the season finale didn't make me like Adam. (I don't really like Fiona, either, but she, at least, is fun to write because I can get all dark on her, and explore the side of her that would rather not be married and with an unseen child.)

and then we could 'portmanteau' (an excellent term) the label and make them all ATossa whaddya think? catchy?

Hmmm... *g*

[cupiscent.livejournal.com]

But Burtina is Burt Newton in drag, right?

[bantha-fodder.livejournal.com]

IT TOTALLY IS. OMG MOONFACE.

I'm sure he's done drag about a million times before.

[cupiscent.livejournal.com]

Also, on the smooshed names thing. Writing it is fine, but I find when you're talking about it, actually, y'know, speaking to another fangirl about it, "Viggorli" is so much easier to say than "Viggo/Orlando". And let's not get into the amusing way Calico pronounces PWP. *G*

But I have to say that after coming from a fandom that has the thing of beauty that is Viggorlijah (the name-combination, not the actual ship), then I'm inclined to declare that no other fandom should even try it, unless it can come up with something similarly elegant. "Sparrington", for instance, is a work of pairing-naming art. It makes use of the overlap of sound in the names, and defines the dynamic of the ship in the use of word "sparring". I mean, honestly. SOLID GOLD.

[gobsmackit.livejournal.com]

In conclusion, there is no such thing as character bashing in a fic that is actually worth my time.
Uh, I agree, though I can understand someone who's gotten bashed for writing dark, Death Eater!Harry fic wanting to pre-empt people from freaking out.

As for smooshed pairing names, I don't really like them, but I do use some of them, mostly because of LotRiPS, which has made it so that I don't bat an eye at Monaboyd, Domlijah, Billijah, Dombillijah, Dorli, Viggorli, Domviggorli, Seanlijah, and other lovely smooshings, even though I found them a tad ridiculous when I first started reading in the fandom. Even though I don't necessary read all those combos, it's much more convenient and actually less confusing to me than BB/DM, VM/OB, DM/BB/EW, EW/DM, etc. While I don't necessarily use HP smooshings, I'm so used to I don't really even register when I read. Outside of those two fandoms, though, I don't think I'd ever use any.

Now, ship names is an entirely different story (the Good Shop, Pumpkin Pie, et al.) - unless it's ironic or tongue-in-cheek, blech.

[gobsmackit.livejournal.com]

Oh, actually, I do use Foxshy (Matthew Fox/Josh Holloway), because it makes me feel like Sean Connery.

[ingridmatthews.livejournal.com]

My new least favourite is Burtina.

Burt Ward/Nina Simone? *scratches head*

The "smooshed" names began when FF.N stopped allowing people to use the "/" sign in their summaries. Yet another thing to thank The Pit for.

[juliefortune.livejournal.com]

I don't understand disclaimers, period. I mean, I use them because others want me to do so. But to me, disclaimers seem to be more about "let me hide my eyes from that which I do not wish to see," which bugs me in connection with literature (and yes, fic is literature). We self-limit, and I don't think we ought to do so. I think if the fic is good, no matter how dark or scary or odd the subject matter, readers will gain something from the experience.

But warning that you're going to bash a character, and then you set up a straw dummy with the character's name pinned on, and you give all the other characters sticks -- well, that's lazy writing.

And I'd avoid it for other reasons than content!

-- J.

[svilleficrecs.livejournal.com]

Dude, if writing out the names is too mentally taxing, why not do the initials?

[nufaciel.livejournal.com]

True, but in some fandoms initials don't work. Take Smallville for example:

CK/LL

Is that Lex, Lionel, or Lana? Believe me, I wanna know, because I am not a Lana fan. :D

[svilleficrecs.livejournal.com]

It totally works in some situations, like clex.

I guess I'm just mortally irritated at things like all the cutsey little names the shippers in Roswell fandom had for their various pairings. Made me nauseous. I guess it's not that big of a deal in Whoverse because there aren't that many pairings to keep track of (unlike your three boys, three girls, endless combinations WB template). I also get a little... I ship, but I never got the whole OMG I'm Lee/Laura 4 eva and how could he like Kara and all Kara/Lee shippers are... whatever they get accused of. Going after the obvious? In practice I sometimes don't mind the combo names, the theory makes me nervous.

And Ten/Rose just... I like the way that looks. :) But please, keep me informed if one sticks with them.

[(Anonymous)]

My new least favourite is Burtina.

Indeed: Burtina sounds like a stage name for a cross-dressing Burt Reynolds impersonator.

[executrix.livejournal.com]

I'm surprised to see anyone referring to her *own* story as "character-bashing"--I thought the conjugation was, "I write canon-correct IC fics, YOU don't understand my woobie, SHE character-bashes."

[clex_monkie89.livejournal.com]

For extra points, you can bitch about smooshed pairing names.

*Hides username*

[poisonavery.livejournal.com]

Do you think that possibly, someone could write a ficlet about a character they dislike, and while still giving them strong points and flaws, make it clear that this is a character they dislike and want other people to dislike?

Per example, Harry Potter fandom, let's go with the character of Ginny Weasley whom I don't particularly care for. I could write a story about her and Dean Thomas, being all sweet together, her being very kind to him, them having good times and laughs, but I could also add, from her point of view, that she only plans to dump him once Harry Potter comes around, making her appear shallow and superficial and petty, etc.

Does that sort of make sense?

As for smooshednames, here's one that irks me: National Hockey League-Tampa Bay Lightning-Vincent Lecavalier/Brad Richards....BRINNY

WTF THAT SOUNDS LIKE A MOLD THAT IS GROWING BENEATH MY REFRIGERATOR! EVERYTIME I SEE IT, I WISH TO GO BUY SOME LYSOL! >:O

[bantha-fodder.livejournal.com]

See, if you can actually support that with canon, that you believe Ginny is the sort of person to go out with someone and just use them to get to someone else, then that's okay, I guess. I mean, I disagree with your reading of Ginny, that she is shallow and superficial and such, but then that's more a problem of us interpreting things differently. But if you can honestly support that opinion with the canon text, then it's not character bashing, it's characterisation. But if you can't support it, or if your support is, "well, this one time she did bad thing x," then you can't really call that conclusive characterisation, particularly if in your story the other characters then view her as petty and superficial if in canon they don't. Like, I doubt Hermione would be, "you're a big fat whore, Ginny Weasley, and I hope you get syphilis!" or whatever. So character bashing isn't just about how you represent the character you don't like, it's also how you represent the characters that you do.

[azurelunatic]

Indeed. I can very vividly picture Dean hiding off in a corner sulking about having been dumped, Hermione coming upon him in her quest for a quiet corner to revise in, Hermione doing her Head Girl duty and attempting to find out what was wrong, and then blowing up at Ginny.

But she'd probably say something like "Do you realize how much of my time you just wasted?"

"What crawled up your arse, Hermione?"

"Dean Thomas was crying in a classroom, that's what! And do you know why? Because you broke his heart! You're no better than you ought to be, Ginevra Weasley, and it would serve you right if Harry did the same to you. Don't come crying to me when it happens either! Now, if no one else has any problems, I'm going to go prepare for my NEWTs."

And she'd flounce off, leaving Ginny (and half the Common Room) gaping after her.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

I agree, and I think there's a difference between showing the negative (cannon) side of a character, and inventing stuff.

Want to write that Dumbledore goes a bit too far when he's sure he's right? That's fine, because that's canon. Very canon - Harry acknowledges it himself.

But you can't have Dumbledore torturing muggleborn students for fun. That's OOC, and not Dumbledore at all.

Explore what you dislike about a character, but don't mangle him/her to do it.

Well...that's true

[jazzypom.livejournal.com]

The thing is, characters bashing is so transparent in fiction and if a character affects you that much, don't write it. I do know that I don't like Tonks from the HP series at all, but that didn't stop me from writting (I think and if the comments on the stories are to go by) a well rounded character who was a little selfish and a little young.

I think it's possible to not like a character but actualy write him/her well. It's called professionalism, people.

Re: Well...that's true

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Oh, definitely.

But see, there you go - you wrote a characer who was a little selfish. A lot of people, including myself, disagree that selfish is the right word. (Although I do think there is another word to describe her that's also not flattering, but I can't think of it. Maybe a bit dependent?)

But you also made her well rounded, and didn't make her evil. You just wrote your own interpretation. And I think that's actually good - you should always write who you see the character as.

But as I said, you can't have Dumbledore be Voldemort's ally in disguise, you can't have a Ron who beats Hermione, etc.

well, i'm standing by that word

[jazzypom.livejournal.com]

because i thought how she brought up their circumstances was a bit crap, and her behaviour at Christmas was rather immature, but I've gotten over it.

I think she came off rather selfish in the story I wrote (it was a Fleur/Tonks and Remus/Tonks combo) because she had to be, and didn't shy away from it. But the person who I wrote it for (a 'wotcher wolvie shipper') actually liked the effort.

[isography.livejournal.com]

Jesus Christ, Burtina? That is just... silly.

Also, am friending you, as have meant to for some time. No need to reciprocate, just being polite. :)