Subject: It should be okay. (nm)
Author:
Posted on: 2014-11-15 21:28:00 UTC
-
Not-Entirely-Hypothetical Question by
on 2014-11-15 20:57:00 UTC
Reply
Given the ban on doing missions for religious/Bible-based fanfic, what is the official stance on missions for canons that heavily refer to religious (esp. Biblical) mythology? I'm specifically thinking of the Dresden Files series, but Supernatural comes to mind as another example. I'm even more specifically thinking of this Suefic, featuring a Sue who is supposedly the Biblical Eve.
Now, given that the Sue is the gorgeous, uber-powerful Queen of Sexy, she has very little in common with the actual Biblical figure, and personally I think there is a lot wrong with the Sue no matter what she is. However, I don't want to offend anyone. How do you guys feel about this? -
That shouldn't be a problem by
on 2014-11-16 17:04:00 UTC
Reply
Both Supernatural and Good Omens have missions so obviously canons which borrow heavily from religion and myths are not off-limits.
However, having an Eve who is nothing like the biblical figure, would only be a charge if religious/mythological characters in DF are generally kept recognisable if and when they appear. (I have only read Storm Front so I don't really know anything about the canon.)
If there have been no instances of religious figures making an appearance in canon, it would be a safer bet to just focus on how the Eve is a typical overpowered Sue with an overblown background and how she is distorting canon rather than on how she doesn't fit the biblical description. -
RE: Question by
on 2014-11-16 14:26:00 UTC
Reply
Go for it. I have a feeling that some divine retribution should be involved in the assassination, though. *shrug*
-
RE: Question by
on 2014-11-16 19:02:00 UTC
Reply
My guess is that if it trivializes or disrespects ideologically sensitive content, it counts as a charge. And yeah, divine retribution sound like fun - that one incident with Sekhmet was truly fantastic. :D
-
It should be okay. (nm) by
on 2014-11-15 21:28:00 UTC
Reply