Babsie's Den

Call it a political statement, call it opinion, call it my take on most of the Real Ghostbusters fanfic out there, but I'm still proud of how this picture came out.

Mind you, I've mellowed quite a bit since I initially drew this pic, but I still think a good lot of fanfic authors out there are batshit insane. :P Fortunately, for the types of demons a proton pack can't handle, a baseball bat does nicely.

I think I have this figured out now.

In 1990, someone wrote a Real Ghostbusters fan fiction called "Breathless Anticipation", in which Peter is hospitalized and hooked up to a breathing machine because he's cursed by a ghost that steals his breath. This triggered the feels of other ladies who, at the time, were in their 30s, and so THEY glomped onto this story and started writing their own tearjerker stories where Peter is hospitalized and injured and sick. They weren't fans of the source material (a few of them I've talked to refuse to touch the show itself), they were only fans of THAT FIC. The story could have been about the Sentinel, or Star Trek, or My Little Pony or the Muppet Babies, and the result would have been the same. Only these ladies insist on calling themselves a "fandom" of Real Ghostbusters.

Uh, no. Refusing the canon material, refusing to watch the show, eschewing how the characters were intended to be, acknowledging fan fiction only, and reimagining things from the ground up to tailor to your ideas isn't being a fan of something. I'm not exactly sure WHAT'S that called, but it sure as heck isn't fandom.

But that's just me. What do you guys think? What, to you, defines being a fan of something?

This is....odd.

I got railblasted recently for the way I see Peter and the way I portray him in my drawings.  Apparently my take on the little guy is too all over the place and emotionally stunted, and goofy.  However, my take on Peter is based directly on the first couple of seasons of Real Ghostbusters where he IS all over the place and emotionally stunted and a slart aleck slacker and goofy.  I brought this up WITH proof in episodes of every example I made (Thank you Youtube), and after arguing back and forth with this person, I discovered what the problem was.

The problem was that this person hadn't watched the show, outside of a maybe few episodes back in the day, but nothing concrete enough to resonate with them.  They had been introduced to Real Ghostbusters through fan fiction, and adopted the stories as canon...even though they were pretty much the opposite of the show, except for maybe the last couple of seasons when ABC watered it down.  As a result, they saw THEIR viewpoint as canon, and even though my take on Peter is directly based off the show's first and syndicated runs, I was the one who was incorrect.

(I also managed to insult this person by referring to Peter as a cartoon character--WHICH HE IS--but I digress, and that's for another entry.)

Anyway, has anyone else had this happen to them?  Had someone else view fanon or fanfiction as canon to the point where the show it's based off is "wrong"?  I mean in my eyes, if you're going to be a fan of a show or cartoon, be a fan of the show or cartoon!  You like someone's fan fiction, that's great!  But you need to REALLY watch the show and get a feel for how the characters really are if you're going to call yourself an actual fan.

Like...with me.  I've read some good Sentinel fan fiction.  I know people who can write passionate, detailed stories about these two characters that I can really get into.  I like the stories.  I don't mind reading them.  But I'm not going to call myself a fan of the Sentinel.  Why?  Because I've watched the Sentinel, and in my opinion it was just another weird boring little UPN show.  I'm not going to deny the fan fiction is good, but I'm not a fan of the show itself, and I'm not going to call myself such solely by hinging everything on fan fiction.

But I digress.  What do you guys think?  Is this a common thing in fandom?  Discuss!

When writing fan fiction or creating fan art or just growing attached to a character in general, it's natural for your own personal theories or developments of that character to arise.  These are called head canons or "fanons".  And the beauty of it is that with the head canon clause in effect, you can pretty much add your own flavour to that character and make them do whatever they want.  If I came up with a fanon that on Tuesdays at precisely 3:05 pm Peter Venkman suddenly turns plaid after he hiccups four times in succession, there ya go and no one can stop me.

But the thing to remember is that fanons are NOT CANON.  They are not fact according to what the show's developers and writers (and animators, depending on the show) came up with.  As such, if I describe a character with precision, and back it up with specific scenes from specific episodes, commentary from writing staff of the show, model sheets, and writers bibles, you can't argue with me and tell me I'm wrong because you see the character different solely based on overall conclusions and theories you came up with yourself based on your vague overviews of the character and your picking and choosing of traits. 

You can have head canons.  But the fact is that they're NOT facts.  They're your opinions and your customizations and you can write your own stories and do your own art based on your own ideas as much as you want.  But if you outright tell me I'm wrong because evidence from the show doesn't line up with your personal visions and pops your bubble, I'm going to get my hackles up.

Last night I watched the RGB episode "Troll Bridge", which I don't think I've seen since I was a puppy.

Not only is it one of the funniest episodes out there, but a good chunk of the reason why it's funny is because of Peter's antics.  He shrieks in disgust when he wakes up and discovers Slimer sleeping on his blanket, he mouths off to Egon, scoffs at Ray, irritates Winston, he quivers in fear when he's forced to try and converse with the monster du jour and fails, and when the city is doomed to be incinerated by huge fire insects and the other 3 Ghostbusters are scrambling to avoid this fate....Peter decides he's tired and refuses to help, opting to go take a nap instead.  In the end, however, he ends up saving the day AND the little creature in question once he befriends it and decides that this is a worthwhile cause after all.

This is one of the better episodes that shows off Peter's overall character.  He's immature, lazy, whiny, and a smart aleck.  He's an opportunist and compassionate, but mainly if the situation is something that interests him or aids in getting his way.  He complains, he whines, he sulks, he pouts.  He craves attention, is unreliable, and a bit of a klutz.  He's a nuisance and has a nice healthy record of screwing up or making a mess.

All this is balanced out however, by an underlying charm and intelligence.  Peter's a smart little thing when he wants to be, and he's downright hilarious most of the time.  He's more independent than anyone else on the show, and most likely to strike out by himself and do his own thing.  He's the smallest and quite possibly the youngest Ghostbuster, but makes up for it by being scrappy and not backing down or giving up, even if he can't quite keep up with everyone else all the time.

And when all else fails, Peter can turn on the charm and up the adorable factor. Teasing Egon?  Tripping over his own feet and falling down?  Napping in the face of danger?  Awwwwwww. 

All of this is wrapped into an obnoxious little package, and this is why Peter Venkman is my favourite character off this show that I've loved since it's debut.