Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Her Royal Highness the Princess Cimorene ([info]cimorene111) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2006-01-02 22:41:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:fandom: good omens

new cover art for good omens sparks wank. (story at eleven.)
in good omens fandom, wank is afoot. i'll start you off with a quote from our snarky fandom newsletter, [info]niceandaccurate:

[info]quantum_witch posts the new book covers to [info]lower_tadfield ([info]irisbleu does likewise on [info]stjamespark). Overall reaction is mixed between those who think they're cute and those who want to know why Aziraphale is dressed like a 1950s gym teacher and wtf is with the bat wings the artist gave Crowley. Everyone likes the Look Aziraphale is giving Crowley, though.


[info]niceandaccurate was both nice and accurate at the time when it went to press, but there was something brewing in the comments. many good omens fans are very devoted and loyal to the authors of its canon, neil gaiman and terry pratchett. so much so that some of them are apt to take things a bit personally.



the criticisms begin in the original main community for the fandom, [info]lower_tadfield, but it's pretty tame.

there are people who don't like aziraphale's sneakers or crowley's pin-striped suit and hair.

over in the younger fic/art/discussion only comm, [info]stjamespark, opinions are much the same but a bit less restrained.

[info]jennaria and [info]irisbleu make jabs about the artist's style. someone is irritated by crowley's bat wings. [info]ida_pea uses the word "sleaze" for crowley. the fact that only crowley has a wineglass is brought up. [you will see a comment from me there as well; i'm a member of both communities.]

and this pisses [info]quantum_witch off. she makes a public post to that effect.

I'm just happy as hell at the new "Good Omens" book covers, every last tiny precious lovable detail of them. However... some people seem to disagree. Of course, that's always the case with some people.


she goes on to explain that because the cover was approved by the authors--"Even directed, a bit, as he was quoted as saying that the Aziraphale drawing had to go back for tweaking before it was finally approved"--"these images are as close to perfectly canon as we're ever going to get." (emphasis hers)

she acknowledges that crowley's bat wings and horns in the picture aren't canon because she said so because they are contradicted in the text of the book, but maintains that every other detail of the picture is so definitively canon that people don't have the "right to declare "wtf?" to anything [the writers] present [us] with".

in the comments there are some interesting bits as well, such as [info]quantum_witch's response to her first comment, in which it becomes clear that it's much less acceptable to criticise the art of someone famous and published. to this [info]beetle_breath replies that such criticism is "like that moron who accused Anne McCaffery (I'm not really a fan, so sorry for the misspelling) of stealing THEIR idea."

[info]linnpuzzle comments to disagree that the cover is hard-and-fast canon, citing that it's easy to obtain a writer's approval for a piece of art and pointing out that by the logic of [info]quantum_witch's post, all the other covers for the book ever printed would be canon also. (the reply to this is that authors usually don't get a choice of covers; it's the blessing that's been given to this one which makes it special.)

when i originally read this post, there were a couple more comments which had been deleted by the time i saved the source here:

[info]irisbleu (in response to "we should all just be grateful they're not suing us for writing fanfic/making art"): It's not a matter of letting us, per se: it's a matter of courteously looking the other way because they know that most of us aren't doing any harm at all. We're not trying to shove it in their faces or imply it ought to be published. We're doing it for love of the characters.

Think a bit more carefully before you speak for all of us.


[info]jennaria had also posted in response to [info]beetle_breath's comment on mccaffrey fans (this one paraphrased from memory): Wait, did I miss something? Since when was kibitizing book covers the same as claiming the authors stole ideas?

after both those were deleted, i grabbed the source, which was a good thing, because the post was locked down before i could even finish writing up this entry. the link has been replaced with the saved copy.

ETA: from the comments here, a link to a post by [info]quantum_witch from last june that may be related to the current wank, or at least to [info]irisbleu's comment. apparently [info]quantum_witch sent the text of a fanfic sequel to go that she was working on to neil, offering it to him to publish or use in writing an eventual actual sequel without credit to herself. the text of his polite "no thanks" is included in the post.

eta: the eta post has been locked, but you can read a copy here.


(Post a new comment)


[info]yaoiko
2006-01-02 10:57 pm UTC (link)
God damnit, and here I thought I could count atleast one other non-wanky fandom I'm in......*sigh*

~Emi

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]xylona
2006-01-02 11:06 pm UTC (link)
We're mostly nice. Sadly, this is not Agnes's definition of the word, but more the HP-fandom definition of the word, which is to say we don't eat our own in public.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]the_wanlorn
2006-01-02 11:09 pm UTC (link)
Well, I don't know if I'm alone in this, but minus the wings (& horns on Crowley), that's exactly how I pictured both of them.

Pleased as punch am I.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]esclaramonde, 2006-01-02 11:19 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_wanlorn, 2006-01-02 11:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]xylona, 2006-01-02 11:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_wanlorn, 2006-01-02 11:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]esclaramonde, 2006-01-02 11:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_wanlorn, 2006-01-02 11:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]seto_fangirl, 2006-01-02 11:58 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]the_wanlorn, 2006-01-03 12:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_padfoot, 2006-01-02 11:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]vigilanterodent, 2006-01-03 05:28 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kinneas, 2006-01-03 05:39 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkbunny, 2006-01-03 06:52 am UTC

[info]purplehat
2006-01-02 11:37 pm UTC (link)
Finally! Good Omens wank!

Is [info]irisbleu's strange comment a reference to this post?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-02 11:42 pm UTC
*headdesk* - [info]romana03, 2006-01-03 01:11 am UTC
Re: *headdesk* - [info]purplehat, 2006-01-03 01:18 am UTC
Re: *headdesk* - [info]romana03, 2006-01-03 01:21 am UTC
Re: *headdesk* - [info]marylake, 2006-01-03 04:17 am UTC

[info]arielchan
2006-01-02 11:59 pm UTC (link)
Anyone else notice the fan email to Neil in his recent post asking him if he reads or writes GO fanfic.

o_O Seriously, dumb people in my fandom, shut UP. Neil has said before he doesn't read the fic, and why in hell would he WRITE it?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2006-01-03 12:15 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 12:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]arielchan, 2006-01-03 12:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 12:21 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 12:23 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]greenling, 2006-01-03 01:30 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]yaoiko, 2006-01-03 05:22 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2006-01-04 08:33 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ciaan, 2006-01-04 07:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2006-01-03 12:23 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 12:25 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]pyratejenni, 2006-01-03 04:13 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]romana03, 2006-01-03 01:13 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 01:15 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mcity, 2006-01-03 03:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]yaoiko, 2006-01-03 05:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mmanurere, 2006-01-03 11:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]arielchan, 2006-01-03 12:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 12:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]castalianspring, 2006-01-03 12:47 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 01:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]castalianspring, 2006-01-03 03:10 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 01:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]castalianspring, 2006-01-03 03:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 01:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jaseroque, 2006-01-03 08:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 02:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jaseroque, 2006-01-03 04:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]semiotics, 2006-01-03 07:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-05 05:51 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]isntitironic, 2006-01-03 05:16 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 12:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]la_viv, 2006-01-03 01:50 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 02:00 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]la_viv, 2006-01-03 06:02 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 04:54 pm UTC

[info]simkin_mouse
2006-01-03 12:21 am UTC (link)
haven't the right to declare "wtf?" to anything that they present me with, and we should all be bloody grateful

WTF?! quantum_witch sounds like the fanon version of Anne Rice.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 12:27 am UTC
I missed that in the wank. - [info]mcity, 2006-01-03 03:45 am UTC

[info]goldberry
2006-01-03 12:22 am UTC (link)
OMG! Good Omens wank! :O *Tranquilizes it, tags it, sets it free to track its migration*

(Reply to this)


[info]gabhriel
2006-01-03 12:23 am UTC (link)
IT'S WHAT'S INSIDE THAT COUNTS. :O

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]xylona, 2006-01-03 12:26 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mcity, 2006-01-03 03:46 am UTC

[info]coffee_mug
2006-01-03 12:39 am UTC (link)
I don't get book-cover wank. My own mental images of characters are more canon to me than anything some artist drew.

If this was any fandom but GO, there'd be some serious Wing!fic by now (or is that just Lotrips?).

Crowley's bat wings remind me of two things, though

a) a German kiddie book series called Little Vampire which I wish had a fandom because I'd so write, dude, I'd so write

b) Bartending. At a goth club. In the dark.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 12:46 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]coffee_mug, 2006-01-03 12:55 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 01:09 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]belafarinrod, 2006-01-03 01:24 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 01:29 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]marks, 2006-01-03 01:26 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]funwithrage, 2006-01-03 01:42 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]marks, 2006-01-03 01:45 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 01:51 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]dandywolves, 2006-01-03 03:23 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]yaoiko, 2006-01-03 05:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 01:43 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]purplehat, 2006-01-03 01:52 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 02:04 am UTC
(no subject) - soula, 2006-01-03 02:42 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]yadda, 2006-01-03 03:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]isntitironic, 2006-01-03 05:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]isntitironic, 2006-01-03 05:36 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]platedlizard, 2006-01-03 09:15 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]isntitironic, 2006-01-03 06:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]platedlizard, 2006-01-03 09:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 10:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2006-01-03 03:54 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]coffee_mug, 2006-01-03 11:50 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2006-01-04 01:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]coffee_mug, 2006-01-04 03:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]wrongly_amused, 2006-01-03 08:42 am UTC

[info]parzi
2006-01-03 12:55 am UTC (link)
This makes me sad too~ I thought GO was the most wank-free fandom I'd ever had the pleasure of being in or ever will (then people started arguing about the movie but that since probably won't happen all is peace again)...well I suppose it still is.
But come on guys, they're just book covers (and though I say this I'll definitely buy the Aziraphale version of these even though I already have the paperback, because then my friend will buy Crowley and we'll match.)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]yaoiko, 2006-01-03 05:14 am UTC

[info]stella_polaris
2006-01-03 01:34 am UTC (link)
Yay, we did it.

>_<

Personally, I'm ok with the covers. Not what I had in mind, but definitely not "OMG YOU KILL MY ANGELS!!!1!!"

But for a wank, this is relatively lame. So, don't give up, fellow fandomers. We're not HP quite yet.

I'm more bothered by the asinine OT posts that haunt Lower_Tadfield.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 01:37 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 01:45 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 01:47 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 01:47 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 01:52 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 01:54 am UTC
(no subject) - ninglor, 2006-01-03 01:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]xylona, 2006-01-03 01:47 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 01:50 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]xylona, 2006-01-03 01:52 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 01:56 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]theladyfeylene, 2006-01-03 05:52 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]luthe, 2006-01-03 06:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-03 08:01 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-05 06:01 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 01:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 01:47 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 02:00 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 02:06 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 02:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]stella_polaris, 2006-01-03 02:35 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 02:48 am UTC

[info]adora_spintriae
2006-01-03 02:57 am UTC (link)
They're still looking at each other like they want to get into the other's holy/damned pants. Which is all that matters.

(Reply to this)


[info]memii
2006-01-03 03:41 am UTC (link)
Er, I'm not sure if English is your second language, but your report would be so much more readable with proper capilization.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]amasaglajax, 2006-01-03 04:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mirabellawotr, 2006-01-03 04:10 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]memii, 2006-01-03 04:13 am UTC

[info]pyratejenni
2006-01-03 04:04 am UTC (link)
I think MZB is going to have to rise up and bitch-slap [info]quantum_witch.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]selenis, 2006-01-03 05:19 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]pyratejenni, 2006-01-03 05:25 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkbunny, 2006-01-03 07:55 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]selenis, 2006-01-03 08:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ciaan, 2006-01-04 06:39 am UTC

[info]marylake
2006-01-03 04:05 am UTC (link)
So, quantum_witch's points are basically:

1. The new book covers are amazing and no one is allowed to criticize them ever or Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett will shoot disapproving looks at you.

2. Her art looks a lot like the new book covers.

...Yeah.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]elektra3, 2006-01-03 04:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 02:22 pm UTC

[info]memii
2006-01-03 04:16 am UTC (link)
Waitasec, Quantum Witch actually sent a fan novel to Gaiman? And told him he could use it? What?

Is the fandom getting stupider, or is it just a side effect of the fandom getting bigger?

(Reply to this)


[info]oxydosic
2006-01-03 04:32 am UTC (link)
I'm just happy as hell at the new "Good Omens" book covers, every last tiny precious lovable detail of them. However... some people seem to disagree. Of course, that's always the case with some people.

That just came off as really condescending to me, maybe it's just me.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]nlb_muffin, 2006-01-03 11:26 pm UTC

[info]snarkbunny
2006-01-03 07:25 am UTC (link)
This inspires a new icon.

Also I am suddenly wanting to write fic where Crowley tries to take credit for fandom_wank.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]atalantapendrag, 2006-01-03 09:56 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkbunny, 2006-01-03 11:48 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]deerlike, 2006-01-03 10:30 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkbunny, 2006-01-03 11:52 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gingerkiss, 2006-01-03 12:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]esorlehcar, 2006-01-03 01:05 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 02:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]c, 2006-01-03 05:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]whimsy_chan, 2006-01-05 07:15 am UTC

[info]schmendrick
2006-01-03 11:18 am UTC (link)
Oh, [info]cimorene111, you evil, evil bitch, you. This whole wank is all your fault for being a Nazi:

Alas, the only regrettable thing about being at the bottom of the pile in this delightful, flesh-rending melee (as enjoyable as it has been) is what brought me there in the first place - My failure to realise one could still be lynched for leaving their opinions where the Third Reich of Fandom could find them.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/quantum_witch/23536.html

(Reply to this)

(Deleted post)
Re: Please to be noting ICON - [info]snarkbunny, 2006-01-03 12:02 pm UTC
Re: Please to be noting ICON - [info]jaseroque, 2006-01-03 12:26 pm UTC

(Deleted post)
Re: Please to be noting ICON - [info]go_shirly, 2006-01-04 03:00 am UTC
Re: Please to be noting ICON - (Anonymous), 2006-01-17 08:38 pm UTC
Re: Please to be noting ICON - [info]jaseroque, 2006-01-03 12:12 pm UTC
Re: Please to be noting ICON - [info]amasaglajax, 2006-01-03 01:39 pm UTC
Re: Please to be noting ICON - (Anonymous), 2006-01-05 06:11 am UTC

dracothelizard
2006-01-03 02:34 pm UTC (link)
Well, Aziraphale looks like he's from the 50s which is how he is described, and Crowley looks sleazy and like he wants to do some naughty things to bookboy, which also fits.

And also, Good Omens is a wonderful book, thanks for the reminder!

(Reply to this)


[info]emlan
2006-01-03 05:43 pm UTC (link)
Obligatory "Hooray I'm on fandomwank, kewlies!" post.

Anyway I need to red this book.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2006-01-03 05:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]pyratejenni, 2006-01-03 06:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]vigilanterodent, 2006-01-03 08:58 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cimorene111, 2006-01-03 09:24 pm UTC

[info]hermisia
2006-01-04 01:36 am UTC (link)
So... how 'bout that Look?

(Reply to this)


[info]also_not_a_pipe
2006-01-04 01:53 am UTC (link)
I'd be in bad need of tissues and several well-deserved "but what are your thoughts on yaoi?" icons if I went to the trouble of trying to explain why I hate the Crowley/Aziraphale pairing with the fiery passion of a thousand Harlequin novels, but I must ask:

Am I the only one who got the sneaking feeling that people were criticizing the illustrations for not being faithful representations of the fanon Crowley and Aziraphale, what with the "he looks like he's from the Fifties!" and "Crowley doesn't have scruffy hair!" comments?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]xylona, 2006-01-04 02:56 am UTC

[info]ciaan
2006-01-04 06:54 am UTC (link)
Well, I honestly couldn't bear it if there was an actual published sequel that bore no resemblance to what has evolved in my brain.

Fanfic != canon. If GNeil and PTerry felt the same way as that, they would cry little tears at the thought that other people were writing stories with their characters that did not match what had evolved in their brains. Because they love their characters so. And there are indeed some authors who feel that way. But fanfic authors have no right to do so. You write fanfic, the original author goes and writes more... you deal with it. I mean, I once wrote a fic for a webcomic, and then had the author ask me to take it down and tell no one because it was too close to what she was planning on doing over the next few months and she didn't want her plot to be spoilered. And you know what was most amusing, when her plotline finished? Not the things I'd gotten right. The parts I'd gotten wrong. Those were seriously funny.

...Okay, so the parts I got right were funny too. But it was mainly funny because I wrote the fic in an effort to do something that would never ever happen in the comic, and so when it did, it meant I'd gotten the whole premise WRONG by being right.

Now that's hilarity.

(Reply to this)


 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map