author_by_night: (zoeserenity by hobbitseeker)
I'm making this post public. :) 

I believe that the concept of "parasocial friendships" is only gaining traction in popular usage, although the term itself has been around for some time now.  (As is often true.) Essentially, a parasocial friendship is one where you might feel very close to someone, but the closeness felt is very one-sided. This happens outside the internet social sphere as well, but I'm here to talk mainly about the internet end of it, as well as how making connections with people and engaging in discourse with them is more difficult than it used to be. 

Parasocial relationships include: Vloggers, podcast hosts, bloggers, and even fan creators who've also shared their personal lives. They do not interact with you, though - or if they do, the interaction is incredibly minimal. For example, I listen to a podcast where I feel I "know" the hosts. They'll like my replies to their tweets, but that's the extent of it. They don't know me. They don't follow me. This can even mean that it's easy to cross lines you didn't consider existed. At worst, people can become demanding. Sarah Z of YouTube talked about some of her followers demanding videos of her, the way you might jokingly bug a friend.  Except because she's not their friend, it isn't funny.

An example  of these relationships in blogging community is a popular blogger who posted parodies as well as personal entries on LJ around 2003-2008 or 9.  She was on my flist, but we barely interacted, at least as far as I can recall. I knew her best friend's name, I knew some personal things I'm not going to get into (even if she did post them publicly to her hundreds of followers, that still feels weird), but I was just another comment. And you know, that was fine. I LIKED her, but didn't really need to be friends with her. I just enjoyed her stuff. (ETA: Since this is public, I omitted the name.)

Conversely, there were creators I did reach out to back then where the  friendships were mutual.  They shared stuff, I felt I had something in common with them, we became friends on IM or on LJ.

The fun thing about LJ is that I sometimes knew people without knowing I knew them elsewhere.  For example, very early on in the Harry Potter fandom I read a fanfic that was amazing, one of my favorites, and much to my sorrow I never heard of the author writing anything else. One day I clicked on the link to the author's website... it was a good LJ friend of mine. I was like, "ARE YOU KIDDING ME? WHY DID YOU NEVER WRITE AGAIN?" because in that context, it was an entirely appropriate response. :P   

That being said, even seemingly mutual friendships weren't necessarily as close as they seemed. There were a few people who I thought I was close to, only to realize we really weren't that close. That's another phenomenon not entirely exclusive to the online sphere, it happens IRL as well, but I think lack of tone - and, at times, nuance - on the internet makes that even more of a challenge.  I found out one "friend" who wrote a fic I liked never liked me. I discovered a forum post where he said he couldn't stand that I IMed him. So don't give your IM name on the forums? Don't have conversations with me, which implies you enjoy my company? Whatever, his problem. The point is that it was complicated even when there was apparent reciprocity, because it was still one-sided even with interaction on his end.

Despite situations like those, I do miss the opportunities fans have to meet other fans through their work, as well as engage in fannish discuourse. Vloggers and podcast hosts aren't really trying to get to know their fans, the way a lot of people on LiveWidth and other mediums were back in the day. Twitter's algorithms make truly following people and exchanging conversations harder, because you don't necessarily see what your friends post, nor do they see yours. Reddit is very much based on upvotes and downvotes. It's also harder to engage in discourse due to the reactionary nature of so many websites.

I sometimes wonder if that's another reason LJ and DW are so quiet these days - people aren't meeting and coming here to engage further the way they were before. I've come across so many people who are shocked LJ and DW even still exist. They aren't realizing their favorite creators or random people on forums have LJ and adding them. Often, people aren't looking to meet anyone at all, as much as they are relaying their thoughts to a larger audience. Which, so we're clear, is not a bad thing - no one is obligated to socialize with anyone else, to exchange theories or meta with anyone else, to respond to comments or retweets. But there's far more of this one-sided discourse than there was before.

We're floating in the same water, which has its own beauty, to be sure; but it's not a communal beauty as much as it is an intuitive one, which can, at times, make it all rather bittersweet.


author_by_night: (Pawnee sign by nuv0le_rapide)
So the internet has been talking about this for a while now - friends with kids versus friends who don't have them, single friends versus married friends, etc. We get videos like this, where Moms woefully explain why they can't talk to their childless friends anymore, and corresponding comments saying those Moms are selfish.

I don't have kids, but I have friends who are married and/or have kids, and yeah, your friendship changes. I'd argue, however, that if your day-to-day life works differently than a friend's, it can be hard to get them (however well-meaning) to really understand why regardless of the reason. I worked full time while I was in college, and my classmates would be all, "hey, let's do this at 2 PM on a Tuesday!" Seriously? Sometimes I haven't even had a chance to eat lunch yet. The real world isn't a 90's sitcom where you can sit around a cafe all day and still have a job. 9:30 PM, then? Are you kidding? I wake up at six tomorrow morning.

But enough talking from me. Let's examine both sides and the crazy things they assume about one another. With pop culture references, because they're like, awesome.


What Single/Married Friends Think You Do )
author_by_night: (Well Shit by author_by_night)
Saw this secret, which sort of broke my heart. And for some reason I'm worried it's about me. I don't know why, I just have this weird... feeling. Maybe it's just that it seems familiar? I feel like someone may have linked to it a while back.

Short version for people who don't like links: Basically, someone had posted another secret saying how much they cared about an LJ friend - come to find out they'd been defriended.

I think sometimes people are under the impression that someone has stopped using LJ, or stopped reading theirs. That's often why I defriend. Other times it's because we've drifted, and there's a lot of times it was an accident - seriously, I've wondered many times "why hasn't x posted in so long?", and I realize they're not on my flist anymore for some reason.

If by any chance this is about me, I'm sorry. And even if it isn't... if I defriended you, and you'd like to be added back, let me know. I've screened comments, just... because. :) I really do miss people who I did defriend because I thought they just weren't around anymore or felt we'd drifted, so if you're back or you'd like to reconnect, let me know.
author_by_night: (Default)
[Error: unknown template qotd]
It's always okay. There's nothing wrong with a little privacy invasion - it proves you care. I'm all for reading text messages and emails, following your SO down the street, listening in on phone calls with whatever gender your SO prefers in case (s)he really isn't "just a friend", anything that ensures the security of your relationship.


None of the above is true. Unless you think your SO is in immediate danger, it is never okay. It doesn't show you care. If (s)he does it to you, it's not showing (s)he cares. It's a violation of trust.
author_by_night: (zoetrain by hobbitseeker)
[Error: unknown template qotd] That's a really difficult question! It would depend entirely on so many factors - the situation, the people involved, the actual choice involved, etc.

I do find it annoying when girls and women willingly sacrifice their friendships for men. Here's an example - a relative and I will be discussing how she had a certain friend most of her life. This friend was with her thick and thin through everything.

This is usually where the conversation goes:

Me: So... what happened to Mary Sue anyway?

Relative: Well, you know, I met Gary Stu, got married. :)

Wait, what? "I got married and moved 87 miles away" I can understand. "Raising five children makes you a little busy" I can understand. "I went to med school and barely had time to eat dinner with Gary Stu" I can understand. But "I met Gary Stu, got married" - really? I don't know, I can't imagine forsaking a friendship only because I found someone. Any significant other has to understand that as much as I love him, my friends are important too. They are a priority.

That said, on some level I think any significant other will come first. And honestly, my friends would have to understand that. I hope that I will one day find a guy who I can mix my friends with, or who I make friends through at the very least. I DO hold my friends nearer and dearer than a lot of people, but then, any guy worthy of my time would understand that. One thing that really bothers me about some books and movies and stuff is when characters will actively choose a guy over all their friends for no real reason.

On the other hand, some think that people should never choose their significant others... which I don't think is fair either. When you're truly in love with someone, there are times when they will - and should - come first.

ETA: So I guess the short answer is... both, depending on the circumstances.

author_by_night: (harry/ginny clings by katieay)
(This post contains spoilers for the Harry Potter books.)

Your Friends Are Not Watching the Same Show As You...

I think that the point is a valid one.

Last year, my Harry Potter friends and I were obsessive with - well, of course, Harry Potter. A Harry Potter movie trailer required as much attention as a tornado warning. "Kelsey's Shack" made us think "LOL Kingsley Shacklebot!" (Actually, the latter is almost a little too obsessive...)

But siriusly seriously, my point is, at one point... it didn't take much for us to talk about, think about, obsess over Harry Potter.

 Now, however, the books are over, and  things are different. There's the people still holding on, half hoping there will, someday, be another wizarding world related work from Jo. There's the people who still like the books enough, but who have moved on to greater pastures. 

I think that it's been hard for people to accept certain things. Myself included, to be honest. After all...  think of it like this: you graduated high school with a bunch of friends, and then you went off to college. When you got together again in June, you realized things were different now. Your new roommate may have gotten you into fantasy baseball, but your High School buddies stared at you like you're insane when you mention it. Or maybe your one friend still wanted to watch Rocky Horror like you always do, but you realized you're just not that interested anymore.

I think that it is important to accept the following:

1. Not everyone wants to hold on.
Some things stick for people; other things don't. I'm obsessed with Harry Potter still, but I've read other series where when the books ended... so did my obsession. There was no need for me to theorize or analyze anymore. I feel TDH left a lot of open holes for me to try and fill with fanfic and theories and analysis, and a lot of my flist would say the same - but a lot of people stopped needing that.

2. However, some people still ARE going to hold on. There is nothing wrong with those of us who still love the books and still analyze them. We know the series is over, but that's not going to stop us from still  being obsessive.

3. It's okay to be in between 1 and 2. One can still be inwardly obsessed about something and still have stopped  analyzing it. Heck, there's tons of books I've long outgrown and/or gotten over, but that still have a special place in my heart.

4. Not everyone is going to follow you to your new fandoms. You might love Doctor Who, but your best fandom friend thinks Doctor Who is the world's most ridiculous show ever made. Your friend has not died. She has not become a Dalek. She just isn't going to share all of your interests. Instead of mourning, focus on the stuff you DO still have in common. And if she really is your closest friend... there's probably a lot more to your relationship than sharing the same fandom(s).

Let's go back to the high school example I used earlier. People do change; and you're not going to necessarily be able to stay as close with all your friends. But if you learn to enjoy what's still there, and even some of the new things... you'll find that sometimes, it's okay.
author_by_night: (Secrets by onsunset)
[profile] julibethis holding a friending frenzy, which she's asked me to "pimp", so to speak. It's multifandom (though so far the fandoms represented are Heroes, Supernatural and Harry Potter.)

Please go make friends, or plug your own LJ!


author_by_night: (Hiro is my hero by calico_icons)
Disclaimer: Entry inspired by a secret on the [community profile] fandomsecrets community.

Something I've noticed in almost all of the fandoms I'm in or know of -  Heroes, Harry Potter, Wicked the book, Wicked the musical, Rent, Pirates of the Carribean, Supernatural - is that there's a huge emphasis on romance. Actually, often smutty romance, at  that. Meanwhile, in all of those fandoms, save Pirates of the Carribean, the themes of friendship and/or family seem just as important, but they are not given the same amount of screentime. Well, I don't really know if that's the case with Supernatural, but gazing through the comms, it certainly seems to be the case. Also admittedly, Rent is clearly about romantic love, but there's still themes of friendship there too. (Mimi and Angel, Joanne and Mark - a friendship that probably wouldn't normally happen, all things considered - and Mark and Roger.)

I don't have a problem with people's shipping preferences - to each his/her own, right? If you want to write Petrellicest or Wincest, more power to you. Same with if you want to ship Remus/Sirius ( a ship I can see on some level anyway), Harry/Hermione, or Will/Jack. 

But I have  a general question - why is it that in these fandoms, non-romantic relationships, canon or not, do not generally get equal writing time? Even I have to admit that my entrance into the HP fandom came with musings about whether or not it'd be Harry/Hermione or Hermione/Ron, if Remus/Sirius was plausible, etc. I only became a genfic person later on. And even then, I still shipped Remus/Tonks (which wasn't canon at the time) and Ron/Hermione. 

So what is it about romance and smutfics that gains so much more popularity, and why do people see the need to put canon friends and siblings in romantic and/or smutty situations?

Discuss. :)
author_by_night: (Elphaba and Fiyero by google image searc)

Two news items today - one happy and one bittersweet - have furthered my belief in everlasting love.

Friends Forever indeed.

A real-life Walk to Remember. (Saved the best for last..)

The last one really touches me. It's great that she'll have a wedding day, though sad that she'll die. But at least she and her fiance are going to be together forever, in a sense,and that's really important, for both of them to know they spent the last days together as one.

January 2025

S M T W T F S
   12 34
56 78 91011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 24th, 2025 10:23 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios