Weird love's better than no love.

Buffy ,'Dirty Girls'


Supernatural 2: Why is it our job to save everybody?  

[NAFDA]. This is where we talk about the CW series Supernatural! Anything that's aired in the US on TV (including promos) is fair game. No spoilers though — if you post one by accident, an admin will delete it.


Amy - Mar 19, 2011 12:45:14 pm PDT #18535 of 30002
Because books.

Really really lovely vid all about Sam and Dean, just being brothers and there for each other.

There are slashy overtones in the beginning of the vid, to give fair warning.


Juliebird - Mar 19, 2011 12:56:29 pm PDT #18536 of 30002
I am the fly who dreams of the spider

The vidder says so, but, man, that's a whole lot of lip licking and lip sucking going on in the first thirty seconds. Also, lots of erotic sleeping shots and closeups of mouths. Yeah yeah, working with an already canon homoerotic subtext, blah blah. It's good, but it's way shippy and sensual. Okay, back to watching.


§ ita § - Mar 19, 2011 12:56:48 pm PDT #18537 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

That's slightly not gen. Beautiful stuff, though. Boys!

I pimped Show last night to a friend of my sister's, but asked him not to tell her I did it. And then in the mail today I get a DVD of Arrested Development and Family Guy, so he can totally tell her if he wants. Still, I was mentioning damaged and addicted protagonists, and he was all "What show? I don't watch much TV, but I might check that out."

Which would be one theoretically straight guy for the books.


Amy - Mar 19, 2011 12:59:37 pm PDT #18538 of 30002
Because books.

Yeah, that was a little odd, but the rest of it was so lovely, I couldn't not rec. I really loved all the brotherly bitching and pranking paired with the rest.


Juliebird - Mar 19, 2011 1:04:48 pm PDT #18539 of 30002
I am the fly who dreams of the spider

That was a very beautiful Sam/Dean vid.


§ ita § - Mar 19, 2011 1:07:41 pm PDT #18540 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

I don't get why creators put in what seems a clearly non platonic gaze in and label it as not having a pairing. The vidder is coy about it in the comments--it's not like the lip licking and the dressing just tripped and fell into the vid.

And I'm not asking because I need my delicacy protected or anything. I'm just really about accurate labelling. Is there not a common "preslash S/D" grouping in the Wincest camp, or is it a personal choice?


Amy - Mar 19, 2011 1:11:53 pm PDT #18541 of 30002
Because books.

I've seen pre-slash used for fic, although not often.

I'm not a huge vid watcher, so I'm not sure what the conventions are in terms of labeling. I know I've seen people clearly label footage that's been manipulated to tell an AU story, but I haven't paid much attention otherwise.

I'm sorry! I should edit my post.


Juliebird - Mar 19, 2011 1:14:09 pm PDT #18542 of 30002
I am the fly who dreams of the spider

it's not like the lip licking and the dressing just tripped and fell into the vid

and the clutching and touching. Yes, these are all shots from the show, but the closeups are not. The zoom on these moments are not. Maybe it's like the anti-slash rule? Where some people will call a gen fic pre-slash to get the slasher audience? Or maybe the vidder is just hawt for Sam and Dean and was putting in their favorite luscious clips in? Even the song choice is erotic.

Again, nice vid, but am confuzzled about the actual intent.


Juliebird - Mar 19, 2011 1:16:39 pm PDT #18543 of 30002
I am the fly who dreams of the spider

Amy, it's not you, and it's not offensive. It's the vidder I'm wondering about, who labeled it gen. It's not outrage and getting the dogs out, it's just curiousity and discussion.


§ ita § - Mar 19, 2011 1:26:00 pm PDT #18544 of 30002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Or maybe the vidder is just hawt for Sam and Dean and was putting in their favorite luscious clips in?

the clutching and touching. Yes, these are all shots from the show, but the closeups are not

And neither is the implying of the watching of the dressing and the lip licking. That's put in there on purpose, and that was done with a shippy PoV. There's a fine line of "no more shippy than Show!" but pretty much any time anyone says that (about ANY pairing) they're actually writing pre-slash.

I know on the D/C side in fic pre-slash is used quite a lot. I have a very specific definition for it in my head, and it's probably not a usefully shared one. It's usually when one or both of the pair doesn't understand what they're feeling is non-platonic, and nothing is acted upon, although personal space may be invaded and possessiveness might be demonstrated.

You have to string together a lot of bits from the show to make it pre-slash, and leave a lot of other bits out. It's not the same as Show, not at all. Also, there's no kissing in pre-slash. I've read stuff labelled that that ended in sex. Pre what, people?

Sorry-I have a labelling jones, and I hate when people label their stuff disingenuously. It makes me suspicious of their motivation.

Amy, it's not you, and it's not offensive.

What Julie said. I don't get what the vidder was doing.

Oh, did I mention I also hate the "slashy/Wincesty if you squint!" label? Be honest, and if you're putting in innuendo, own it. Don't act like it's all on the reader to put it there.