![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Writer's Block: American Censorship Day!
Nov. 17th, 2011 02:01 am[Error: unknown template qotd]
At least according the two year old teenyboppers who inhabit the Ed Westwick fanforum. For that matter, NO negativity is allowed there at all. That. is. ridiculous! I've never seen ANY fanbase be so pro-censorship. Leighton's fans diagree with her, and there are fans that disagree with Blair Waldorf...are those opinions censored on her fanforum, or the GG fanforum? NO! But, these people who supposedly love and admire Ed Westwick so much won't even allow HIS negative opinions about Chuck to be on a board discussing HIM. (Leighton is pro-Chair, but at least anti-Chair shippers TRY to understand her opinion before dismissing it out-of-hand. You can't even read Ed's Chuck-bashing on his own damn fanboard because his opinion doesn't count. Goes to show you how much they actually respect him.)
Anyway, this is the infamous post, which I'm posting here for everybody on LJ to see. (I've already reposted it on TWoP, too.)
"I think everyone knows here I don't like Chuck Bass. And I'm glad Ed doesn't like him either. However, I was thinking today. It's not that I *dislike* him: I don't mind bad guys, villains are interesting--and Chuck is an interesting villain BUT Chuck isn't portrayed a villain on the show. He's a Gary Sue. Nothing is ever his fault and everybody including his enemies will always step in and help him no matter how poorly he treats people. Hell, even Blair took blame for IP and it wasn't even HER fault. It was his.
I see Chuck Bass a modern-day Dorian Grey. Blair is his Sybill. However, the writers want to keep on insisting that their relationship is epic!, romantic!, the be-all-end-all of relationships, past and present. Now, as someone who knows people who have been emotionally and phsycally abused (and Chuck IS a textbook abuser), I take offense at that. Serious offense. I don't mind seeing deestructive relationships on tv. I don't even mind seeing the woman in abuse relationship, but telling me it's romance .... well, I'm boycotting the show. I adore Ed, I adore Leighton, I adore Penn, hell I even adore Blake and Chace, but I will not watch something where abuse is considered romantic. That disgusts me.
Back to Dorian Grey. Wilde never romanticizes Dorian Grey. Oh, he makes the character very witty, very appealing in shady, seedy way, but he doesn't say "this guy is a romantic hero and Sybill is the love of his life" (Dorian acts like she is, but doesn't treat her so). He just says: here's Dorian Grey. He's corrupt, he sucks, and he's evil. But he's so damn good looking: has great taste in art, clothing, jewelry, etc. BUT HE IS EVIL! And you will be hurt by him if you spend any time at all in his company. And he will not regret hurting you but you will feel the sting for the rest of your life and wish you had never met him.
Does Dorian pay for his actions? That's debatable depending on how you view the ending. I think he does. But it comes after long years of getting away with everything--and people knowing he gets away with everything. But even while he is getting away with everything, he is only worshipped in the "he has beautiful things" way. Sure, he has "friends"--but they are wary of him. Sure, he has a good reputation, but there are always scandals that follow him wherever he goes. Wilde enforces that he is fascinating from afar--but nobody really likes him. They just find him interesting.
Now, if GG would THAT route, I would totally okay with Chuck Bass. But instead, fans and certain writers of the show insist on telling me he is a good guy. Which is why I can't be a fan of him. If he was admired as Dorian Grey-type, I would totally be on the Chuck Bass love train (because it's a 'love to hate, love to admire, but don't ever trust him because he'll hurt you badly' love not 'aww, prince charming Chuck love').
Anyway, I wanted to get that out of my system."
**************
Yes, I will post on Ed Westwick's fanforum. Despite their infantile views, I like several threads there. And, there are a few who manage to not squee all the fucking time when they post, who are capable of intelligent conversation that doesn't sound like babytalk. However, I will definitely be spending far more time in Leighton's and the main GG fanforums.
(I guess I've officially had my rite of passage and am now an official LJer now, given that so many of friends and communities I'm in have complained about fanforum.)
Anyway, this is the infamous post, which I'm posting here for everybody on LJ to see. (I've already reposted it on TWoP, too.)
"I think everyone knows here I don't like Chuck Bass. And I'm glad Ed doesn't like him either. However, I was thinking today. It's not that I *dislike* him: I don't mind bad guys, villains are interesting--and Chuck is an interesting villain BUT Chuck isn't portrayed a villain on the show. He's a Gary Sue. Nothing is ever his fault and everybody including his enemies will always step in and help him no matter how poorly he treats people. Hell, even Blair took blame for IP and it wasn't even HER fault. It was his.
I see Chuck Bass a modern-day Dorian Grey. Blair is his Sybill. However, the writers want to keep on insisting that their relationship is epic!, romantic!, the be-all-end-all of relationships, past and present. Now, as someone who knows people who have been emotionally and phsycally abused (and Chuck IS a textbook abuser), I take offense at that. Serious offense. I don't mind seeing deestructive relationships on tv. I don't even mind seeing the woman in abuse relationship, but telling me it's romance .... well, I'm boycotting the show. I adore Ed, I adore Leighton, I adore Penn, hell I even adore Blake and Chace, but I will not watch something where abuse is considered romantic. That disgusts me.
Back to Dorian Grey. Wilde never romanticizes Dorian Grey. Oh, he makes the character very witty, very appealing in shady, seedy way, but he doesn't say "this guy is a romantic hero and Sybill is the love of his life" (Dorian acts like she is, but doesn't treat her so). He just says: here's Dorian Grey. He's corrupt, he sucks, and he's evil. But he's so damn good looking: has great taste in art, clothing, jewelry, etc. BUT HE IS EVIL! And you will be hurt by him if you spend any time at all in his company. And he will not regret hurting you but you will feel the sting for the rest of your life and wish you had never met him.
Does Dorian pay for his actions? That's debatable depending on how you view the ending. I think he does. But it comes after long years of getting away with everything--and people knowing he gets away with everything. But even while he is getting away with everything, he is only worshipped in the "he has beautiful things" way. Sure, he has "friends"--but they are wary of him. Sure, he has a good reputation, but there are always scandals that follow him wherever he goes. Wilde enforces that he is fascinating from afar--but nobody really likes him. They just find him interesting.
Now, if GG would THAT route, I would totally okay with Chuck Bass. But instead, fans and certain writers of the show insist on telling me he is a good guy. Which is why I can't be a fan of him. If he was admired as Dorian Grey-type, I would totally be on the Chuck Bass love train (because it's a 'love to hate, love to admire, but don't ever trust him because he'll hurt you badly' love not 'aww, prince charming Chuck love').
Anyway, I wanted to get that out of my system."
**************
Yes, I will post on Ed Westwick's fanforum. Despite their infantile views, I like several threads there. And, there are a few who manage to not squee all the fucking time when they post, who are capable of intelligent conversation that doesn't sound like babytalk. However, I will definitely be spending far more time in Leighton's and the main GG fanforums.
(I guess I've officially had my rite of passage and am now an official LJer now, given that so many of friends and communities I'm in have complained about fanforum.)
