Saturday Randomness: Fanonical Pairings

[browngirl]

I'm writing an unexpectedly difficult story, and one of the reasons it's difficult is that the pairing is fanonical; the characters don't interact in canon. I'm writing it because it's hot because I like fanonical pairings, for many of the same reasons I like introducing people in real life.

Long ago, I was a member of bdotp, a community devoted to pairings of any/all characters played by two actors who'd achieved stunning chemistry in one particular canon, and I was very charmed by how compatible so many of their characters could be made to be. In my current fannish obsession, with such a big cast, there are many offscreen interactions that can be surmised even though they don't happen onscreen, and I really like that about it.

What about you?

*gets back to writing*

Comments

[rubynye.livejournal.com]

Funny... I use "fanonical" to mean things that fanfic usually assumes happened/happens or that often happen in fanfic, rather than relationships that have no canon basis. Which lead you into the murky waters of what exactly constitutes canon basis, from a canon couple to canon UST to fan-perceived semi- or unintentional canon UST...

I use 'fanonical' in both senses. And yeah, determining 'canon basis' can get very murky. *bewares the murk*

[ilthit.livejournal.com]

That is indeed wise! :D I almost got into a conversation about it on QueerlyGen.Dreamwidth.org but I was already drawing fire for something I said about the definitions of gen (I regret nothing) so was forced to abstain. Let someone else examine that particular potential wankbomb!

I suppose you could talk about hermeneutical/historical interpretation as opposed to structuralist analysis, but it's hard to present that discussion without seeming to make value judgements, despite the fact I don't see any moral difference between writing porn about Sam/Rosie or Sam/Frodo, or Sam/Merry or Sam/Lobelia. Bring it on.