Nicholas Leifker wrote:
Gary, your reasoning is noble, but horribly flawed.
The flaw in your reasoning is very simple. You are using your own, HIGHLY
BIASED opinions of Ranma 1/2 (your description of them, not mine) to color
your arguments, and as a result you're stifling the creativity of the
writers of theis ML.
Writers are free to put an alternaverse in the disclaimer and continue
writing as they please if they want to get past criticisms on
character. Because stories that use the 'best' friend cliche are not
cannon. If a story is based upon this 'fact' then I would expect some
very good explanations. IC/OOC may not be the over-riding things to
think about when writing, but they do play a big part. Many people have
varying tastes on what they like to read and I expect critics do as
well. If I were to C&C a story, IC/OOC is something that I look for,
because what made me care about the characters in the first place were
the way they acted. I'm sure other critics feel differently and C&C
accordingly. To say that Gary is stifling the creativity of writers is
going a bit too far as I am one that has benefited from his C&C on
characterization. I felt he enhanced them, rather than stifled me.
Sir, it is a noble gesture to say that you would like the characters to
remain true to Takahashi. However, there is only one person who is capable
of staying true to the characterizations of Ranma 1/2, and she's writing
Inu-Yasha now. (And no, it's not Krista! ^_^ ) Truth to tell, I know
of several people who would have disagreed with your stories IN GENERAL on
the basis that 'serious' Ranma fanfiction is going away from what Takahashi
intended.
Not really as it's often been pointed out, not all of Ranma 1/2 is
comedic in nature. There are stories that have a more serious tone in
the manga.
I argued with them then; I argue with you now. You cannot claim that your
interpretations of Ranma are 'correct characterization', and go around
discrediting other works on that basis - not without tarnishing your own
honor. I merely showed you what you have been giving others all this time,
and you react with the very same defenses that others have given you - a
defense that you have often ignored.
As a critic he is intitled to point out what he felt was wrong with a
story. For example if a story is based upon the Ukyo/Ranma 'best'
friend concept and he feels that there is no evidence to support this,
he has a right to express it as a critic. If the author feels his
interpretations are not the 'correct characterization' all he needs to
do is justify it. And authors are free to ignore C&C if they don't feel
like accepting them. It is ultimately up to the author on whether or
not he/she chooses to listen to said C&C.
Fanfiction thrives on the fact that we take the roads that Takahashi
DIDN'T. It lives on diversity and fresh, innovative ideas on the
characters. These are the roads you walk, and the roads that you seek to
close to others with your slander.
Of course an author is free to take a different road. But to accept
certain conventions as fact (ie. 'Passion Spice or Hammer Technique')
meaning they happened in the manga is a much different thing
altogether. Feel free to use them but C&C on canonicity should be
expected. Roads like 'can Ranma become gay' and such are perfectly
okay. To say that he was already gay, you would need some serious
backing. Roads that change the facts set out in by the canon and do not
say that this is an alternaverse will be hounded upon. Gary takes the
time to read such stories that I would delete almost automatically. I
find this to clear the road for authors rather than close them.
Mind you, it isn't that we do not appreciate your critiquing; we do.
However, your critiquing, due to several facts (not the least of which
being you post it on a public forum), is causing more harm to fanfiction
than it is good, now. Fanfiction must be an open field. Yes, that
occasionally means you get a stinkbomb now and then. However, that also
means you occasionally get a gem down the line. You must take the bad with
the good; anything else is a lie.
Who's this we? I know that I am not a part of that, because I agree
with most of what Gary says on characterization. I don't feel that he
is harming fanfiction. Sure Fanfiction must be openfield. Does this
mean negative C&C on characterization must never be alowed? I don't
think so.
As for Shampoo's characterization, I have one bit of evidence from manga
supporting me. She *did* attack Ranma and Akane's last attempt at the
wedding. In this case, it is another judgment call: Would Shampoo consider
the fact that Cologne is dying more imprtant than stopping Ranma and
Akane's wedding, or not? What would be so important that Shampoo would
give up her happiness just so that Ranma hears the last words of an old
woman? If it were "Great-grandmother has been kidnapped by bird-creatures
and needs your help!", then it would be more understandable. However, all
we see is that Cologne's dying; no reason for the situation is given. In
this case, I'm inclined to believe that Shampoo would stop the wedding, if
for nothing else than to try to make it that Cologne's wishes for her and
Ranma to be together eventually can come to fruition. Of course, you are
allowed to use your own interpretation... provided you do not chastise
others for theirs.
You're opinion. For me I choose the former. Being Chinese, I happen to
think that Shampoo would place her great-grandmother above the
marriage. There is a saying that I can't translate very well. But if
you've watched Mulan, you will understand. Just because we don't see
the reason for the situation doesn't mean there isn't one. And if Gary
doesn't provide a reason then you would be right. I would give him the
benefit of the doubt but put the question to him at that point. That is
perfectly good C&C to send to Gary. If fact consider it C&C from me,
Gary ^_^
-- Nick