Fanthropology seems to be developing some mainstream media focus, lately. NPR hosted an interview yesterday with a woman who wrote a whole book about fanatics of one variety or another (entitled "Who Are You People?"), and today I found a link to The Guardian's article on Lumos 2006. "Interesting!" thought I - "it'll be great to get an outsider's impression of something as fannish as a convention!"
Or maybe not.
Let me start this off with a quote.
This is Harry Potter for adults. A concept that I'd always thought of as one of those minority tastes like quantum physics for children. Or Star Trek for girls.
Straight off, you should have a pretty good idea of why I'm now about ready to jump down this writer's throat. Bitch all you want about the weirdness of grown women dressed as students and witches. Gripe vociferously, if you so desire, about the uber-intellectualization and analysis of a children's book series. I'll just sit back and smile about still further proof that most people (even writers) don't understand the one great truth of literary analysis: you can analyze anything. Seriously. Put me in a room with a TV for the span of one segment of any (fictional) tv show and a commercial break, and I could come back to you with at least... oh, three subjects for literary analysis papers. And given a bit of time, I could write a fair amount of highly intellectualized analysis on any of those subjects. It's not hard, people. You just have to have the training, the will, and a little bit of instinct for intellectual and artistic bullshitting. The inherent value of the subject matter isn't what matters (although you'll get more out of some things than others, naturally, and you'd do better to start with something either well-written or voluminous), it's what you can pull out of it, and how skilled you are at doing so. A good essay-writer can pull off a fabulous analysis of just about anything.
But, and here's where I get angry, don't you dare start pulling that 1970s "sci-fi is for boys" shit. Not here, not now, not in the 21st fucking century. We have been fighting that for way the hell too long, and - silly me - I thought we'd finally gotten past it. For god's sake, how many female writers and scriptwriters, readers and die-hard fans do we need before people are convinced that looking into the future (or any other speculative genre, or, for that matter, any genre at all) is not a sex-based concept?! Shall I list names? Or point out that back in the days when I went to cons and such, I saw just as many women as men? Or note that I actually know more female sci-fi fans than I do male, and considering I'm in the right age bracket for serious geekiness, I don't think that's completely an issue of selection bias?
Next quote.
It started with Kirk in Star Trek, she says. Fan fiction writers needed a romantic partner for him, and since there wasn't a suitable female character, he got paired off with Spock.
I know about 90% of the folks on my f-list write fic of some kind and occasionally venture into writing relationshippy stuff of the homosexual variety, so let me pose this question - how many of you write a given pairing because there's no other "suitable female (or male) character" for one of the two?
I thought not.
Now, being as how I wasn't born yet, I can't comment on the whole thing with K/S. Squicks me like nobody's business, anyway, because... well... it's Kirk. But I seriously doubt anybody came to the idea of writing the two of them together just because there wasn't a suitable female to pair him up with. It's been years since I watched TOS, but I know Chapel was after Spock, and it's not like there was a shortage of scantily-clad women for Kirk, even working on the assumption that people were too terrified of interracial couples to consider Uhura.
The writer does actually encounter another English major, an academic no less, who challenges her... but not in the way I'd have liked to see her do so. Forget the "major philosophical themes" and the cries of literary significance. And forget how every naysayer who speaks eventually comes 'round to the "but at least they're reading!" argument. Forget all of it, except the fact that this art that we English majors spend four years of our lives having drilled into our brains is just as applicable to a Lysol commercial as it is to Nabokov or Dickens. Get used to the idea that it won't kill us - it will, in fact, do a lot of anthropological and psychological good - for us to analyze popular books and media. And deal, openly and realistically, with the fact that fandom and all its eccentricities are here to stay.
And the next time I catch someone making a crack about sci-fi being only for boys, I swear I'll throw a capslock hissy fit that'd make Book 5!Harry cover his eyes and whimper.
Or maybe not.
Let me start this off with a quote.
This is Harry Potter for adults. A concept that I'd always thought of as one of those minority tastes like quantum physics for children. Or Star Trek for girls.
Straight off, you should have a pretty good idea of why I'm now about ready to jump down this writer's throat. Bitch all you want about the weirdness of grown women dressed as students and witches. Gripe vociferously, if you so desire, about the uber-intellectualization and analysis of a children's book series. I'll just sit back and smile about still further proof that most people (even writers) don't understand the one great truth of literary analysis: you can analyze anything. Seriously. Put me in a room with a TV for the span of one segment of any (fictional) tv show and a commercial break, and I could come back to you with at least... oh, three subjects for literary analysis papers. And given a bit of time, I could write a fair amount of highly intellectualized analysis on any of those subjects. It's not hard, people. You just have to have the training, the will, and a little bit of instinct for intellectual and artistic bullshitting. The inherent value of the subject matter isn't what matters (although you'll get more out of some things than others, naturally, and you'd do better to start with something either well-written or voluminous), it's what you can pull out of it, and how skilled you are at doing so. A good essay-writer can pull off a fabulous analysis of just about anything.
But, and here's where I get angry, don't you dare start pulling that 1970s "sci-fi is for boys" shit. Not here, not now, not in the 21st fucking century. We have been fighting that for way the hell too long, and - silly me - I thought we'd finally gotten past it. For god's sake, how many female writers and scriptwriters, readers and die-hard fans do we need before people are convinced that looking into the future (or any other speculative genre, or, for that matter, any genre at all) is not a sex-based concept?! Shall I list names? Or point out that back in the days when I went to cons and such, I saw just as many women as men? Or note that I actually know more female sci-fi fans than I do male, and considering I'm in the right age bracket for serious geekiness, I don't think that's completely an issue of selection bias?
Next quote.
It started with Kirk in Star Trek, she says. Fan fiction writers needed a romantic partner for him, and since there wasn't a suitable female character, he got paired off with Spock.
I know about 90% of the folks on my f-list write fic of some kind and occasionally venture into writing relationshippy stuff of the homosexual variety, so let me pose this question - how many of you write a given pairing because there's no other "suitable female (or male) character" for one of the two?
I thought not.
Now, being as how I wasn't born yet, I can't comment on the whole thing with K/S. Squicks me like nobody's business, anyway, because... well... it's Kirk. But I seriously doubt anybody came to the idea of writing the two of them together just because there wasn't a suitable female to pair him up with. It's been years since I watched TOS, but I know Chapel was after Spock, and it's not like there was a shortage of scantily-clad women for Kirk, even working on the assumption that people were too terrified of interracial couples to consider Uhura.
The writer does actually encounter another English major, an academic no less, who challenges her... but not in the way I'd have liked to see her do so. Forget the "major philosophical themes" and the cries of literary significance. And forget how every naysayer who speaks eventually comes 'round to the "but at least they're reading!" argument. Forget all of it, except the fact that this art that we English majors spend four years of our lives having drilled into our brains is just as applicable to a Lysol commercial as it is to Nabokov or Dickens. Get used to the idea that it won't kill us - it will, in fact, do a lot of anthropological and psychological good - for us to analyze popular books and media. And deal, openly and realistically, with the fact that fandom and all its eccentricities are here to stay.
And the next time I catch someone making a crack about sci-fi being only for boys, I swear I'll throw a capslock hissy fit that'd make Book 5!Harry cover his eyes and whimper.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 08:27 pm (UTC)That actually is the reason a lot of old-school Kirk/Spock slashers give. (And the same reason for why there were so many OCs in early fiction.) Whether or not this came out of women being ashamed of just admitting they like it, out of them needing to justify it or downplay it or whatever, I don't know. But it was a reason that was offered. However, it wasn't the only reason offered. Methinks a fan skimmed an essay on the early days of fan fic and latched onto one point and wouldn't let go.
I could actually get into a very interesting tangent on how it's very interesting that there was a sect of early K/S ficcers who felt that a male alien was more 'suitable' for Kirk than Uhura, but I'll save that for another day.
The article came across to me, when I read it, as someone who was paid to write about the 'crazies'. Especially since she went out of her way to make it seem as strange and bizarre and foriegn as she could. I'd bet any amount of money that the author doesn't believe half of what she's writing, doesn't care how it comes off, and is just milking the angle she was given. So much of what she said is so stereotypical and cliched, it's like she spouted rhetoric and interlaced it with a handful of personal experiences from the con.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 10:10 pm (UTC)...Or, at the very least, puts me in mind of "Why Can't A Woman Be More Like a Man," from My Fair Lady. But that's my early obsession with Rex Harrison rearing its ugly head again. :P
You're most likely entirely correct about the writer - she most likely got assigned this piece and is doing the best she can with it, from the angle that'll get her the most reaction. And really, I couldn't care much less about her snide commentary re: the convention itself. I probably wouldn't even have read the whole thing if it weren't for that quote at the beginning. As a lifelong sci-fi fan, that really got my hackles up.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 08:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 10:03 pm (UTC)I think I remember that LotR article, too. Stupid people drive me insane, particularly when they're in positions of journalistic semi-integrity.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:37 pm (UTC)Love the icon, by the way!
no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:41 pm (UTC)Love the icon, by the way!
Hee, thanks. It's one of my faves, too. :D
no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:46 pm (UTC)That's actually getting to be less and less of a problem these days, thank the gods. It's more prevalent among comic book fans these days than true SF types, and even there it's dying out thanks to the growing popularity of manga and anime.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:50 pm (UTC)On the other hand, all kinds of wacky stuff turns up on Fandom Wank. I remember one post, just after I started watching B5, where a guy was bitching about how Ivanova couldn't possibly be Russian and a Jew. o_O What caves do these people live in, honestly?
no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:54 pm (UTC)Uh.
....
Nope, still can't process that one.
Actually, I kinda wish I'd seen that bit of wank. My last boyfriend was a Russian Jew. ;)
no subject
Date: 2006-08-10 04:23 pm (UTC)It devolved into everyone quoting their favorite lines and laughing their heads off about a) how stupid the guy was and b) how utterly canonical it is that Ivanova is both Russian and a Jew.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-09 11:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-10 04:21 pm (UTC)At least that's how I feel about them right now. I'm praying they're not *really* quite that pathetic. But it's hard to tell. :P
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 11:31 pm (UTC)OK, just had to add that. Will shut up now.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 11:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 11:37 pm (UTC)I fangirl that series like nothing else. More than Harry Potter. More than Lord of the Rings and Pirates of the Carribean and France and Walt Whitman and CANDY all rolled up together as one.
Maybe I should just force a copy of the first book on you sometime in the future. I may do that. XD
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 11:44 pm (UTC)Meanwhile, I have a rec for you, as well - have you read anything by Charles de Lint? I'm juuuust finishing his "Someplace to be Flying," and it's soooo interesting. I keep picking up written-verbal ticks from the Crow Girls, who are apparently a common thread in a lot of his books. They're so cute!
no subject
Date: 2006-08-12 12:00 am (UTC)And I'm always favorably disposed towards books with an intelligent, brave, non-stereotypical heroine. Phedre isn't your typical fantasy-novel perfect warrior-princess: she's a vain, melodramatic prostitute, but she's clever and loyal to her country and she tries her best to do good with what she is given.
Ahahaha you see. Once you get me started on these books, you can't stop the ranting. Ever. >:D
And oh, must look that up.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-10 12:22 am (UTC)And the next time I catch someone making a crack about sci-fi being only for boys, I swear I'll throw a capslock hissy fit that'd make Book 5!Harry cover his eyes and whimper.
Can I join? Please please please? I haven't capslocked in forever.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-10 04:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-10 04:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-10 04:17 pm (UTC)Here's the article. (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1837941,00.html) Again, my apologies!!!
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 11:29 pm (UTC)LYSOL COMMERCIAL.
I would respond more coherently, but I think I just broke myself laughing too hard. Being a future-English major, I know what you mean. SO MUCH. We were able to justify watching Legally Blonde in class the last few days of senior year. And oh, did we justify it.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 11:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 11:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 11:42 pm (UTC)bullshittingliterary analysis....I'm such a bad influence. I really do love literary analysis, it's just... it's so easy to make fun of it! XD