In his book, Will Brooker offers a number of ways to explore how Star Wars matters in the lives of fans. What methods did he use that struck you as particularly insightful? What theoretical models do you feel motivate his study and how? And what does this book teach us beyond the case study of Star Wars?
Theories of Popular Culture
Class blog for AMST0355, Spring 09, Middlebury College
Brooker discusses how Star Wars matters to fans by examining their reactions to The Phantom Menace. First, he describes the experiences of fans who feel that the original Star Wars trilogy was an integral part of their childhood. These fans experience a “shared culture” (page 82) based on love and appreciation for Star Wars. Many of them claim that Star Wars shaped their friendships, as well as their conception of morals.
In terms of theoretical models, the fans of the original trilogy can be seen as cultural elitists, proponents of the Culture and Civilization approach to American Studies. The Phantom Menace did not appeal to them because it lacked the full development of characters or the witty dialogue between the characters that was present in the old films. These fans see the old films as “high culture”, and the new films as “low culture”. The question of authorship also came to my mind, as disgruntled fans denied Lucas’s input in the first films and claimed that he was simply eager for money with the later films. I also thought of Adorno’s arguments through the Frankfurt school that popular culture becomes standardized and leads to passive consumption. Unlike the original films, which were so unpredictable and special, many fans whom Brooker interviewed claim that The Phantom Menace aims only to shock the audience with special effects, not to rouse their intellect or emotion.
Brooker’s book itself is about fans, for fans. From the beginning of the chapter the language is geared towards fans who understand the Star Wars lingo and subtle jokes. This chapter of the book seems to be particularly about voicing the opinions of the fans. Brooker explores how the fans felt “betrayed” by the film, how they felt rejected as an audience because Lucas claims the film was meant for children. Fans argue that the old films appealed to everybody. Brooker also examines how fans deal with their disappointment in the film. He describes some fans who watch it again and again to find more they like about it, some rant about it on blogs (while others defend it), and others create paratexts, such as fanfiction or their own versions of the film. Using the Force is applicable in this way to looking at other texts because we can see the decoding that fans perform, and how they reencode texts with their decodings. We can also examine how fans judge authorship through a cultural text, and how fans judge modern day popular culture. Star Wars is a particularly interesting text because it exists in the context of the 1970s/ 80s and in the context of the early 2000s.
I found it interesting that Brooker acquired much of his research from the emails he received from fans of a Star Wars-related website. He mentions that he cannot possibly include all of the ways in which people play with and talk about Star Wars. Brooker focuses on the online community of Star Wars fans because this is the means through which most fans currently share their ideas with each other and with the rest of the world. He even claims that he chooses not to focus on more outdated forms through which Star Wars fans express their interests with and feelings about the series.
Star Wars as a cultural form is clearly a site of negotiation. Fans interpret and use Star Wars in many different ways, most of which vary from what George Lucas tried to encode in the series. Brooker shows, for example, how some fans have picked their field of study or profession based upon Star Wars. Others see the series even as a form of religion or a means of “inspirational escapism” and “a source of guidance and comfort” (Brooker 11). Each chapter of his book is a different case study in which Brooker shows a different way that people express their Star Wars fandom, while also highlighting the importance of “community and interpretation” (Brooker xvi). Brooker’s book demonstrates some of the many ways that Star Wars has been decoded and re-encoded by fans over the yeas. In doing so, it also shows the large impact that a popular culture form like Star Wars can have on the American public, particularly as new meanings and forms of consumption of it continue to arise. Using the Force is an example of how a form of popular culture can affect people’s everyday lives in different ways, and, thus, can also influence society as a whole.
I read (decoded?) “The Fan Betrayed” as an illustration of Althusser’s ideology theory. The diegetic world constructed on the basis of the first trilogy and the fan-fiction that accompanied it was challenged when “The Phantom Menace” came out. As a result, they had do either reject the film as inauthentic – from a position of high/low culture, realism/lack of realism, Lucas being spoiled by success, generational gaps, etc. – or watch it over and over again to construct a viable ideology that incorporated Episode I into what they believed about the original.
That said, it is obvious – as Sarah pointed out earlier – that this is primarily a cultural studies text, since Brooks intervenes minimally in his discussion of Star Wars as far as interpreting the original text goes.
Sorry, to clarify, I am talking about Chapter 4 “The Fan Betrayed”.
I found chapters 2 and 3 especially interesting. I think that Brooker focuses a lot on the decoding process. I liked how he divided viewing alone and viewing with friend into two different groups. I feel that the group of guys and one girl that were watching Star Wars were in a competition to prove who knew the most about Star Wars by quoting lines and random facts. I found this interesting most people who watch their favorite movies do not usually engage in this sort of competition with their friend. I also found the amount of the attention to detail the viewer that watched the film alone interesting. Their obsession and frustration with minute details was very interesting. The distinction reveals the same person could have multiple decodings of a film depending on if they watch it in a group or by themselves. I also found Emma comments and her lack of commentary interesting. She highlighted the fact that women and men decode differently (this might also just be because she was viewing the movie with men).
I wish Brooker had elaborated more on his decision to exclusively conduct his research via online media and mediums. He kind of writes it off automatically as a foregone conclusion – that relying on web-based forums and email solicitations would be the most logical and most effective means of gathering data; but I have a hard time with equating online communities with physical gatherings or conventions. Though on a self-esteem/personal security level the simple act of knowing there exist other Star Wars fans may provide a degree of ontological reprieve, I’m suspicious of equating outright the online interactions with face-to-face, physical acts of physical community. I’m not sure that at this point I can develop this thought beyond the point of skepticism.
As for theoretical models, I think Stuart Hall’s notions of encoding/decoding play a large roll in Brooker’s analysis of Star Wars texts. Lucas’ excuse for the Phantom Menace as a film intended for younger audiences stands in stark opposition to the older fans who decoded his alleged demographic tilt as an industry-driven ploy for profits.
Tahira’s comment about Brooker’s decision to distinguish between the group and individual interactions with the text. I can’t help but feel that Brooker is like a young Stuart Hall (who used to melt the floor of his Creature Cantina playset to replicate authentic blaster damage and transcribed Greedo’s alien dialogue phonetically).
Take for example this quote from Hall’s essay on encoding/decoding about the “oppositional” mode of decoding: “He/she [the viewer] detotalizes the message in the preferred code in order to retotalize the message within some alternative framework of reference” (175). Now compare that to the following point from Brooker’s book in reference the cop with a Bobbo “FETTish” and the straight edge kid who looks up to the Jedis: “Rudy, like Daniel patascher, negotiates the generally accepted associations about characters’ ethical standpoints in order to have them fir more comfortably with his own outlook.” (17) Pretty similar argument, huh?
Now admit that one’s outlook or set of beliefs is only a part of one’s frame of reference. To be fair, Brooker does a good job of spanning the gamut in terms of the different aspects of a viewers identity that can affect what meanings they take from the text. Pamela Kinley, the woman who dresses up as different characters from Star Wars. Brooker mentions that her roles have included a Sith and a Jedi. Both of these roles are implicitly coded as male. Though this border’s on the line of feminist cultural studies, this fan’s gender does play a key role in how she views the characters, relates to the text, and decodes it in general.
The examples of the young fan who grew up without a father and the girl who lost her mother to cancer and was raised by an abusive stepfather are also interesting. In this case, their gender is not as an influential as their past experiences in determining how they relate to the text and what specific moments might strike a chord with them.
Religious convictions are another example that Brooker cites…and there are many more potential aspects of one’s identity that can affect how someone decodes a text like star wars.
However, the difference between chapter 1 and 2+3 reflects a distinction between the role one’s identity affects his/her negotiation and the role one’s context (i.e. group vs. individual decoding). My question is this: where is the line drawn between negotation theory/Hall’s model and audience studies in terms of viewer identity and context of consumption. Or is this simply a pointless distinction I’m trying to make here?
One last point I wish to make about this whole issue of context, specifically regarding watching star wars together and watching it alone. The example of the college kid whose group experience with star wars consisted of drinking every time the Millenium Falcon malfunctioned and Yoda mispoke stuck out at me. Or rather I should say resonated with me – that is not to say I have played the game (Big Lebowski’s another story, though). But rather, I am not a huge star wars fine (though I enjoy the movies) and this kind of socialized form of interaction with Star Wars would be something I might do. The purpose of Star Wars in the above example is simply an excuse to socialize with friends and have a good time – I feel like that the film itself is kind of beside the point. But with the examples he cites of solo interactions with Star Wars the viewer seems to be more concerned with Star wars itself. I mean if you actually notice that “Wedge’s snowspeeder tow rop in the Hoth Battle is far more noticeable in the Special Edition” (67) you’ve gotta be a really die hard fan.
Do you guys agree with this plausible distinction (and I admit there are plenty of counter-examples out there) or is this just another misguided notion?
A method that I thought was insightful was Brooker’s act of participating in the group viewing of Empire. As he does throughout Using The Force, he presents himself to his readers and to his subjects as a Star Wars fan. In creating solidarity with fellow fans and identifying himself as part of that community, he can gain insights into Star Wars Fandom that outsiders would miss. Also, communicating with subjects online allows for potentially greater diversity and a wider range of participants than could be possible by interviewing people at a convention. In this way, participants can talk about their Star Wars experiences on their own terms and on their own time.
Brooker uses the theoretical model of cultural studies in analyzing Star Wars fandom. As such, Brooker takes into account cultural context as well as reception of cultural objects. The theory of negotiation also manifests itself when Brooker discusses the conflict between the powers that control the production of Star Wars related objects and fans who choose to interpret and make their own meanings.
The impact of popular culture on the lives of individual people is highlighted especially in the first chapter. The ability of Star Wars to influence people in key aspects of life such as spirituality and career paths is brought to the forefront. I find it interesting that he contrasts Star Wars with other pop culture phenomena by underscoring people’s lifelong relationship to it. This suggests that pop culture texts that are likely to have the strongest effect are those that can be consumed (or are consumed) by both children and adults, usually having a large library of secondary texts. Superhero characters would be an example of this.
I really enjoyed Brooker’s stories and the way he divided up his findings, specifically when he joined the group of friends watching the Empire because I think it’s crazy how he was able to analyze calculations and references within the conversation. He would explain how intratexts refers to sticking to knowledge of the world inner story world, how
intertexts refer to broadening findings across several movies (the same text), non-canon (encyclopedia, etc.), or even realistic relationships among the people responsible for the texts, such as the filmmakers. He would also add that extratextual sources included inside jokes, or personal stories. The reason why I find it so insightful because I now imagine myself analyzing the way I enjoy wrestling: My friends and I discuss the feuds taking place while the wrestlers have their matches and talk about their characters in the storyline (intratext), discuss the backstage politics resulting in the direction of the storyline (intertext), and joke about how each of us would perform the wrestlers’ finishing moves on each other as kids and almost break things in the house.
I would like to add that there is definitely an encoding/decoding loop taking place in Brooker’s studies. He mentions that several ideas from non-canon literature that were created between the release of the original trilogy and the release of the special edition movies, were borrowed and used in the Special Edition films. This is an example of secondary text put back into primary text and re-coded.
Furthermore, this book teaches us that this form of case study is a tricky one, and I would use the example about the group viewing of Star Wars as the main example. I found it interesting that Brooker noticed that the viewing sparked a common bond and friendship between him and these strangers on the basis of Star Wars fandom and knowledge, but at the same time, knew he was on a different footing with them since he was the guy watching them, in a sense, with the possibility that they would act a certain way that affected the results of his objective study. “Repaying a subject’s trust while retaining a critical distance is a difficult balance to achieve, and a great deal of power ultimately lies in my hands as researcher and writer” (page 62).
I agree that there could be an excuse in the group viewing, but I do feel that some members involved require a certain knowledge, experience, and even joy from watching the film, to make the game understandable and fun.