 |
|
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) smallship1 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have been known, when in curmudgeonly mood, to quote famously right-on comics writer Grant Morrison on the subject of fans. In an interview given to the comic fanzine Ark, around 1989-90 sometime, he said that fans were "fat men with beards and fat women with horrible headbands who dress up as elves and sing songs about Blake's Seven. I think they should all be guillotined for the sake of humanity," he went on to say. Charming man. I've never bought anything of his since, and I never will. He's not unique, though. Many people share his opinion, and some of them are fans. I should explain, though, as they would themselves, that they're not *that* kind of fan, oh no. They're a different kind of fan entirely. This view has recently been articulated by one Ken Lowery in an article on fandom to which iamza linked. iamza didn't like the tone, but felt it necessary to concede that Mister Lowery had a point. I have no such scruples. Whether he has a point or not, whether there is any truth in his words or not, even if they are certified as true by God Almighty, the article is scurrilous, it is hateful, and it is bigoted, and I reject it utterly. Strong words, you may feel. You may think, on reading the piece, that the writer's tone is quite moderate and reasonable. You may think I'm angry because the shoe fits rather too well. If that is the case, take a look at the beginning and the end of the thing. At the beginning, we have a picture, which presumably Mister Lowery has selected to epitomise his view of fandom. Look at it, and then come back to the Grant Morrison quote above. Look similar? Body fascism is an integral part of this bigoted view of fans. If the woman in the spandex costume were what is regarded as a "normal" size, men would be drooling all over that photograph. I don't know if Mister Lowery would, but I would not be surprised. Her enthusiasm for fandom would not be an issue. But because she is a different shape, she is portrayed as an object of contempt and hate. And now to the end. See Mister Lowery's advice for dealing with fans. The man is advocating shunning. As someone whose wife was shunned in the workplace for nine long months, this renders me speechless with rage. This is hatemongering of the lowest sort, and the man should be pilloried openly for it in a much more public forum than this little journal. So. Having established that, does he in fact have a point? There are people in every field of human activity who are by normal standards strange. Communities with a common interest can be very welcoming to those who for whatever reason lack some of the "normal" social skills. That is undeniable, as it is undeniable that passions run high in some fan communities and can lead to the overstepping of boundaries. If the alternative, however, is to view passion as a bad thing, something to be avoided in oneself and ridiculed in others, then I am afraid I would rather have the passion and the overstepping as well. I would rather have the brilliant fan fiction and the "wank" (and how that word is calculated to generate contempt and disgust in itself is something I have touched on before) than the sort of lukewarm feelings that seem to be the best these supposed fans can manage. I would rather see love, however naively and ineptly expressed, than mere "appreciation." And if that offends Mister Lowery and Mister Morrison and his ilk, then I can only suggest, with the greatest respect, that the whole lot of them, at their earliest convenience, go and boil their heads, preferably in ullage. One final thing: Mister Lowery quotes Russell T Davies on "the fans." RTD, as is well known, has no time for the fans, except of course for the privileged few who are his friends and who he gets to write for him. So, if he has no time for people who love the programme he is now running, who take an active interest in it and who have strong opinions about it, who does he have time for? What is his ideal audience? Cattle. Ciphers. Uninvolved, uncritical, docile drones who will pay over the money and watch the show because it happens to be on. People who know their place and stay in it. Passive spectators. Consumers. I am not of that number. And I refuse to let Mister Davies, Mister Lowery, Mister Morrison, or any other arrogant, hypocritical snob make me ashamed of that fact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Howdy Stranger!
Some weekend just recently, most of my apartment neighbors went stir fry bonkers. They dressed in brightly colored tribal clothing and some of them painted their faces. They gathered together in large groups, played very loud music for a very very long time, while eating specific types of fattening food and drinking alcoholic beverages. They watched this particular show and became so emotionally involved that they jeering, cheered, screamed, moaned, shouted, argued and otherwise carried on like loonies.
They were watching the superbowl. I don't consider their behavior normal because there are more psycho sports fans than psycho sci-fi fans. I consider their behavior normal because tribalism is normal amongst human beings. All tribalism calls for ritualistic displays of adherence, be it face paint and beer or fanfic and costumes.
There. Is. No. Difference.
Except members of the larger tribe will almost invariably claim, at some point, that their greater community size confers greater social approval upon its members.
Nah. Most people are weird and it takes guts to have fun. Life is short, then you die, and nobody cares in the end. Live it up!
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I read it as merely the latest in a long series of hate pieces (and, again, I feel no need to moderate my language) that I have encountered over my many years of association with fandom in one form or another, in which obesity (and lack of shame therein, especially when observed in women) is linked with what one might call "excessive enthusiasm" and stigmatised as outside the pale of "normal" humanity. That society *is* currently body fascist I think even Socrates would be able to verify by observation in quite a short time; that that body fascism is expressed with less restraint in articles about fandom than in other ways, likewise. The picture Mister Lowery used has nothing overtly to do with "entitlement" or "ownership," but in linking it to the article he perpetuates a stereotype as offensive as Fagin or Stepin Fetchit. I will always have sympathy for any group thus stigmatised, however they express themselves in letters and blogs, and whether I belong to it or not.
I'm also not sure how you equate pirating intellectual property with expressing an opinion on a book, film or television series. I would be very interested in any statistic which purported to prove that a majority of fans who speak in terms of ownership of the object of their fandom actually believe that they own that whereof they speak. Passion leads to extremes of phraseology, as you may have noted here, and does not automatically connote an inability to distinguish between meum and tuum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a difference, I think, between engaging with fans, listening to fans and ultimately, doing what fans say. The former two are probably not objectionable, but the ultimate result to be avoided is the latter, and in not wanting to engage with fans at all, that's probably throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
I can see where Davies is coming from - to an extent. As a successful showrunner with a modicum of talent, you don't really want to get all muddled with the criticism of a (and let's face it) vocal minority. Steven Moffat - who looks pretty much set on course to take over from RTD - has the better attitude. He looks at the forums and the comments, but he doesn't take it to heart and continues to do what he thinks best. And honestly, that's all we should be asking for. Davies, et al. can get criticism from other quarters other than strictly fans - the audience for Doctor Who is mainstream anyway - so that's who he should be really listening to. AI figures are a better gauge of that than Outpost Gallifrey.
In a show like Doctor Who, we've seen what pandering to the fans does: John Nathan-Turner did it, and you wind up with a wank-fest as excruciating as Attack of the Cybermen. That's the one that Eric Saward and uber-fan and "continuity consultant" Ian Levine came up with, in case people had mercifully forgotten.
I don't like the attitude of "do not engage". That is patently ridiculous. But I do propose one thing: listening to the fans doesn't necessarily make the product better. It just makes you a better person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Necessarily, no, and I wouldn't try to claim that it would. But as you say, it won't necessarily make it worse either, if you're any good at what you're doing. Returning villains had worked before. Linked stories had worked before. And exposition about niggling continuity points would only have been noticed at all by other fans. And if it comes to it, RTD has done all these things in nuWho and got away with it.
But this is getting off the track. I think my point is that there is not listening to "the fans", or not engaging with "the fans," or whatever, and there is not engaging with "the fans" and making a point of saying so publicly in "ugh, ick, poo, nasty, keep them away" terms. I would like to think that if writers and creators have any social responsibility at all, it might include not fostering uninformed prejudice among their audience. Thanks to RTD, everyone who reads about nuWho in the Radio Times or wherever now knows exactly how sad, pathetic, creepy and worthless he thinks "the fans" are, and they haven't had to meet any of them to find out.
What people think of me and my friends is their business. What they say about me and my friends in public is, I think, to some extent mine. When they have access to a large audience, it becomes not just my business but a matter of urgent concern. So I speak.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not saying you're wrong, and anyone who is nasty to the Countess is just well, horrible. However, and unfortunately, media and comics fandom rather contributes to its reputation by courting publicity and trying to become legit. It seeks recognition from the creators, then gets annoyed when the creators find it embarrassing, or start handing out writs and take down notices. Creators don't have to take and notice of fandom, though when they themselves are plainly fanboys, like RTD and Morrison, their denial becomes annoying.
Also, unfortunately, this is typical human behaviour. The same things happen to any group whose obsessions and beliefs a second group does not understand. Looking from the outside, this may look idiotic, as, say, the various splits in the Anglican church look from my atheistic viewpoint. That's because I have nothing invested there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So when I answer the hypothetical question "what might be RTD's ideal audience?" with the word "Cattle" you construe that to mean that *I* think of some section of the human race that way. As ways to be wrong go, that ranks fairly high, and I think most people here see that....but let me make it blindingly clear just in case, because you never know.
I do not regard and have never regarded non-fans, or people with red hair, or lawyers, or Norwegians, or people whose last name begins with a D, or any section of the human race as anything greater or lesser than myself. Non-fans are just as intelligent, talented, creative and human as I am, and equally worthy of being listened to and having their views respected. So are fans.
I am not the one peddling bigotry here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Last babble Next babble 
