#about nonfan academics

[studiesof-fandom-primaryblog]

My Life as an Acafan: it’s complaining time!

Right now, I’m reading the key works of fan studies. I’m reading and selecting works that will bring the type of debates I want to have in my classroom. It’s an exercise any competent teacher does - no matter how long they’ve been teaching. I’m not well versed yet on most things related to fan studies because I’ve started studying it kinda recently, but I’m slowly reading most of things any fan scholars should read and I’ve a couple things to say. Most aimed to non-fan academics.

If any non-fan academic is reading this, I think you should be aware that it is glaringly evident that you have never set a foot on fandom more than necessary and don't understand the core of fandom. You all try, you all make some good points and, somehow, you’re always off the mark. You do not get it. 

As a black bisexual woman, I’m going to do an analogy to make it easier to understand. The feeling I have when I read a non-fan academic talking about fandom and fans is almost the same feeling I get when I read a white person or straight/cis person trying to explain racism and homophobia/transphobia. You do not get it and you will never get it because you didn’t go through it and, probably, won’t ever go through it. It’s not your standpoint - and take this standpoint I’m saying here as the same one from standpoint theory. It feels off place and like missing several points about fandom.

Another thing is that non-fan academics come off, not sure if it’s intentional, as people that believe their analysis are impartial or mostly impartial because they are not fans. I’m gonna say this as a historian: there’s no such thing as impartiality. Everyone has a bias, especially if you ‘re studying something. If you commit to do research, and one that ends up being your lifetime work, it’s indisputable you have a bias and it shows. My God, you’ve no idea how much it does show, even if you think you don’t. I can read between the lines and understand most of you think we are akin to cultists - which shows you do not understand fandom at all. The least thing fandom has, as collective, is a behavior of venerating or excessively admiring anything at all. Fandom is a bunch of ruthless critics that even if they swear they love something, they’ll absolutely tear it down at any time and any place without hesitation if they feel like they are entitled to. Nothing is sacred and nothing is safe from criticism or fandom’s cruelty. If you do not know or understand this very basic notion, you truly have no idea what you’re studying or talking about. 

Also, I think the terms fan and fandom are used carelessly by some non-fan academics (I’m so close to calling them local academics, just so I have a label to identify them ahahaha). Everyone that has an intense enthusiasm for a particular work is a fan for them and, kinda automatically, are part of fandom. I don’t agree with that notion at all. Those fans are not part of fandom. Fandom is a collective, they are people coming together and interacting and forming relationships. It’s a social thing and I say this as a fandom fan since 2005. Listen, I’ve always been a fan in the sense of getting obsessed with several media works. I mean, by the time I was 10, I knew how to recite every single line and sing every song of The Lion King, The Little Mermaid and Mulan. Does that mean I was part of Disney fandom? Hell no. I just became a fandom fan in 2005 when I became part of the community and started consuming fanworks. Non-fan academics need to start listening to fans, because we set ourselves apart from those people. It’s so disrespectful to us to take our terms and apply them in a way that they are not supposed to be used, especially to explain experiences that are not related to us. 

But maybe the problem stems from the name of the field itself. Maybe if it was called Fandom Studies, we would not have this kind of controversy in relation to the use of terms like fan and fandom. After all, Fan Studies implies all kinds of fans and not only the ones that are part of an organized collective. Maybe the solution is to have two fields: Fandom Studies, to deal with the social experience and the individuals that carry out fan practices (like Jenkins pointed out that, when people identify themselves as fans, they are not focused in just one particular work, but rather a range of works and apply sets of practices on them) and Fan Studies, to deal with individual and isolated experiences of being enthusiastic (read having emotional attachment) over mass media works. Like enthusiastic people, they might identify themselves as fans because fan is a common word nowadays, but they do not use the term fandom because, most of time, they don’t even know the word or what it means. So, how can you reduce fandom to any experience of emotional attachment to any kind of media? I mean, if fandom fans so many times differentiate their investment to a particular work by saying ‘I watch this, but I’m not part of the fandom’ i.e. consume/create fan practices in this media; how dare you to take our term and apply to people that don’t even know what it means just because they’re emotionally attached to a piece of mass media work? 

If someone does not partake in fan practices (aka content created by fans in an organized community), they’re not part of a fandom. And, when I say partake, I mean consume and/or create, not just one of them. This is fandom 101. This is a problem that I see with non-fan academics, they do not respect what we establish in our community.

Someone who watches a series or movie regularly or just really loves them is not a member of said fandom. It’s not that simple. And, if you think that it’s not like that, I dare you to do just one thing: go to a movie premiere of a big franchise like Marvel and, without proper context, start asking people who seems invested (aka wearing shirts or looking really excited to be there) things like ‘So what is your favorite fandom discourse/meta about this franchise you’re about to watch?’ and then you come back to me and tell me how many people actually knew what fandom is and what meta/discourse means in that context. I’ll bet good money not even half of the people who are wearing t-shirts of said franchise will understand what you’re talking about.

So, being part of fandom means being engaged in particular social practices. That’s how, among ourselves, we differentiate us from the people that just love very much certain mass media works. It’s different. Non-fan academics need to remember they are studying living and breathing subjects who are incredibly analytical, so I think maybe it’s time to take a step back, rethink your attitude and respect the norms dictated by the community you research. I mean, I’ve been part of fandom for 15 years and I haven’t ever seen one single fan defend the idea that people who just love intensely some work of fiction and do nothing more than buy a t-shirt cause it looks cool are part of fandom.

Ever.