Disciplining Fandom
April 25th, 2008 by LorettaFinal papers written by: Loretta Gary, Bizzy Hemphill, Ben Mazer and Alex Weintraub
Vogue Anti-Fandom: Who Owns Luxury?
Ben Mazer
Full paper: Vogue – BMazer
Vogue, an influential magazine about women’s fashion, has come under attack for being elitist, conservative in their styles, and most recently, as racist. The April 2008 cover has sparked dissent and farther-reaching criticism about the magazine from within the fashion industry and fan communities. This growing anti-fandom within the larger world of fashion fandom is detailed and placed within models of fan communities. We conclude that anti-fandom of Vogue represents a disagreement with larger taste hierarchies and deserves a different type of analytic treatment.
—
A Defense of Theory Fandom and Anti-Fandom: New York Times Readers
respond to Stanley Fish
Alex Weintraub
Fan Artifact: “French Theory in America” (Part 1 and Part 2)
Full paper: fan-culture-weintraub.pdf
On April 6, 2008, literary critic, Stanley Fish, wrote an article for the New York Times discussing an upcoming book about the history of French Theory in the United States and his opinion on desconstruction. In the article, he posits that the polarizing reception of French Theory is based on a false notion that deconstruction can move beyond the rhetorical sphere and into the political realm. The article received over 600 posts, some from fans of Theory and some from anti-fans. In a follow up article published on April 20, Fish defends his point against selected posters’ arguments, both in favor of and against Theory. Again, the article received hundreds of posts in response. The incident brings up interesting issues of the politics of fandom and the use of internet forums for debate over fan/anti-fan objects. Fish’s thesis mischaracterizes Theory and ignores a broader, ongoing debate. Also, looking at the incident from outside the debate reveals many similarities between high cultural fandoms and pop cultural fandoms in ways that are covered by select authors in Fandom.
—
The Absolute Pleasure of Discipline: Rocky Horror Fandom and Foucault
Bizzy Hemphill
Full paper: Rocky – BHemphill
In this paper, I will examine the modes of disciplining in fandom, using the callbacks during Rocky Horror Picture Show as my main example. I will draw on the philosophy put forth by the editors of Fandom that studying fans is an important way to learn about interactions in a mediated society. While many (if not all) fandoms also have disciplining processes and rules that fans within the fandom must follow, Rocky Horror fandom is a particularly clear example because of the callback phenomenon: fans are expected to perform in certain ways at certain times. I will interview several Swarthmore students who identify as Rocky Horror fans about they have learned how to participate in Rocky Horror fandom, as well as objects from the producers, like the DVD, and the official fan club. Using Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish as a theoretical framework for understanding disciplining in society at large, I will examine the relationship between the subversive possibilities of fandom and how the disciplining of citizens in society can be used as a framework for understanding the disciplining processes of fans of a particular fandom.
—
The Thinning Line between Fandom, Consumerism and Citizenship: The Nickelodeon Nation & the Youth Consumerism Culture
Fan Site: Nicktropolis
Full Paper: Nickelodeon -LGary (better formatting. same content. sorry.)
In this paper, I would like to explore the blurring of fan practices with the accepted consumer identity through a discussion of the growing youth consumer culture. Throughout this brief study, I will argue that media producers are purposefully cultivating fans out of their young audiences in order to satisfy their own capitalist desires. Therefore, I believe there is a connection between the process of infantalization that Barber introduces in Consumed and the current growing acceptance of the adult fan. To address these issues, I will begin with a short introduction to the existing scholarship on youth consumer culture – which is almost entirely situated outside of fan studies. Then, I will provide examples from Nickelodeon to showcase how the youth consumer culture is a prime location for the blending of the fan identity with the consumer’s role and the practices of citizenship to create the new level of consumerism that we see taking over today.
Posted in Colloquium | 1 Comment »
Man, I still feel bad about interrogating Alex during this colloquium, so in case anyone is checking back to see this, I thought I’d elaborate my remarks about “Theory fans” just a little bit. The reason I asked Alex about where he became acquainted with cultural theory, etc., is that my understanding of theory– certainly “Theory” when it’s spoken of as a capital-T gestalt– is a disciplining apparatus specific to academia.
In fact, it has been impression that whenever we speak of capital-T “Theory” we speak of an instrument of professionalizion. (I think this blog post by Tim Burke gives you a sense of the rhetoric surrounding this idea.) Individual theories– individual ideas about life, art, culture– can be absorbed by anyone, and might appeal to anyone. You don’t need to have been to college to read Barthes for pleasure or dig Foucault’s insights about prison society. But “Theory” as a gestalt, “Theory” as an institution, is something different: its canonical texts provide common ground and common tools for social/cultural scholars, so those scholars teach new generations of students the texts so they can understand the discussion that came before them, so those new students generate their own new insights in terms of the toolbox “Theory” offers them… it’s an ideological state apparatus, and you can definitely tell from this post that I took English 80, right?
I’m not sure if this comment is clear, but it sort of points to my motivations in bringing the question up at all. So with these ideas in mind maybe you can see why I didn’t mean to speak of “amateur academics” (I think that notion is incoherent), and why I’m invested in challenging the rhetoric of “Theory fans”.