![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sekritomgMan, I suck.
So, here's some of it.
About the most rigid standard you can hold a fan fiction to is characterization, because the characterizations of various South Park residents is fairly consistent. The boys in particular have fairly set personalities:
Stan is sensitive and emotional but not irrational. He tends to have gut reactions to situations and tends to have a higher level of stick-to-itiveness than his friends. He is the least trusting of and least dependent on the town adults. He is the most well-balanced of the children, and is the most emotionally well-adjusted. He is amiable and prone to taking a leadership role.
Kyle is emotional and irrational, and has a high moral code but changes his mind about things. He is easily manipulated but book smart, and he wants to believe adults and trust his parents. Whereas Stan internalizes his emotions, Kyle is volatile. He is the super-ego to Stan’s ego and Cartman’s id. He sees himself as a victim and a good judge of moral standards.
Cartman is hedonistic and his primary concern is self-satisfaction. He is wily, manipulative, and clever, but lazy and uncurious about the world. He does not seem to really believe in anything other than pleasing himself — even when he takes up “causes,” he is easily distracted by food, toys, or the chance to annoy someone else. He is subdued when he feels bad for himself, unless he seeks vengeance.
Kenny is highly sexualized and world-weary. His personality is the most difficult to grasp because he doesn’t have a voice per se except in a couple of instances, but it is sometimes possible to make out what he is saying; it is usually possible to follow his reactions and thought processes. He is insightful and ambitious.
Butters is naïve and trusting, but to a point. He is not a complete idiot, but he tends to take things at face value, at least at first. He does have a limit, but where this limit is set is determined by what purpose the creators need him to fulfill in a given scenario.
Even the children with smaller parts have fairly distinct personalities:
Clyde is unsure of himself and needs validation. He is mopey.
Craig is vulgar and brash. He despises stupidity in general, and Eric Cartman specifically. He is aggressive.
Token is self-conscious and easy to upset.
Tweek is a paranoid spaz, which is the extent of his characterization. He is not, however, delusional.
Wendy is strident and possessive, but inclined to her own set of ethics and sense of justice. She generally starts out wary of the group mentality, but later crumbles under internalized social pressures.
The adults have similarly consistent personalities, which for the sake of brevity I will not outline here.
The two problems with South Park fan fiction apply to these children’s personalities. They are 8 or 9 at the time of the show, so to write romantic fiction, authors generally age the characters. Therein lies a problem: One assumes that a teenager would have matured and developed his personality past that of his 8-year-old self, but if his personality is developed too far he is only recognizable as himself in name only. This phenomenon is referred to as “OOC” or “out-of-character.” Therefore, the goal in most stories is aging a character just enough.
There is a caveat here, which is that, as mentioned before, the reality of South Park is highly flexible — so the personality of the characters, or the extremes of their personalities, often fluctuates based on the role said character is need to fill in a given scenario. Butters is a good example to take: In one episode he is entirely naïve and willing to do everything Cartman tells him to without question. Yet in other episodes he seems conscious of his dweebiness, and laments the situation, or breaks character to swear or something. This can be roughly applied to any character.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:16 (UTC)I'm not done reading, but I needed to say that.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:22 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:24 (UTC)Except the rest of this is way more insightful than anything I'd come up with upon entering the fandom.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:25 (UTC)To be fair I'd been like hanging out for a month or whatever.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:28 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:30 (UTC)I could eat a donut right now, or I could go to sleep. Which appeals to you?
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:33 (UTC)Dude, eat a fucking doughnut! Then go to sleep if you're tired. But the doughnut should be your priority.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:36 (UTC)Okay,
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:53 (UTC)Did you get the doughnut?
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:55 (UTC)Which new fanfiction?Oh, shut up, it's a fandom. I mean, from what I've heard not a very good fandom, but if you're in it it must have some kind of upside.Yeah, and then I wanted another one.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:02 (UTC)The one that you found when I first posted it, if you remember?Doesn't matter, it apparently SUCKS, because even though I wrote it one or two years ago it was 10000 words of pure of effort, yet I can write some shitty fluff and it gets 700 reviews of "OMG KAWAII???"Shut up, Foodstamp, you whiny ingrate. But that's the nature of that fandom--stupid things get exalted. There's basically no writing of quality in the category. Including my own.I'm going to get some ice cream when I get out of the bathtub.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:07 (UTC)It probably doesn't suck. I mean, I didn't read it, so I guess I wouldn't know, but I'm sure it was kawaii and well-written and emotional, because that's just how you write. Yes, probably two years ago, too.I love it when you talk shit about other fandoms.I really need to go to sleep. If I am late for this 8:25 a.m. class my balls will explode. Or something.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:13 (UTC)No no. I mean, maybe it was kawaii. There were fights in supermarkets and things and poorly-written love confessions, AWWWW. But it was terrible. Terrible. I'd take it down except it sort of gives me an ego boost when I'm feeling especially disconsolate.Ooh, I won't take that as a hint to rant more, as your time is limited and I've got lots of shit to talk.I think your balls have already exploded; I can't see them at all. I forgot that it's a school night! TAKE CARE.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:18 (UTC)You think everything you write is bad, and so far none of it is. Some of it's better than other stuff, but that's just how things go. And we all put extra effort into some things, etc. I'm sure it doesn't suck. I'm also not going to read it so you can't convince me otherwise. Why does it give you an ego boost?Go ahead! I'll read it ... tomorrow at 4 p.m.I AM GOING TO BED SO FUCKING LATE GAHHHHHHH
I'm going to go brush my teeth. Then I'll reply to anything that's here when I get back.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:26 (UTC)Oh god, you're so nice to me, thank you. I place all of my writing in terms of relative suckage. But this is the most horrible piece ever, being that I started it four years ago, and I never improved in all that time because it wouldn't seem consistent. It's for my ego because of all the reviews. Yes, I'm a bad person. I like staring at that account because of the numbers.I can't rant on cue, but it will come, don't worry. Oh, here's something briefly: I bitched on the comments for a DBSK video saying that the fandom is like an especially obnoxious group of anime fans, and people are flipping out and giving me thumbs-down because THEY KNOW I SPEAK THE TRUTH.I was like, "Dude, it's only ten here," then I remembered. I'M SORRY GO TO BED. I wonder if you'll get this reply before you leave.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:32 (UTC)Maybe again this is a stupid thing to say but technically I'm not being nice, I'm saying what I think. Being nice would be lying about it. If I didn't think you and your writing were amazing we wouldn't be having this conversation. Oh, numbers are nice.Oh, you have so many fandoms to hate. To think, tonight we've talked about DBSK, Tales of Symphonia, and Kingdom Hearts, and I don't know anything about any of those.Yeah, and 12:30 isn't even that late. I JUST HAVE THIS FUCKING HORRIBLE DAY TOMORROW.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 21:05 (UTC)Of course my initial response is "YOU'RE SO NICE," because even if you're just saying what you think, it's flattering to me that you've actually taken the time to do so. THANK YOU. I so want to make you proud. Random fact: the reader traffic on my South Park account and my Kingdom Hearts account is the same, how funny.At least you know what to hate about those fandoms, and you've enlightened me about LotR.HEY IT'S LATER. How did your day go?
no subject
Date: 2008-10-22 01:02 (UTC)I hadn't logged in on FF.net for like, a long, long time, and apparently ... you can track user page status now? Word. Oh my god, you make me hella proud. STOP SAYING HELLA. Um, vice versa. I'm just fucking happy you can stand me.It's so good to be on the same page with what to hate about fandoms you don't care about.It was surprisingly good.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 03:56 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:03 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:04 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:14 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:16 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-21 04:28 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-22 08:26 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-22 22:31 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-22 08:11 (UTC)