character identification redux
Oct. 15th, 2008 03:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
meganbmooreOver at ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
fanficrants, there's a post about obsessive shipping that also covers one of my big pet peeves: "Character identification." A quote from the post:
favorite pairing is the best and complex and sophisticated despite evidence on the contrary and the fact that 90% of this person's belief are based on personal insight and in short project their own feelings and emotions onto the characters. As someone who has had addictions and has had experience in therapy, I will never use my own experience as an excuse to see the characters the way I want, much less glorify them. I can't stand it when threads that go well turn into personal rants about how the author misses the Point of Ship X because it wasn't written the way they wanted and that anyone who disagrees with them is treated like the scum between their toes and mentally incompetent. I just wanna post there and NOT discuss your retarded diatribes (even if it was something I agree with) because they are based on personal experience and PURE subjectivity.
See, here's one of my two big things* about character identification: as soon as you start seeing yourself in a character, it's possible-and even probable, that you're also projecting onto a character. Do you see the character wanting what the text indicates they want, or what you would want if you were the character? If you see something between them and another character, is it because they actually are interested in that character, or because you would be if you were them? If you see the other character reciprocating, are they reciprocating, or is it that you want them to reciprocate, because it would be giving your character what you think they want?
Here's a very common scenario in fiction(read: almost everything ever set in high school, or almost anything with a large cast): You have characters A, B, and C. B and C canonically love each other. A flirts with B, though it isn't clearly stated if it's empty flirting, or indicates real interest. B will acknowledge but not respond in kind, or ignore it. This can indicate complete disinterest, lack of time for such things, or consideration for C's feelings. More often than not, the most logical interpretation is that A's flirting is meaningless, or meant as a distraction, hiding true motives, etc., and B knows it.
But say you identify with A, and you like B, and think B reciprocates. Can you honestly say that this is because there is something to indicate this, or is it a case of you see yourself in A, and if you were A, the flirting would mean real interest, and since you see yourself in A, you want the feelings to be reciprocated?
Or say you identify with B, and as a character, you prefer A to C, and if you were to fall for someone, You would fall for A, not C. And since you see yourself in the character, you interpret your motives as the character's motives.
Are you looking at the character as the character, or the character as you?
Here's the thing: identifying with a character is probably the first and best sign that you should be more critical of your interpretation, to examine how much of the interpretation is the character, and how much is what you want for the character, and what would be the case if you were the character. Some people need emotional involvement to get into fiction, and find that through character identification. And there's nothing remotely wrong with that. But identifying with a character makes objectivity difficult, and discussions stemming from it tend to be partly or wholly from the perspective of "speaker as character" not "speaker looking at character as portrayed."
*The other is that, like the varieties of "I wanted to be a boy when I was young" or "girls were mean to me in the 9th grade," and other emotion/history reasons it turns a discussion from being about fiction to being about the person. Disagreement is no longer disagreement with their opinion, it's disagreement with them as a person, and casts them as your victim. It's a defensive mechanism that's usually used when something can't be defended objectively, and the speaker doesn't want to admit that they may really not have much beyond personal wants and preferences to stand on. There's nothing wrong with admitting that.
ETA: I think I abused my right to use the word "here." Then again, that's probably normal.
ETA 2: It's been brought to my attention that a lot of this came up in a private conversation, and parts may have come up in other private conversations. As I had mostly forgotten about the first, I may have forgotten about others. I think I've said this before, but I promise, I never make any posts directed at a person to say I think they're wrong about something. If I voice my disagreement, I do it with the person whereever it came up. I don't believe in withholding my opinions or tailoring my LJ for others, but I also don't believe in public attacks on an individual. Most of what I've said has been in open posts and conversations here before, though scattered, and what I'm talking about is pretty common fodder at![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
fandom_wank , hated_character , fanficrants , fandomsecrets (as both secrets and comments in discussions), metafandom , a few other communities, and a couple non-lj-related places I visit from time to time. Pretty much all my fandom commentary posts are spawned from them.
fanficrants, there's a post about obsessive shipping that also covers one of my big pet peeves: "Character identification." A quote from the post:favorite pairing is the best and complex and sophisticated despite evidence on the contrary and the fact that 90% of this person's belief are based on personal insight and in short project their own feelings and emotions onto the characters. As someone who has had addictions and has had experience in therapy, I will never use my own experience as an excuse to see the characters the way I want, much less glorify them. I can't stand it when threads that go well turn into personal rants about how the author misses the Point of Ship X because it wasn't written the way they wanted and that anyone who disagrees with them is treated like the scum between their toes and mentally incompetent. I just wanna post there and NOT discuss your retarded diatribes (even if it was something I agree with) because they are based on personal experience and PURE subjectivity.
See, here's one of my two big things* about character identification: as soon as you start seeing yourself in a character, it's possible-and even probable, that you're also projecting onto a character. Do you see the character wanting what the text indicates they want, or what you would want if you were the character? If you see something between them and another character, is it because they actually are interested in that character, or because you would be if you were them? If you see the other character reciprocating, are they reciprocating, or is it that you want them to reciprocate, because it would be giving your character what you think they want?
Here's a very common scenario in fiction(read: almost everything ever set in high school, or almost anything with a large cast): You have characters A, B, and C. B and C canonically love each other. A flirts with B, though it isn't clearly stated if it's empty flirting, or indicates real interest. B will acknowledge but not respond in kind, or ignore it. This can indicate complete disinterest, lack of time for such things, or consideration for C's feelings. More often than not, the most logical interpretation is that A's flirting is meaningless, or meant as a distraction, hiding true motives, etc., and B knows it.
But say you identify with A, and you like B, and think B reciprocates. Can you honestly say that this is because there is something to indicate this, or is it a case of you see yourself in A, and if you were A, the flirting would mean real interest, and since you see yourself in A, you want the feelings to be reciprocated?
Or say you identify with B, and as a character, you prefer A to C, and if you were to fall for someone, You would fall for A, not C. And since you see yourself in the character, you interpret your motives as the character's motives.
Are you looking at the character as the character, or the character as you?
Here's the thing: identifying with a character is probably the first and best sign that you should be more critical of your interpretation, to examine how much of the interpretation is the character, and how much is what you want for the character, and what would be the case if you were the character. Some people need emotional involvement to get into fiction, and find that through character identification. And there's nothing remotely wrong with that. But identifying with a character makes objectivity difficult, and discussions stemming from it tend to be partly or wholly from the perspective of "speaker as character" not "speaker looking at character as portrayed."
*The other is that, like the varieties of "I wanted to be a boy when I was young" or "girls were mean to me in the 9th grade," and other emotion/history reasons it turns a discussion from being about fiction to being about the person. Disagreement is no longer disagreement with their opinion, it's disagreement with them as a person, and casts them as your victim. It's a defensive mechanism that's usually used when something can't be defended objectively, and the speaker doesn't want to admit that they may really not have much beyond personal wants and preferences to stand on. There's nothing wrong with admitting that.
ETA: I think I abused my right to use the word "here." Then again, that's probably normal.
ETA 2: It's been brought to my attention that a lot of this came up in a private conversation, and parts may have come up in other private conversations. As I had mostly forgotten about the first, I may have forgotten about others. I think I've said this before, but I promise, I never make any posts directed at a person to say I think they're wrong about something. If I voice my disagreement, I do it with the person whereever it came up. I don't believe in withholding my opinions or tailoring my LJ for others, but I also don't believe in public attacks on an individual. Most of what I've said has been in open posts and conversations here before, though scattered, and what I'm talking about is pretty common fodder at
fandom_wank , hated_character , fanficrants , fandomsecrets (as both secrets and comments in discussions), metafandom , a few other communities, and a couple non-lj-related places I visit from time to time. Pretty much all my fandom commentary posts are spawned from them.