prillalar | Slashy vs homoerotic

Skip to Main Content

Slashy vs homoerotic

I've been trying to think about "slashy" versus "homoerotic". I don't think they are exactly the same thing, although they overlap quite a bit.

For example: In LotR, the movies especially, Merry's and Pippin's interaction seems very slashy to me, but not homoerotic. It's close friendship slashy.

For example: In the BtVS series premiere, the Master performs a ceremony so he can draw power through Luke, one of his minions. Luke kneels in front of the Master and feeds from the Master's wrist. The Master daubs a symbol on Luke's forehead in his own blood. This was homoerotic, but not, to me at least, at all slashy.

I'm not sure what the difference is, though. I was going to say that "slashy" implies some sort of relationship, but obviously the Master and Luke aren't two random people who don't know each other.

Maybe "slashy" implies a desire on my part to take things further, in fic or in thought. I don't want to make up stories about Luke and the Master, but I want to write reams of Merry/Pippin.

What do you think? Is there a distinction? If so, what is it?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Maybe the 'slashy' is that it requires those two particular characters, whereas homoerotic is more the situation - almost any two characters could be in the Master and Luke's shoes, and the vibe would be the same, because it's the act, not the people? Whereas with Merry and Pippin, it's the relationship, not any specific act, that gives off the vibe?

Yes, my view is similar. For me, slashy situations and interactions happen when two personalities strike sparks off one another. I think one can say both that an entire relationship is slashy, and that a particular scene, moment or action is slashy. But in either case, for it to read as slashy, you have to know who each person is and what they're like.

Homoeroticism, as everyone has said, doesn't require knowing who anyone is. A still photo of two random guys kissing is homoerotic, but it ain't slashy. I haven't seen your BtVS example, but it sounds like what musesfool says is right, that any two guys could take those same roles and the scene would still be homoerotic. But it would only become slashy if, for example, it was played out by two guys who had a long history between them of love, hate or something in between, like say Lucius and Snape (I know, wrong universe!), which it doesn't sound like is the case with Luke and the Master.

Luke and the Master would be analogous to Lucius and Voldemort. And let's just say that Master and Voldemort? Kissing cousins in the looks department, though the Master was far more interestingly rendered by the Maestro, Mark Metcalfe, whereas Voldemort, in his personal appearances, has tended to be more cartoony. (Yes, I liked the Master quite a lot.)

A still photo of two random guys kissing is homoerotic, but it ain't slashy.

Yeah, I think that would be my read on the difference.

Hmm, hmm, hmm. I feel like I'm getting closer to a definition that works for me. But it did seem like Luke and the Master had a long history -- he wasn't just a simple minion. We didn't know that history, though.

I think for me it has more to do with my own reaction. Slashy implies that I'm invested, maybe.

But it did seem like Luke and the Master had a long history -- he wasn't just a simple minion.

True, but I never got a sexual vibe off them except for that one scene. The Master seemed to prefer Darla for that (imo).

Did you watch Firefly? Like the berry-feeding scene in that ep where they're going to burn River as a witch, even if there was no intended sexual subext (and given that it's a Joss show, I bet there was), the fact that this man is kneeling before this woman, hugging her about the waist and proclaiming how much he loves her as she feeds him berries - her fingers to his lips - that was a pretty freaking erotic pose. The fact that the characters are brother/sister gives it that queasy bad wrong edge *because* it's such a charged pose. It's probable that any two people in that position would appear erotic (or maybe I just have a dirty mind), but the incest is what gives it the extra thing that made me want to write about it.

Slashy implies that I'm invested, maybe.

Or that. *g*

I've thought about this but that's not quite it for me. Because, really, this all came off of a discussion with someone about my story Blood Will Tell and whether or not it is Sirius/Lucius slash. To me, it's a story about their relationship and it's homoerotic but it's not slash. Maybe because that's not the *point* of the story. But I know that other people consider it slash and that's a valid interpretation.

I think you have a good point, though. Maybe slash implies *focus* on the relationship. Hmm.

Maybe slash implies *focus* on the relationship.

Heh. That's what I've been arguing over in my LJ, about slash=romance (in the sense that romance is a story focusing on the love/lust/sexual relationship between two people of either gender in any combination).

If the relationship is incidental and/or not a plot point, it may be slash in the sense that it's a homosexual pairing, but the story's genre (mystery/drama/comedy/action) should take precedence.

I usually use 'slashy' for stituations that could be used by fans to support some subversive interpretation. Homoeroticism is inherent in the work itself and anyone who isn't too blind or too uptight should be able to see it. Most of the time, the two occur together, IMO. In addition, I think 'slashy' is often used to mean 'this is homoerotic, but I'm a 13 year old fan with a crummy vocabulary'.

I usually use 'slashy' for stituations that could be used by fans to support some subversive interpretation.

I think that's a useful definition. Slash is often, though not always, transgressive. Hence all the discussion about whether stories about canonically gay characters are slash or not.

I would tend to use "homoerotic" to describe characters or situations that are canonically homosexual and to reserve slashy specifically for fan interpretations of presumably straight characters as queer. I think of the m/m and f/f pairings and sex scenes in my original fic as homoerotic, not slashy, but of Harry/Severus as slashy, not homoerotic. However, I do at times use "slashy" as shorthand for both categories.

Interesting thoughts. So slashy, to you, is more about interpretation -- is it the act of interpretation?

I'm tempted to say that slashy is in the intent of the author, but that might be misleading. I wont go so far as to say that slash is in the interpretation, because I think that some things *don't* genuinely admit of slashy subtext and some things do; in other words, I think there are cases where the fans are reading the subtext into a show and cases where it's really there. Of course, I'd be hard-pressed to give you an example of a case where it wasn't there--maybe the best I can do is to point to people who'll pair Any Two Guys, regardless of how much screen time they've had together and whether they've interacted in any meaningful way.

I guess ultimately my distinction is between characters who would define themselves as gay/bi/whatever their vocabulary is and characters who would define themselves as straight. But then, what would Mulder say if you asked him if he was straight? *g* All I know is that my characters Fionn and Dermot are lovers and partners who have sex with both men and women professionally, and Mulder and Krycek are guys who get into really suspicious fights. *g*

Interesting thought. To me, homoerotic occurs in the relationship between characters. Slashy occurs in a more triangular relationship between characters and audience. Which I guess is what you said, put differently. *g*

I hadn't thought of it quite that way before, and I'm so glad you said that -- it makes perfect sense to me.

:-)

I really like the way you've phrased that.

For me slashy is all about the narrative, whereas homoerotic is a sort of aesthetic description.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. If you're watching a TV show and you think something is slashy, how does that relate to the narrative?

I mean that slashy elements typically relate to the story for me, so if I'm watching The Sentinel, say, the slash elements might be Blair making Jim eggs or them sharing a room at the monastery. Krycek kissing Mulder's cheek is slashy. Whereas when I think 'homoerotic' I think in terms of pictures: Orlando kissing Viggo's cheek (no story, just a cute impulse), Michelangelo's David, the dancers at Babylon in QAF.

I don't necessarily think that this makes perfect sense or that there is no crossing between the terms, but pretty much this is how they separate out in my head.

I want to write reams of Merry/Pippin.

Heh heh. She said "reams".

I think the two major things that define the difference for me are that 1) slashy is a relational thing, a tension of possibility that becomes evident over time as the characters interact, while homoerotic is an immediate situational thing, a similar tension of possibility that is evident and contained even in a tableau and 2) slashy applies to something fans want to work with while homoerotic applies to something critics want to work with.

Realizing, of course, that the latter is by no means a hard and fast distinction, especially around here.

Slashy also tends to describe, particularly, friends or enemies; it has a pretty distinct valence. Luke is neither, he's a minion. Perhaps we could say slash requires time to build up the erotic charge that a homoerotic scene/moment has or gains very quickly, which makes the presence of a highly charged *relationship* superfluous to homoeroticism.

Perhaps we could say slash requires time to build up the erotic charge that a homoerotic scene/moment has or gains very quickly, which makes the presence of a highly charged *relationship* superfluous to homoeroticism.

Oh, I really like this. Slash does seem to be all about the relationship to most people.

Hmm, good question. I doubt that there'll be a consensus on the issue, but I'd go with "homoerotic" as something that's more overt and calculated to arouse. "Slashy" seems subtler. For instance, the recent Nicholas Nickleby movie *points at icon* had some definite Nicholas/Smike slashy overtones, but homoerotic? No, I think it was too much in the background. The focus is definitely on other aspects of the plot, relationships, etc.

I don't think it's quite this simple, but to me, slashiness can be read into a work, while homoeroticism is closer to the surface.

I really ought to see that movie. Maybe on my winter break.

I don't think it's quite this simple, but to me, slashiness can be read into a work, while homoeroticism is closer to the surface.

Yeah, we read slashiness into a lot of things. Good point.

HOLY BATSHIT, ROBIN!

. . . Er, that would translate to "Good Lord, I can't believe there's actually someone else out there who actually noticed the slashy undertones in Nicholas Nickleby!". That "you are my home" line really did it for me. Convinced me, I mean. I even wrote about it recently in my LJ ^_^ Anyhoo, hurrah!

::sods off to hunt for Nick/Smike fanficcery::

Kindred spirit!

semielliptical and

macteague and I are on a Nicholas/Smike quest. There's no fanfic yet as far as I know, but I'm working on fixing that problem. Maybe in a month or so... ;)

I've made icons here (http://geocities.com/bow_chicka), if you want to take.

::waves:: Found this from bonibaru's journal.

For me, homoerotic has more of a sexual connitation. Slashy having a more relationship connitation.

Buffy example:
"Killed by Death" Angelus/Xander scene. Talking partly about sex, almost whispering, standing with their mouths inches apart. Basically looking like they're going to jump each other. This, to me, is more homoerotic than slashy because it's got more of a jump-your-bones vibe.

"Spiral" Spike/Xander scene. Xander helping an injured Spike, casually pocketing Spike's lighter, proffesing but not really meaning their mutual hate, smiling at each other. This is more slashy to me because it really has no sexual overtones but still has that slightly-more-than-friends vibe.

I think basically anything "slashy" could be reasonably construed as close friendship if you didn't want to look at it as anything else. "Homoerotic" is more something that would make someone who doesn't like that sort of thing vaguely uncomfortable watching.

I reckon 'homoerotic' (in addition to being slighly jargon and thus eshewed by many) is more for stuff that's actually there - like all those descriptions of how Dorien Grey is really really hot. Tends for me to mean deliberate subtext.

Slashy I use for both sometimes, but think of as more the gay gayness that isn't necessarily placed their by the writers.

I don't really know how to define it, but I just wanna add to the good points already given that 'homoerotic' is more a standard term. People use it for movies, books but widely, while 'slash' is much more a fandom term and is directly related to fanfiction. For example, if you wanna talk to someone not in fandom that two guys in a movie had spark or suggestive scenes, you will use the term homoerotic, because slash won't tell this person a single thing.

My thought is that it's the difference between the symbolic and the individual. In this context, I think 'homoerotic' is a literary term referring to the symbolic significance of the relationship and/or the interaction in question. 'Slashy' is much more emotional, based much more on the individual characters. I feel it's also more subjective.

For example, a mentor/student relationship between a queer-coded older man and an innocent younger man is homoerotic. The way Garak and Bashir interact within this framework is slashy IMO.

A male-bonding relationship between a disquieted conventional man in denial and his infuriating pest is homoerotic. I think Bashir's teasing and O'Brien's squirming is slashy.

I do see Merry and Pippin's relationship as slashy, but not homoerotic; I think you chose an excellent example. I can easily see them engaging in a sexual relationship if that level of incest is acceptable in their society, but there's no symbolic framework for their relationship that makes it homoerotic. At least none that I know of: I haven't read the books very carefully, and at this writing I have not seen Return of the King.

I do, on the other hand, find Sam and Frodo's relationship homoerotic as well as slashy. Partly because of the master/servant thing, the love and loyalty that crosses that barrier, but also because of the symbolism of military service. (The idea that Sam's role, though not his master's attitude towards him, is based on WW1 batmen makes it more homoerotic to me, but not more slashy.)

I find Legolas and Gimli's relationship homoerotic, but not particularly slashy. I've read some beautiful stories about their intense romantic friendship, but I can't take that last step to seeing them actually forming a sexual relationship. I can see how others find it slashy, perhaps, though I do wonder if they're just running with the homoeroticism and there is no slashiness. :0)

I think everyone has said it already, but I think 'slashy' means subtle hints at gayness that are unyeilding, but homoerotic is when something serious actually happens between two male characters.

What does BtVs stand for? It sounds good.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only