(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] emergent.livejournal.com at 04:31am on 25/07/2008
If I follow you, I agree- but I'm not entirely sure I follow you. What does it mean to evaluatie and criticizing "based on an internal world" vs. "...based on the real world"?

Does it mean...

1) Text quality and 'interestingness' VS broader context?
2) Internal consistency and 'world coherence' VS some measure of 'quality'?
3) Making some comparison using the standards of the internal/local world VS broader standards?
4) Comparing only to other items in field/genre VS more global standards?

...or something else?
[parent entry] [link] [reply]
evilmagnus: (Default)

(no subject)

posted by [personal profile] evilmagnus at 05:06am on 25/07/2008
I think (and I'm reaching here), that this is in reference to Dr. Horrible's Singalong Blog. There's been much Angst amongst the Whedonites (Whedonistas?) about how Joss has betrayed his feminist credentials because this one time, in this universe, the female character was not kicking ass and taking names.

i.e., because Joss is perceived as feminist-friendly in the real world, all of his works must be judged on that. And if he writes a character in a world that isn't in line with this, even if it's necessary for the story he wishes to tell and consistent to that world, then he has somehow failed his fandom.
[link] [parent] [reply]

May

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  1
 
 2
 
 3
 
 4
 
 5
 
 6
 
7
 
 8
 
 9
 
 10
 
 11
 
 12
 
 13
 
14
1
 15
 
 16
 
 17
 
 18
 
 19
 
 20
 
21
 
 22
 
 23
 
 24
 
 25
 
 26
 
 27
 
28
 
 29
 
 30
 
 31