hope: Art of a woman writing from tour poster (bend this)
puddingsmith ([personal profile] hope) wrote2006-09-17 11:15 pm

subtext in fantexts

I think it's one of the potential drawbacks of slash that its very existence to an extent denies the possibility of homoerotic subtext in gen stories.

And yeah, okay, I know all you SPN readers out there will be "wtf! in gen stories they sleep in the same bed and give each other baths ALL THE TIME!" but, okay - frequently I also notice stories posted with notes like "subtexty wincest" or "pre-slash" or "you can read this as slash if you want" or "hints of slash".

In other words. SUBTEXT. Slash's existence potentially excises homoerotic subtext from non-slash stories: because as soon as there's subtext, frequently authors feel they have to re-classify. Which means a whole lot of things, most on the side of the audience reception to the story.

More than a few of the gen stories I really, really love - in this fandom and other fandoms - have strong subtext. That is just subtext. Juicy, homoerotic subtext. Which is satisfying in its own right; something completely other than slash. If I'm looking for slash to read, I won't be satisfied by something that's just subtext. And if I'm reading a gen story about a same-sex partnership, I'd be disappointed - even unsatisfied - if it was strikingly lacking in subtext.

Interestingly problematic division there, I reckon.

Interesting in terms of SPN specifically too; the text itself has such a strong subtext and text of emotional and physical intimacy; a queer reading of it is quite easy. It's fascinating watching people classify their stories as slash or non-slash when they re-create or even emphasise just a little the intimacy that occurs on the show itself.

[identity profile] executrix.livejournal.com 2006-09-17 01:57 pm (UTC)(link)
I think it's a question of "Which possibility, when?" Because I think it's perfectly possible to say, "In this story, Characters D and E are madly in love and banging like bunnies at every opportunity whereas Characters F and G have loving feelings for each other that are not sexual and Characters H and I really need to buy a vowel." And, for that matter, for the same writer's next story about D and E to have them as very good friends who are not sexually attracted at all.

I know I've read about the negative impact of popular Freudianism in the 1920s and after on lots of happy Boston Marriages (where the participants had to start thinking of themselves as at least potential lesbians) but even if it's uncomfortable for fictional characters to think through the implications of their feelings and actions, I think it's better for the poor darlings to stop deluding themselves....