![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tellitslantMan, you know, I never can stand it when those dirty dirty RPF-writers try and justify their actions. Like, doesn't everyone know how wrong that is? A celebrity's public image is totally their private property. No one else but them should be able to project or theorize about or parody that image, because it's certainly not a commodity upon which they and/or their publicists and/or companies trade. It is completely and inextricably entwined with their true soul-self. And nothing can really be fiction if it's about someone real, too, so everyone writing RPF is putting stuff out there that other people could believe is true, and that would do so much damage to a celebrity's reputation.
All RPF is horrible and a blight upon the Internet, but some is worse than the rest. You know what's utterly terrible? The way that so many of those dirty writers pick on the poor kids who were Mouseketeers. I mean, sure they all grew up pretty damn gorgeous. But Mouseketeers, man! Don't you understand how damaging that can be? Especially since so many of them have careers in the entertainment industry beyond that one TV show. Writing fiction about them is especially heinous. Well, maybe it's a little less so if it's parody fic. But any sort of fiction that seems to be meant to pass itself off as a real representation of events in a Mouseketeer's life? Anyone who writes or supports that is cruel and evil and could never have any good in their soul. I bet they just don't realize how much that hurts a celebrity, to see their public image - I mean, their name and likeness and pure sense of being - used to tell stories about things they never did.
I have decided to take this opportunity to share some images from something that I consider one of the most horrible examples of the above and that is for reasons unknown to me often overlooked. If you are faint of heart or deeply attached to any of the former Mouseketeers, you MAY NOT WISH TO CLICK ON THIS CUT.
(1963, by Doris Schroeder)
(1961, by Doris Schroeder)
(1964, by Barlow Meyers)
(1964, ill. Robert L. Jenney and Maxine McCaffrey)
(1964, ill. Robert L. Jenney and Maxine McCaffrey)
*shakes head sadly* Do you see? Do you see how impossible it is to have fiction about real people, real live people, without completely damaging their self-worth not only as a person but as a celebrity? No one written about in this manner could ever grow up into an actualized human being with any self-worth or continued bankable value. Totally impossible you cannot refute that no way no how it's just clear that what those evil writers do is wrong... oh wait.
Yeah.
Please note that the above argument does not at any point touch on the legality of RPF as opposed to the legality of the above licensed merchandise. That's not really the point I'm trying to make; I'm trying to deal more with the "OMG it hurts their souls!" side of the argument. Obviously Walt Disney owned Annette, in a legal relationship that RPF writers don't have with their subjects - which is to say, he made and then controlled her public image, which is what these books are about, which is what RPF is about. Disney was not literally a slavedriver, did not literally own Annette Funicello the person (that other studio head Mayer, we might be able to make a case for, but moving on *g*), but he owned the rights to Annette-the-Mouseketeer's image.
I mean, dude. I can't say that "Disney-the-corporation/Disney-the-man did it!" is a full-stop rebuttal to the bad-wrong-evil accusations. But if Disney can license a public image and produce merchandise like this? Then there is very obviously a clear divide between a celebrity's image and who that celeb is when he or she goes home at night, and writing fiction about one does not necessarily affect the other.
All RPF is horrible and a blight upon the Internet, but some is worse than the rest. You know what's utterly terrible? The way that so many of those dirty writers pick on the poor kids who were Mouseketeers. I mean, sure they all grew up pretty damn gorgeous. But Mouseketeers, man! Don't you understand how damaging that can be? Especially since so many of them have careers in the entertainment industry beyond that one TV show. Writing fiction about them is especially heinous. Well, maybe it's a little less so if it's parody fic. But any sort of fiction that seems to be meant to pass itself off as a real representation of events in a Mouseketeer's life? Anyone who writes or supports that is cruel and evil and could never have any good in their soul. I bet they just don't realize how much that hurts a celebrity, to see their public image - I mean, their name and likeness and pure sense of being - used to tell stories about things they never did.
I have decided to take this opportunity to share some images from something that I consider one of the most horrible examples of the above and that is for reasons unknown to me often overlooked. If you are faint of heart or deeply attached to any of the former Mouseketeers, you MAY NOT WISH TO CLICK ON THIS CUT.
(1963, by Doris Schroeder)
(1961, by Doris Schroeder)
(1964, by Barlow Meyers)
(1964, ill. Robert L. Jenney and Maxine McCaffrey)
(1964, ill. Robert L. Jenney and Maxine McCaffrey)
*shakes head sadly* Do you see? Do you see how impossible it is to have fiction about real people, real live people, without completely damaging their self-worth not only as a person but as a celebrity? No one written about in this manner could ever grow up into an actualized human being with any self-worth or continued bankable value. Totally impossible you cannot refute that no way no how it's just clear that what those evil writers do is wrong... oh wait.
Yeah.
Please note that the above argument does not at any point touch on the legality of RPF as opposed to the legality of the above licensed merchandise. That's not really the point I'm trying to make; I'm trying to deal more with the "OMG it hurts their souls!" side of the argument. Obviously Walt Disney owned Annette, in a legal relationship that RPF writers don't have with their subjects - which is to say, he made and then controlled her public image, which is what these books are about, which is what RPF is about. Disney was not literally a slavedriver, did not literally own Annette Funicello the person (that other studio head Mayer, we might be able to make a case for, but moving on *g*), but he owned the rights to Annette-the-Mouseketeer's image.
I mean, dude. I can't say that "Disney-the-corporation/Disney-the-man did it!" is a full-stop rebuttal to the bad-wrong-evil accusations. But if Disney can license a public image and produce merchandise like this? Then there is very obviously a clear divide between a celebrity's image and who that celeb is when he or she goes home at night, and writing fiction about one does not necessarily affect the other.
