*whispers to Emily* I don't see the slash either. I mean, I see it, in the sense that I totally get what people are responding to, but... not pinging for me.

Blah blah canon blah blah conflict I already wrote this post in LJ, didn't I?

And yeah, that's a good post of Julad's.

has there been any good Lost fic to speak of?

I haven't found much, but what I have liked is up on the what's new page at polyamorous. Unfortunately, Lost seems to be the fandom of Teh Woobie!!!!1! Which, predictably, doesn't do a whole bunch for me.

Lost seems to be the fandom of Teh Woobie!!!!1!

Yeah. And I could sort of see that in the case of, oh, say, Charlie perhaps. But folks keep woobifying Sawyer which just strikes me as all kindsa wrong.

Sawyer is exactly the character that fandom would automatically woobify, though. It's like he was designed for it. He's snarky! He's mean! He has Secret Pain! He even likes to read! And no one understands him, poor dear sweetie.

He's the Spike. Who was the Spike before Spike was the Spike?

Kerr Avon.

ETA: Well, directly previous, Krycek maybe. I dunno how much Krycek got woobified, though.

Sawyer is exactly the character that fandom would automatically woobify, though.

I know. I don't like it, but yeah, I suppose I should have expected it.

Who was the Spike before Spike was the Spike?

Methos? Sure, he killed thousands, tens of thousands . . . because he liked it. But he was a poor, sweet, misunderstood snuggiuggums.

BTW, I liked Methos. I'd do Methos in a heartbeat. I just never saw the point of woobifying him.

I think Krycek and Methos were presented less ambiguously. Methos was pretty firmly in present times on the side of the good, despite horrible past. Neither Spike nor Sawyer were as nice from their inception. And Krycek was never painted nice. He helped the heroes, but he always seemed clearly opportunistic to me.

Avon ... I need to do some rewatching.

There is a lot of Charlie woobification because of Dom, and there is a sickening amount of Sawyer woobification. Thing is, the characters are flawed in interesting ways, and for me, smoothing over those flaws just makes them boring.

Methos was pretty firmly in present times on the side of the good, despite horrible past.

I think I could argue that Methos was on the side of Mac, more than on the side of good per se. He liked MacLeod, sure (and I'd even buy that he had a crush on the guy), but I read him as someone who'd decided that the side of Mac, and thereby the good, was pragmatically the best side for him to be on.

This is probably HL debate no. 376, though. Before "Mac should never have listened to Cassandra" and after "Byron--did Mac kill him for justice or out of jealousy?"