alias_sqbr: the symbol pi on a pretty background (Default)
[personal profile] alias_sqbr
So I've read a bunch of online fannish arguments where people go "These sorts of fans are crazy" and give examples, and then talk about the way fans should actually think, and end up conflating "Crazy fans" and "People whose attitudes are rational, but different to mine". And I had thought about where one should draw the line.

Some examples of sane attitudes for a fan (most people won't have all of these at once):

  • The one true text (such as it is) is the canon. Fanfic can be fun and all (maybe even better than the original text), but it's not the way the story actually happens;
  • There are infinitely many possible interpretations and offshoots of canon, all valid and interesting, and potentially as worthy of being taken seriously as the original source;
  • It's the authors perogative to write whatever they like, but we're under no obligation to like it;
  • You can enjoy something while also enjoying picking it apart and looking at all it's flaws, but that's not the only way to enjoy something;
  • If the author wants to be any good they should pay attention to constructive criticism (especially on stuff like unconscious bias).


Crazy attitudes for a fan:

  • There is One True Version of the text. Anyone who doesn't see this is a fool. Anyone criticises the One True Text is an evil heathen. Anyone who enjoys thinking about or writing different versions of the story is an evil heretic who Misses the Point;
  • ..and that one true text is imperfectly reflected by the "canon", meaning that the author is an evil heretic too, who must be made to see the light about how their story actually goes.


I feel a bit weird using the words "crazy" and "sane", but no better ones come to mind. Also, I banged my elbow this morning and it still hurts :( (Yeah, ok, so those of you who know [livejournal.com profile] sonnlich may not see my mild twinges as all that terrible. I don't care, I like whining!)

Date: 2007-11-10 08:15 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] penchaft.livejournal.com
Nonononononono. It's much simpler than that.

Crazy(batshit) attitudes for a fan:
• Being in Avatar fandom.

Date: 2007-11-10 08:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] penchaft.livejournal.com
Avatards make Lexicongate look like a philosophical discussion of the highest calibre. It's bizarre. Even Harmoanians think they're crazy.

Date: 2007-11-10 11:04 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] volandum.livejournal.com
Okay, enlighten me.

Date: 2007-11-10 09:08 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tevriel.livejournal.com
Pain is still pain. :) Pain that is less painful or long-lasting than my pain is still sucky and I endorse your right to whine about it.

I agree with you, although the question of canon as One True Text gets more complicated in fandoms that have internally inconsistent fandoms. (e.g. Star Trek, which is more or less the Original Fandom even, and comics fandom, which... well, Pick Your Own Canon, for reals.)

Date: 2007-11-11 12:32 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nico-wolfwood.livejournal.com
Yes! As someone who grew up on X-Men (and can go on and on about the Phoenix saga and the improbable retconning thereof) I do find it can be hard to have a cannon when all the writers are free to do whatever they want to each others work.

(wank wank)

Date: 2007-11-10 10:37 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ataxi.livejournal.com
The biggest issue I have with fan culture is its tendency to exalt that which I consider most base. I just can't fathom why people invest so much time in works considered trivial entertainments even by their authors (authors, like your JKs and your Joss Whedons, who when questioned about their work tend to refer to a sort of desperate pseudo-science of embedding serious content in such trivial vessels).

That probably makes me a critical conservative outside the carnivalised objective-value-free post-modern menagerie of fandom. It also makes me someone who wishes people could stop talking about Trek and Potter (and stop talking about talking about them, and ...). Sometimes it's the literary equivalent of the pop charts being dominated for decades by endless remixes and covers of "Ice Ice Baby" and "She Loves You".

But it upsets me that genre is a ghetto, both in an artistic sense and in the sense of market penetration, because I love certain types of work that, on some level, are insultingly understood by the broader public as equivalent to Trek or Potter. And there's a "reverse racism" to it as well, when established creators outside the ghetto who have managed to escape its narrow categorisation dissociate themselves from it utterly (Atwood famously).

But then finally, and in total contradiction, one comes to love this same ghetto for the unique creative constraints it places on the art produced within it, and for the misshapen yet oddly charming hunchbacks of works that result, e.g. the pulp writers who've become some of my great favourites despite all of the absurd tics of their work.

(wank wonk)

Date: 2007-11-11 11:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ataxi.livejournal.com
Yeah, I agree, it's at best tangential to the OP. Too bad!

(oh, and on the subject of too bad, Joss Whedon sucks ;-).

That boorish intro out of the way, I think the point is that fan communities are sustained primarily by the value their participants place on the social interactions enabled thereby, and only partly by the value of their supposed organising subjects.

This, I think, touches on what I'm trying to say:
"there's the fact that people in fandom (and fanficcers in particular) often focus their most intense energies on things they acknowledge aren't any good but feel deeply attached to anyway"
The thing is why are they deeply attached? It's because of what the emotional payoffs they get from interacting with the community around these mediocre works.

Fans, typically outside the mainstream socially, are always in search of social scenarios where the bar for participation is lowered.

RPG sessions are a classic case. They provide an opportunity for socially awkward people to interact in a structured, safe environment.

Harry Potter fandom is another. Everyone's read the Harry Potter books. They're easy to read. It's easy to insist of them that they should be regarded as cheap entertainment and nothing more (and thereby avoid elevating discussion to a more exclusive level). The bar to getting into HP fandom is way, way low.

But it's what you do once you're in that counts ...

The trouble is that even the simulation of a social structure eventually becomes genuine, with real castes, status and prejudices, and the "pretend importance" habitually placed on irrelevancies like the OTP or who ships who, or whether one PC is able to beat another one up in-game also becomes real importance, especially for people who have become accustomed to enjoying an in-community status that they are deeply insecure about their ability to achieve in the wider world. Like the status enjoyed by a GM or a dedicated, skilful fic-reccer and beta reader (or the small degree of status I once enjoyed as UniSFA's best Tekken player!).

So the "crazy" fans you're referring to perhaps are these people. People acting logically according to the parameters of a constructed reality the solidity of which depends on the emotional investment of the other crazies. And that's why their opinions on canon seem like fundamentalist doctrine - because they are religious doctrine, the only substantial commandments of the only community with which they really identify ...

And when the buzz dies, when the range and intensity of others' emotional investment reduces, they're quick to stake out another field of interest (usu. another TV show or book series) which will provide them with a better payoff-for-time ratio.

Re: (wank wonk)

Date: 2007-11-14 04:45 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ataxi.livejournal.com
Yeah, I jumped in with boots on ... hopefully I might get someone's goat, that's pretty much why I post in your comments anyway, you understand ;-)

Re: (wank wonk)

Date: 2007-11-14 12:17 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ataxi.livejournal.com
Yeah, I was pretty mild ... I even opened with a disclaimer! I guess fans don't care that they're only in fandom because they can't kick people around with overpowering domain knowledge and undeserved status in real life. Or maybe they just can't do it as well ;-)

I'm probably a very mild troll, or an unusually "brusque" person all the time. I wouldn't seriously come here and try to piss you or your commenters off ...

I'm glad you're still out of the deeper abyss of weirdness. Don't start writing all your comments in coded capitals.

Date: 2007-11-10 07:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sonictail.livejournal.com
That's a good summary, but I have one better

Fan: Sane, Open Minded and Nice. Can have polite conversation and enjoys discussion.
Fanatic: Fucking Jackass, Lock em in a closet and throw away the key. You don't want other people to know that people like them even exist.

Profile

alias_sqbr: the symbol pi on a pretty background (Default)
alias_sqbr

January 2026

S M T W T F S
    123
45678 910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 12th, 2026 05:07 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios