Dearest, beloved, Fandom Wank.

I know you were looking forward to great excitement today. Some of you said words to me that indicated you anticipated fiery 'judgement' upon those who remained fresh and dewey white, those you call n00bs.

Anyway, you got today instead.

Stop anticipating things, we'll just break your hearts.

Sincerely,

Sepia P. Magpie, Esq.



PS: Use this post to reflect on how you could be better people. Or just fuck around in the comments.

So, Terry Pratchett was (rather unflatteringly) interviewed in the Times. [ETA April 20, 2007: The previous link is now dead. For all those interested in your wank history, here's a working one, supplied here by a helpful anonymouse: Sod the Booker, this is popular: Giles Hattersley meets Terry Pratchett.]

Here is a loose and free paraphrase of a portion of the interview:

Interviewer: "So, when did J. K. Rowling stop beating your wife start ripping off your work?"

Terry Pratchett: "You're crazy if you think I'm actually going to answer that."

Interviewer: "I'll take that as a yes." (<--Actual real quote)

Potter fans: "OMG Pratchett dissed JKR! He's so jealous!"

Me: *Headdesk*

The Leaky Cauldron report on the article, with links to other Pratchett interviews/letters, is here. [ETA May 14, 2009: Although the original post remains, the old comments page, with all its glorious wank, appears to be gone. If anyone knows a workaround URL to get to old Leaky comments, let me know.]

Oh, yeah. The wank report from the last time this happened is here.

( ETA: A response from Pratchett about the interview )

ETA2: Because it's impossible to discuss Pratchett without someone wanting to try his books, we now have a thread of Pratchett recs. In fact, have two.

Today is the 25th of May. As some of you know, towel day. As some others of you may know, lilac day.
( Yes, I'm lame and cut for old spoilers. )

The LJ-community discworld is therefore today full of 25th May posts. Some of those icons and posts  ask "Were you there?". Of course nobody has been there, because the event is purely fictional. Everyone is pretty much aware of that - it's seen as a "being there" moment by reading the book or showing the love for  the book, a lot of explanations are out there. There are discussions, but all short and civilized, generally people share their LJ-icons and talk about the  book.

Not stealthmunchkin. It starts in an icon post with the "Were you there?" subject in LJ's discworld.. stealthmunchkin replies:

No. I wasn't. I'm pretty sure you weren't either...

A few other community members reply, but not really many (I'm in there, too but only with one comment and as it's not the wank-post, it doesn't really qualify for i_wank). The comments stay civilized, the discussion dies down soon. Only  20 comments, by far not all related to stealthmunchkin.

That's  obviously not what stealthmunchkin had in mind.

A post follows soon.


I've been getting annoyed at all the 25th May/lilac posts and, I thought, with good reason.

( Read more... )

Now, that of course finally gets the comments flying!

Category "I loled":

I did find your post remarkably funny though, as one who simply doesn't get slash fiction nor really half the posts today :) I'm not going to get after you, mostly because you remind me of one of the kids from my student teaching, Max. I always found it hard to even chide him when he made fun of the other kids cause it was too funny and cute.

Category: "Don't be a jerk"

I beg your pardon, what was your point? Cos all I'm seeing is "I'm a better fan than you because I mock people who participate in said fandom, bitches." You may get annoyed at people who celebrate fictional events, but hey I get annoyed at elitist assholes, which is precisely what the tone of the post seems like.

If you're doing this for anyone reason than just to be a jerk, then I'm sorry, but I fail to see why "celebrating" the 25th of May makes any difference: I don't think Terry Pratchett is going throw down his pen in disgust because his fans act like fans.

Category: "Now who takes fandom too seriously?"

what i think from all this debate is that the people who complain the others weren't there seem to be upset that they were taking the book too seriously, for celebrating an event that is just fictional. and, from my point of view, being upset because of that or argumenting that the characters would be upset because the lj'ers weren't there is just another way of taking it too seriously. and, if this is not the point, and they just think it silly to wear lilacs because it's fictional and not because "vimes wouldn't like it", then it's the same as complaining to people who dress as jedi masters and so on - i mean, just spoiling other people's fun.

( Lilacs, they are like cosplay and 9/11, in a way )

I bury the hope of being in at least ONE wankfree fandom now.

Edited for a stray italics tag and another LJ-cut.

EDIT: And still people pipe up to tell the comm how annoyed they are. Obviously it has to be said as often as the lilacs have been mentioned, for great justice or something. Thanks to pyratejenni for pointing it out.

Yeah, I saw one and posted this separately because I felt the first was a bit mean, and I thought that maybe other people felt the same way, though not as hostile. Besides, there were 222 comments already when I saw the post.

Won't somebody think of the not-hostile wankers?

EDIT the second: Won't they ever stop? copperdraft is RLY RLY ANGRY (thanks, onaga!). Also, from the same user: "What, there is a site that mocks fandom wankers?!"  on the community. I love the comments on this one.

Fandom_Wank is like a small piece of fairy-cake: It helps to give a sense of proportion. And calling attention to it is just going to ensure you get mocked more.

Fairy cake for everyone while we sit on our pretentious and elitist asses (come on, "elitist"? What about abortions in China and babyseals? We know you can do better)and wait until the afterwank dies down. Discworld wankers are like Reg Shoe, they just won't let go.

Discworld wank, from wank_report.

overlord_mordax posts in the Discworld community that the witch books make her "more angry than words".

( The witch books ... are anti-story. )

gumbuoy disagrees.
( the point is ... )

Mordax says that she likes stories that follow standard narrative conventions but have new window dressing, and the two argue for a bit.

conuly jumps in to say that that's naive.

scienceprincess uncovers the real point of the way Pterry takes apart fairy tales and stories, but, sadly, logic is too much for Mordax and she does not reply.

More logic that flies over Mordax's head. See also the other two pages of comments.


ETA: Mordax makes a new post about why she gets the point without actually getting the point in truth.