the shadow the original content creator casts

[rthstewart]

So, I was going to post something exploring raykel's discussion earlier about adults playing with toys that are really intended for children. But before we do that, knitress wrote the following:

As someone who just stumbled into this, the whole ur doing it wrong thing seems very parallel to some of the debates in Lewis scholarship/'scholarship'/worship. Joy Gresham, Mrs. Moore, Lewis' lifelong friend Arthur Greeves.
I mean, if you're going to go on at huge length about what the original author would have wanted, shouldn't you, y'know, learn something about his actual life?

lady_songsmith and andi_horton have both said, oh yes, please share your reading list!

And so knitress has said she will post her reading list. This is an interesting exercise in a couple of respects.

• There are a lot of people in the Narnia fandom who assert that adhering to Lewis' intent is very important, so illuminating what Lewis did intend and separating that from what others think he intended is interesting. I know some of you know far more about Lewis' life and art than I do, so do share, if you are so inclined.
• Stepping back a few meters, some folks really like this sort of exercise at the more philosophical level -- who if anyone has the right to interpret something once it is freed into the wilds. Assuming we do understand the author and what he or she intended, what modicum of respect is owed the original creator? Or his or her designee or progeny? Gresham named Ramandu's Daughter Liliandil for the DT film. Rowling asked once that people not include underage sexual content in HP fic? Does any of that mean anything? Should it?
• Last, there is the frustration all authors feel when the reader doesn't get what you intended. Sometimes it's a flaw in the writing; sometimes though it probably doesn't matter how clear you are, right? The reader is going to take what the reader is going to take.

In response to the above, divining authorial intent isn't something I usually worry about. I take a plain language view to borrow from a canon of statutory construction -- if it's there on the page, literally or thematically, it's fair game.  I'm more interested in exploring what I and others think about their work, and the community that develops around that exploration then I am in understanding more of what the author thought about his or her work. People pull more than I intended out of my work all the time and frequently I have no greater intent than "Shiny! let's try that!" and "Gosh I love that line. Let me build 10,000 words to include it." Or, "fandom poke. poke. poke."

Admittedly, TSG Peter and I both share extreme ineptitude in the areas of philosophy, theology, and languages. Being a shallow sort, I do not usually ask the big questions. (Though when I told Clio that, she said that I may assert the absence of a rear view mirror and claim inability to think big thoughts but that's because I pour my philosophical musings into fic.)  I decline to speculate as that would call for introspection.

Comments

[linneasr.livejournal.com]

Dear Rth,

I wish I had a quip or a comment that would help brush away the mean-spirited comments that some people make to you, or a magical shield that I could erect around your creative mind.

The value of the fiction that you are writing is soo big, in that you are providing grown ups with a way to see ourselves, our lives and our experiences & situations in Narnia. Narnia! A world of magic and wonder, where the beasts & trees talk and love!

I'm well into middle age (as you know :-)) and I don't want to leave my self & my maturity (if there is any) behind when I visit Narnia. It's a great place, but Clive Staples did write it for children, and at a certain point, I needed more juice to the story to be able to stay enchanted - which you are providing. Of course I want to see the complex, dynamic world I live in today reflected and refracted into this fictional place! Why wouldn't I?

There is a view of the world which believes that it is better, safer, and wiser to delimit and deny that which "shouldn't" be there (according to a 2000 year old story, but it's not necessary to go there right now). This is, at the core, the same view which veils women and hides them behind laws and walls "for their own protection." Do we really want to surrender to this view?

Have courage, Rth. You're writing fiction, and I do hope it's a fun hobby - because it's a very fun read - and you're also bringing light to a very dark corner of the world, for who knows who might read your material today and open their minds tomorrow? And if their minds open because you mentioned a same-sex giraffe-relationships in AW, perhaps they'll be kinder to a gay man or a lesbian in RL someday.

The meaning of what you're doing in Not-My-Children's Narnia is important: it's about freedom, and courage, and honesty & integrity. It's about having confidence in one's own imagination, and that's very important. Not to mention the occasional terrible pun.

Please continue writing.

Best wishes.
And lots of magical shields.

[rthstewart.livejournal.com]

Write. Well, and right. Thank you. The less I saw the better and we'll just let this one go. Thank you again.

[harmony-lover.livejournal.com]

YES. I can't thank linneasr enough for saying all of this so elegantly. I only found this thread today (and that's because my own RL has been eating away all my energy and mental capacity), and at any other time I would be writing my own long commentary on authorial intent and fic and free speech, etc. However, at the moment I will simply agree wholeheartedly, and say that no one, Ruth, should be more proud of what they accomplish with their writing than you. Not-My-Children's Narnia conveys so much about love, hope, integrity, compassion, and all the kinds of love in the world. You have created so much that is beautiful, and you have given me ways to go back to Narnia as an adult that I never thought I would have. You are pushing others to reconsider their own moral compasses, and decide whether the values they adhere to are truly the ones they want to carry in the world. Do not be discouraged, ever, by the naysayers. Just remember how much we all love you for what you create.

[rthstewart.livejournal.com]

Thank you for pausing in your very busy life to comment. I do hope things have calmed down and I know RL has been difficult!

I told someone today that I just feel more under siege than ever before. The loss of a couple of readers over recent chapters of AW really stings, still, in this case because I know they have not left the fandom, just me, so yeah, it IS personal. Then the usual steady stream of FB, commentary and PMs that use the word "uncomfortable," or mention nothing but the typo I missed two years ago, or that it's gotten dull and dry and whatnot and so I conclude that maybe it's a hint and I've overstayed the welcome. I know, DRAMA QUEEN. Ridiculous. Not even a First World Problem. So I did not commit pseudo-cide last night as I very much wished to and just soldiered on.

And I do hope you have some days of stress free goodness.

[harmony-lover.livejournal.com]

I just want to note that I have tried, three times now, to reply to you via PM. The first two times my messages were wiped out by forces beyond my understanding - LJ fluke? The third time, my wireless connection had cut out, and I lost all the text when I tried to send. It's not my fault! I will send you a regular e-mail at some point, and hopefully that will work better. :)

[rthstewart.livejournal.com]

Really, sometimes Google Chat or Skype (text not voice) is SO MUCH EASIER. Hang in there!