Archive for January, 2011



Obsessing on Supernatural: As Promised, My Theory on Winchester Preference
Sunday, January 30th, 2011 15 Comments »

As most of you know, I’m a little on the obsessive side, particularly when it comes to Supernatural. So, it shouldn’t be a really huge surprise that I’ve spent waaaay too much time thinking about this idea and this show. (Have to do something when I’m not writing!)

That being said, my only examples are from my own family (which I describe below), so I’m interested to hear your take on things as well! (By the way, there are spoilers through Season 5 but no Season 6 stuff in this blog post, just so you know.) And if you’re not a Supernatural fan, please feel free to skip this entry. You’re not going to miss anything Alona and Will related, I promise! :)

I’m a relative newcomer to the Supernatural fandom, but it doesn’t take long to see that people are very passionate about the show in general and also, usually, about one brother over the other.

To be clear, I’m not talking about which Winchester is more attractive–frankly, they’re both hot enough to cause corneal damage if you look at them for too long. :) It’s not even always about who you agree with in whatever argument they’re currently having. I can often understand where my non-preferred Winchester is coming from, even as I hate what he’s saying/doing. I can also see it when my preferred Winchester is f*cking up big time, but it doesn’t change how I feel about him.

I believe brother preference is, at its core, about sympathy/empathy for that character rather than right or wrong or even logic. When the brothers are lashing out at each other, whether with words or fists or both (like when Dean uses John’s words on Sam, “If you walk out that door, don’t ever come back.” ACK!), who does your heart break for? Who do you want to hug and say, “It’ll be okay?”

That’s what I’m interested in. Both are flawed people–hell, that’s probably one of the reasons we love them so much. They are so broken and we want to fix them, or help them as they try to fix whatever is wrong themselves. One is not more broken than the other. They are just broken in different ways.

But we still make our choice. We ally ourselves with Sam or Dean, in a manner, I think, that has nothing to do with whether they’re right or wrong or even if we, in that given situation, would make the same choice.

Why? My pet theory is that it has something to do with birth order (whether you’re the oldest, youngest, middle or only child). Which makes sense to me as this show is way more about family than it is about vampires, werewolves, and wendigos. But I don’t think it’s birth order operating in the way one might expect. (A quick summary from Wikipedia on the theory behind birth order for those who aren’t familiar.)

I’ll explain, but first, a little background…

I started contemplating all of this because of conversations with my younger sister, who incidentally is the one who introduced me to Supernatural. As with anything–books, tv, movies–we view the Winchester family through the lens of our own life experience. I’m the oldest of three. I have a brother who is almost four years younger, and my sister is thirteen years younger than I am.

The key relationship in this case is the one I have with my sister. People who meet one of us first and then the other are shocked at how similar we are, even with the huge age gap. There are physical similarities, of course–our parents can’t tell us apart on the phone–but I’m told it’s more in mannerisms, how we express ourselves, and even our opinions. We finish each other’s sentences or say things at the same time ALL the time. She chose the same college I did, even the same major. NOT because I did those things, but just because we are very much alike. This is a little surprising to most people, even our parents, given that she was only four when I left for college.

But when she was little, she was often left in my care (hello, thirteen year old in the family is cheap labor–free babysitting). I changed diapers, gave baths, fed her jars of Gerber baby food, and put her to bed. I taught her how to tie her shoes, and I’m the one who witnessed her first steps (she was trying to reach me as I was dancing around the room to a Paula Abdul video–yes, it was 1989.)

I didn’t mind being responsible for her. It was fun to teach her stuff, usually the things she wasn’t supposed to know. She could identify Madonna and Janet Jackson on the radio (again, 1989!) when she was, like, two. Most kids were listening to Barney tapes. In another classic example, she asked my mom what a prostitute was, after I’d watched Pretty Woman (my favorite movie at the time) with her in the room. I’d thought she was too young to understand. (And yes, I got in trouble, but it was funny to see my mom try to answer that one.)

Christmas circa 1990:
christmas-1990
christmas-1990-2

As she got older, though, I figured out I had to back off on being responsible for her or she was going to hate me. She already had parents; she needed a sister. So, instead of asking her about whether she’d gotten her homework done, I asked if there were any cute boys in her class. :)

Now, as a college senior, she is a completely awesome person, one of my best friends, and someone I am proud to know.

Thanksgiving 2010:
susan-and-me

I promise, I’m bringing this back around to Supernatural right now…

When I finally got into Supernatural (this is one where she beat me to the punch in being a fan), we started talking about it. It became very clear, almost instantly, that despite our similarities in so many other areas, we were on opposite sides of the Winchester fence. :) And, like so many other fans, we are fiercely loyal to our brother of choice and unable to understand WHY the other doesn’t agree.

And I think it surprised us both. Not simply because we don’t agree–that can and does happen, though not often (we are both Ryan Atwood girls all the way, for example)–but more because of WHICH brother we each prefer.

I’m the oldest with the youngest left in my care. I’m not the rebel. I’m the one trying to keep the parents happy, if I can. Who does that sound like?

Yeah…except I’m 100% in Sam Winchester’s court, every single time.

And my sister? The youngest, the one who is, in my opinion, braver than me, more likely to strike out on her own? She favors Dean. All the way.

This completely befuddled us, until I started really thinking about it.

I like Dean. I do. He’s funny, sarcastic, and painfully aware of his responsibilities to his family and the world. That being said, I find myself angry with his character. A LOT.

Have you ever had to watch someone make mistakes you’ve made? I can see Dean driving Sam away. I cringe when he’s yelling at Sam for one of his many instances of poor judgment. Dean’s often so focused on that parental-like, “I’m responsible for you” aspect that he can’t see Sam as a person, as someone who is trying so hard with impossible standards as his guide.

My sister, on the other hand, is completely exasperated by Sam’s stupid mistakes. And she doesn’t blame Dean in the least for getting angry with him, even when Sam’s intentions are good.

So, I wonder then if I identify with Dean too much to be comfortable with him. I wonder if oldest children see their own flaws (as they perceive them) in Dean and youngest see theirs in Sam.

In other words, the role we play in our own family affects how we relate to this fictional one. Perhaps we judge the brother in our role more harshly because we have been there. I can’t be on Dean’s side because, gah, I’ve made those mistakes or similar ones. I want him to be smarter or better than me. With Sam, I don’t have that issue. I can view him with sympathy and without that same kind of prejudice.

What do you think? Sound off in the comments. Tell me your Winchester of choice and whether you’re a oldest, youngest, middle or only. (For the record, I’m guessing only children will resemble oldests in their brother choice. Not sure about middles.)

And yes, I know. I think about this way too much. :)

It’s Not Sunday But…
Wednesday, January 26th, 2011 4 Comments »

My goal was to update my blog every Sunday, but I’ve been a little off schedule since the holidays and with working on G&G3.

So, even though today isn’t Sunday, I’m going to post a short update today with the goal of a real post next weekend. (Any topics? I ALWAYS need blog topics. I’m happy to blather on about anything, but have trouble coming up with specific ideas. What do YOU want to hear about, if anything?)

Random G&G stuff:

–Portuguese rights sold last week for G&G and QOTD. Did a little digging and I believe it’s a Brazilian company that bought the rights, which means the books will be available in Brazil (probably not Portugal) as a few people were asking.

–Paperback for G&G comes out on May 10. And I *think* there will be a chapter or two of QOTD in the back! So excited about that!!!

–On February 19, I’ll be attending the Children’s Literature Breakfast at the Abbington in Glen Ellyn, IL, sponsored by Anderson’s Bookshop. Hoping for a chance to meet “Weird Al!”

–And I’m also super excited to be at the Teen Book Convention in Houston on April 9. It’ll be a reunion with Kristen Tracy and Brent Crawford, two of my tour buddies from last summer. I’m so happy to be seeing them again!

–Working on finishing up G&G3. When I’m done and the book is turned in, I’ll be:

a) a little more coherent and capable of carrying on a conversation without breaking off mid-sentence to stare into space

AND

b) writing up a post about some of the things I’ve learned from writing this particular book. Tried something new this time and had a few conversations with other writers about it. Eager to write down some thoughts about it, but must get the book out of my brain first.

Other assorted items (which, oddly, seems to translate to television-related items):

Supernatural returns this week. Yea! I want my Sammy back, preferably with a soul. I understand why the show needed to tear the brothers apart, but I’m looking forward to having them back.

–I’m kind of addicted to Southland. But mostly the Ben McKenzie parts. :) Has anybody read Jennifer Echol’s amazing book Going Too Far? If you haven’t, you totally should. It’s SUCH a good book, I’ve read it several times. Ben McKenzie is now who I picture as John After. *fans self*

–Watching Shameless on Showtime. Holy crap. Not for the easily offended, but I love seeing how this family (particularly the kids) all pull together.

Books:

–Purchased…
The Iron Duke by Meljean Brook. From the opening pages, it reminded me of the blend of technology and old-fashionedness we saw in Firefly, particularly the episode where Kaylee wears the foofy pink dress and Mal fights a duel. I think this might be considered steampunk. Not sure. This is my first venture into this territory.

–From the library…
Kiki Strike by Kirsten Miller
Mindblind by Jennifer Roy
Book of Shadows by Alexandra Sokoloff
Distant Waves by Suzanne Weyn
Possessions by Nancy Holder
Good Behavior (a memoir) by Nathan L. Henry

Looking forward to reading them all…when G&G3 is done! :)

In which I get a bit rant-y
Thursday, January 6th, 2011 5 Comments »

All right, I’m probably not even going to post this, but I HAD to get it off my chest. GAH!

I read lots of books in a variety of areas. Adult, young adult. Science fiction, paranormal, contemporary, urban fantasy, historical, romance, mystery. Serious, funny, absurd.

I go to each of these books for a different reason. Sometimes I want to be scared. Sometimes I want to cry or be deeply moved. Sometimes I just want to go along for the ride while we’re slaying demons or trying not be seduced by one.

I don’t consider any of these genres or subgenres to be lesser than another. They’re just different. Depending on my mood or what’s going on with my life, a certain kind of book will appeal to me more at one moment than another. I think a lot of people are like that.

So, can someone please explain to me why we insist on valuing these books differently? I’m not talking about whether you enjoy more one than the other–I’m okay with that. We all do that.

I’m talking about openly praising one type of book for being better than others because of it’s NOT in a particular category or putting down another because it is in said category.

I just finished reading an article–not a blog entry or a personal list but an actual official article from news source–that listed five or so YA books as the best of 2010. And I agree that every single one of those books on the list deserved to be there, based on my own experience with them or what I’d read about the books from others (still need to read a couple of them myself.)

But what bugged me and sent me straight to my keyboard to write this was the last line of the article, which was something to the effect of, “See? Good books in the Young Adult category and not a single paranormal creature among them.” Like this was something to be proud of or–and this is what irritated me–that the category of “good books” and “paranormal” could not overlap.

Urrrrgggh.

First, it’s misleading to assume or imply that YA is made up of nothing but paranormal stories. Yes, there are a lot of them and yes, SOME of them get lots and lots of attention. But there are many amazing contemporary, historical, mystery, suspense, and spy novels, too. (A few recent ones off the top of my head: Rosebush by Michele Jaffe, DUFF by Kody Keplinger, Revolution by Jennifer Donnelly, Fall for Anything by Courtney Summers, Return to Paradise by Simone Elkeles.)

I know the perception is that YA is all paranormal, all the time–and I know that can be frustrating for those who don’t enjoy that subgenre–but it’s not actually helping to counteract that situation by writing a sentence that implies you had to wade through mounds of paranormal crap to find these few diamonds in the rough. If you want people to know about other books outside the paranormal genre, then recommend more of them. There’s no need to bash on your way out the door. There just isn’t. You’re certainly not going to endear yourself to paranormal readers by doing so.

Yes, there are lots of paranormal/science fiction/fantasy stories out there right now and I’m not even going to pretend to be less than thrilled about that. That means I get to read and write what I love. Period. How awesome is that?

But do we need to hate on an entire subgenre just because it’s popular? Do we need to assume that just because it’s popular and kids like it that it must be junk? I don’t get that.

Believe me, I know there’s less than stellar story-telling out there–everywhere, in fact. Not just in the paranormal genre. And I’m all for calling a spade a spade. You don’t like a book? That’s okay, you don’t have to. You don’t HAVE to like anything. There are lots of books that are wildly popular in the paranormal genre that I have not been able to connect with or finish. Fine. That’s just how it is. No biggie.

But to dismiss an entire subgenre simply because of what it is, without regard to the quality of story-telling or writing within it, doesn’t make sense.

If it makes you laugh and cry but has a vampire in it, is it less of a book than one that makes you laugh and cry WITHOUT a vampire in it?

Why? Who says?

I think there might be a perception that working with paranormal creatures is easier because you can just make stuff up. But here’s the deal–writing is hard no matter WHAT you’re writing.

I feel like this is the same attitude that makes comedies less likely to win Best Picture at the Oscars. Do we need to cry in order to acknowledge the quality of something? Can’t evoking emotion–whether it’s laughter or tears–and engaging the reader/viewer–in whatever way possible–simply be enough? Why do we have to qualify it?

Again, we’re not talking about whether you liked a certain book or not. We’re talking about lining books up under the label of “Best Books of 2010.” The selection for that list is completely opinion-based, I know. We have no objective way to measure this kind of thing.

So, maybe my issue is more with how that list in the article was labeled. If paranormal books aren’t even in the running, not even up for consideration, then say that. Call it The Best Non-Paranormal Books of 2010. Then I’m fine with it.

Whew. End rant.

What do you guys think? Am I off the mark here? Blinded by my love of all things supernatural? :)