My article is premised on seeking to 'show' rather than 'tell' (Denzin, 2010;Ellis, 2004Ellis, , 2009). In particular, my aim is to show fandom as performative, affective and varying in intensities, rather than tell through potentially reductive over-analysis and theoretical abstraction. My own traversing of the autoethnographic terrain has entailed a spectrum of affective registries; works have resonated, inspired, challenged, provoked, agitated, enlightened and frustrated me, often simultaneously within the same text. Holman Jones, Adams and Ellis (2013a) note that "autoethnography creates a space for a turn, a change, a reconsideration of how we think, how we do research and relationships" (p. 21), with a salient aspiration characteristic of autoethnography steering towards "creating a reciprocal relationship with audiences in order to compel a response" (p. 22). Moreover, Ellis and Bochner (2006) intimate that autoethnography aims to be "unruly, dangerous, vulnerable, rebellious, and creative" (p. 433) as a mode of inquiry, with these often explicitly 'messy' texts designed to provoke readers, to question, to (re)think, and potentially to act by being