We're All Fans Now MM25 Fans Sept 08

8/2/2019 We're All Fans Now MM25 Fans Sept 08

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/were-all-fans-now-mm25-fans-sept-08 1/4english and media centre | September 2008 | MediaMagazine 7

MM

You could be forgiven for thinking that, in this

age of multiplatform media and downloaded

or streamed content, everyone is a fan of something, whether it’s a specific TV show,

or an indie-rock band. Being a fan – taking

part in the shared activities and practices of

a fan community – seems to have become an

ordinary, everyday part of media use. We’re

all fans now, aren’t we? After all, following the

narrative puzzles of Lost or Heroes is hardly the

cult, underground preserve of a select few. It’s

properly mainstream: above ground, centre stage.

And rating and reviewing bits of media content

has also become increasingly commonplace,

rather than the specialist territory of amateur fan

magazines or ‘fanzines’. Yes, surely we’re all fans

now, whether or not we even use the label.

According to this argument, studying fans

of film, TV, and music is important for Media

Studies because in contemporary consumer

culture, being a fan is one part , and sometimes

a highly significant part, of our self-identities .

What’s been dubbed ‘media fandom’ – the

detailed appreciation of particular media texts

– is, for some people, just as much an aspect

of who they are as, say, their class, age, or their

gender. And though there have been different

strands of work, and different traditions and

theories, applied to media fandom and sports

fandom, these approaches are themselvesbeginning to converge, given that sports fandom

is now itself often one type of media fandom.

Indeed, whilst some fan passions may fade,

others seem to stay with us for life, becoming

a type of ‘enduring fandom’ that we can’t

imagine ever being without. This can sometimes

be a sports or football fandom, often linked toregional and family identities and so speaking

literally of where we come from. But it can also

be the love of a film franchise – Star Wars or

Lord of the Rings fans – or even a TV series like

Doctor Who (my own ‘enduring fandom’). And

if many people are fans, throughout much, if

not all, of their lives, then Media Studies owes it

to itself, and to us, to take seriously the creative

endeavours and the emotions exhibited by this

‘everyfan’.

Emotional attachmentIn Fan Cultures, I argue that fans’ emotional

attachments to particular objects call for a theory

which is not limited to audience interpretation.

All too often, Media Studies has had a lot to say

about audience readings and understandings

of content, but much less to tell us about how

audiences feel about the media they consume.

Even the approach known as ‘Uses and

Gratifications’ concerns what people do with

the media, rather than how they might become

attached to, and invested in, particular

media texts. And where fandom is concerned,

emotional attachment – some have compared

this to a form of love – is a vital component.

From ‘everyfan’ to anti-

fans, superfans, andbrand fans.... MattHills, one of our

foremost theorists of

fandom, explains why

the fans themselves are

becoming the subject of

academic study.

Heroes (left and nearright): courtesy of

image.net

Lost (far right):courtesy of C4’sextranet press site


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/were-all-fans-now-mm25-fans-sept-08 2/48 MediaMagazine | September 2008 | english and media centre

MM

Finding a quick and easy definition of media

fandom isn’t easy, partly because the term has

been so widely debated. The author of Fans

(2005), Cornel Sandvoss, offers up the following:

I define fandom as the regular, emotionally

involved consumption of a given popular

narrative or text.

Like a kind of ‘love’, this emotional involvement

may even be so intense as to go beyond an

individual fan’s ability fully to put it into words

and explain it. Partly for this reason, and

partly because fan love is often felt to have an

authenticity and a privacy for fans, I have used

a version of psychoanalysis to think about it.

This is an approach which has a longer historyin Film Studies, though in the past it has been

used in textual analysis rather than in relation to

audiences’ feelings and attachments. Something

else that is important about the emotional

involvement of fans is that, again rather like the

feeling of being in love, this isn’t just about blind

devotion and automatic approval of the fan

object. Instead, fan love often has to tolerate

disappointments and frustrations from the

fan object, such as Star Wars fans hating the

character of Jar Jar Binks, or football fans vocally

criticising their team when they lose. Fandom

represents an attachment to media content

which can often be highly critical – wishing and

willing media producers or sports teams to do

better.

Fans are highly critical and creative

audiences; they don’t just criticise their beloved

shows or franchises when they fall short of

expectation, they also make their own fanfilms, or write their own fan fiction. As Henry

Jenkins wrote in his ground-breaking study of

media fandom from the early Nineties, Textual

Poachers, fans are ‘consumers who are also

producers’.

One way of thinking about media fandom,

then, is that it pre-dates and prefigures the

audience activities of ‘web 2.0’: fandom got there

first. Only now are mainstream, digital media

catching up with, and seeking to generalise,

what have previously been special types of fan

interaction and engagement.

The anti-fan

The emphasis on fans’ emotionalinvestments in specific media has led, more

recently, to a new strand of fan studies: work on

the ‘anti-fan’, kickstarted in the Noughties was

by media scholar Jonathan Gray. What might

this strange category include? Well, anti-fans

are people who are passionate about a media

text, but negatively so; they loathe or detest

what they take it to represent. Unlike fans, anti-

fans aren’t close readers of what they hate; they

form an image of the detested media object ‘at

a distance’, by referring to marketing, trailers or

other publicity. Anti-fandom therefore appears to

hinge on a negative stereotype of the particular

text or genre and its assumed audience. For

example, ‘romantic fiction is formulaic and stupid

and its readers are engaged in empty-headed

escapism’ (or so an anti-fan would claim). Or, to

give another common example, ‘horror films

Heroes (left, below and far

right): courtesy of image.net

Star Wars (below left)

Lord of the Rings (above and

right)


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/were-all-fans-now-mm25-fans-sept-08 3/4english and media centre | September 2008 |MediaMagazine 9

MM

are allegedly sick and twisted and those who

enjoy them are wrong in the head’ (according to

horror’s many anti-fans). Whereas media fandom

might allow us to define, culturally, what sort

of person we are, with what sort of tastes and

interests, ‘anti-fandom’ is about who we are not,

and what sorts of identities we seek to define

ourselves against , and in strong opposition to.

It can also be about fan rivalries, of course,

such as fans of one football team taking another

team as their ‘anti-fan’ arch-enemy. And fans of

a TV series can become anti-fans of particular

elements within it, passionately detesting

developments in the storyline or new actors. The

idea that TV shows can ‘jump the shark’ (named

after a supposedly ludicrous event in the US TV

series Happy Days) or lose their original appeal

or uniqueness is one version of this. Fans who

make such a claim are, perhaps, shifting theirallegiances and are on the way to becoming ‘anti-

fans’ of media they previously embraced.

‘True’ fansWe might all be fans now, but this doesn’t

mean that we’re all equally fans. Fan

communities commonly make a series of

distinctions between ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’,

sharing a sense of what distinguishes fans from

non-fans, or ‘hardcore’ fans from ‘newbies’,

for that matter. Far from just being groups

or networks of like-minded individuals, fan

cultures tend to be marked by distinctions of

authenticity, defining what counts as a ‘true’

fan. The length of time one has been a fan

can contribute to one’s fan authenticity, with the

‘hardcore’ often having been long-term fans, as

can the quantity and quality of fan knowledge


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/were-all-fans-now-mm25-fans-sept-08 4/410 MediaMagazine | September 2008 | english and media centre

MM

one has accumulated. Whether it’s the league and

game stats a football fan can quote, or detailed

knowledge of a TV show’s production history,

fandom isn’t just about emotional investment,

it’s about investing in knowledge, about

knowing the right things. Fans are the experts

of popular culture. What’s nothing but trivia to

a non-fan may be essential learning for a fan.

Culture industries play on this desire for fan

knowledge, of course, through such materials

as DVD extras, commentaries, and podcasts

offering exclusive content or behind-the-scenes

information. Fan authenticity can also be a

matter of getting early access to media content,

with movie fans typically wanting to attend

the earliest possible previews or screenings,

and TV fans wanting to see YouTube clips or

other on-demand content ahead of official firstbroadcast. Being a ‘true’ fan can mean knowing

more than other fans, and knowing it first.

As such, there’s sometimes a strong streak of

competition in fan circles; and there are also

hierarchies of fans. Those who know more,

and have greater access to behind-the-scenes

information, become the ‘leaders’ of fan groups

and the high-status ‘superfans’ within their fan

communities. And fans’ thirst for access and first-

look or first-listen media can also involve them

in battles with the industry, for example when

new songs from well-known bands leak online

ahead of their release, or when TV episodes

leak pre-transmission, such as happened ahead

of the BBC return of Doctor Who in 2005. This

‘grey’ economy of media content exists in a

murky realm; some of it may be deliberately

aimed at generating or sustaining a fan base,

working as viral, word-of-mouth marketing and

promotion ahead of ‘official’ release; some of it

may genuinely get out there against the wishes

of the industry, but in line with fans’ interests.

This reinforces the point that media fandom has

never just been in the pockets of the industry.

Struggles between fans’ and producers’ agendas

have frequently been documented, whether it’s

football fans opposing the buy-out of their team,or movie fans criticising the casting of a much-

loved character such as James Bond.

What does ‘fandom’ mean?One big problem in defining fandom is

this: what exactly should the term refer to?

Remember that Sandvoss mentions ‘popular

narratives or texts’ as the proper objects of

fandom, but where does this leave the power

of brands within consumer culture? Can one

be a ‘fan’ of Converses, or the Apple iPhone, or

even McDonald’s? Or how about being a fan

of Subway, but an anti-fan of McDonald’s? For

some, this might stretch the language of fandom

too far, but it is hard to discern exactly what

might distinguish more conventional media fan

objects from brands that we are emotionally

invested in; that we regularly and perhaps

habitually consume; that we might have built up

considerable knowledge about, and which may

well have become part of our self-identities. The

rapid rise of the iPod, for example, as an iconic

consumer good, and the brand values of Apple

(along with its dedicated and vocal consumer

champions) seem remarkably close to more‘traditional’ fan objects and fan communities. This

being true, perhaps Media Studies could borrow

from fan studies to think not just about sports

and media fandom, but also ‘brand fandom’

and its own struggles between producers and

active consumers. Even ‘fashion fandom’ could

be explored more generally. Recent debates

surrounding ‘anti-fandom’ have started new

areas of study; so too might these ways of

opening up the term ‘fan’.

Whether it’s the ‘everyfan’ of digital media

contexts, the ‘anti-fan’ who hates some media

while loving other texts, the ‘superfan’ who

knows it all – but could still learn from, andcontribute to, Media Studies – or the ‘brand fan’

who has very clear consumer loyalties, fandom

undoubtedly means a lot of different things to

a lot of different people. In How To Do Things

With Cultural Theory (2005), I even consider the

strange idea that there might be fans of Media

Studies and media theory, but perhaps that’s

another story!

Matt Hills is a Reader in Media and Cultural Studies at

Cardiff University. He is the author of several books,

including Fan Cultures, and has published widely on the

subjects of cult media and media fandom.

Following it up

Matt Hills (2002): Fan Cultures

This introduces a range of key theories of

fandom, including approaches using media

sociology and psychoanalysis.

Henry Jenkins (1992): Textual Poachers

Where it all began: a seminal study which put

‘media fandom’ on the Media Studies agenda.

Though dated, having been written before the

rise of the internet, it is remains an excellent

starting point for discussions of fan activity.

Cornel Sandvoss (2005): Fans

Another excellent overview, especially good

for the way it focuses on individual fans rather

than the more established approach to fan

groups and communities.

ed. Jonathan Gray et al (2007): Fandom:

Identities & Communities in a Mediated World

A good, up-to-date edited collection, with a

section on ‘anti-fans’.

Matt Hills (2005): How to do Things With

Cultural Theory

Heroes (left): courtesy of

image.net

Star Wars (below, far leftand above left)

Lord of the Rings (above)

Documents

We're All Fans Now MM25 Fans Sept 08