Let's Talk January: Conflicting Headcanon!

[mithen]

tropicsbear asked about when fans' head canon disagrees with mine. I'm a real fan of "Live and let live" when it comes to fannish readings of canon, but I admit sometimes it can put me to the test. Recently I've been trying my hand at making gifsets, particularly of the 1980s Sherlock Holmes series with Jeremy Brett. The funny thing is I'll make gifsets of a scene that I think has a really clear reading, and then discover other people read the exact same moment very differently. Like this tiny moment, when Holmes returns from the dead and surprises Mrs. Hudson at Baker Street, then steps forward and gathers her into his arms:



Someone reblogged it with the commentary "You can totally see how uncomfortable he's getting and how he wishes this hug would be over already." Suffice to say that's not how I read it, but really, there's nothing in that moment that absolutely rules out either reading. Or another moment, where a nervous little girl thanks the very daunting Holmes and he gravely shakes her hand, and then:



I didn't read that as a particularly forced or fake smile (I know people whose natural smile is that little lip-twitch, that might be the reason), but based on the tags and commentary, others did. So putting up gifsets has been an interesting exercise in getting steady reminders that it's very possible to read exactly the same canon moments in dramatically different ways.

This tendency is exacerbated in comics, where there's just SO MUCH canon for key characters that there's no way it all fits into one continuity. I'm pretty sure there's been something like 50 Christmases celebrated in what was at most fifteen years of Batfamily continuity, for example. What that means is that however you wish to interpret a character, there is a LOT of canon to support your interpretation. For example, I hate the idea that Bruce was abusive or cruel to Dick when he was Robin. But there's no denying there are moments across the decades and decades of titles showing their interaction that could well be classified as cruel treatment. In fact, if you piled them all together, you could well have what would look like years of misery.

You could also put together enough scans to "prove" that Dick's time with Bruce was an idyllic time filled with tender moments! Comic book canon simply overflows the time available; as a result, one can cherry-pick the canon that they want.

Because of this, I have come to find it relatively easy to accept alternative versions of comic book characters I love: they've just contructed their version of the character from a different assortment of canon than I have. If someone prefers to see Batman as a child abuser, or Superman as an arrogant dick...well, that makes me sad (because I love my versions of them and I do rather wish everyone could see them as I do) but it's also got nothing to do with the characters I love, in some ways. I'm able to go on my merry shippy way.

So I don't tend to mind when someone's interpretation of characters is different from mine and they just don't like the characters. But I do confess the thing that puts me to the test are people who believe Bruce is a child abuser (or Sherlock is a sociopath or Thorin is horrible) and still write my OTP. If they write them off or make them the villain, I can ignore them. If they think they're awful but still put them into the pairing with the other character I love...well, that's back-button-and-brain-bleach time, usually followed by ranting at my long-suffering husband for a while. But that happens so rarely that my fannish experience is generally a positive one!

Comments

[tropicsbear]

I totally agree with everything you said in this entry. Most of the time I don't really mind other peoples' interpretations of a character. My pet peeve is when they force their interpretations on other people. Like, excuse me but that's not how I see *character's name*, stop trying to prove that my interpretation is "wrong."

[mithen]

I try REALLY hard to live and let live with alternate takes on canon, because--well, who does it hurt, really, if someone wants to see the characters or relationships differently than I do? It's not like it bothers Bruce, for example. *grin* And it only hurts me if I eat my heart out over it rather than hit the back button and move on...

[senmut]

FWIW, I interpret those scenes same as you.

(Also, thank you so for making the Brett gif sets. It's been SO nice to see them)

I totally agree with live/let live. And about comics continuity.

[mithen]

I've been so enjoying making the Brett gifsets! I've wanted to cultivate a more visual eye lately and they've been a lot of fun to try out my meager Photoshop skills on....

Comics is just a big constant facepalm for me right now...

[alltoseek]

Have you seen S3 of Sherlock yet? My biggest problem with this season (and I have lots of them!) is that even the writers could not agree on a characterisation. For any of the characters. They are all over the map - especially Sherlock.

Over the hiatus, with so little original canon, fic portrayals of Sherlock have been wandering farther and farther away from what I saw as IC according to the first two seasons. One thing I was really hoping is that watching S3 would remind people what Sherlock is really like.

Except the show writers themselves have no clue what he is really like - they portray him as being everything under the sun! Not just for disguises, I mean just for plot reasons - however they want to twist and turn the plot, they write Sherlock to fit. Instead of, you know, having a character's motives/reactions/character drive the plot.

They've got dark!Sherlock and fluffy!Sherlock and self-sacrificing!Sherlock and abusive!Sherlock and oblivious!Sherlock and understanding!Sherlock and massively-stupid-and-blind!Sherlock and and and... So pretty much the writers have given the green light to any characterisation anyone likes of Sherlock - write him however you like - it's IC!

[mithen]

Except the show writers themselves have no clue what he is really like - they portray him as being everything under the sun! Not just for disguises, I mean just for plot reasons - however they want to twist and turn the plot, they write Sherlock to fit. Instead of, you know, having a character's motives/reactions/character drive the plot.

That would work a lot better with more canon! It's kind of interesting because we've got so many contrary moments crammed into such a short time, it's a bit overwhelming! I'm kind of okay with having various Sherlocks to choose from for writing purposes, but it can lead to a pretty fragmented series....

[alltoseek]

Yes, exactly.

But the thing is, they had 270 minutes of more canon, exclusively Sherlock-focused, too. More canon doesn't seem to be helping them develop/explicate his character in any consistent coherent way. They have to want that before they can do that. I don't think they care enough at this point. They are just having fun with explosions and comedic moments and dramatic moments. They are writing for the tv audience who doesn't want to think but is just along for the ride and forgets everything as soon as the show is over.