slashgen or preslash

[jmtorres]

I wish people didn't feel like everything needed a pairing label. Also, just because you're slashing them in your own head, it doesn't necessarily come out that way in fic: Cas being a stalker is kind of canon, it's not necessarily a pairing thing. I say this because I am getting sort of frustrated at reading things that are supposedly a particular pairing and then nothing pairing-like happens. I've started getting excited at seeing NC-17 in the labels not because I'm particularly interested in reading about them having sex but because it means I can fairly reliably expect them to be having an actual relationship and not just burgers. Not that I'm not up for cute burger-eating fluff, but it's gen and it's misleading to claim it's not.

*sigh*

Comments

[grey_bard]

Oh agreed on the preslash only if there is actual slash coming, but even *that* usage is unpopular in certain circles. I still think it is a useful label to have, though.

[niqaeli]

I dislike it really a lot. I find it -- honestly, it's the double-standard that drives me up the wall. If non-explicit het subtext can be called gen, then non-explicit slash subtext can be called gen too. I tolerate slashgen better because, well, at least it's calling itself gen in there somewhere.

But it's probably relevant that I hate the usage of gen that is no-romance, myself. It's insane to argue that romantic human relationships don't, you know, happen all the time. If the focus isn't on the pairing, honestly, it's gen.

This is just me, though. I speak for no one but my own damned self.

[grey_bard]

I like it not as a "You must put this label on it to save poor straight people from seeing it!!!" thing, but more as a useful "I would like slash subtext, thank you for telling me I can find it here".

Like, is preslash gen? Yes, yes it is. But it is a species of gen which perhaps a slash audience would particularly like and would like to be made aware of.

I certainly prefer it being called preslash to being called slash. If nothing happens, there is no slash!

[elspethdixon]

a useful "I would like slash subtext, thank you for telling me I can find it here".

*nods* When it comes to certain fandoms and pairings, I definitely have a preference for slash-friendly gen. And I always like it when I know an author shares my shipping preferences. Even gen can be written through the lens of an OTP -- shipping is about more than overt sex and romance. It's also about which character serves as another character's emotional lynchpin. And reading genfic where the wrong character is Character's A Most Important Person, or where there's obvious UST between characters who's relationship is enjoyable when platonic but would be squicky to you-the-reader if sexual (because the characters are siblings and you have an incest squick, or because mentor/student relationships squick you, or some other specific-relationship-dynamic squick, or because you'd really like to never be made to imagine character X having sex) can be as jarring as reading something where there's a textual, consummated romantic/sexual relationship that you don't ship.

Whereas gen that has a nice helping of slashy subtext in the flavor you prefer is often just as satisfying as fic with actual sex scenes.

[lotesse]

Oh yes this. I think I've used "romantic gen" before to describe this - I assume that readers will figure from the other header info if it's m/m or m/f or f/f. But - as a reader! - I want a word for it, because so often that's what I really want.

[kaptainvon]

I agree with jmtorres: using the prefix 'pre' implies that the slash is going to happen, that the subtext will become text and the UST be resolved at some stage. I think that has problems vis-a-vis false expectations and obligations and I probably wouldn't use it for that reason.

It might be fun to explicitly state "slash subtext" to inform potential readers that it's there if they look, but part of me's saying that subtext pointed out to the reader is less fun for all involved. It's like listing the characters in a header when one of them's being there is supposed to be not only a surprise, but the crux of the mystery plot you've been building up for three chapters. Etiquette and 'advertising' (for want of a better word) seem, sometimes, to be at odds with quality of writing/reading.

[grey_bard]

Every writer can choose to do as they wish. But on the other hand, sometimes it is nice for people to know *why* they might want to read your fic and it helps the fic find the audience that would like it.

[kaptainvon]

I know. It's a weird little conflict of interests, though, don't you think? Especially if the knowing-why-to-read actively counteracts the actual story by self-spoilering.

[grey_bard]

Well, it depends on whether the writer and the reader feel that it *does* counteract the story. For that matter, why does anyone ever list genre or pairing? Because many readers want to know and many writers want to let them know. Not everything is about the surprise.

It isn't for every story or everyone, but there are cases where it is a good option.

[elspethdixon]

Not everything is about the surprise.

Particularly romance, in some ways -- there's rarely any surprise about who the heroine's Designated Love Interest is going to be in a romance novel, and even in a series where there is some question (Will the heroine choose guy A or guy B?) it's generally a choice btween two characters who are both introduced as potential romantic leads early on in the series. If you get to book six and the heroine suddenly goes off to live happily ever after with guy C who's just appeared in this instalment, there's usually reader outcry (dieMicahdie. Diediedie and take the ardeur with you).

I think a lot of the appeal of certain kinds of romance plots for some readers is knowing the who from the get go and concentrating entirely on the how and the when. Not "will they fall in love?" but "when will they realize that they're in love?"

[ratcreature]

I dislike "pre-slash" as label too, but much of it is indeed focussed on the pairing and not gen. Much like I don't see in X-Files Mulder/Scully UST as "gen" just because there is no sex, it's MSR het.

I'd prefer if those stories labelled themselves as slash with UST if there is significant UST and pairing focus but no sex, and plain gen if it is all in the author's head, but I don't see it as a reader as more than friendship. That way it's clear what is/isn't happening, for slash just as for het.

[cimorene]

I've noticed the universal tag Unresolved Sexual Tension on A03. It seems useful for the promiseless, gen-like variety.

[grey_bard]

True, though it would need some kind of modifier or pairing tag or description to advertise the precise *flavor* of UST.

[jmtorres]

Yeah, UST is a good old fannish standard, but I maintain that it's not exactly present in two people eat burgers. Seriously. Burgers. Burgers are gen, damn it.