the-alchemist.livejournal.com (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
the-alchemist.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
thisengland2008-08-06 10:44 am
the-alchemist.livejournal.com) wrote in thisengland2008-08-06 10:44 am
Entry tags:
(no subject)
I am perhaps not the only one who, spurred by the histories ficathon, is looking forward to this year's Yuletide Treasure.
This post is intended to point histories fans in its direction, because the more of us there are the more likely it is there will be histories!fic, and that is a good thing.
But it's also intended to suggest we get some kind of consensus about how our fandoms are categorised. Last year there was only 'the Henry plays', which seems to me to be a bit unsatisfactory. But how should it be done?
- One big 'Shakespeare - Histories' category?
- 'first tetralogy' and 'second tetralogy'? But what about people who get them mixed up - it's a bit confusing that the second one comes first in historical terms, and what about people who don't know what a tetralogy is but are fans of R3 or H5 or whatever?
- 'Richard II', 'the Henry IV plays', 'Henry V', 'the Henry VI plays', 'Richard III'?
- individual plays?
It seems to me that when it gets to the fandom requesting part of the schedule, in September, it would be better if we could all agree and ask for the same things so as not to confuse the organisers.*
* Although more histories-esque if we could have a giant schism over it, split into Team Whiterose and Team Redrose, and then maybe get assassinated by a bunch of Henry VIII and King John fans incensed at not getting included at all.
This post is intended to point histories fans in its direction, because the more of us there are the more likely it is there will be histories!fic, and that is a good thing.
But it's also intended to suggest we get some kind of consensus about how our fandoms are categorised. Last year there was only 'the Henry plays', which seems to me to be a bit unsatisfactory. But how should it be done?
- One big 'Shakespeare - Histories' category?
- 'first tetralogy' and 'second tetralogy'? But what about people who get them mixed up - it's a bit confusing that the second one comes first in historical terms, and what about people who don't know what a tetralogy is but are fans of R3 or H5 or whatever?
- 'Richard II', 'the Henry IV plays', 'Henry V', 'the Henry VI plays', 'Richard III'?
- individual plays?
It seems to me that when it gets to the fandom requesting part of the schedule, in September, it would be better if we could all agree and ask for the same things so as not to confuse the organisers.*
* Although more histories-esque if we could have a giant schism over it, split into Team Whiterose and Team Redrose, and then maybe get assassinated by a bunch of Henry VIII and King John fans incensed at not getting included at all.
no subject
(Not creepy! I've been poking about yours, as well. >_>;; And, yes, I appear to have a monopoly on Very Small Fandoms. Still need to get around to writing Kalevala fic.)
no subject
Exactly! No fandom cliches yet. Which is, as far as I am concerned, just how it should be.
no subject
Well. My lady wants me to write her Ivan/Alyosha, and the Brothers K fandom seems like it's all about the Dmitri/Alyosha, so it's not like small fandoms are exempt from the taboo-busting. But I agree about the kids on the music. XD
no subject
no subject
Although I have seen Tennant/John Barrowman, but it was crackfic where fangirls paid them to. I'm not sure crackfic counts. ;)
no subject
Maybe I should write a NYR fic anyway, just to be on the safe side. There is an unfilled request for Richard II/Henry IV (or maybe it is Richard II&Henry IV, I'm not sure). Surely I could manage that.