Untitled

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

Who we are

Life has kept me away from social media venues for quite some time now, so I am curious as to who is out there. If you care to, please respond to any (or all or none) of these questions, in as much (or as little) detail as you feel is appropriate.

 What is your fandom?

 Are you into multiple fandoms? If so, what was your first?

 How were you introduced to fandom and how long ago was it?

 Primary fandom activities: Fan fiction writer? Artist? Reviewer? Editor/publisher? Other (e.g., gamer, cosplayer, filker, blogger/vlogger, fill-in-the-blank)?

 Where do you mostly hang out with/interact with your fandoms and other fans?

 Do you see yourself as someone who always will be involved with fandom to one degree or another?

 (I will post this to more than one online forum, just to cast a wider net, so I apologize now if you get “reruns.”

 Thanks!

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

In response to a still ongoing discussion in another blog (https://www.tumblr.com/blog/view/systlin/190067283295), I offer the following (as it seems to be too long for a direct reply within that discussion):  I see various comments posted about how Anne Rice is responsible for disclaimers on fan fiction. For the record, such disclaimers have been in use almost from the beginning. Here is a post I did on this topic previously.

The first Star Trek fanzine--Spockanalia, published in 1967 while the series still was in production--did not carry any legal disclaimers, even though the content was derived directly from material that had been created by others (and that content was not given out to anyone else for use without legal permission being given and remuneration received.)

However, that first zine (and later issues) was sent to the Star Trek offices, where it was read by Roddenberry, Fontana, Nimoy, Kelley, etc., and garnered nice letters in response. So I am sure the editors had no expectation that they would be sued for copyright infringement. And it was not all that long before such disclaimers did start appearing in zines. Eventually they became standard usage. These disclaimers would state that the zine producer did not intend any infringement on the copyright of <insert name or names here>. They also incuded language about the zine being not-for-profit. It was hoped that these disclaimers would keep the zine producers out of the legal crosshairs. And, by and large, it worked. I can think of a handful of print fanzines back then being targeted by TPTB.

Once fan fiction expanded onto the Internet, many fans took that concept of disclaimers with them. Some continued to be of the more detailed variety but--since online fiction was not taking in any money in the way that print zines had to--many others devolved to the level of "not mine, don't sue."

Individual copyright holders have reacted to fanzines and online fan fiction . . . well, individually. Prior to the blossoming of Internet fandom, most simply didn't know it existed. Since then, most (but not all) of those that do either seem to acknowledge it or ignore it.

I know that the fans behind AO3 take the stance that fan fiction is legal ("fair use" and all that). And it also has been noted that it is likely that no one will want to come after them because there is no money to recover, it would generate bad publicity, etc. But maybe someday a copyright holder will decide that there is a principle involved-- such as intellectual and/or creative copyrights. (We came close with Star Wars fanzines, which at one time were in danger of being shut down by Lucasfilms due to what was perceived as"adult content" in a specific zine.)

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

New book about the work of Georgette Heyer (and some others) that I am enjoying. The only problem is that it makes me want to stop to reread the books being written about.  :-)

It is available as a FREE PDF or you can buy a print version (I did both):

https://www.uclpress.co.uk/products/130865?fbclid=IwAR1NTz3x0qhHQzGH6ZpAa9Q0cAyrUNqbyRsDPqC-GxTprAaa9SaAEKdXhHE

[thenatsdorf]

American red squirrel (via)

[guerrillatech]

[everythingfox]

(via)

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

Upcoming streaming event for David Soul

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

Another Trek-not-Trek

From 1988:

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

Trek-not-Trek

I mention this book, which I have had since it was published in 1979, in case others here might not be aware but might be interested. Robert Asprin was a noted and award-winning SF author.

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

Interesting article on critiquing

Found here:

https://www.teenvogue.com/story/fanfiction-fandom-why-criticism-is-healthy-stitch-fan-service?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Swords%20and%20Spaceships%20021221&utm_term=BookRiot_SwordsAndSpaceships_DormantSuppress

[boldly-kirk]

just finished reading an academic journal about how kirk and spock are the epitome of a perfect relationship because they represent two halves of the same whole and holy shit 😭💖

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

There has been more than one academic text which has referenced the relationship between Kirk and Spock. I do not recall this specific quote being repeated in any of those books, but I'd have to look to be sure. However, "two halves of the same whole" definitely originated in the (non-academic) book Star Trek Lives! (Lichtenberg, Marshak, Winston, 1975).

Lichtenberg and Marshak: When we asked how Spock and Kirk regard one another, what in fact their relationship consists of in texture, Gene Roddenberry said, " . . . I definitely designed it as a love relationship. And I hope that for men . . . who have been afraid of such relationships . . . that they [Spock and Kirk] would encourage them to be able to feel love and affection, true affection . . . love, friendship, and deep respect. That was the relationship I tried to draw. I think I also tried to draw a feeling of belief that very few of us are complete unto ourselves. It's quite a lovely thing . . . where two halves make a whole."

Also, in another non-academic book, Shatner: Where No Man . . . (by Marshak, Culbreath, and William Shatner, 1979) there is this:

Marshak and Culbreath: "I know you've told us you designed that relationship as 'two halves which come together to make a whole."

Gene: "Oh, yes. As I've said, I definitely designed it as a love relationship. I think that's what we're all about — love, the effort to reach out to each other. I think that's a lovely thing. Also, dramatically, I designed Kirk and Spock to complete each other, and in fact the Kirk, Spock, McCoy triad to be the dramatic embodiment of the parts of one person: logic, emotion, and the balance between them. You cannot have an internal monologue on screen, so that is a way of personifying it, getting it out where it can be seen — that internal debate which we all have within And I designed Kirk and Spock, as I told you, as dream images of myself, the two halves. But in terms of the characters, yes. That closeness. Absolutely."

So Roddenberry was not looking at this as a romantic/sexual relationship, but along the lines of Epic Friendship. (And I say that as a K/S fan!)

In fact, in later years, when K/S reached underground fanzine publication, He remained . . . hmm . . . diplomatic? . . . neutral? . . . when communicating with fans on the subject. But it was not how he himself viewed these characters that he created, as witness this recounting in Star Trek Creator: The Authorized Biography of Gene Roddenberry (David Alexander, 1994), regarding Star Trek pro novels:

"In the mid-1980s, Gene's attitude toward the books changed when Pocket books . . . published a novel containing elements of K/S . . . . Gene investigated and he was livid. Printed Star Trek was taking a much different course than the one originally plotted by its creator. Gene was not a homophobe — anyone who knew him knew that, but these were *his* characters *He* created what they were and they were not going to be changed *that* much without his permission. . . . and the offending edition was withdrawn and rewritten with 30 pages excised."

[fiadhaisteach]

When I "entered" fandom, back in the early '90s, fic was mostly in fanzine form still, but migrating to the 'net via MUDs and newsgroups and mailing lists.

Here's the thing though, most fic, regardless of source or fandom, was sorted into one of three categories: Gen, Het, and Slash.

Gen had no romantic pairings, but might focus on a character or two. Those characters would be listed with commas. (Kirk, Spock, McCoy)

Het was, as implied, heteroromantic and/or heterosexual and the pairings were represented by an ampersand. (Spock & Uhura, Kirk & Chapel)

Slash was not het or gen. Pairings were represented by a slash symbol; hence the name. (Kirk/Spock or Kirk/Spock/McCoy)

I lost track of the fandom communities for a bit in the late 00s/early 10s, discovering that LiveJournal had died, but AO3 was born (🎉🎉🎉) during my hiatus.

I was very confused by the change in the common useage of the & and / symbols, though I rather like the new system because it allows for a greater romantic diversity.

I learned, but I know there are older stories who's writers are no longer around who used the older system.

I also still see folks choosing all the tags for their pairings... possibly because it's not well explained anywhere or there are confusing descriptions depending on where you look?

Anyhoo... something to keep in mind. Or maybe I'm misremembering and should just go back to my corner. 😋

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

Okay, let me see if I can, in fact, manage to make this post, and I am condensing what I could have said to something more manageable.  :-)

I connected with fandom almost 50 years ago and published fiction was, of course, only in zines. Originally, when ST zines began publishing, there were no labels, because there was no need for them. There was no "plain brown wrapper" type of material that needed to be distinguished from other types. That began in 1972, with material that is now called "het" (a term that did not exist until Internet fan fiction became part of the mix). Labels were not used consistently at this time, but when they were, they simply called this "adult." With this different type of material on the increase, and a number of fans wishing to avoid it (or find it), zine publishers and adzine editors began labeling. So this is when "adult" and "gen" (meaning for a general audience, not an adults-only audience) entered the common fannish vernacular.

In 1974, the first K/S hit publication, but barely. It achieved greater publication from 1976 on. It was not yet known as "slash"--just K/S.

When Star Trek fandom and fanzines opened up into what became known as Media fandom, a few other fandoms developed their own same-sex pairings ("Magnum Force," "Starksy and Hutch," "The Professionals"). They adopted the naming convention of K/S fandom: H/J, S/H, B/D. This is how these zines were referred to in the adzines. When referring to the "genre" as a whole, it was verbalized as "slash," and that eventually became the word used in print as well, and a category/label of  its own.

Thus, gen, adult (later het), and slash.

Also, other types of relationships (friendship, het) were often represented with a virgule (e.g., Kirk/Uhura or K/U for a romance or even Kirk/Spock for friendship only).

[imetyouonljpodcast]

This Week In Fandom History → January 11, 1949

The first network TV broadcast airs on this day, connecting KDKA-TV in Pittsburgh, PA, to Midwestern airwaves to show a live variety program. For the first time, friends across state lines could watch TV together. I really love imagining the phone calls that people shared with their faraway friends and relatives after watching the same TV program at the same time, for the first time, together.

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

Well, up into the 1990s, long distance calls cost extra (particular before direct-dialing was available), so I don’t think it was common for people to call up someone faraway just to talk about a TV show.

Not until Star Trek came along, of course. We Trek fans who had an income were happy to fork chunks of it over to Ma Bell to talk Trek with friends, plan fanzines, etc.

[commanderquill]

I know that saying you don't own any of the characters or source material before a fanfiction is both useless and a product of past fear-mongering from lawyers, but seeing people continue to write those disclaimers is still oddly comforting in its familiarity. It's become one of those obsolete traditions that people continue to do only because someone taught them to do it, with maybe a few still thinking it would be bad luck not to. Either way, despite its origins, it's a tradition that has stayed the same between fandoms, authors, ages, and websites, and I like that.

(You can try suing me for my opinion, but I'm not worried. After all, I have my disclaimers).

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

This same topic just came up on Reddit, so I will "recycle" my response here.

The legality of fan fiction has been debated for almost as long as fan fiction has been around. The first Star Trek fanzine--Spockanalia, published in 1967--did not carry any legal disclaimers, even though the content was derived directly from material that had been created by others (and was not given out to anyone else for use without legal permission being given and remuneration received.)

However, that first zine (and later issues) was sent to the Star Trek offices, where it was read by Roddenberry, Fontana, Nimoy, Kelley, etc., and garnered nice letters in response. So I am sure it seemed unlikely to Devra and Sherna, the editors, that they might be sued for copyright infringement.

And it was not all that long before such disclaimers did start appearing in zines--first the Trek zines and then beyond, as fandom expanded into media fandom. Eventually they became standard usage. These disclaimers would state that the zine producer did not intend any infringement on the copyright of <insert name or names here>. They also included language about the zine being not-for-profit. These disclaimers would, it was hoped, keep the zine producers out of the legal crosshairs. And, by and large, it worked. I can think of a handful of print fanzines back then being targeted by TPTB .

Once fan fiction expanded onto the Internet, many fans took that concept of disclaimers with them. Some continued to be of the more detailed variety but--since online fiction was not taking in any money in the way that print zines had to--many others devolved to the level of "not mine, don't sue."

Individual copyright holders have reacted to fanzines and online fan fiction . . . well, individually. Prior to the blossoming of Internet fandom, most simply didn't know it existed. Since then, most of those that do either seem to acknowledge it or ignore it. Not all, however. There have been multiple examples of Internet fiction being targeted with legal challenges.

I know that the fans behind AO3 take the stance that fan fiction is legal ("fair use" and all that). And it also has been noted that it is likely that no one will want to come after them because there is no money to recover, it would generate bad publicity, etc. But maybe some day a copyright holder will decide that there is a principle involved-- such as intellectual and/or creative copyrights. (We came close with Star Wars fanzines, which at one time were in danger of being shut down by Lucasfilms due to some--what was perceived as--"adult content" in a zine.)

[nuwuitari]

i work for a historical association and in one of our libraries i found a hand-gilded book of poetry called “star magic” and im not saying that i work in the real world equivalent of the tower at palanthas im just saying WHO HAS TIME TO HAND PAINT THAT MUCH GOLD LEAF

[nuwuitari]

update: its a 1980s star trek kirk/spock fanzine full of poetry and it has a hand drawn gilded picture of spock in it

[nuwuitari]

[poupon]

hide that shit before the university of iowa gets wind of it and knocks down your doors to acquire such a rare fine vintage of kirk/spock

[systlin]

As someone from Iowa I’m messaging this to them at once so we can get our greedy little corn hands on this beaut and maybe I can go look at it in person

[the-emblematic]

@uispeccoll 👀

[systlin]

@uispeccoll we have a new one y’all need to get!

[backroadsandbinders]

I will never forget the day I found out that there are only two copies of this really specific Dionysian text that was copied from ancient scrolls in like the 1600s, and one belongs to a practicing revivalist sect in Greece, the other is in Cedar Rapids

[delicatesuitbarbarian]

Just a clarifying note. The “gilding” referred to would be silk-screening, an artistic (and extremely effective) technique that was used sparingly in zines back in The Day--starting with Interphase #1 in 1975. That was a Star Trek zine of course. In my zine library I also have examples of Starsky and Hutch and Blakes’s Seven zines using silk-screening.