If the Reavers were created by a toxin, how does that jibe with them making more reavers just by being seen, as happened in Bushwhacked?

I'd probably have to fanwank this myself, but I think I can. In the Firefly pre-movie 'verse, Reavers are nearly mythical creatures. Boogie men that are often thought not to be anything more than ghost stories. Anything Mal tells us is pure theory. He says, if I recall, "one way to deal with that kind of will is to become it, I suspect." I made sure I had words like "one way" and "I suspect" to make clear these were theories. It is not a given for Mal that survivor boy is going to go all reaver (or he never would have brought him on board.) He makes that leap when he is told there is evidence of mutilation -- he knows it has to be self mutilation, since he knows they didn't do it and that self mutilation is a thing reavers do.

"Bushwhacked" was designed to do the thing all the early eps were burdened with doing: introducing the characters and the 'verse in the absence of the network showing the gorram pilot. It's structured to clearly illustrate the two extremes of the world: too much civilization and too much liberty. It was a way to place our people somewhere in the middle. And give an excuse to revisit Simon and River's fugitive status, and have everyone interrogated so we could meet them in a clear way. Bascially just hitting every important expositional point with narrative.

One last fanwank that isn't mine. I may have read it here, but I like it -- when Mal and Zoe search the ship, food is still on plates, mid-meal. It looks like everyone just stopped and vanished. This could prefigure Miranda. Someone suggested that the reavers Pax-ed the ship and that survivor boy was the small per cent that didn't lie down. Could work.

And thanks, Zenkitty!

Ha. I'm sorry, but it cracks me up every time. It's like, "Yep, they're not under here!" I mean, I can fanwank it as their being very thorough (leave no placemat unturned!).

Well, I'd be claiming it as an homage to the search scene in Life of Brian: "Found this wooden spoon, Sarge".

I was wondering, where exactly does the term "fanwank" come from? 'Cos, you all know what wank means in Britain, yes?

When it comes (no pun intended) to differences between the movie and the Firefly backstory, I just view it as something that had to be done for the sake of the story and pacing of the movie, and leave it at that.

However, now you've made me think about it, is there a reason why the original "psychosis breeds psychosis" theory can't fit with the Pax reality? Pax makes the Gen 1 Reavers, all subsequent Reavers are created as a result of Gen 1 Reaver attacks.

where exactly does the term "fanwank" come from?

Fanwank

Cheers! I had a quick google, but that brought up fanwank, rather than an explanation for it. I couldn't quite work out the link to wank, other than "That explanation is completely wank"! But stroking the ego works for me. As a concept, I hasten to add. ;)

Originally, fanwank was used to describe elements of the (canonical) story that existed for no other reason than to please the fans--usually a reference to a past storyline. In some fandoms (esp. this corner of ours) it has taken on the meaning described in that TVwiki link (although the TVwiki definition is the meaning I intend when I use it) but that's not the original meaning.

added in edit...

This is a better explanation of the original meaning of fanwank than the one I provided above:

fanwank - This term has its roots in very crude slang. It describes a story in which the writer is showing off intricate knowlege of the series by pulling in as many threads from the series continuity as possible and tying them together. Fanwank pays homage to the writer (rather than the series) for being so clever. Other, non wankish stories can artfully weave new ideas in with series continuity and tie them all together in a way that makes the reader go "Wow!" But fanwank relies on cleverly arranging continuity rather than creating a good plot.

Retcon is an older and less crudely expressed concept, and is distinguished by being actually canonical.

On Reaver-Pax: Just rewatched Bushwhacked for the second time since seeing the movie and the Paxed ship thing still works for me (at least as well as some of the other things we're asked to believe in the series/movie) if you can assume a short (hours? days?) active half-life for Pax in atmosphere so that our heroes don't get Paxified when they unsuit. I thought about that when Mal was cracking his cap and what a different story it'd be if the Pax were still active.

Placemats revealing River and Simon: This makes me smile every time because I've seen law enforcement officers act like that in real life. Looking inside a breadbox for a suspect or flipping through a notebook while searching for stolen stereo equipment, I guess it's part of the training. I think the scene would maybe have been less without that. And the reveal to the outside of the ship with our sibling-pair is ALWAYS beautiful. The look of unabashed delight on River's face, the look of fear on Simon's, they whole prettyness of it makes me want to watch it again. If the shot had included the big cruiser hanging over their heads looking like it's ready to crush them just for being so insignificant I think I'd need a towel.

The episode still creeps me out and it's hard to watch, but that's what makes it so good. Oh, wanna watch it again... OiS first, then another Bushwhacked. Then I need to see the movie again. I'll be in my bunk.

When it comes (no pun intended) to differences between the movie and the Firefly backstory, I just view it as something that had to be done for the sake of the story and pacing of the movie, and leave it at that.

To me that's the most important thing. "Show don't tell" is one of the basic tenants of good story telling, particularly if you don't have a bunch of time for things to unfold. Opening the film with Simon busting out River (particularly the way they showed it, with the time-shift, which made me happily uneasy with thoughts of "IS this happening or WAS this happening" through the opening of the film) was so hugely dynamic and pulled the audience right into the story. HOW Simon busts out his sister is so much less important than THAT Simon does it. Sure he's a little less prissy now, but he's still a naive rich overly-tidy boy taking on the world that created him and running for his life.

Retcon is an older and less crudely expressed concept, and is distinguished by being actually canonical.

Retcon and fanwank aren't related, though.

A fanwank is something I do to explain something that doesn't make sense. A retcon is something the creator does that messes with our previous (perfectly reasonable) interpretation of canon.