|Date(s):||23 January 2005 (account created) - 3 June 2011 (last post)|
|Moderator:||acari, Amireal, Fabu, fairestcat, inalasahl, isiscolo, lovelokest, Oulangi, p_zeitgeist|
|URL:||metafandom's delicious account,|
newsletter on livejournal,
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.
... wouldn't it be great if there was a fandom newsletter that just linked to *everything* interesting? It wouldn't have to point and laugh, or even comment at all, just list the hot spots people are gathering in. With the terrible dispersion that LJ has afflicted upon fandom (I couldn't possibly friend everyone who's interesting on, so I rely upon links to find out what's going on), such a newsletter would be invaluable. 
The name "metafandom" was originally meant to suggest "beyond individual fandoms and about fandom itself", but this meaning is largely ignored by the members of the community, who prefer to it to mean "fandom meta", leading to an endless circular argument about the inclusion of content that is not "meta."
Having a post linked on metafandom could be both a blessing and a curse. Depending on the topic and fan temperament, having someone preface a comment on a post to your journal with "here from metafandom" could be welcome, or not so much.
The inaugural metafandom post was posted on January 23rd 2005 It linked to 25 posts, the first one being Sophia Helix's post quoted above.
On January 4, 2006, lim posted the first metafandom FAQ
What does metafandom do?
We post links to interesting discussions in fandom on LiveJournal.
What doesn't metafandom do?
We don't provide commentary or opinion. We don't guarantee your blood pressure. We don't censor according to your personal taste or decency. We don't link to fiction or fanart. We don't promote communities or nathons. We don't promise anything and we don't push any agenda except this: Make Up Your Own Mind.
Or, you know, don't. Whatever.
How do things get listed on metafandom?
It's really simple.
There are four compilers who trawl for content together throughout the week. Those compilers have access to a shared memory category in the community. Whenever they come across something they add it to the memory category. On an update day, the person on duty compiles a post from the memories, hence the name "compiler". Only compilers have access to the memory category but anyone can contribute links.
How do I contribute links?
Make a comment on the most recent entry in metafandom. Anybody can do this, members or not. You don't even need an LJ - anonymous commenting is always enabled. If you like, you can email metafandom. You must include the specific URL. You can find the URL by copying it from the address bar when you're on the right page. It might look something like this:
How do I get listed on metafandom?
You need to host an interesting discussion in fandom on LiveJournal, or the beginnings of one, and send us a link. The content of each post is up to the individual compiler, as they have to read each post, quote it, code it, put their name to the metafandom update and receive the comments, so it might not go in. dodyskin will probably sling it in eventually though: she's easy.
You didn't list my/my friend's post. Why not?
Most likely because you didn't tell us about it. Otherwise... Because it wasn't an interesting discussion in fandom on LiveJournal. Because it was about your cat. Because there are only so many hours in the day. Because we never promised you a rose garden.
Someone came from metafandom and was rude to me. What do I do?
Well, that's horrid. If you want the link to your post taken down, comment on the relevant entry or email the relevant compiler and make your request. We'll get on that ASAP. Try to remember that not everyone is online 24/7, and there may be some delay. As we do not link to flocked (friends locked) entries, your post was probably published publicly on the internet. metafandom does not take responsibility for that. You can find out how to flock your entries here.
I am offended by a post you linked to. What do I do?
We don't know! What do you think you ought to do?
I don't think that was an interesting discussion; I think that was a load of wank. Who do I tell?
Write it in your LiveJournal? Send us a link.
How do you define interesting?
In the traditional way.
I want to make banners, icons, a fanlisting! I want to show the world my love! Is that okay?
I want to make icons, banners, a hatesite! I want to rally fandom against you! Is that okay?Yes.
- The mods have changed over the years, and the community later cross-posted to Dreamwidth and used Delicious and an automated bot created by Murklins to simplify the posting.
- By 2010, the community included a lot of links to content that was more about social justice than fandom, or about intersections between fandom and privilege. This caused some debate, and also indirectly led to the creation of Linkspam on Dreamwidth.
- As of late 2010/early 2011, the newsletter version of metafandom on the various journal platforms was not published as often. However, metafandom editors continue to collect links in the metafandom delicious account (which includes the link to and snippet from each relevant post). Thus, the delicious account can be used not only as a way to find archived metafandom links, but also as an inbetween-newsletter-issues source for (to be) metafandom-ed links.
- The last post was in June 2011. (Note that Delicious was relaunched in September 2011, breaking functionality many newsletter communities had relied on to make posting links from delicious easier. If metafandom had still had plans to continue, this would have torpedoed their plans.) In 2013 the newsletter Metanews was started by other fans to fill the hole Metafandom left.
- In 2017, the LJ community was imported to Dreamwidth as a backup. 
As of 2017, the livejournal community had 1,121 posts; 4,223 comments; 2,104 members; and 3,788 watchers.
The most recent FAQ (as of Jan 29, 2019)
This community is for linking to interesting discussions in fandom, any fandom, on LiveJournal, Dreamwidth, and other livejournal clone/fork sites. It provides no commentary or opinion, just links and brief excerpts. It does not link to friends locked entries. Links must be essentially fannish in nature.
If you've seen (or are having) an interesting discussion somewhere on LJ, DW or another journaling site, drop a link in the comments or email metafandom. If you want to help out with compiling, email metafandom.
Anyone may join this community and anyone may comment (whether they are a member or not). However, only compilers have posting access, so the only posts are links roundups, once a day.
Metafandom links to public posts and does not notify people as a rule. Content published openly on the internet is available to all those with internet access. We do not link to flocked (friends locked) entries.
You can find out how to flock your entries here.If you want us to take the link to your post down, simply comment on the relevant entry and we'll do that as soon as possible. It is no problem. Alternatively, email the compiler whose post you want editing."
On Being Linked by MetafandomSome fans complained that after being mentioned in a metafandom post they received unwanted and negative attention. One of the list moderators wrote:
"In terms of what we all post in our own journals, I recognize that sometimes when we post, we assume a certain readership (our flists), and that when people who don't know us read something out of the context of all our past posts, they may misinterpret it and jump to false conclusions about us and our beliefs. This is the risk we take whenever we make public posts, and believe me, I know how frustrating it is, it's happened to me more than once. But I also believe strongly in linking to interesting and thought provoking content on lj (hence my many rec/link posts) because it keeps the conversation going and adds new voices, and yes, draws attention to folks who are posting clever and thoughtful analysis (just as I want to draw attention to the writers who post good fic, I want to increase the readership of folks who post good meta). I know that there have been a few incidents where people have felt attacked by one or more commenters who came via metafandom, and I'm sorry that that's happened - of course we can't always agree, but I wish that we could all discuss things in a civil manner without resorting to personal attacks. But I assure you that it is never our intent at metafandom to cause trouble."
But, maybe I'm just egocentric or something, or maybe it's because I don't write fic, so my fandom participation is mostly recs and meta, but when I write a meta post or fannish essay and post it publicly in my lj, I do so assuming that it will get linked from [livejournal.com profile] metafandom or someone's journal, and that it will attract commenters not on my friendslist. Now this does not mean that I think I'm entitled to have every meta I post linked somewhere or that I think my meta is all so good that of course it will be linked. But I've found that writing assuming the largest potential audience really saves me from a whole lot of grief later, should the post be linked.
However, others were grateful for the exposure and discussion that ensued from a metafandom link.
Wow, I always get metafandomed over half-assed random posts. But welcome, all, and thanks for the awesome discussion! I always meet so many smart people through metafandom.No need to apologize for tangents or rampant speculation! I fully support both.
Positive Commentary on Metafandom
In 2009, a LiveJournal post titled In search of anti-racist fanfic writing discussion which sought after "a place where people who are in the process of writing fanfic can talk about colonialism, appropriation, etc. in the source material/canon and in their own narratives" received some comments recommending metafandom as a place to find discussions of race and racism.
metafandom sometimes has discussions on race and racism in fanfiction.
I'm seconding metafandom, it's the best place I know of to keep up to date with this sort of thing. And if you want to start a new conversation write your own post and mention it in the comments, you may get linked to.Other than the race tag at metafandom (and there's more at "culture" etc) the other best resource I know of for sheer weight of fandom-race links is The Great Race Discussion Linkspam.
In 2010, a fan wrote approvingly of the positive discussion of Mary Sues taking place on metafandom, publishing their own thoughts on the subject in response.
Criticism of Metafandom
Some LiveJournal comments made in 2009 remarked on the fact that the metafandom community had become very self-absorbed and inward-looking, and had ceased to have any kind of productive debate as a result - suggesting that the quality of discussion on metafandom possibly deteriorated in later years.
I've stopped going to metafandom because there seem to hang only completely self-absorbed jerks and know-it-all idiots around there. Just one glance at the first handful of summaries of posts makes me want to bang my head against the closest hard surface until it breaks. (Either surface or head.)
Having poked my head in for a brief look, I detect the danger signs of any kind of critical community (lit crit, cultural crit, whatever) that spends too long talking to itself and about itself and not enough time back immersed in the source material...... eventual complete disconnect from any of the things they/we originally loved and were interested in talking about. At which point I usually lose any original interest I had and wander off, whistling, to read/write/watch something...
telperion1: (in response to azalaisdep)
That's an interesting connection. I don't have much connection with crit communities, except within my own academic discipline (philosophy) where sometimes people will go round and round debating [x]'s interpretation of some key philosophical text - never getting back to whether the original key philosophical text was right, never mind saying anything about the key philosophical issue.Metafandom seems worse in many ways. I don't mind crit in small doses, but I think you really nailed the issue there.
Yeah, I feel for you on this one. I think at some point people get so far into any crit type discussion (political, literary, religious, whatever) that they really can't see beyond what they've determined is 'right' and so discussion really halts. I think that's especially true in forums as opposed to academic realms, because people in academia are challenged by their peer review systems to continue growing whereas electronic forums do not have any real standards or means to encourage growth. That is why I've stopped playing in these things for the most part. I barely have time to write. I'd rather do that than have pseudo-intellectual discussions with people who are 'right'.
Popular Topics on Metafandom
In 2011, LiveJournal user schmevil wrote a post entitled I really miss Metafandom, in which they lamented the loss of metafandom and what it brought to fandom, and the lack of a similar community to take its place.
I really miss Metafandom
Like really, really. I miss the links to specific fandom meta, in fandoms I'd never heard of. I miss the links to gonzo acafan analysis, using theories I'd never heard of. I miss several hundred comment posts, full of people who didn't even know each other, but managed to have a great conversation anyway. I miss the discussion chains, hopping from journal to journal over the course of weeks. NOSTALGIA.
1. Yes, Metafandom still exists on Delicious, but (is it just me?) I feel like it's time is over. It's the post Metafandom era. And getting close to the post LJ era. (Not so much in the sense of LJ becoming a ghost town, but rather, it's been for a long time a relic, and with the rise of Tumblr and Anon fandom, its relevance is fading).
[...]Those huge Metafandom-generated discussion of days gone by were one of my primary ways of being fannish. So yeah. Boo to its slowdown, and to its move away from LJ/DW (as a newsletter). 
Other users agreed, and pondered whether it might be possible for someone new to revive metafandom and keep the newsletter going.
It would be nice if the folks who ran metafandom would hand it over to someone else willing to keep posting it. Fandom newsletters sometimes have interesting meta links, at least.
I don't know any who'd be interested in picking up Metafandom at this point. Maybe two years ago, but now? Perhaps a new fandom newsletter would be more enticing, but even then, with the move away from LJ/DW, it would need vastly different linking and link-gathering strategies. More WFA in scope?
Role in Livejournal Fandom
It sort of dominated Livejournal fandom, for better or worse.
It probably depends on what circles you moved in. I'd say it dominated the acafen sphere very heavily.
I went there very occasionally. It actually didn't loom very large to me? Maybe it was more of a thing for fandoms based on Western canons.
I like reading meta and checked it out regularly. Lots of posts were pretty eye-roll worthy, but it was rarely not entertaining (both in the negative and positive sense of entertainment). I lurked, though. It probably was less fun if you got caught up in it.
I s[p]ent three years in LJ fandom without ever hearing about it. When I finally did, I found meme. Mind you, I also didn't hear about Race Fail while it was happening.
It was one of goals as a teenager to get on there. Same with Metaquotes.
Always felt like attempts by people who were trying to either get ahead in education by analysing fandom, or by people who wanted to somehow find a way to monetize fandom
Really? I don't remember anyone in the metafandom crowd being pro-monetizing fandom, though maybe I missed some.
Nah. Some people just enjoy analyzing stuff.
What, exactly, would be the problem with someone "trying to get ahead in education"?
They aren't in fandom for genuine reasons, they are observers who see themselves as above the rest of fandom.
I didn't realize you're only allowed to be in fandom for certain reasons, and I'm sort of amused by the idea that being genuine is what's important here.
lol WUT. The fan-academics who posted their are neck deep in fandom. Speranza helped form the OTW and has written reams of fanfic. Cereta was a huge The Sentinel fangirl. Cathexys enthusiastically talked about the huge amounts of fanfic she read. What are you smoking? I'm sorry, I know FFA is largely not a fan of meta that analyzes fandom itself as opposed to meta that analyzes canon, but I read metafandom since it started and eeeeverybody involved was a giant fanfic-loving nerd. You might hate the OTW or AO3 or their meta or fanfic output or what, but you are just Wrong On the Internet on this point.
metafandom is still occasionally cited as a reference for fans who are interested in reading through older meta. The term "metafandom" is also used in contemporary fannish discourse to describe meta about fandom or fannish topics, although it's unclear if that usage reflects the specific legacy of the community or just an original derivation of the term.
- Sophia Jirafe. the waning of ambivalence; archive link with expanded comments, 23 January 2005. (Accessed 06 March 2010); reference link
- skuf. 'I don't think shaggirl has anything to do with fandom meta...' 05 March 2005.
- gaudinight. 'a litte disappointed in Metafandom' 23 April 2007.
- oh, good grief! by telperion1 via LiveJournal. Published December 22, 2009 (Accessed July 1, 2018).
- 23rd of January, 2005
- MOD POST
- metafandom - Profile, Archived version (Accessed 9 April 2017)
- A few quick thoughts about metafandom dated June 14th, 2005; reference link.
- Thoughts on linking to public posts
- fail-fandomanon post dated July 5th, 2010.
- Comment from Why is there so little geeky academic discussion of femslash? (2007)
- Comment by alex, LiveJournal. Published January 16, 2009 (Accessed July 1, 2018).
- Comment by alias_sqbr, LiveJournal. Published January 16, 2009 (Accessed July 1, 2018).
- Mary Sues on metafandom by sci_frey via LiveJournal. Published April 15, 2010 (Accessed July 1, 2018).
- Comment by satismagic, LiveJournal. Published December 23, 2009 (Accessed July 3, 2018).
- Comment by azalaisdep, LiveJournal. Published December 23, 2009 (Accessed July 3, 2018).
- Comment by telperion1, LiveJournal. Published December 28, 2009 (Accessed July 3, 2018).
- Comment by elliska, LiveJournal. Published December 23, 2009 (Accessed July 3, 2018).
- I really miss Metafandom by schmevil via LiveJournal. Published November 24, 2011 (Accessed July 1, 2018).
- Comment by etrangere, LiveJournal. Published 25 November 2011 (Accessed July 1, 2018).
- Comment by sandoz_iscariot, LiveJournal. Published 25 November 2011 (Accessed July 1, 2018).
- Comment by schmevil, LiveJournal. Published 25 November 2011 (Accessed July 1, 2018).
- fail_fandomanon, Archived version
- Tumblr post by flyingfish1. Posted on December 5, 2017. Accessed on August 13, 2018.
- "metafandom" tag on Tumblr. Accessed on August 13, 2018.