This is Fandom?

From Fanlore
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Meta
Title: This is Fandom?
Creator: yourlibrarian
Date(s): July 25, 2009
Medium: Online
Fandom: Fandom
Topic: Outside views of fandom
External Links: This is Fandom?
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

This is Fandom? is a 2009 essay by yourlibrarian.

Its focus is a short film about fandom called "Participate: The Revolution of Fan Culture."

Excerpts

I took a look at Participate: The Revolution of Fan Culture (which made me wish that, as in most cases where "revolution" is used, people used the more appropriate "evolution.") About 16 minutes in, it discusses fanfic and references LJ. However it gives only a passing nod to the vast amount of participation in places such as FFN and LJ, to focus instead on fan films and the fans who have become part of the entertainment industry (all the interviews are with people who make a living or make money from fans). This odd skew was perhaps most apparent in one interview segment where Lucas is referenced as the fanboy who changed things by being a geek and making a geek film. I thought an even better argument for Lucas being a fan and a revolutionary was what Lucas did for the technical side of filmmaking, not to mention the financial side by demonstrating the incredible empire-building power of merchandising. What troubled me is how "Participate" skewed the definition of fan, and also suggested that the "revolution" in question was in fact the commercialization of fandom.

While I agree completely that to be a fan is to be a participant in some way, this focus on the migration of a few fans into the industry seems to be as much about fans as interviewing a well know artist about hobby painters. Sure, one's personal passions may have been the source of a professional pursuit, but to focus on the people who have taken a professional track is to ignore the vast hordes of people who lead completely different lives from their fan passions, and to the work that fans do as fans. The concerns of the professional and the concerns of the fan are different things.

This presentation of "fan culture" as a professional culture bothers me for two reasons. For one, and I could be wrong about this, it takes the view of sports fans and transplants it to entertainment fans. I suspect the idea that every sports fan deep in their hearts wishes that they could be the one on the field, pitching the perfect game or scoring the winning goal, might be true. And surely many entertainment fans would also like to be the one on the screen, or at least the one behind the scenes putting something on the screen. But I don't know that being a fan should automatically be equated with wanting to be a pro. For some people a hobby is just that, a break from one's normal life and not a frustrated desire to make a living from the hobby itself.

The second reason is, I think, an unsubtle desire for "legitimacy". And the easiest way to make anything legitimate (especially in the U.S. culture) is to make money from it. The interviews and footage for this documentary come largely from the NY ComicCon, and I think one could hardly have a better example of the commercialization of fandom (and the growing meaninglessness of the term "fan") than to feature it. People are paying attention to ComicCon these days because it's seen as a place where money can be made – not necessarily from sales but from marketing. Celebrities then follow the money and crowds follow the celebrities. Had this film focused on, say, Escapade instead, I think it would have been a substantially different film, and a much better exploration of fandom as a culture. Being a separate culture was discussed in the beginning in somewhat vague terms, but it doesn't seem to have been the purpose of the film despite being in the title.