Fuck yeah, Fandom is Beautiful

Abstract

First-wave ethnographic work in fan studies, especially that of Henry Jenkins, Camille Bacon-Smith, Constance Penley, Roberta Pearson and John Tulloch, remains foundational to contemporary fan scholarship. Jenkins’ work in particular remains relevant for its ongoing commitment to fandom as a social identity and as a network; this contrasts sharply with the work of later scholars who see fandom as a matter of enthusiastic but individual engagement. It is important for fan scholars both to revisit and to emulate first-wave scholarship because the terms of the relationship between fans and the entertainment industry are being radically renegotiated. Fandom is increasingly understood to have economic and promotional value to content producers, and there is a danger that fandom-as-enthusiasm is being encouraged by producers even as fans are in danger of being alienated from their creative labour and from each other as a community.

Harry Potter, avagy a politikai bölcsek köve? Populáris kultúra és politikai aktivizmus

“…A szakirodalomban a rajongás különböző mértékeit határozzák meg, ettől, illetve a rajongói lét meghatározó szerepének elfogadástól függően következtetnek arra, hogy valóban játszik-e szerepet az emberek életében valamilyen kitalált világ iránti érzelmek hatása, képesek-e a fiktív történek tanulságait átvinni a való életbe. Coppa, 2014;Dessewffy-Váry, 2017. ) A rajongás, rajongói csoportokba tömörülés mindenképp meghatározza az emberek kapcsolatait, jellemzően azonos értékeket valló emberek tömörülnek kisközösségekbe.…”

From Fan Culture/Community to the Fan World: Possible Pathways and Ways of Having Done Fandom

“…It seems unfair to say that early fandom scholars overlooked the broad spectrum of regular fans to focus on… the creators and participators for whom fandom was a way of life … when that was precisely their defined object of study. (Coppa, 2014, p. 74) It is fan community-i.e., fan culture-that largely forms the object of dispute here, with Coppa (2014) suggesting that "the fandom of Fandom no longer describes a community of people" (p. 74). Responding to this critique, the editors of Fandom argue that fan cultures should continue to be studied alongside more individualized and personalized fan affects: "Studies of fans need not all be discussing the same types of fans, practices, or engagements to have a symphonic quality when considered in total" (Sandvoss et al, 2017, p. 10).…”

“…Without the "group social participation" of fan community, and the "critical sensibility that comes from engaging culture from the inside, as someone with a defined role in the cultural ecosystem" (Coppa, 2014, p. 78), Francesca Coppa (2014 counters that fandom is "in danger of being owned: our work, our communications, our relationships to and with each other. Fandom is more than its economic/revenue potential" (p. 80).…”

“…In this article I've suggested that we need to take seriously the way in which fan studies has begun to split analyses of fandom between "traditional" and "brand" or "industry-driven" fans (Linden & Linden, 2017, p. 37;Busse & Gray, 2014, p. 431), as well as paying close attention to related debates surrounding the place of "first-wave" fan studies and its "Fandom is Beautiful" approach (Coppa, 2014;Sandvoss et al, 2017). These developments-along with work in subcultural theory (Kahn-Harris, 2007;Hannerz, 2015)-all pose the question as to what place fan community/culture should have within contemporary fan studies.…”

Life as a Networked Fan

“…Some scholars have suggested that online communities and/or fandoms are fragmenting (Delanty, 2018;Coppa, 2014;Hills, 2017;Larsen and Zubernis, 2012). Instead, we suggest that digital technologies facilitate new types of networks which are fan-centric rather than fan community-centric, and which extend offline.…”