Subject: Re: ‘Lust Objects’ vs ‘Favourites’ and Other Definitions
Author:
Posted on: 2010-01-25 14:41:00 UTC
I think that is a great idea. This sorting into either L.O. or Favorite is a little crude to my taste. Of course, it depends on the agent what kind of Objects they would have. All in all I also like the categories you offer and I think they cover about anything there is.
I was just talking with Trojie, and we’ve been thinking that there really needs to be more terms for how agents see characters, because right now everything seems to be broadly classed into “Lust Object”. It just seems to us that the term is too narrowly defined. There are pleanty of ways to adore a character without lusting after them – Trojie and I randomly named a few in our conversation:
Mothering Instinct Objects: the ones we/our agents want to cuddle and feed and tuck into bed, like sick hobbits, or as Jay did for creatures like the Watcher.
Fluffy Adoration Objects: Trojie pinned this one quite effectively when she pointed out that imagining an attractive character being domestic and doing something like making breakfast doesn’t qualify as “lust”.
Respect Them Or Else Objects: the ones we/our agnets adore but are not, by any stretch of the imagination, romantically interested in. Dumbledore would probably fall under this umbrella a lot, as would a character like Arwen or Major Kira to non-femslash female agents.
Paired Objects: the ones who come in pairs and are interesting as a pair – either psychologically or just because they have a relationship that ought to be respected on pain of death, like Sam and Frodo, regardless of whether it’s romantic or platonic.
I’m sure there are more. These all seem to be currently lumped under the heading of “Favourites”, which isn’t inaccurate, but… well, this is the PPC. Do we often leave things simple if we can be more precise?
Honestly, I’m not really sure what I’m after here. I’m certainly not suggesting that every agent’s profile be altered to have listings for all the above sorts, just looking for ideas, I guess – trying to categorise them more accurately, since this is only from our point of view and more minds could make things clearer (or just come up alternate names for these Objects, if you can think of something better, because these aren’t too great).
In short, what are your thoughts?
There's characters I both lust and wish to hug. No, I shan't tell you! Nyeah!
Maybe just saying "Favourites" is better anyway? You have a point. Now that I think about it, I have some like that, too. I suppose we could have some that outweigh others, but that would just get messy...
Well, I'm not telling you which character is the Fluffy Adorableness Object that started me thinking about all this in the first place! So NYAH right back!
... lust-objects which one considers too weird to reveal to other people?
Because the thought of telling other people about them causes one to go red?
Maybe what we should just do, since it's simpler, is have every agent refer to various Objects by whatever term is most appropriate for them, making things up as necessary, with "Favourite" and "Lust Object" just being the most common.
...whether you have a crush on a char or not, what should they be called?
I may be reading this wrongly, but I assumed that 'Lust Objects' were... well, precisely what they sounded like, whereas 'Favorites' were characters you respected and adored but by no stretch of the imagination lusted over. So, for instance, my (soon to be forthcoming) Agent holds Draco Malfoy as a Favorite and Pierre Gringoire as a Lust Object. (Actually, the only reason she doesn't lust over Draco is that she's a total slash fangirl, and so much prefers him with other men, but that's a different story; there's a reason she transferred to DBS.)
I agree, though, that 'Favorite' is too broad a term. I like the ones you suggested, and would add in a couple of other possibilities:
Anti-Favorites: Characters you love to hate. People like Professor Umbridge would be in here, or possibly Mrs. Bennet.
Favorites of the Intellect: Characters you just want to have a conversation with, possibly over a nice dinner. Hermione, for instance, might qualify, or Aragorn.
Those are all the ones I can think of at the moment. I agree that the agents' profiles probably shouldn't be altered to have them all, but possibly once we organize the list a bit more we could make a new page and just link the 'Favorites' category in the infobox to that.
I'm quite fond of the Paired Objects. I agree that there are many characters you only like when paired with someone else. Fred and George Weasley spring to mind, or Alice and Jasper Hale (yes, I'm a slight Twilight fan. Not a rabid one by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm rather fond of those two.) It's nice to have a shorthand way to express that as opposed to the rather cumbersome, 'Draco. Well, only Draco when he's paired with Harry in plausible goodfic. And only when he's in character.' (Actually a lie; I am quite fond of our Mr. Malfoy in all of his evil, canon glory, but the point remains.)
--anamia
And yes, you're right - at the moment everything's either grouped into "Lust Object" or "Favourite", which works, but I just find them lacking. I like your Anti-Favourites idea in particular.
Also, you're not the only "slight Twilight fan" - I like Jasper and Alice quite a lot, too. :)
I think that is a great idea. This sorting into either L.O. or Favorite is a little crude to my taste. Of course, it depends on the agent what kind of Objects they would have. All in all I also like the categories you offer and I think they cover about anything there is.
Sorry if I nitpick a bit overmuch.
One character -- I think one of Trojie's, Agent Gypsy -- had his eyes on Serenity, and insisted on the "registered subject of adoration" official term in a mission years ago, rather than a Lust Object. I'm still brainstorming my characters, but I was planning to have one be nonsexed, and have him use that name while his more normal partner stuck with the more common Lust Object. So there are ways to communicate nonsexual interest in a canon, even if not everyone necessarily believes you.
It seems the question would be if you want to have a character with something in each category listed, or want to have a normal sized list of Lust Objects, but be able to further detail what type of adoration is going on. In the former case, trying to come up with a half-dozen broad categories makes a lot of sense.
In the latter, though, I think you'll run into problems trying to get any amount of agreed definitions. The character I was toying with would have a 'thing' for fighters with a strong personality, but while Legolas woobiefication would drive him up the walls, he'd never respect an elf or adore someone for being domestic. Something that's precise for him wouldn't work for most other characters, just as something that's precise for Stormsong wouldn't work for most other agents, or how a description of Discworld kleptomania might not be common. In that sense, something more along the lines of putting the description of how the item is adored within parentheses, perhaps with a few established examples, and using the Object Of Adoration superset might be easier.
That's just the newbie viewpoint on it, though.
Frankly, I'm more just after viewpoints and possible silly names that we could throw around for various sorts of Favourites. I'd also like my agent to be able to say she has a Fluffy Admiration Object in a mission without having to explain it, I guess (one of Agent Sedri's less overt traits is her total denial of having a Lust Object, you see - I added the quirk to make her more fun to write).
Certainly, there won't be unanimously agreed definitions, but I thought it might be fun to play a bit. You have a point, of course - some agents' liking of canon characters simply won't fit into general definitions. Maybe in those cases they could make up the names - after all, there are no rules, as long as it doesn't get too ridiculous. "Object Of Adoration" could work, though I imagine it could get shortened down to something like "who's your Object?" in context, which would be... strange.
(As for the nitpicks, don't worry - I do it a lot myself when working with clients, or when beta reading missions or fanfics. I just didn't want you to feel like you had to point them out.)
Last I, uh, checked, anyhow.
Sorry about that, and thank you for catching the mistake.
Yes, gattsuru, I see them. Too bad we don't have an editing feature. I really must stop making changes and then hitting "post" without doing my third read-through... Ah, well. :)