fandom quiz

[jmtorres]

echan and I have spent seriously, like, three hours, discussing fannish categorizations of material as it strays further and further from canon. We are interested in your opinions on the following:

In reference to vidding:
What constitutes canon (or nonviolation of canon)?
What constitutes an AU?
What constitutes constructed reality?

Where are the lines between these categories? What separates them? What rationales and characteristics can you use to differentiate between them?

Where does crossover fall in this scale?
Does the use of secondary sources make a vid fall into one category or another?

Second verse: would you care to tackle the same questions (as relevant) wrt fanfiction?

If you're very good, I may post my own thoughts on this matter when I am less drunk.

Comments

[laurashapiro]

I've been wondering about AU vs. constructed reality for years now. Fic just seems to have AUs, with "constructed reality" being a term only used for vids. But is there a difference? Is "constructed reality" just an AU in vid form?

I have no idea.

I feel like there's a clear line between CR and canon, but things like slash or unconventional het pairings (Claire-Sylar ::shudder::) make it seem fuzzy again. Those who privilege authorial intent would argue that all shippy vids in which the characters are not canonically in a romantic/sexual relationship are by definition CR/AU, but I don't see it that way, exactly.

It's confusing!

My $.02

[tamtrible]

Mostly wrt fanfic, I don't watch many vids, really....

For me, the line for canon is... no provable violation of established source material, as of the time of initial writing (that is, as of the last source material the author watched/read before writing), or at least as of when the story is set. I don't really count things that were made AU by subsequent changes in source material

Things like slash relationships only fall under AU if it is categorically established that the character Has Not Done That. Otherwise, unless the camera (or "camera") has been following the character 24/7, it's always possible that they've been getting sexed up (or whatever) on the sly.

Also not really considered are silly/trivial violations of Prior Canon, that are obviously either errors or minor jokes. That is, at worst, bad writing, but not really AU.

Constructed reality is not really a term I've run across before, I think it may be a vids-only thing. AU is... anything that substantially violates canon. Ranging from "Canon relationship? What canon relationship?" to "Our Heroes in the Wild West".

Crossovers can be AU or non-AU, or AU for only one source. I'm inclined to call them AU (for at least one source) if the "rules" of at least one source need to be violated to get the two to cross. For example, a Bab 5 x-over with any of the Star Treks would kind of have to be AU. But Doctor Who could cross over with a wide variety of things without actually going AU, because, well, he does things like that. And pretty much any set-in-reality-today source could cross without going AU. But (imo) crossovers don't really need to be *labeled* AU in cases of clashing source material, since it's kind of obvious.

As to vids with non-source material, I'd only really count them as AU if, again, they somehow violate established canon. Though I might be a bit stricter about it than I would be with fanfics, in terms of provably established canon, since the medium is a bit more... exact, in any case. In a fic, bad characterization or the like is simply a matter of sloppy writing, rather than "bad" source.

[china_shop]

I'm still new to vidding and probably wrong about everything (*g*), but this made me wonder whether a vid is AU or CR (and I guess I tend to think of vids as more CR than AU simply because with vids, the reality is so very constructed, whereas with fic, we were making up all of the words from scratch anyway /digression) if there is substantial re-purposing of footage. By which I mean, if you approach the footage out of context, ignoring what came before or after each shot, and try to create a new story. Use X's reaction to an apple and re-contextualise it as a reaction to the TARDIS, or fudge it so in context it looks like it's person A in that long-shot when it's actually person B. Plus manips, etc.

I know all vidding has an element of that, but in non-AU/CR vids, don't we generally assume the viewer will bring the context to the vid, whereas with AU/CR, we're hoping they'll be able to put it aside?

Actually, now I've confused myself. Ot1h, there's trelkez's OT3 White Collar festivid, Let's Misbehave (I'm late for work, so no link, sorry), which I don't think of as CR, really, but which tells a new story by re-purposing clips with abandon. Maybe it is CR and I'm just not classifying it as such because I want to believe? And otoh, I read the BtVS bootcamp thread from way back when, and the posters there were very aware of the context of each clip, and the connotations and resonance that flowed from the surrounding scene/episode, and I've totally lost my train of thought, sorry... *fail*

*scampers off to work*

[katta]

I haven't heard the term constructed reality before. Would that be the same thing as an elseworld? Because in fic, I think there's a very real difference between single-change AU fic such as "nothing after season 4 happened" or, more drastically, "Buffy Summers never came to Sunnydale" and elseworld AU stories of the "everyone is a pirate" kind. And crossovers could be either of those. I guess that translates to vids as well?

[niqaeli]

I pretty much view constructed reality as a vidding term and something that involves going abroad from your main source to construct. So, my Barrayar vid concept: well, given I don't have *any* A/V source for the fandom, it's pretty much a pure constructed reality. Then also things like vids for fic that require you to go afield of the original source qualify for me.

My view of canon vs. AU is really stretchy because I spent a long time in comics fandom and ahahahaha. Yeah. Also, I'm a huge genre fan so. Yeah. Canon AUs happen a lot. But I do make a distinction between an AU and an alternate timeline. Alternate universe, to me, is dragons, or high school, or 18th and 19th century military. Alternate timelines, are fairly obvious: the what-ifs and could-have-beens and if this-had-been different. I actually regard always-female or always-male AUs and their related ilk to actually strictly be alternate timelines. It's one tweak and then everything falls out from how their lives would be different.