Thank you for appreciating that [post is here]! It always feels like I’m going out in front of a firing squad when I say that “creating/consuming dark fiction is not endorsement of it in real life” because people who do conflate those will insist that I’m an x,y,z-apologist. No. That’s incorrect.
ANOTHER WALL OF TEXT™ what is happening to me? I just miss you guys a lot, that’s what 😉
“Why did this person say/do this thing?”
I support the creation and consumption of dark content in media, in fic/art/music/etc. as a means of exploring it, as a means of unpacking it, as a means of trying to figure out where it comes from and how to recognize it. Sometimes it’s not so easy to pick out the “bad guy.” Sometimes the “abuser” seems to be a “good” person. Sometimes the “abuser” is reenacting their own trauma. Finding reasons for a behavior are not excuses for that behavior, but it can help provide answers for those of us who want them.
~Story time~
My grandmother was a tough old lady, what we call a “battle-axe.” She was blunt and tactless, and downright MEAN most of the time. She raised her children through terror and bullying, held grudges for decades, was short-tempered with her in-laws and grandchildren.
She was also very smart in her role as a professor in a college, and had a sweetness to her that very few people in my family experienced bc they were so deterred by her tough exterior. I was one of the few who got close to her, and I wanted to know why she behaved the way she did to others.
Seeing movies like Mommie Dearest, in which Joan Crawford was portrayed as somewhat of battle-axe to everyone in her life, too, I could see similarities between her and my grandmother.
Could my grandmother have had the kind of pressure in her life that Joan did, competing with the misogyny in her career? I thought so.
Both of these women set incredibly high expectations for themselves and others, and then reacted badly if reality didn’t meet their expectations. They were not good at handling disappointment and would take it out on others.
In other media, I would see “only” children worshiped by their parents and then these women were dissatisfied, bitter adults, who would never get that kind of attention again. (Not sure about Joan Crawford, but that was my grandmother’s childhood.)
^What I’m saying is that media (fic/movies/books/music/etc.) gave me insights as to why my grandmother behaved the way she did. It provided reasons for the behavior. I didn’t take these as excuses, but it increased my empathy for her and others I met who were like her. Rather than do as the rest of my family did, by writing her off as “a mean old lady,” I could understand her and navigate my way into a better relationship with her. They missed out on her good parts because of her bruises.
^The first time I saw this graphic, I felt that expression in my soul. These are fictional characters. They are not real.
Writers write them. What is “writing” anyway, but speculative reality? We used to call fanfiction “specs,” short for “speculative fiction.” It’s thoughts. Not all writing is for idealized versions of life and/or wish-fulfillment.
I’ve heard from VC fans who are survivors of child abuse, sexual abuse, etc. who said that VC helped them in some way,
whether it was recognizing that the abuse they suffered really was abuse (and not normal!),
or whether they have since made fanworks with VC characters that helped them explore their own past and examine it from a place of safety,
or in consuming other fanworks, they got some closure on their own experiences in some way and were able to heal or begin to do so,
or just in making friends here that have helped them through difficult times,
I could go on and on… there is enormous value in creating/consuming dark fiction.
Whatever Anne Rice’s agenda is/was in writing the Vampire Chronicles, it doesn’t matter to me, because of how much good I have witnessed that has come from it. If some of her inspiration for certain aspects seems relevant to me, I consider it, but it doesn’t really matter as far as I’m concerned.
It all really boils down to the old adage “Live and Let Live.”
For the most part, yes, I am grateful for that blessing EVERY DAY. Seriously. Every SJW™ argument that passes my dash, I breathe easier when I see that it’s not for OUR fandom.
Fiction =/= Reality. Fiction has been used for centuries to explore and investigate things we love about Reality, things we don’t understand, even things we find repulsive about Reality. Fiction is in fact Speculative Reality: “What if X happened to Y? How would that improve our understanding of X and Y?”
To investigate the text thoughtfully is one thing, but our fandom veterans -myself included- can see that a lot of this SJW Culture™ seems more about “calling out,” choosing a Problematic™ topic to battle with (there are tons in our canon to choose from!) and using that as an excuse to attack, rather than the desire for a rational discussion. They often do this in the name of Righteousness (for popularity? Or just their own satisfaction?), but there are so many Problematic™ topics that are NOT simply black or white, topics which have been argued about long before the internet, and will continue to be argued about forever! I’ve seen good blogs deactivate (or go on hiatus) for being dogpiled for the slightest headcanon or SJW disagreements, and that’s not what I want to promote in our fandom, regardless of who’s right.
PSA: If you ever see one of my posts that gets you all fired up like “Ooooh she is so wrong about this and I’m gonna lay the SMACKDOWN now!” just know that I do not, as a general policy, engage in public SJ debate. I might be willing to discuss things privately if you approach me in a respectful manner with facts to back up your claims. I don’t run this blog for Social Justice™ points. I DO NOT CARE ABOUT SOCIAL JUSTICE™ POINTS.
1. Headcanon is like an opinion is like an arse, everyone’s got their own.
2. Headcanon is in fact an interpretation, nothing more nothing less.
3. Don’t preach your headcanon as some universal truth.
4. All the three above apply to readers as well, not only rpers, of course.
Please don’t get upset if/when someone disagrees w/ your interpretation, just remember it’s about fictional characters, and not a personal attack. Even if the facts are from canon itself, some ppl may choose not to recognize some canon facts.
//I don’t want to be rude or whatever, but fictionkin is not a real thing. You cannot be the soul of a fictional character. An author worked hard to come up with and create these characters–they sprang from their head and their hard work. It’s disrespectful to claim otherwise.
I really don’t want to see this become a “thing” in this fandom, because we don’t need people claiming and being allowed to claim they are “The Real Lestat” etc. etc.
This is a thing? I don’t mean to be rude either, just saying, for one’s own sanity, these are fictional characters ‘mkay?
I’ve been trying to find a way to put these thoughts into words (words that will not bring my favourite hate anon back with a vengeance) since i-want-my-iwtv mentioned this earlier today. However, I suppose I will take the chance because fuck it, I’m going on hiatus tomorrow anyway.
tl;dr – I think if Armand was convinced that this was something Claudia truly wanted (and let’s be honest, with his Mind Gift, it wouldn’t be hard for him to determine) then he would have no problems going forward with this relationship. He sees Claudia mostly as the woman she is inside her mind and less as the child she is in body only. While the relationship presents some challenges, I think it is possible and have no problems roleplaying it as such.
It is true that my Armand is pursuing a romantic, and hence possible sexual relationship, with a Claudia. She has been aged up in that thread to avoid the usual legal and moral implications that would be involved with a five year old appearing body involved with a seventeen year old appearing one. However, with the way the characters are, I would not have shied away from a relationship with a canon Claudia for them either (only used fade to black because while Armand may not have issues with it, I sort of squick at writing that).
However, the big issue for me is that while Claudia may LOOK like a child, she isn’t. Armand, a character who is the most cerebral of the coven. He knows what is going on in everyone’s mind and will occasionally alter it to his own liking. Because of this, my headcanon is that outward appearance means little to him. He sees people the way they see themselves. So when he looks at Claudia, he sees the adult woman she truly is and not the body she is trapped in.
That does not mean to say that he is completely oblivious to the implications of a relationship with her. It would not be possible for the two of them to be romantic in public, risking mortals making a scene. Even the coven (particularly Louis I would think) would raise a fuss at the two of them together. These would be of concern but in the end would not sway them necessarily.
Most of all, for Armand, who was kidnapped to be used for sexual pleasure at a young age, he would be most concerned with making sure this was what SHE wanted. Armand is portrayed over and over as selfish but I believe that he has a soft spot for victims of human trafficking and sex crimes. It is one of the reasons I disregard anything past him meeting the sun in his canon because the whole story line with Benji and Sybelle is so far from my understanding of the character that I can’t believe it to be the same Armand.
I-want-my-IWTV 