Alrighty, so what did we learn about Fandom world today, kids?

We have learned that there are places and spaces to take a piece of work or art and discuss it critically. To explore how we feel about it and what we interpret from it. Oftentimes, this means coming across people who have interpreted something completely different from you and feel about this work opposite from you. And that is normal and healthy and okay. These can be blog posts, forums, etc. All sorts of spaces.

Fan-made art is not one of them.

But- in the case of fan artists. People who use precious time, resources, and energy to make fanart, fanfics, and other things because they want to explore their interest in the characters or themes unless the creator specifically asks for feedback, you generally do not give criticism on it. Especially if it deals with a pairing or theme or character you don't like which is what said creator is writing about in the first place.

If this was normal art or published writing, I would say any criticism is fair game. That's their life and their work.

But you know how much money fan art people make for their work? Nada. Zip. Zero. It's illegal to.

For example, I am not big on the Sylki ship. I know a couple of people who are. And I see Sylki fanart all of the time. I have expressed how I feel about the pairing and Sylvie herself. I've explored those emotions and analyzed why I interpret it the way I do and why I don't like the idea of Loki and Sylvie as a romantic pairing . But one thing I try my hardest not to do is to go into Sylki spaces, find fanfics or fanart and comment "but it's incest and Sylvie is super toxic and bad for him and she's a Mary Sue!" If I did that, I would bet money I would be immediately shot down.

Now, for the fanart...

@steasstuff is a good friend and has made plenty of gorgeous artwork before. They are allowed to make art to explore any number of feelings about any piece of work at any time. And that includes feelings about uncomfortable subjects.

For example, let's take the myth of Medusa. We all know the one version that is the most tragic for that character comes from Ovid and it's the most popular telling. She was sexually assaulted and then blamed for it so then she is given snake hair that turns men to stone. Then Perseus runs up and kills her as a victory prize for his quest. So we get lots of art looking like this from when it was first told:

But what has happened in recent years is that people look bad and see Medusa not as a villain but as a tragic figure they wished had a happier ending. They see themselves in her and empathisize with her pain.

Then, in 2008, we get a piece of art that completely flips the story and roles called "Medusa with the Head of Perseus" by Luciano Garbati

Garbati wanted to subvert her story. To take Medusa from a victim, a monster to be defeated, to something powerful and triumphant. He said "What would it look like? Her victory, not his? How should that sculpture look?"

We always keep reimagining and asking "what if" of stories, regardless if they were being told in 2000BCE or 2016 or 2024 for that matter. It doesn't mean we can't gleam an interpretation from Ovid about Medusa being capable of destruction and Perseus as someone heroic, but it doesn't mean we can't also let our imaginations stretch and we cannot ask questions and discuss it.

To me, that beautiful fanart of Stella Ransome is @steasstuff's own "Medusa with the Head of Perseus." And that is just human nature. To ask questions, discuss, wonder about the possibilities, and wish that tragic figures have happy endings.

Okay, so don't invade spaces where the discussions aren't happening, kids. Especially not to fans.