A) The term “shipper” does indeed apply to other shows. There are shippers for just about everything on TV including just about any kind of pairing you can think of. And some you probably don’t want to thoink about at all.
B) I myself am kind of an anti-shipper. I dislike the idea of reducing a decent show with many interesting aspects to a Harlequin Romance that only focuses on two main characters. The romance aspect has been done to death. I’d love to see a show where there’s no romance at all. That’s why I loved The X-Files so much in the early seasons. Of course, everyone else wanted Mulder and Scully to get together and the search for ratings kind of made it unavoidable. Blech.
C) That said, I think Rachel and Ross will wind up together simply because that’s the kind of storytelling that the American Viewing Public likes. When two chatacters are shown to be the will-they-or-won’t-they couple of a series, chances are they’ll be together at the end.
I’m lost here – I never heard this term before. I thought you were all bent out of shape because your roomie kept making trips down to FedEx or UPS or maybe the docks at weird hours. Not because it was their business or their job of course, Just because they were obsessed with shipping things. You know how those addictions are.
I think it’s from “relationship(per)”. People who think the greatest part of a TV series is the relationship (usually romantic) between two lead characters.
“relationship” is the basis of the term “shipper”, it refers to someone who um, places great credence in certain romantic relationships with a series. Take the classic example:
Buffy the Vampire Slayer:
There are many fans who are more fixated on the “Spike - Buffy” relationship then the other polt points in the show. Similarly there are fans who were all about the “Willow - Tara” relationship. These fans tend to be amoung the more ardent and hard core, often being more involved in fan sites, fan fiction, conventions, and more active in general threads about the topic. Generally, they know a great deal about the show and can be a good source of information, if understandably a bit biased at times.
Obviously, having such active fans says something about the show. Although, being a “shipper” for Buffy must be tough, due to the firm rule in the Buffy-verse that there can be no happy relationships-- ever. FWIW: I did indentify with the Anya-Xander relationship quite a bit, and was cheesed a bit at how it was wasted.
Dude, did the Buffy fandom come up with the term “shipper”? I always thought it was original to X-Files. I was a vehement antishipper-to-the-death, so the series finale made me violently angry. As did much about the last four seasons. Sigh, what a show.
Just out of curiosity, were there any major shows before Moonlighting in which the main characters had major sexual tension, i.e. they weren’t in a relationship but might be one day? Seems to me that prior to the eighties, the leads of any major series would either already be in a relationship (almost certainly married) or it would be clear that they would just be friends forever?
Incidentally, I think I’m with the majority when I say that consummating the relationship on Moonlighting thoroughly screwed up the show.
“Shipper” indeed comes from “relationshipper” and originated among Xfiles fans who wanted Mulder and Scully to fall in love and have a relationship. Me, I would have liked to see Mulder and Skinner get it on. . . MMMMMM. . Mitch Pileggi. . .
Where was I? Oh, yes, the term “shipper” has now been accepted in pop culture to denote simpleminded people who want to boil down the myriad complexities of human interaction into insipid high school romances betwen their favorite characters on a TV show.
I say screw the “shippers” and bring on the one-shot slash porn episodes. . . on “Friends,” let’s have Joey and Ross hump each other like a Falcon video. How about an Angel/Wesley/Gunn threeway on "Angel’? I’d love to see William Petersen top George Eads on CSI.
Oh, yes. Mitch Pileggi and his amazing pectorals. He’s yummy!
Did you catch last month’s rerun of Friends on NBC? Mike
(Phoebe’s boyfriend) had to keep Ross from answering the phone, per Rachel’s plea because she had given her phone number to a guy in a bar. Ross and Mike are sitting on the couch, the phone rings, and since Ross is sitting closest to the phone, Mike quickly flings himself over and grabs the phone. There is this MARVELOUSLY delicious slashy second where Mike (super cute) is so very close to Ross, like in his face.
Oooh, I just wanted them to both head for the bedroom and get it on!
Shipper here. Ross and Rachel Forever (but they really need to stop making Ross such an asshole.) Also SPUFFY. SPUFFY SPUFFY. MUST HAVE SPUFFY. (That would be the Shipper term for Spike + Buffy)
It occured to me after I posted that Cheers would qualify as a show in which a major subplot was the sexual tension between the lead characters. I’m curious if it was the first (successful) show that featured a “relationship” that didn’t involve marriage.