Read on Twitter
I& #39;ve been thinking abt, the "ofc you need to understand the limits of ur perspective, but it still has value"
and. Actually, I kind of disagree with it as a blanket statement. One Westerner to another, lemme tell you your views do NOT in fact always matter. (I explain:)
and. Actually, I kind of disagree with it as a blanket statement. One Westerner to another, lemme tell you your views do NOT in fact always matter. (I explain:)
So using my anecdote abt the white kid in the ethnomusicology class asking why he can& #39;t call Islamic prayers music even though the prof presenting told us the practitioners specifically said it& #39;s not music as an example: sometimes your views have no value on a specific topic
It does not matter that you listened to a recording or watched a video and enjoyed the calls to prayer and thought it musical. You are not a practitioner nor is that culture and environment in which this is part of your soundscape your lived reality. So your views don& #39;t matter
In fact, it& #39;s not your job nor your right to come in and redecorate, so to speak. You are a guest in the space and a guest to the phenomenon. If anything the onus is on you to be a good guest and not an exploitive tourist.
Now of course, the anecdote doesn& #39;t 100% apply to danmei since danmei isn& #39;t a spiritual practice and since it IS media made to be consumed and interacted with. I use the anecdote not as a 1-for-1 comparison but an example of a paradigm
The paradigm being: if it is not your lived reality, there is absolutely no reason you should get to dictate in any real way how something is defined or used, or if there are any "problems" with it by yout standards.
Actually maybe this is a better example: so back in 2014, there was a rather major blowup/clash, between Goodreads communities, and fandom at large. The issue? Ppl were creating listings for fanfic on GR, and as GR does, rating and reviewing as they would indie pubbed m/m
the issue with that, then, being that they were critiquing things they didn& #39;t like, or spelling&grammar, or structural issues, and honestly sometimes/often in exaggerated outraged tones, as was the trend to lambast books you didn& #39;t like, bc those reviews were amusing to read
now I think pt of the reason some fanfic authors got unhappy is bc they thought it was another reposting site, and not a review site
ofc, some of the GR defenders derided unhappy fanfic authors & defended GR by saying it was a cataloging site, which imo is only part of the story
ofc, some of the GR defenders derided unhappy fanfic authors & defended GR by saying it was a cataloging site, which imo is only part of the story
the whole discourse around it was rather a lot and I got into several active heated arguments on it actually in GR librarian group, trying to explain why fanfic authors would be unhappy (I actually only learned later some thought it was reposting stories) abt rating+reviews
now, some of the arguments arising from the GR side was: they put the work out there. Rating and reviewing is our practice, and reviewers rights take precedent over author feelings & authors don& #39;t have the right to suppress reviews (which makes sense for indie pub w $ involved)
But like.. obv, as far as fandom conventions go, you dl;dr, bc fanfic authors are not just hobbyists but also fans who are *sharing* their passion with you, not *creating a work for consumption* for market share. In a fandom spaces, it& #39;s not the same author-audience paradigm
So I was trying to explain why fanfic authors might be upset abt their works removed from the intended context (fannish context) & treated in unintended waya to ppl in the GR groups/threads on this topic, and being met with a lot of resistance lmao, bc Their Opinions Matter 
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="đ" title="Auf den Kopf gestelltes Gesicht" aria-label="Emoji: Auf den Kopf gestelltes Gesicht">
It didn& #39;t matter to them that fannish contexts had certain conventions and that fannish politeness worked certain ways; their arguments kinda went to: we perceived it and critiqued it and we have the right to interact with it how we want per our community conventions
But... fanworks AREN& #39;T created for a Goodreads context & target audience as far as intended textual interactions go. So for me GRers arguing "well we& #39;re also a type of fan, and we have our ways and we interact with it our way here"... didn& #39;t really hold water
I remember making an analogy of archeologists excavating an artefact of another culture and bringing it back to a museum for that culture to invite critique on based on *their* standards and practices
djvdjdn twt format defeats me once again
i give up on this thread, may come back and try to rework it or just... delete it lmao...https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="đ" title="EnttĂ€uschtes Gesicht" aria-label="Emoji: EnttĂ€uschtes Gesicht">
i give up on this thread, may come back and try to rework it or just... delete it lmao...
