Today’s readings focus on the practices of fans of different forms of popular culture, from Star Wars to Twin Peaks to The Beatles. How do you see fan practices relating to broader issues of popular culture consumption? Are fans completely atypical consumers, or just extreme versions of “normal” consumers? And how does DeCerteau’s theories of everyday life help us understand fandom?
Theories of Popular Culture
Class blog for AMST0355, Spring 09, Middlebury College
The concept of majority marginality in our technologically advanced society interested me. DeCerteau’s idea that the power to produce is concentrated in the hands of major corporations brought back ideas of Culturalism, with its cry for a return to folk culture of individual production. I think that the rapid rise of the internet has returned some production power to the masses and changed fan relationships.
Both Brooker and Jenkins use the internet as a primary point of study for their chosen fan groups. Instead of having to put out newspaper ads like Ien Ang in search of Dallas fans, these two scholars simply found the preexisting online communities and studied them. Both groups engage in a level of consumption far above “normal” everyday consumers. Both Star Wars and Twin Peaks fans engage in creativity and production in their analysis and theories of their favorite text. This production of fan fiction and carefully thought out speculation goes well beyond the normal consumption levels of everyday life.
One practice through which fans actively separate themselves from everyday practice is attending conventions. By assembling with dozens/hundreds/thousands of other dedicated fans of a particular cultural object, an individual can engage in active consumption of the text and show off what they have produced. Fan film screenings and costume competitions are just two examples of production practices found at conventions. However, these fans must not be viewed as “abnormal” in the broader context of American culture; fans of our professional sports teams engage in practices far more regimented, involved, and dedicated than most fans of film, television, or literature.
I agree with Noah that this heightened fan participation has definitely given the consumer more power. It seems that all the reading we’ve done this week has focused on the way “obsessive” fandom has created a sort of hegemony in terms of a top-down production.
For example, the Jenkins article focuses on how “reception rather than the author” crated meaning for viewers of “Twin Peaks,” de Certeau writes on how consuming can be a “silent production” and how consumers transform “the dominant cultural economy in order to adapt it to their own interests,” and even the Beatlemania article saw the rapid consummation of a music group as sexual liberation.
Often, I think, hardcore fans are seen as brainwashed by a corporate medium: i.e. some girls who have to buy all the Hannah Montana paraphenelia. It was interesting to see a different viewpoint giving control to the fans. I’m not quite sure which side I agree with, though.
The diversity of this week’s readings made me realize how fan practices are inextricably and uniquely linked to popular culture consumption. Fans (a term which should be applied to the entire spectrum of intensity that we discussed in class but here is mostly intended for the more enthusiastic echelons) typically practice consumption in a purely material fashion. Star Wars fans, for example, choose to participate in the consumption of scriptural culture such as open online debates that are conducted via discussion forums. In my mind, a fan’s practices both double as a form of material and ideological consumption. The latter can be observed in the consumption of the complex, dense, and technical para-texts associated with being a fan; the consumption of an online lifestyle and internet media; and the consumption of foreign viewpoints and attitudes. Fan consumption should not purely be conceived as material. Fans are ardent consumers of a broader continuum of products and ideas than those who simply enjoy the ‘canon’ text itself at face value. (NOTE: This is not to say that fans don’t accelerate the material consumption process as well … ardent baseball fan might buy season tickets versus going sporadically and your more aggressive Star Wars fans buy more than the usual amount of costumes, cards and so forth.)
De Certeau would suggest that everyday life, which is repetitive and unconsciously carried out, differs for fans and non-fans in terms of their strategies and tactics. Fans alter their surroundings to produce their own that sprout from the popular culture being consumed.
Besides the general amplification of engagement and commitment to the original text or item of popular culture, fans also consume higher amounts of speculation than “normal” consumers of the text. (In somewhat excessive jargon, De Certeau “user” and “procedures/tactics of consumption”, which to me seems semantically superfluous). Your middle-of-the-road consumer does not analyze profoundly, seek additional problems for interpretation, or imagine the possibilities outside of the text itself. Beatles fans who pondered what Paul had for breakfast or who the band slept traveled beyond a person who places their records on the turntable. These were practicing speculation as well as consuming it by interacting with other fans. They behaved as atypical consumers in the sense that they consumed ideas and internalize practices that non-fans veer away from.
On a final note and kind of related note, Adorno’s argument that female adolescents were simply conforming to an image, behaving with rhythmic obedience as a result of obsessive, and oftentimes sexual energy, was fairly provocative. I partially agree that adulation of the male star was a way to express sexual yearnings that would normally be repressed. Thoughts?
I though the article on the Beatles was very interesting. I think the article does a great job highlighting the important of age and fandom. One of the things that attracted young girls to the Beatles was how they handled sexuality. This article reminded me of a recent South Park episode entitled “The Ring” in this episode they address the popularity of Disney’s The Jonas Brothers. I believe that they have a similar appeal. I also like how the article emphasized the importance of the post war affluence and how teens had a new found leisure and buying power.
I think reading this article and the article on Twin Peaks show a the spectrum of fandom. It also shows how the industry and producer interact differently with audience of various ages and genders. Both also illustrate the power of fan participation and the ability that they have to influence the culture text over time.
I hardly know where to begin…I guess I’m feeling a bit overwhelmed by the pure volume of fandom information I just absorbed. I guess I’ll begin with the question about whether fans are “completely atypical”, separate from all other consumers in a clearly defined way. No, I do not think such a definitive line can be drawn…considering the gray area between fans and merely active consumers, it seems clear to me than fans fall simply in a different range on a spectrum of consumption, but not as a separate entity.
As far as what fandom can tell us about broader issues of pop culture consumption, the sense I get is that fandom is a “positive” practice. Positive in that it encourages reinterpretation and growth rather than supporting the forcefed/brainwashed model of the radical Marxists and the C&C/Culturalism folks. While issues like Hannah Montana, which Melissa mentioned, blur this line between “positive” and “negative” (lame word choices, I know, but that’s how I group them in my head) effects, the general trend I see in reading these critics is an endorsement of fandom.
On a side note, I’d like to mention that I’ve been reminded often in this unit on a book I read a month or so ago–“The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao” by Junot Diaz. Oscar is a “disastrously overweight” Dominican teenager living in New Jersey, and his tastes encompass the whole of the “geeky” culture spectrum–Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, any other form of sci-fi/fantasy, RPG’s, anime, comics, etc. He himself is a copious writer of sci-fi/fantasy stories. The book weaves together these reference points with Dominican history and the tragic story of Oscar’s cursed family in a really remarkable way. I highly recommend the book. It’s a quick read; Diaz’s sentences are like runners in a dead sprint, and the book overflows with energy and compassion. I just mention it because Oscar’s exterior is completely shaped by the texts he consumes.
Reading Jenkins’ analysis of web-based Twin Peaks fan communities made me realize how dependent fandom is on the evolution of technology. She points to the fact that Twin Peaks would probably not have been nearly as successful had it not been for the invention of the internet. Decades later, the role of the internet has exploded and continues to grow. This has given way to new levels in the spectrum of fandom. Specifically, LOST fans have a number of tools at their disposal to practice their fandom inaccessible to previous generations. TiVo has revolutionized the detail to which fans can scrutinize programs and to provide feedback about a show can occur in the moment as opposed to after the end of the show with the prominence of communication tools like Twitter.
I’d argue that fans are extreme versions of ‘normal’ consumers in that they are normal consumers in most aspects of their life besides that which they are extreme fans of. However, as we discussed in class, there is a relationship between whether or not something is considered normal by society and what levels of fandom can be accepted as normal.
I think De Certeau’s comparison of the relationship between the producers and non-producers to that between the Spanish and the conquered Indians was insightful. It made me think of Indians and African slaves in Latin America who, being forced into catholicism by their European masters, secretly practiced their own indigenous faiths. They took a dominant ideology and mapped on to it their own views and interpretations; they made their own meanings. I think this is helpful in understanding the relationship between, for example, Star Wars fans and George Lucas. There is certainly ideological domination, but within that, there can be resistance or negotiation. We see this of course in certain fan practices like the affirmation of Boba Fett’s female gender, the homosexual readings of character relationships, and the rejection of figures like the Ewoks or Jar Jar Binks.
To pick up on the end of what James was saying; if everyone’s doing it, does that make it normal?
I enjoyed the Brooker book but when it comes to Star Wars I’ve always felt like it’s some big in joke that I just don’t get. I’ve seen the movies, some of them in the cinema, some of them more than once, I’ve played the Lego video game, I’ve read a couple of biographies on Lucas, and studied a fair amount on the emergence of “summer movies”, but I just don’t get Star Wars. Its actually incredibly frustrating from a film studies perspective, it’s like I know this is a hugely significant film or series of films and I watch them and externally I’m like ‘wow, yeah, this is really amazing’, and internally I’m thinking, ‘Light-sabers? Really?’
Sometimes I just think life would be easier if I was a Star Wars fan.
I think the question of consumption is an incredibly interesting. It throws control into a kind of grey area, which is what we discussed in connection to Barbie. But the question of being a fan is different, it’s a form of self-expression, you choose what you are a fan of and how active you are as a fan, but what’s fascinating is when you keep that secret. Why do people devote there weekends to slash fiction but then lie about it? I mean, there’s an easy answer to that, but big picture, it’s much more complicated.
I also think the way the author interacts with fans is important in connection to what it means to be a fan, or a consumer. I’m sure I’ve read a Lynch interview where he claims never to analyze any of his own art (I think the comment is actually made in reference to a statue of a dead cow or something weirder but whatever) Lynch also never wanted to solve the WKLP mystery, but the TV masters made him. These two facts are so important when studying TP, because they make it obvious that the programme was designed to engage people in problem solving practices that would undoubtedly classify them as fans. Lynch wants fans, not Beatlemania fans, but he wants TP to have fans, he acknowledges their importance and influence.
For all the odd, extreme stuff people do with pop culture that makes them a fan, when it comes down to it; it’s better to have fans than not to have fans, thus it’s better to be a fan than not be a fan. I would argue its much less “normal” (and I hate that word) to consider yourself not a fan of anything than to consider yourself a fanatic of something. Which, I guess means, if I had to choose, I’d say fans are closer to atypical consumers than an extreme of the “normal” consumer, but I know it’s not that simple.
De Certeau states that “Renters make comparable changes in an apartment they furnish with their acts and memories.” (524) I feel that the big thing about consumption is this molding of texts to suit the interests of the consumer. Brooker’s Star Wars and Jenkins’ Twin Peaks fans use their respective film and television texts and take the time to dig deeper by analyzing them and relating them to their own lives. There seems to be something similar in the way that Becky of the Star Wars Chicks and community use their online network and the films to support one another just like many females used Beatlemania to progress sexual liberation of females in the ‘60s.
It’s really hard to define what normal consumption is but I do feel that active participation, such as pausing video and frames in both Star Wars films and in Twin Peaks episodes to analyze and describe what is going on that passes their 2 hour and half hour viewings respectively constitute an atypical way of viewing, while the normal viewer consumes what they can in that certain time slot. Depending on how long you spend and how deep in scope you reach, makes the atypical fan extreme.