It's no secret that the typical fan is very possessive of their fandom. Traditionally this has taken the form of bitter rivalries between fandoms as fans argue between each other which is the better franchise to devote their attentions to. Sometimes, as in the case of Star Trek and more recently Star Wars, fans will even fight about the best products of a franchise, further dividing fans into quarreling little cliques.
This is an important topic to me, one that I'm passionate about and one that I will speak about over and over again in my life. But it holds an important place in the larger scope of understanding how the United States' society in particular has developed its interpretation of 'popular' culture.
Of course, traditionally, fans of 'popular' culture (as I'm discussing it here) are considered to be nerds. In the 1990's and early 2000's the definition of nerds in U.S. culture has shifted to be overall more accepting where it hasn't remained downright vilified by anti-intellectuals. This acceptance, or tolerance at least, has allowed fans to be more vocal and confident.
Nevertheless, fandoms use the power of the Internet to join together to create networks that believe they drive their franchises forward. In some substantial cases they do. In other notable cases, they don't.
Based on observation, it appears that these fandoms collectively believe they can sway the market. I, myself, am guilty of this flawed kind of groupthink, as indicated in my previous post about why Chris Pine is calling you an idiot. As I attempt to demonstrate in that article by using Netflix as my driving piece of evidence, there is a modicum of truth to this.
Certainly, fans have sometimes made it believable enough that they drive the market for their product to some folks in 'the biz' to drive home their point and influence the outcome of the show. This is extremely rare, and usually only a reaction of individual producers of a show to their fanbase rather than the corporate movers and shakers making things happen.
In U.S. culture, there is a great deal of anxiety tied up in fandoms. These shows are stories we enjoy because we find aspects of ourselves reflected in them. Where the aspects of ourselves are absent, we fantasize that we possess them anyway. They are the stuffed animals from our childhood we didn't have to give up to stay cool and relevant as we matured - not that it seems like many of the people I'm talking about in this blog are likely to have given up any stuffed animals voluntarily anyway.
And what they did give up was probably a very traumatic experience.
In fact, for many fans our collective childhoods seem to have become nothing but Freudian nightmares of traumatic experiences which we must delve deep into our fandom to escape from. It's okay - your fandom is therapeutic! You don't have to confront your emotions.
Except that when you do that to your fandom you're not really supporting it at all. You're appropriating it, and that's what causes the divisiveness among fans of even the same franchise.
That's why the creators of these franchises seem so antagonistic to you and your specific wishes.
Here's where I'm going to tell you something you may find abrasive:
No matter how much you like your franchise, it's not yours.
Those are their stories to tell, not yours. If you have stories to tell, tell them! Fanfiction is still a thing! And if you like to read fanfiction then bully for you! But you're not going to canonize it no matter how much you cry.
Yet, a shadow still looms over that horizon...
Copyright laws have mutated quite a bit over the 20th century. The laws that allowed for the creation of The Wizard of Oz and Snow White no longer exist as they did when they were created. There were several reasons why the changing copyright laws are relevant to my argument, but the most damaging one happened in 1995 when a particular cartoon mouse was set to enter the Public Domain.
The relatively recent expansion of social networks in our history has exacerbated the problem of maintaining the Mouse's family-friendly image for the global conglomerate. Suddenly, Walt Disney Corporation was the covetous fan - the Mouse's creator had long since passed from this world, leaving several well-meaning businessfolk in charge of the product.
I have worked for Disney. Even the businessfolk love Disney - almost everyone who works there from the bottom to the top is a fan of their various product lines in one way or another.
So, with all of their covetous might, they changed copyright laws in order to maintain control over the Mouse. As someone who isn't interested in using the Mouse's likeness in any way shape or form that doesn't bother me too much.
But laws aren't written for mice. They're written for intellectual properties.
Since 1995, copyright laws have become increasingly draconian. The entertainment industry as we know it is nouveau riche in the grand scheme of trust fund babies. Before the twentieth century, performers weren't extremely wealthy. Even the famous ones.
The rise of the entertainment industry and the gentrification of generations of wealthy performers and producers created a belief in the trust fund. It's this belief that your success should benefit generations of your family that will never even have to do anything to maintain what you created in order to live comfortably above the middle class that has created social stratification globally for as long as mercantilism and capitalism have been the dominant means of gaining power through currency.
If this is getting too political for you, that's fine. I ask you to stick with me, though, because all of this is going to tie back into fandoms here in a moment.
Philosophy lesson: you are impermanent, and so are your assets. Artificial means of perpetuating those assets do not, in fact, deify you or cause you to be any less impermanent.
Still too thinky? I'll simplify: Greed bad. Sharing good.
Obviously my thoughts on the matter are more complicated than the four-word version given above, but if those are the words you took and not the philosophy lesson then you've already lost.
(Now we come full circle) - your ability to alter the course of your favorite franchise does not shape your impact on the world. Mostly because it's like trying to hit your head on a rock that isn't there. You think you're getting nowhere because the rock is hard, but really you're getting nowhere because there isn't a rock to chip away.
Participate gloriously in your fandom and celebrate it. Engage in discussions about it, disagree passionately with each other about your perspectives. Dialogue is amazing, and it feeds the creative process. But coercion and complaints are not dialogue, nor is obstinance against the word of the franchise's creative directors helping the creative process.
Everyone who creates things loves to have fans. But nobody and nobody likes a crybaby.
 |
| Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combination is a fancy way of saying, "Don't sweat the small stuff" |
This is an important topic to me, one that I'm passionate about and one that I will speak about over and over again in my life. But it holds an important place in the larger scope of understanding how the United States' society in particular has developed its interpretation of 'popular' culture.
 |
| 'Popular' is a very interesting word for this genre. Its usage is sometimes... illogical. |
Of course, traditionally, fans of 'popular' culture (as I'm discussing it here) are considered to be nerds. In the 1990's and early 2000's the definition of nerds in U.S. culture has shifted to be overall more accepting where it hasn't remained downright vilified by anti-intellectuals. This acceptance, or tolerance at least, has allowed fans to be more vocal and confident.
Nevertheless, fandoms use the power of the Internet to join together to create networks that believe they drive their franchises forward. In some substantial cases they do. In other notable cases, they don't.
 |
| They took the sky from you and they're damn well not giving it back. |
Based on observation, it appears that these fandoms collectively believe they can sway the market. I, myself, am guilty of this flawed kind of groupthink, as indicated in my previous post about why Chris Pine is calling you an idiot. As I attempt to demonstrate in that article by using Netflix as my driving piece of evidence, there is a modicum of truth to this.
 |
| Pablo Hidalgo loves to taunt fans about Star Wars canon |
Certainly, fans have sometimes made it believable enough that they drive the market for their product to some folks in 'the biz' to drive home their point and influence the outcome of the show. This is extremely rare, and usually only a reaction of individual producers of a show to their fanbase rather than the corporate movers and shakers making things happen.
 |
| Haha, nice try, Supernatural fans! |
In U.S. culture, there is a great deal of anxiety tied up in fandoms. These shows are stories we enjoy because we find aspects of ourselves reflected in them. Where the aspects of ourselves are absent, we fantasize that we possess them anyway. They are the stuffed animals from our childhood we didn't have to give up to stay cool and relevant as we matured - not that it seems like many of the people I'm talking about in this blog are likely to have given up any stuffed animals voluntarily anyway.
And what they did give up was probably a very traumatic experience.
 |
| I call this one Squishy, he's my favorite! |
In fact, for many fans our collective childhoods seem to have become nothing but Freudian nightmares of traumatic experiences which we must delve deep into our fandom to escape from. It's okay - your fandom is therapeutic! You don't have to confront your emotions.
Except that when you do that to your fandom you're not really supporting it at all. You're appropriating it, and that's what causes the divisiveness among fans of even the same franchise.
That's why the creators of these franchises seem so antagonistic to you and your specific wishes.
Here's where I'm going to tell you something you may find abrasive:
No matter how much you like your franchise, it's not yours.
Those are their stories to tell, not yours. If you have stories to tell, tell them! Fanfiction is still a thing! And if you like to read fanfiction then bully for you! But you're not going to canonize it no matter how much you cry.
 |
| I'm not even going to count. |
 |
| Haha! |
The relatively recent expansion of social networks in our history has exacerbated the problem of maintaining the Mouse's family-friendly image for the global conglomerate. Suddenly, Walt Disney Corporation was the covetous fan - the Mouse's creator had long since passed from this world, leaving several well-meaning businessfolk in charge of the product.
I have worked for Disney. Even the businessfolk love Disney - almost everyone who works there from the bottom to the top is a fan of their various product lines in one way or another.
 |
| To this guy it's about dollars and happiness. I don't care if you believe me or not. |
So, with all of their covetous might, they changed copyright laws in order to maintain control over the Mouse. As someone who isn't interested in using the Mouse's likeness in any way shape or form that doesn't bother me too much.
But laws aren't written for mice. They're written for intellectual properties.
Since 1995, copyright laws have become increasingly draconian. The entertainment industry as we know it is nouveau riche in the grand scheme of trust fund babies. Before the twentieth century, performers weren't extremely wealthy. Even the famous ones.
 |
| Not that you can tell from this magnificently dressed bastard (Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart) |
If this is getting too political for you, that's fine. I ask you to stick with me, though, because all of this is going to tie back into fandoms here in a moment.
Philosophy lesson: you are impermanent, and so are your assets. Artificial means of perpetuating those assets do not, in fact, deify you or cause you to be any less impermanent.
Still too thinky? I'll simplify: Greed bad. Sharing good.
Obviously my thoughts on the matter are more complicated than the four-word version given above, but if those are the words you took and not the philosophy lesson then you've already lost.
(Now we come full circle) - your ability to alter the course of your favorite franchise does not shape your impact on the world. Mostly because it's like trying to hit your head on a rock that isn't there. You think you're getting nowhere because the rock is hard, but really you're getting nowhere because there isn't a rock to chip away.
Participate gloriously in your fandom and celebrate it. Engage in discussions about it, disagree passionately with each other about your perspectives. Dialogue is amazing, and it feeds the creative process. But coercion and complaints are not dialogue, nor is obstinance against the word of the franchise's creative directors helping the creative process.
 |
| In case you didn't know, this is Adam Driver making fun of you for being a whiny baby. Literally. |
Everyone who creates things loves to have fans. But nobody and nobody likes a crybaby.
No comments:
Post a Comment