#blucosmo

[rtffanculture]

Tumblr Post 4

First and foremost the relationship between gender and fan culture as the demarcation between “affirmational” fan works and “transformative” fan works was written with the opinion that commonly affirmational work is mainly re-stated source material and the authors and creators tend to associate with these fans more. As “obsession_inc” stated these are the “sanctioned” fans and perceived as primarily male. Likewise, “transformational” works are fans that take the source and twist it to their own purposes to which creators have shown to be disgruntled with and as such these are “non-sanctioned” fans and are primarily female. Therefore, being non-sanctioned fans positions female fans in a lower status than the sanctioned. Essentially the social status of female fans within a fan community is the same as it is within normal society- beneath men. Within the reading “Feminized Fandom, Retail, and Beauty Culture by Elizabeth Affuso the main idea is that gendered, traditionally female products are being created within the fan markets which is both enforcing traditional gendered products and a form of “commodity feminism” while on the other hand allowing for new fan practices and opening more spaces within fan communities for female fans.

Where these works meet is that they both show that female fans in plenty of fan communities weren’t sanctioned fans and did not tend to congregate within popular and common fan spaces. Female fans created their own spaces using their transformative works.  With new products being created for female fans they are promoting them into fan spaces they hadn’t traditionally been in such as fan cons. With the article Affuso talked about how the make up lines had their own booths and entire set-ups to draw female or feminine fans. 

There is a slight argument that this is enforcing older gender roles on their fans by the products being make-up and therefore pushing a capitalistic and post-feminist fan. I would disagree with this and say that these products don’t cause the relationship between gender and fan culture to be lessened in anyway. Female fans like products of variety and if anything it’s more frustrating that any products created for fans are placed on the gender binary rather than just being for everyone, in whatever creative capacity they wish.

What questions that I begin to ask were as a result from when Affuso discusses the use of fan labor to promote the make-up products. By using common video’s online such as make-up tutorials, haul videos and more, it becomes clear that there is manipulation of female fans to use the products only as directed. What then must be asked is the question of if this is also a deterrent of female fans creating transformative works. If that is true, then this is a calculated way to push female fans into the “affirmational” works that are sanctioned. Whether or not this is all a diabolical plot remains to be seen, but it begs the question.

Affuso, Elizabeth. “Everyday Costume: Feminized Fandom, Retail, and Beauty Culture.” The Routledge Companion to Media Fandom, by Melissa A. Click and Suzanne Scott, Routledge, 2018, pp. 184–192.

[rtffanculture]

Star Wars Fan Film | TK-436: A Stormtrooper Story

The gritty tale of an Imperial stormtrooper who is forced to confront his past in the heat of a battle.

In Julie Levin Russo’s “user-penetrated content; Fan video in the age of convergence” the main argument she presents is that in this age of digitalization of mass media and resulting massive amount of fan vids and films created can be used for the profit of the media industry and creates an atmosphere between the industry and its fans/creators that ranges from litigious to loving.

The fan film that I chose for this post is the winner of the 2016 Filmmaker Select Star Wars Fan Film Award. This is competition that the official Star Wars website encourages fan creation and allows for creations of different genres and styles. The winner of the filmmaker select is TK-436: A storm-trooper story. 

This film contest encapsulates the clear lines of division between the creators and the industry in its many guidelines that are meant to control the types of productions that the Star Wars fandom promotes in official capacities. In the guidelines that have changed several times throughout the years there can be no unlicensed copyrighted material used in the entries, except for a collection of approved images, music and sound effects. This results in what Russo describes as it being “sanctioned derivative film-making is extremely narrow” prior to 2007 this rule was the other way around in that no in-universe fan fiction could be submitted. The ever-changing guidelines show how the industries relationship with creators is ever changing as what types and quality of fan videos that are commercially promotable and therefore profitable.

In the fan film contest rules currently, there are many distinctions on how the submissions are judged, limiting the types of creators that would wish to participate in such a competition.  By creating further and more exact specifications in the competition it better holds in place the “distinction between owners and consumers”. This fan film does all that the competition asks and in this way, it also plays to the older conventions that is Star Wars while trying to show a unique perspective of story. The protagonist is a male stormtrooper, who in battle realizes that the girl he loved and left behind is about to be killed by one of his comrades. The uniqueness is in that it perpetuates that all sides of war are damning, and no one is solely a victim or a criminal. The conventions it adheres to is the male protagonist struggling with choosing love or duty which plays inline very much so with older Star wars fans that are “likely” middle -aged white men. In no way is this bad but it goes to show how well Star Wars knows their audiences and how they then know to steer its fan creators and control fan creations. Interestingly enough there is the contest submission on the Star Wars Site and then the full directors cut on the creators own web page that is showing further how the industry is narrowing fan creation.

Russo, Julie Levin. “User-Penetrated Content: Fan Video in the Age of Convergence.” Cinema Journal, vol. 48, no. 4, 2009, pp. 125–130. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/25619735.

[rtffanculture]

Tumblr post 1: Guidelines of research in fan studies.

In fan studies the ethical considerations and guidelines are an extremely important part of the scholarship. In Kristina Busses’ “The Ethics of Studying Online Fandom” she makes clear note of following a policy of “fans first” stating that all work in fan studies must be given explicit permission by the fans. As well as the fans must be properly cited. There are several points of discussion in the most of fan studies and in Busses’ work, one of note is the role of the ACA-fan (academic fan) and their spaces within the fan community and the academic world and therefore where they overlap and what that means in one’s research. This is of important attention due to how it affects the guidelines set by the researcher. 

First and foremost the guideline that should be followed in personal opinion should be as Busse states “ ‘ balance the rights of subjects  ( as authors, as research participants, as people) with the social benefits of research” (11) We must take into consideration every time we undertake a new project, the potential harm both to the individual subjects and communities. In relation to the ACA-fan in determining their role they must decide multiple factors including the debate of “text or people”, how to cite their subjects, and understand their ability to identify conflict within the community and be careful to comment on it in fair and academic terms and not cause any further discourse as an ACA-fan. Debates of “text or people” is I believe a personal choice to the research project. When choosing works, especially as both a fan and academic it is important to choose works that aren’t intended to be shared beyond the community and to not choose such a work or participant that could be contrived as bias or a conflict of interest. As well when wishing to discuss fan works that many may have objection too, or it would be very difficult to gain permission from,I believe that the best practice would be to contact several embedded fans within said community and bring forth your argument for the use of such material and go from the opinions of those fans. This is especially important if one is already an embedded fan in the fan community being studied and it can be shown how there is not or limited bias on the works or participants used in the research.

I feel that the “best practices” would be clear consent from the creators/authors of the work along with confirming the ways in which they wish to be cited in the work. Furthermore, upon approval from the fans showing what the intended points of research and argument for the project should be shown. Also how the fans works and/or participation in the study is both beneficial and how it is to be used should be given. Lastly, if the researcher is not welcome or could cause potential harm it is best to choose a different subject of study.  

Busse, Kristina. The Ethics of Studying Online Fandom. The Routledge Companion to Media Fandom. Edited by Melissa A. Click and Suzanne Scott. Routledge, 1 November 2017.

[rtftransmedia18]

Fanboy Auteur and The Hobbit

Through Suzanne Scott’s Who’s Steering the Mothership: The Role of the Fanboy Auteur Transmedia Storytelling we are introduced to the concept of a Fanboy Auteur and how this influences the Trandmedia story creation. The text I have chosen to focus on is an interview with Peter Jackson as he was beginning the making of The Hobbit. With The Lord of The Rings, Jackson was a relatively unknow director that made a Oscar winning film trilogy The Lord of the Rings but also along  the way he showed that his understanding of Tolkien’s was most definitely that of a superior fan. 

Of course he was not the creator of middle earth but to use Scotts words a ‘translator’ for the transition of the books to film. In the interview it is expressed that the film is being made for the fans. That Jackson is a “Tolkien Enthusiast” as said by Sir Ian Mckellen. Scott discusses using paratexts as a fanboy auteur to assert their control. In the interview with Jackson he discuses having the rights to adapt appendices from The Return of the King. By stating this Jackson showed that he has control over a portion of the text and can change it any way he wishes. Jackson goes even a step further however by associating himself to Tolkien. In many ways Tolkien is the ultimate author. His literal death allowed the fans to take over control for many years of Middle Earth and its Interpretation. When Jackson stepped onto the scene now they had to deal with a author again.  By Jackson associating himself with Tolkien as a creator of their beloved texts but also as a fan due to the many years between the creation of the books and the films we see that his Fanboy Auteur title is established. 

Jackson says in his interview that “Tolkien was writing what was happening outside of the pages of The Hobbit but happening in Middle-Earth at that exact time. So we are doing sort of The Hobbit supersized with this extra material.” By in a sense saying his work is like that of Tolkien’s he is elevating himself as a creator. In the reading its shown that audiences respond to authorial interpretations with further text creation. When the decision to make The Hobbit cam about Jackson was not the original choice for director but by taking over as director his Auteur “powers” came back and his control over its creation and interpretation was restored.

Woods, Sean. “Q&A: Peter Jackson, Master of Middle-Earth.” Rolling Stone, Rolling Stone, 19 Feb. 2013, www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/q-a-peter-jackson-master-of-middle-earth-20130219.

- Suzanne Scott, “Who’s Steering the Mothership? The Role of the Fanboy Auteur in Transmedia Storytelling”