nntp2http.com
Posting
Suche
Optionen
Hilfe & Kontakt

ON TOPIC: Respecting Roddenberry's Vision

Von: ToolPackinMama (philnblanc@comcast.net) [Profil]
Datum: 30.04.2010 07:48
Message-ID: <hrdr05$8ds$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Newsgroup: alt.startrek alt.tv.star-trek.tos
Gene Roddenberry is the only one who can really say what his vision was.
He's dead now, and all we have is the evidence. People do well to
cultivate their own vision instead. I'm very inspired by Gene, but I
don't worship the guy. He was a man, not a god. Life goes on. He'd want
us to go on with it, I think.

If somebody (like me, for example) caricatures Kes and 7of9 as Lesbian
lovers in a parody with the intention of entertaining people with
something funny, it shouldn't be judged to be disrespectful to the
vision or to the characters. Comedy has its own rules. It's a kind of
pornography. Porn doesn't have to be great art, it only has to make you
feel horny to do its job. Comedy doesn't have to make sense or be right:
it only has to make you laugh. If somebody is laughing then comedy has
done its job. What makes you horny, what makes you laugh, what works for
you is a very personal thing.

Some people are sickened by the thought of bondage, others love it. The
different kinds of porn and comedy don't have to appeal to everybody to
be justified: all kinds of subgroups need to be served.

We love the TREK universe and characters, but that doesn't mean we have
no right to play with them in our imaginations any way we want to. We
have the right to publish whatever lunacy results from these musings,
yes. Free speech does have rules, however. Free speech rules say that no
one has the right to libel or slander Gene, Bill, Leonard, or any of the
fine *real people* who worked so hard to entertain us. We also do not
have the right to libel each other via the net, nor to casts aspersions
upon each other, nor to cast our fellow fanfic writers in a false light
or in any other way attempt to tarnish their reputations and spoil their
social and professional chances, simply because we might disagree with
their vision, or style. There's a law against that sort of thing.
Behaving emotionally is one thing, but acting in a criminal manner is
something else.

Considered criticism is just as valuable as praise to a serious writer.
It's not an insult to a writer to disagree with a detail in a story, or
question their reasons for a particular bit. In the real world,
professional writers have to tolerate lots of nitpicking of this sort.
Spelling and grammar corrections are niggling and petty, but also
useful. Anyone who is serious about writing should welcome feedback of
all kinds. I have changed things in many of my works because one of my
readers had a good reason for being bothered by it. If I agree with a
critic I'll take their advice, and my work is better for it.

I care what people think. I just refuse to care too much!

I advise you all to honor your own vision first. It's your own spark of
divine fire: cherish it. But respect other people's rights to have a
different vision. That's what freedom is about.

Freedom does not mean mighty, moneyed Paramount has a right to stifle a
poor little commentator's artistic self-expression.

Freedom also does not mean the majority may freely bully the minority
into silence. That is not an exercise in freedom, but in tyranny. Gene
wouldn't go for THAT, I know!


[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]

Antworten