MistyMountainHop

I tend to write many of the T7S characters as having the most potential for self-awareness and change that they're depicted as having on the show. Then I'm as accurate with details from the 1970s as possible, however inane (like what TV show was airing at exactly X time on X channel during X year, etc.).

On the show, the characters also have a variable self-awareness of -- and stance on -- socioeconomic and political issues. Depends on the episode and the season. That inconsistency allows fanfic writers to choose which version of the characters they want to depict in their stories.

Anyway, I see nothing wrong with writing the characters in fic with attitudes they might've held in the 1970s. The fact is, though, we can't be sure exactly what they believed. The 1970s, as all eras do, had their fair share of progressive and conservative thinkers, as well as anywhere in between and in the extreme. For example, Hyde is depicted in more than one episode to be a feminist. He's depicted in others not to be. So which is it? As fanfic writers, we get to decide what version of him (and other characters) we want to write.

And it's cool you write from the place. And other writers might be more interested in depicting the characters in the microcosm of their fictional universe rather than letting the macro of the real world take over the interpersonal relationships they want to write about. Nothing wrong with that, either. People have to write what they're passionate about exploring. Too many T7S fics are generally the same, and having different writing voices and POVs is important.

einsteinsugly

"The fact is, though, we can't be sure exactly what they believed. The 1970s, as all eras do, had their fair share of progressive and conservative thinkers, as well as anywhere in between and in the extreme."

Yep, there's definitely a lot of variation, in my politically infused mind:

Progressive: Hyde, Donna, and Fez.

-Hyde's a weird mix between anarchism and social democracy (in an ideal world, the government can provide for the people, but in reality, it's insanely corrupt).
-Donna's a straight-up progressive.
-Fez is more progressive, but tends to focus on social issues more than economic issues.

First-world progressive on social issues, mindless about everything else: Midge.

Leans more progressive: Eric, particularly in terms of social welfare programs (plus healthcare and education) and in terms of foreign policy. However, Red's conservatism seeped in a bit. So, he's socially moderate on personal grounds (mostly) and socially libertarian on political grounds. The main divide on the latter, between father and son, is regarding the war on drugs (one of the few social issues Red isn't socially libertarian on).

Middle: Kitty. More progressive on some issues (in regards to social welfare programs [plus healthcare and education] and foreign policy is more open on LGBTQ+ rights for the era), is less progressive on others (on gender roles and such).

Leans conservative: Jackie and Kelso, but in different ways. Kelso's the willfully ignorant type, and Jackie was raised in a Republican household. She becomes a bit more progressive as she hangs out with the gang more (particularly, Hyde and Donna), but then she ends up in the middle. Like Kitty.

Conservative: Red and Bob. Bob moreso on religious grounds, and Red on borderline neocon grounds. He's usually only a social conservative on a personal level, for the most part, because he isn't super religious (and values the separation of church and state).

Thus, Red definitely holds the constitution near and dear to his heart, and hates wanton disregard of its principles. He hates corruption and is a protectionist as well (having worked at the car plant for years, he was actually in a union, in my mind).

*****

Yeah, there's definitely some variation in history. In this case, it's also essential to differentiate between each character.

Hence, a general historical lens dictates how society, in general, felt about an issue. Whether they were split, on the wrong side, or on the correct side (from today's lens). And character variation dictates how they'll respond to it. Whether they'll accept society (and societal shifts), or if they won't.

To me, unless it's in a fantasy universe and hence the author can do whatever they damn well please, downright ignoring the ills of the past is counterproductive. At least to me. The past varies within a personal sphere, but the mentality(ies) of society at large shouldn't simply be brushed aside to make today's readers (and writers) feel better.

Donna K.

MistyMountainHop

I'm not sure Eric would be libertarian, tbh, but to each their own interpretation. I don't discuss real-world politics in online public spaces and rarely in terms of the T7S characters. I'll talk about it in private, though. That being said, feel free to express your own opinions and interpretations, as you've been doing.

That's a point to be made. But people also have the right to focus on whatever they want in fanfic. The doesn't mean they're brushing aside the politics. It's just a different kind of story they're writing.

Just like there's nothing wrong with people exploring heavier topics in their stories, fanfic is also for people to enjoy writing and reading what they want. Not everyone wants to wade into political waters in their creative work. Assessing or judging an author's political awareness, interest, or opinions based on whether they write apolitical fanfic is myopic. If people simply want to write and read about characters they love and their relationships with each other, there's nothing wrong with that. And it doesn't mean they're "brush[ing] aside [the past] to make today's readers (and writers) feel better." Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Fanfic is a place of creative freedom, and no one person can or should dictate how a TV show (or whatever property) is explored in fanfic. If people want to write a 100,000-word treatise on how 1970s politics might've played out in the T7S universe, so be it. If they want to write a 604-word fluffy drabble where Red and Kitty argue over muffins, so be it. There's room for all of it in fanfic.

einsteinsugly

Thanks! Since I'm passionate about politics and history, I put a lot of thought into the T7S characters and how they'd react to issues/events of the day, even if some reactions may be less than pleasant.

To get back on topic, I've been fiddling with how deep into the 9/11 conspiracy theories Hyde would be. Jackie would just roll her eyes, try to politely listen...well, until she's tired of it and she cuts him off.

Jackie: Okay, will you shut up about building seven?
Hyde: Not until somebody can tell me why it collapsed.

Oh, for Eric, I see him as politically libertarian in the sense that he doesn't want the state to regulate social issues. Personally, though, it's a different matter.

*****

And I don't care about a fic not addressing the issues of the day, if they aren't really addressed in the first place. Red and Kitty can argue about muffins all they want. In fact, that's a fic I'd love to see.

But if those issues are addressed (LGBTQ+ rights, racism, feminism, etc) and the bigotry of society as a whole in the past is brushed aside, that's where I draw the line. It doesn't have to be a brutal interpretation, per se, but it has to be realistic.

Plus, I love when one digs deep, instead of dealing with an unrealistically wide, shallow pool of diverse characters (whether it be sexuality, race, ethnicity, religion, etc). I'd rather have a couple of minority characters who are deeply explored and thoroughly developed instead of a bunch that are just kind of...there for the representation, y'know? To tick off a checklist, whether it be by someone who justifiably feels underrepresented/misrepresented in media (and hence goes into representation overdrive, even if it's statistically inaccurate, by a long shot),or by some corporate media conglomerate who just wants to earn some diversity brownie points.*

*The latter is way worse, obviously.

Thus, I'm stepping off my awkward soapbox now, because I've said what I needed to say. For freaking months, ever since I've joined this fandom (it's come out in disjointed rants, though, in fear of many taking great offense).

MistyMountainHop

I've said it before, but your take is quite interesting.

Kitty and Red do argue about tea on the show ... but even that has a bit of the political in it.

I think people have the right not to write the characters suffering if they're writing an LGBTQ+ AU, despite how much harder life was for LGBTQ+ people in the 1970s than it is now (and, while definitely better, it still ain't so great). If people in the LGBTQ+ community want to write generally fluffy fics between AU non-straight versions of the characters or angst that isn't centered around the characters' LGBTQ+ identity, they're allowed to do so -- not only because of free speech but also because of the suffering LGBTQ+ people have been through and continue to go through. There's room for all kinds of stories in fanfic, regardless of the gender identity or sexual orientation an author chooses to give the T7S characters.

We could talk more in private about this if you want (and we don't have to if you don't want to ).

I do agree that when a fic does make these topics the focus (or a focus), it should be done with plenty of research to get the facts right and show the nuances of the given topic (whatever it might be).

It can be hard to get one's POV across precisely how one means it -- especially online when it's a post and not a conversation between two (or more) people happening in real time. It's easier to clarify when the conversation happens in real time instead of person A making a post. Person B reacts to post hours later. Persons C, D, E, F, etc. react to both posts hours after that, and so on. These kinds of interactions can spin out of control, and all perspective is lost.

Donna K.

einsteinsugly

I'm well aware that others have the right to write/do whatever they want, of course. That's why I'm fine with gender-swapping, LGBTQ+ couples I don't like (unless it's incest or pedophilia, then I have a problem), etc. I mean, they're not my thing (and I don't see Jackie or Hyde as even remotely bi), but whatever.

People also have a right to live in a fantasy world, an AU where being an LGBTQ+ person in the past (and to a lesser extent in the first world, the present) was far less difficult than it actually was. In reality. If it diminishes one's suffering, go ahead. Have that outlet.

However, unless explicitly stated that one is doing so (as you said, or by having a fluffy, cute insular scene that simultaneously and succinctly recognizes the struggles of the outside world, off in the distance), idealizing the past is inherently harmful. One needs to learn from history, so we don't repeat it. Instead of pretending it doesn't exist. Because it does, and in many, many cases, it sucks. Escaping it, other than the ways you and I described (and even then, it's hard), is particularly difficult. It's a massive elephant in the room that needs to be dealt with in some capacity.

I mean, I wish I could wave a wand and make all the suffering throughout human history disappear, but I can't.

Since I can't, in terms of T7S, I have a strong feeling Jackie, Kelso, and Red wouldn't be very accepting of LGBTQ+ people (to differing degrees, and in different ways). Hyde and Donna would be pretty chill about it, but would still recognize the bumps in the road ahead. Eric and Fez would roughly fall under Hyde and Donna camp, but would be a bit more drawn out and dramatic about it. Kitty, Bob, and Midge would be hesitant, but would ultimately embrace it.

My position is not out of malice, but out of simply striving for basic accuracy, so others can understand the past (and the present). So we as a society can learn from the past (and the present). And change, for the better.

****

PS, a quick aside: I have parents that are around the same age as the gang (and upstate NY is similar-ish to rural/suburban Wisconsin), and they...definitely grew up in a different time. They've definitely said some things that, if they were raised in a different era, they wouldn't ever think of saying. Like loudly pointing out (not literally, they're not that obnoxious) a lesbian couple in line, being uncomfortable with seeing a gay couple kiss on TV, dismissing gender-neutral pronouns, etc. They've evolved and gotten better over time, but they're far from having a progressive mindset.

MistyMountainHop

Brought this conversation over to the General Discussion thread to get the Zenmasters thread back on topic.


Jackie and Hyde -- Hyde's wardrobe grows more sophisticated during his relationship with her in seasons 5-7. She clearly bought him "shirts with buttons". Using what money, I don't know. Maybe Bob's.

einsteinsugly

And that bolo tie.

Trust me, I was trying to steer back. But we responded to this thread at literally the same time, and I had to say something, so...yeah.

MistyMountainHop

Jackie knows what Hyde likes.

No worries. This happens quite a bit on here, and we both were having the discussion -- which we can continue in the other thread (if you want), where I responded.

einsteinsugly

Country music inspired attire?

MistyMountainHop

Um ...



Attire that's non-conformist. If bolo ties were the norm, he'd either refuse ties altogether or wear a regular one to show he's not a sheep.

einsteinsugly

And unlike Kelso, he's the real deal, so it won't be a clip on.

MistyMountainHop

Yup.

When he works at Grooves's Corporate HQ, Hyde wears real ties even though they make him uncomfortable (as we've seen in "Hey, Hey, What Can I Do" (5x18).