Master/servant slash
Oct. 25th, 2009 07:28 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
So I think it's safe to say that this fandom has warped any and all master/servant relationships in fiction for me (not that I have a problem with that ;D). That established, I was just a little nervous about reading/seeing Comedy of Errors this past week because it has TWO master/servant pairs and a housemate that I have a crush on was playing one of the two servants. This could have ventured into RPS. However, the actual performance seemed to justify my suspicions of Syracusian bromance. Antipholus and Dromio did a CONSIDERABLE amount of touching and clinging to each other and giving meaningful looks.
But what I'm really getting as is, do you guys see master/servant relationships as automatic potential for slash, or do the undertones from Jooster just bleed over into other fandoms? Just curious.
Discuss.
But what I'm really getting as is, do you guys see master/servant relationships as automatic potential for slash, or do the undertones from Jooster just bleed over into other fandoms? Just curious.
Discuss.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-25 11:52 pm (UTC)I think it's interesting that the two examples there were Jooster and Comedy of Errors, because in both cases the master/servant duo is totally For Life, so there is maybe more subtext to see.
So no, I don't slash all master/servant pairs, but I do think that there's a certain intimacy that can exist in the master/servant relationship that can be slashed quite easily.
Did that make any sense? Cause I'm rereading what I just wrote, and it's not the most coherent stuff on earth...
no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 12:15 am (UTC)I'm not really familiar with fandoms outside of Jooster that have master/servant relationships, so I can't really say one way or the other if the undertones bleed over, but for me, 99% of the slash pairings that I get involve the personalities of the people involved, as opposed to the, "Ooh! Two hot guys! Let's write stories where they break the bed having awesome sex!" that some fandoms have to deal with. Heck, I can see some serious slash potential for Bertie and Bingo (though book!Bingo tends to be more of a shit than Michael Siberry's Bingo of the earlier TV seasons), though I tend to think that Jeeves would be a better fit for Bertie because of how they work with each other.
So, I vote option C, personalities play a big role in whether two dudes have the potential to get it on. *^^*
no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 12:52 am (UTC)One has to be careful, however, because moreso before the Georgian/Victorian era there was a sufficient amount of (for lack of a better word)"non-con" in regards to master/ servants, male and female.
Though I'll admit the word "Sir" will never be the same to me... :)
So I guess I'm "option C" as well.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 02:38 am (UTC)We should list other fandoms with master/servant pairs and see what we come up with. This is so interesting. : )
Hey, wait...I don't watch Merlin, but would Merlin/Arthur count? I see people talking about that all over LJ now.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 03:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 04:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 10:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 02:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 04:49 am (UTC)Oddly I've never seen any J/W stories using the premise that the boys were lovers first and that Jeeves being Bertie's valet was really just a way of hiding their true relationship.
Another good comparable of course is Wimsey/Bunter; Bunter was Peter's sergeant during the War and saved his life on at least one occasion, and probably helped put him back together afterwards. I never really saw them as a couple myself (Wimsey/Charles Parker worked better for me) but there's a lot of emphasis on Bunter's selfless devotion and at least until Harriet comes along Bunter is Peter's closest companion.
Going back to earlier generations, servants more or less expected to be importuned by their masters. It is only in comparatively recent times that people in the lower classes of society have considered that they had any rights over their own bodies; a mediaeval servant, for example, lived or died by the will of his lord. Although in some cases servants probably found the sexual attentions of their masters unwelcome, there must also have been plenty of instances in which they were both perfectly happy with the arrangement and stayed together without the world knowing a thing about it. By their very nature these things just don't come to public attention.
Just trying to say, I think, that the master/servant dynamic is infinitely complicated - as complicated, in fact, as any other dynamic - and whether or not there is a slash potential in any given one would have a lot to do with the personalities involved and the circumstances of their lives.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 07:39 am (UTC)Oddly I've never seen any J/W stories using the premise that the boys were lovers first and that Jeeves being Bertie's valet was really just a way of hiding their true relationship.
Sounds like a very good fic idea, and one that I'd like to see explored as well!
no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 02:43 pm (UTC)Oddly I've never seen any J/W stories using the premise that the boys were lovers first and that Jeeves being Bertie's valet was really just a way of hiding their true relationship.
I second (third?) the goodness of this notion! I guess maybe it never occurred to anyone because we have a canon description of their first meeting? Though there are certainly fics where they knew each other before. Gahhhhh, now I want to write it.
I really wanted Wimsey/Bunter to be slashable, and in fact quite enjoyed what little slash there is with them, but the more I thought about it, the more I had a hard time making it really work as well as say, Bertie and Jeeves. I can see Wimsey/Bunter more readily during the war.
Just long-windedly voicing agreement, I suppose.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-27 07:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 12:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 01:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 02:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 02:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-28 02:27 pm (UTC)