The JohnLock Conspiracy, fandom eschatology, and longing to belong

Academic Commentary
Title:	"The JohnLock Conspiracy, fandom eschatology, and longing to belong"
Commentator:	Bo Allesøe Christensen & Thessa Jensen
Date(s):	2018
Medium:	online
Fandom:	BBC Sherlock
External Links:	TWC Article
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

The JohnLock Conspiracy, fandom eschatology, and longing to belong is a 2018 academic article written by Bo Allesøe Christensen and Thessa Jensen. It was published in Transformative Works and Cultures No. 27: Tumblr and Fandom, which was guest edited by Lori Morimoto and Louisa Ellen Stein.

Using The JohnLock Conspiracy (TJLC), developed by the fandom of the BBC television series Sherlock (2010–17), as an exemplar, we analyze how the functionality of Tumblr supported the development of a fandom eschatology. In this instance, eschatology is not religious but secular: fans claimed to know what the final end of the Sherlock series was to be, and they interpreted various signs as indicating that this would happen. The infrastructure and interactive design of Tumblr as a platform creates a foundation permitting fan group radicalization. Because of Tumblr's infrastructure and gratification system, forming a tight-knit group is difficult. By developing and using eschatology as a belief system, fans create boundaries, decide membership and proper behavior, and enable the policing of other fans.

- Abstract for "The JohnLock Conspiracy, fandom eschatology, and longing to belong"

Some Topics Discussed

• origins of TJLC
• autoethnography and research ethics in fan communities
• Tumblr's infrastructure
• antifans
• secular eschatology
• group dynamics

Excerpts

The case of TJLC as a secular eschatology relies on the group's belief regarding what must inevitably happen at the end of the program: John Watson and Sherlock Holmes (JohnLock) must get together romantically. While explaining and developing this belief, fans create meaning and control, both within the canonical text—Sherlock—and within the problems and challenges users face in on- and off-line worlds. When the final episode of the series, 4.03 "The Final Problem," aired on January 15, 2017, fans found the ending ambiguous. Some were convinced that the pairing was upheld; others were convinced that such a pairing was forever closed off. Reactions to the final episode ranged from disbelief that it was in fact the final episode (https://fanlore.org/wiki/The_JohnLock_Conspiracy) to the physical destruction of Sherlock merchandise (figure 1).

Here we use an autoethnographic approach, which provides a deep understanding of the processes and events unfolding in fandom, to collect data and try to understand the do's and don'ts of fandom (Ellis 2004). We collected data from the Archive of Our Own (AO3; https://archiveofourown.org/), from our own Tumblr blogs, and from various online fandom sources. We acknowledge the limitation of being unable to research the whole of TJLC. Instead, we tried to follow relevant threads, although of course other users or posts might have had a larger impact than the ones we found and describe here. Neither of us engaged in online discussions except for a few reblogs and likes. Lurking on the internet is one of the ways that researchers can examine their subject without its being affected. While Tumblr makes lurking easy, and much of the data can be collected from what seems like public places, trespassing is still an ethical research issue. We did not directly approach fans considered as being at the center of TJLC because outing ourselves as researchers would have put us in a direct line of attack, leading to possible personal repercussions. However, we made the fans we talked to aware of our research.

The practices of TJLC are in alignment with the notion of authorial intent being clearly stated in the text. In this, TJLC differs from practices of transformative fandom in which the author is dead, as stated by AB in figure 3. Defining TJLC by using existing fandom terms turns out to be challenging. Because TJLC is perceived as disruptive and aggressive by other fans, the terms "antifan" or "nonfan" come to mind.

The definition of antifans has changed through the years, coming to refer to different kinds of fan groups or nonfans who in some way are opposed to the canonical text, other fan groups, or certain kind of ships. When Gray coined the term in 2003, the antifan was defined as a fan who strongly disliked the original text. The term "antifan" has since been expanded to fans who could be defined as "inverse loving critics" (Duffett 2016, 48), meaning fans of a given text complaining about the same for not meeting expectations. Although this sounds close to a definition of TJLC (complaining about the lack of JohnLock), it is still a misleading characterization. TJLC is about interpreting the text, and thus accepting the original TV series, but it is also about understanding the text as a sign indicating what is to come. As such, there is no complaining about how the TV series as such is developing; rather, there is a need to further interpret and deduce when and how the "real" endgame will play out. Any complaining about the series would actually be a contradiction to the belief in TJLC because the series itself lays the ground for the belief.

Antifans should instead be seen as groups of fans fighting for discursive dominance and struggling to reach consensus about how a given text should be interpreted. Through this ongoing discussion, fans are able to construct competing truths about the series (Johnson 2007, 286). Hills (2002) talks about the "endlessly deferred narrative" and "hyperdiegesis" to show how a given, finite text can be retold and reinterpreted within fandom spaces (131). These discussions can create great chasms between fan groups because "fans do not easily agree to disagree" (Johnson 2007, 288). This is further enhanced with regard to TJLC because the group sees the text as the ultimate truth, with only one given result possible: JohnLock. Any fans disagreeing with or doubting this result would have to be convinced of the rightness of TJLC or be ostracized.

To reiterate, we propose that TJLC can be understood as an example of secular eschatology. This is characterized first by a bounded teleology involving a final end and a transcendent plan laid out for arriving at this end. Furthermore, faith in this end and the existence of a plan to bring it about uphold TJLC in light of the failure of the significant event to materialize. Second, TJLC contains apocalyptic elements reflecting a collapse of or a problematic within an old imagined order, here between Sherlock and John, and the imagination and projection of a new and better order replacing the old collapsed one. Third, though this new order to come is absent, it is interpreted through different present signs that indicate what is to come. Finally, the sense of time relies on subjective linearity, in which a new beginning is continuously claimed to be what is to come.

TJLC has its origin and development on the social media platform of Tumblr. Although fandom wank and infighting have long been a hallmark of the fan experience, the infrastructure, gratification system, and functionality of Tumblr can be partly blamed for the unrestricted expansion of TJLC within Sherlock fandom.

Tumblr's infrastructure cannot in and of itself account for the eventual impact of TJLC. Still, the obvious differences between Tumblr and older fandom platforms such as LJ and DW might account for the sense of insecurity in Sherlock fandom during the height of TJLC. "Staying in your lane" or "not going into the tags" only works if there is a possibility to set boundaries and enforce them. None of that is present within the current functionality of Tumblr. Tumblr does not support the creation of a place where members have to follow a set of rules. No administration or enforcement of rules is possible. Tumblr remains an open space in which a post is posted and reblogged; the creator of the post loses control with each subsequent use and interpretation of the post, even if the original post is deleted or the blog is deactivated. The impact on the users is twofold: they cannot create boundaries to ensure a safe experience on Tumblr, and they may become isolated in their fandom experience. All of this enables the success of TJLC as an eschatology: a belief system like TJLC makes it possible to belong to a group, to feel like a member of something bigger than oneself. By creating and using the #tjlc hashtag, a Tumblr user becomes part of an ephemeral community, not designated by an actual place (Christensen 2017), however abstract digital spaces might be, but by a common interpretation of Sherlock.

TJLC has for years been blamed for many transgressions within Sherlock fandom, including doxxing, harassing, and bullying other fans on- and off-line. However, explaining the behavior of TJLCers as antifans is not helpful in understanding this particular fandom phenomenon. TJLC evolved through the particularity of Tumblr's platform. It is not inclusive and diverse, and it is not based on the idea of a better world. Rather, it is exclusive: in TJLC, fans do not embrace diversity or criticism but rather enforce a certain kind of singularity. During the height of TJLC, just before the airing of the last episode in 2017 of Sherlock, both sides escalated their fight. On one side were TJLCers who wanted be able to say, "Look! We told you so! JohnLock is canon!" On the other side were TJLCers who wanted to be able to point out how stupid TJLC had been in the first place.

Fan Discussion & Reactions

Tumblr

On Tumblr, many TJLCers expressed their frustration with Christensen and Jensen's article.

hflsjdjd who is writing about us this time

The article was also criticized by some fans as overly jargonistic and poorly written.

Allegations of Bias

Specific criticisms lodged against the article included perceived bias (on various grounds) against TJLC and its proponents:

so like the only conclusion i can come to is that analyzing and predicting tv shows is a completely normal thing to do in contemporary media fan culture, unless you’re women predicting gay romance, in which case academic papers need to be written comparing you to dogmatic religious zealots and deconstructing your destructive impact on society

Anonymous: TJLC: hey, this is a cool show, let's talk about it! Everyone: Why This Group of Young Faceless Females Without a Platform to Defend Themselves Are The Root of All Evil

unleashing real darkness into the world

A Bunch of Gay People Said This Thing They Liked Was Gay and Talked to Each Other About It: The Shocking Tale of Horror and Destruction More At 11: Gay Fans Worse Than Real Life Cults Associated With Violence and Should Be Compared to Actual Nazis in Multiple Rant Posts In Your Area? According to Some its More Likely Than You Think!

But what they seem to be missing is that TJLC is complicated - a group not actually based around shipping Johnlock (most os us do, yes, but that’s not why we’re TJLC’ers) - rather it’s about interacting with a text. Like - if we were doing this with ACD canon, off Tumblr and we were all men, we’d be serious Sherlockians, and possibly engaging in The Great Game.

But because we are primarily female or queer and on Tumblr and interacting with ACD canon, BBC Sherlock canon and lots of other adaptations of Sherlock… well, then we must be delusional. And/or …I dunno… a sect.

So… yeah. That article might have benefitted from actually reaching out to current or past TJLC’ers and talking to us about how we experience it. At the very least it might have informed the research a little… :)

Perceived Factual Inaccuracies

Additionally, the accuracy of Christensen and Jensen's timeline of TJLC was challenged. Their article had attributed the origins of TJLC to a Tumblr post from January 26, 2014; while Christensen and Jensen anonymized the post for the purposes of their article, the author's actual identity was widely discussed on Tumblr. The first post in the TJLC tag on Tumblr is dated January 6, 2014. The acronym's creation by Tumblr users joolabee and graceebooks dates to around the airing of "The Sign of Three" on January 5, 2014. Loudest-subtext-in-television's influential meta post Trust in Gatiss: Operation Johnlock is Go was published on January 7, 2014; while it does not make use of the TJLC phrase or acronym, it is often cited as a foundational text. One comment on this post specifically criticized the editing process, and called for a retraction:

What on earth does OTW’s peer-review process consist of if they bought the claim that midonz started tjlc? They should retract this article on that basis alone.

(Mis)characterization of Social Dynamics

While Christensen and Jensen ultimately contended that TJLC does not constitute a cult, much commentary on Tumblr reacted to the description of TJLC as a secularized eschatology, as predicated on the assertions that it "contains apocalyptic elements" and "needs radicalization" to persist. Many of these criticisms comedically rebutted Christensen and Jensen's depiction of TJLC group dynamics.

tjlc was and is expected to be the only group of thousands of people that has ever existed which did not include any assholes engaging in bad behavior whatsoever

Research Ethics and the Role of Acafans in Fandom

Additional criticisms were lodged regarding the research methodology and ethics of the article.

One Tumblr user, reblogging an early post about the article, initiated a discussion of the article's academic context:

One of the authors was my instructor on a paper I wrote. Nice lady. Brilliant - but occasionally with some slightly out of step opinions.

I think maybe the trouble arises from the fact that, yes, Tumblr is an academic’s nightmare. It’s impossible to come in as an outsider and get some kind of comprehensive overview over what, exactly, has been going on. Tumblr is the kind of place where either you’re immersed, or you might as well not bother.

So they’re looking at Tumblr and TJLC as academics might, and all they see is uncontrollable chaos without moderators or stringent modes of keeping related information together. Welp, they then go; this must be bad.

But what they seem to be missing is that TJLC is complicated - a group not actually based around shipping Johnlock (most os us do, yes, but that’s not why we’re TJLC’ers) - rather it’s about interacting with a text. Like - if we were doing this with ACD canon, off Tumblr and we were all men, we’d be serious Sherlockians, and possibly engaging in The Great Game.

But because we are primarily female or queer and on Tumblr and interacting with ACD canon, BBC Sherlock canon and lots of other adaptations of Sherlock… well, then we must be delusional. And/or …I dunno… a sect.

So… yeah. That article might have benefitted from actually reaching out to current or past TJLC’ers and talking to us about how we experience it. At the very least it might have informed the research a little… :)

Another Tumblr user added their perspective on the article and acafans more generally in a reblogged post, mentioning that their own article on Johnlock and TJLC meta would be published in forthcoming edition of Transformative Works and Cultures:

I will be publishing in this journal on Johnlock meta. My article comes out in September. I am very excited about it. It’s lovely when one’s passion can also be one’s work!

It is a shame that there is a prejudice about fans who write academically (although I understand why). There is always the assumption that the academics are “them.” I certainly do not see myself as a “them.” How do you know the authors of that article were outsiders and not immersed? Most of the fan studies academic articles I read are by people who are fans of the content themselves–they are writing about what they love! And certainly Tumblr as a platform is a lot different than earlier platforms for gatekeeping and control, so it’s not that academics find “chaos”–they are describing the nature of Tumblr comparatively speaking. I didn’t see anything that was not accurate or that I’ve not to come to a conclusion myself about my experience with Tumblr (as opposed to my experience with LJ years ago in a different fandom).

Their article was on a specific rhetorical and relational aspect of TJLC. I did not see it as anti. Certainly, it is not the whole picture…..

…which is why I am so excited about my essay, which is on analytic Johnlock readings, the engagement with the text, etc., and will address the points no one has yet written about, and that you address above, dhae-knight!

I’ve been fascinated and delighted with Johnlock meta since I first fell headlong into this fandom, the very instant I watched ASiP. I had no idea I would–or even could– write about it at the time, but I’ve come a long way since 2014.

And if you have not read Diana W. Anselmo’s piece on Sherlock and queer labor, I recommend it. I’m happy to send you a copy; just message me! (She was a meta writer herself who deleted her blog after s4) http://fmh.ucpress.edu/content/4/1/84.full.pdf+html

The original poster responded to myladylyssa's comment:

I mean, to me the clearest indication that these authors are “outsiders” to TJLC is how they manage to cite zero actual TJLC blogs or metas and instead credit (of ALL people) midonz with the foundation of TJLC. It’s not lost on me that LSiT deleted her blog after she felt her work had been reproduced too many times without proper credit, so for a peer-reviewed journal to publish an article that attributes the entire genesis and propagation of TJLC to one of its most persistent detractors is really egregious in my view and calls into question both the credentials and motivations of the authors. People in the fandom know these facts, they can be fact-checked on existing blogs, and if these authors didn’t know this, then every single blog on this website has an ask box. I answered this exact question for somebody just the other day. The fact that these are actual professors publishing this in an actual peer-reviewed journal doesn’t give this article more credence, it makes it a poorly-researched article that reflects poorly on those respective institutions. @myladylyssa I’m really looking forward to your article, and I have every reason to be confident that it will be fair and thorough, not least because you’ve messaged me on numerous occasions to ask if you may cite certain posts of mine, and I’ve seen you ask the same of others. I mean, we’ve been friendly in the fandom for years now! That said, you’re also the only person I’ve seen doing what I’d consider due diligence before writing about TJLC. I really appreciate and admire your approach and I wish other academics would follow your example.

myladylyssa responded:

Thank you, Amy! I definitely see your point about that article and wonder what happened with it. My article isn’t a thorough history either but focuses on the purposes and uses of meta, but I hope it is a fair and accurate representation of what I’ve witnessed and read, all those I cite, and of the varying viewpoints toward authorial intent and the text. I’m always terrified I’ve missed something.

And I appreciate all of our convos and your work! What an oeuvre! I wish I could cite or discuss all the meta in general, but that’s a whole other paper–or book!

Every piece of meta that disappears breaks my fan and librarian heart. LSiT (thank goodness the meta are somewhere!) and more recently @deducingbbcsherlock, whom I did not know, but I am sorely sorry their work is gone and is only spottily reblogged by my Tumblr. All those fans who are compiling timelines and masterlists are my heroes. How to preserve these?

Pillowfort

On Pillowfort, there was a brief discussion of the article in the 221B Baker St community, after user Alessnox shared a link to the article:

I think they've made a strong argument here. I'd love to see this idea about radicalization to create membership applied to other groups on Tumblr to see if it has broader implictions across all unmoderated democratic (small 'd') forums!

I think it odd that they say that a lack of a safe space leads to radicalization, because the presence of closed spaces so often leads to echo chambers. In the height of TJLC, People looked to leaders to express their opinions articulately, and it feels so much like politics today, it's a bit scary.

I don't think it's necessarily mutually exclusive. What I think they're arguing is that when you don't have moderated spaces (not safe per se, just ones where that space's "rules" and "mores" are enforced by "moderators" and "newcomers" are "taught" the "rules" so to speak) then your voice gets lost unless its radicalized. Echo chambers aren't necessarily radicalization - it's a reinforcement of your own belief standards which may or may not be radicalized.

And people generally do look to leaders to express their opinions. I started thinking about how something like this might apply to a wider democratic society. I'm currently watching the Hornblower series which takes place during the First French Republic so I'm pretty influenced by our schoolhouse lessons on THAT at the moment in how I'm thinking about radicalization.

It's a really fascinating article though!

The Article is Updated

A screenshot of a section of the article The JohnLock Conspiracy, fandom eschatology, and longing to belong that was updated after a fan contacted Transformative Works and Cultures with criticism of the timeline of TJLC.

At least one TJLCer reported contacting Transformative Works and Cultures with criticism of the article's timeline of TJLC - specifically, to share evidence that TJLC (as a term and concept) predated the anonymized post originally cited as the "impetus" for its creation. On July 13, the same user posted an update to Tumblr:

eyyyy the otw people got back to me! the article now says that midonz’s post was “one” impetus for and “part of” the foundation for tjlc lol

In the tags, gark-gatiss continued: "#despite the fact that i provided them with a post that both predates hers and has 10x more notes #there's nothing for it lads #we just have to document our own history." Earlier in the month, the same user had posted a screenshot, ^{Archived version} of the original text of this section of the article, which can be compared with the updated text as of July 14, 2018.