Emma + Baelfire = Swanfire

[nevermore]

Ok,those are the thoughts for now. I’ll wait for yours.

A really interesting read, and I think he’s got some very good points, but to me there were also some problematic leaps of logic. The broader point about the Yelpification of art is well taken. But then, hasn’t there always been art for the masses — that which was meant to please as broad a population as possible — and art for art’s sake (or maybe for other projects, like art as politics)? But yes, some aspects of human activity, when subsumed into consumerist (read capitalist) logics, become either absurd or perverse (or both).

But then he makes some weird analogies. So for example, there are some problematic conflations under the general umbrella of “fandom.” When he’s essentially saying that the GamerGate trolls (who attacked women game developers who are already an incredibly marginalized and underrepresented faction in the industry) with people who were clamoring for an LGBT take on Elsa, this really does a disservice to his argument. In one instance we have an entitled dominant group persecuting members of a marginalized minority, effectively attempting to silence the voices of that minority and keeping it out of what they perceive as “their” domain. In the other instance, we have a vocal minority taking on an activist stance against a default/unmarked hegemonic way of telling a story/depicting a character. So, sure, in both instances we have social media mediating  who gets to express themselves, in what ways, and to what social effects, but this doesn’t mean that both are legitimately comparable. It’s like saying that Nazi officers put in charge of concentration camps, and rebels in, say, the French resistance (to go with the WWII analogy) are both representative of the same thing because they both killed people.

The difference, for me, is that Jason Rothenberg doesn’t treat his main character Clarke (someone very much in S1 Emma Swan mold) like A and E treat Emma Swan for S5.

I feel sort of sympathetic to Rothenberg in this instance (I like the show, but am not super invested, it’s a bit too YA for my tastes). But I think the difference is that his social media persona is a lot more diplomatic and socially talented than A&E. He comes across as a reasonable, thinking adult. The main character of 100 comes off as an evolving, complex entity that lives and breathes. Not as a PlotBot.

[sciencevsmagic]

So Jason Rothenberg (of the aforementioned The 100) wrote a very long post about Lexa’s death, social outcry, and reactions. He makes some compelling points about the things we’re discussing. Even if you don’t watch the show, worth the read to get inside the head of another show runner and to help the discussion along. https://medium.com/@jrothenberg/the-life-and-death-of-lexa-e461224be1db#.vr6h3on2a

That’s a pretty smooth piece. A bit too smooth in fact. It smacks of PR. More informative are the comments. There are claims of baiting. I don’t watch the show, so I don’t know if they’re true. There is one disturbing claim, which I’ve come across before, of someone on the writing staff promoting ‘Clexa’ on LBGTQ forums, shortly before the character was killed off. Many fans are particularly riled about this, as they consider these forums their ‘safe spaces’. If it is true, then it was definitely poor taste.

Generally speaking, I think it’s fine for writers to take their story in the direction they always intended. Kill characters. Don’t put characters in a relationship. All fine. But for heaven’s sake, don’t bait the fans. Baiting minority groups just to gain their viewership is what causes most of the outrage I think – not necessarily the content itself. It’s like the writers want to have their cake and eat it too. This applies to OUAT as well. It’s all well and good if A & E don’t want Emma and Regina together, but then stop baiting the SQ fans!! Same goes for SF! OUAT isn’t even considered that notorious when it comes to baiting – I’ve heard ‘Sherlock’ is worse. We’ve been discussing articles that demonize fans for being bullies, but producers can be manipulative in hurtful ways too.

[RumplesGirl]

If anyone does know about how fandom manifests itself in different countries and cultures, I’d be interested to hear about it. No doubt, each one would have its own quirks and bad behaviour.

I’d be interested to hear as well. I feel as though I only hear about instances of Americans in fandom culture acting out but that’s also likely due to the fact that I live in America.

That’s a pretty smooth piece. A bit too smooth in fact. It smacks of PR.

I also thought it was a bit too smooth. It reads as overly apologetic to the point of mockery–but I was worried I’m too much of a cynic. After months of not really engaging with fans on social media about Lexa’s death (his Twitter feed just looks like a very standard TV show runner–tweets about the show, pictures of the show, encouragement to watch the show) why feel the need to publish this?

We’ve been discussing articles that demonize fans for being bullies, but producers can be manipulative in hurtful ways too.

Oh yes. I think producers/showrunner can be worse! Yes, no one should send death threats or bully in general but 9/10 of the people who do that aren’t going to actually do anything. They, like the article I linked points out, think that their tweet will never be read, or they’re just getting caught up in the fervor of other fans. The showrunners and writers are actually in control of the media piece at the end of the day. They can insert anything they want into the narrative either to silence critics or respond to backlash. Everyone remember the silly “Maybe we should have called him Baelfire” line in 401? After meeting with tons of backlash for naming baby Snowflake Neal, A and E have Prince Charming utter that line without any context, without any surrounding dialogue to explain the awkward line. It was pretty clearly a sarcastic remark to the fandom. And that’s what producers can do; use the media piece as a weapon which, in turn, seems to only fuel more anger and more vitriol from the fans.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[sciencevsmagic]

Oh yes. I think producers/showrunner can be worse! Yes, no one should send death threats or bully in general but 9/10 of the people who do that aren’t going to actually do anything. They, like the article I linked points out, think that their tweet will never be read, or they’re just getting caught up in the fervor of other fans. The showrunners and writers are actually in control of the media piece at the end of the day. They can insert anything they want into the narrative either to silence critics or respond to backlash.

Exactly. These people have a LOT more responsibility than fans since they’re in a position of power. They have control, knowledge and resources at their disposal that fans don’t. Also, they are reliant on fans for their livelihoods! While they can’t cater to their fans’ every whim, they need to remember that they’re not writing fanfiction either (except A & E, but they do get paid for it). Respect works both ways. Which brings me to the next point.

Everyone remember the silly “Maybe we should have called him Baelfire” line in 401? After meeting with tons of backlash for naming baby Snowflake Neal, A and E have Prince Charming utter that line without any context, without any surrounding dialogue to explain the awkward line. It was pretty clearly a sarcastic remark to the fandom. And that’s what producers can do; use the media piece as a weapon which, in turn, seems to only fuel more anger and more vitriol from the fans.

I felt like S5B was bookended by two giant middle fingers to the fans. The first was the immortal “Your questions are pointless!” If fans weren’t engaged enough to ask questions, OUAT wouldn’t still be on air. The second was Emma and Hook’s reunion near Robin’s grave. Now if this had happened in real life, I’d be fine with it. A reunion between loved ones in that context can make you forget where you are. But this wasn’t real life. In fiction, every little thing has meaning, purpose. Especially setting. So having the reunion near Robin’s grave, for no reason at all, was either horrendously insensitive or a deliberate mockery of Robin and OQ fans. Like you said, it’s this sort of thing that fuels the vitriol. If they’re willing to build their fame and riches on the passion of the fans, then they need to work extra hard to produce content that is sensitive and respectful. There may be times when this is difficult, but the examples above are not one of those times. The mockery in those cases, and also in the Neal/Baelfire case, could have been EASILY avoided.

[Slurpeez]

sciencevsmagic wrote: If anyone does know about how fandom manifests itself in different countries and cultures, I’d be interested to hear about it. No doubt, each one would have its own quirks and bad behaviour. I’d be interested to hear as well. I feel as though I only hear about instances of Americans in fandom culture acting out but that’s also likely due to the fact that I live in America.

The UK and Europe have an issue when it comes to football (soccer) culture and hooliganism. (Less so today, but it still exists). In 1985, 39 fans were killed at the European Cup final when some Liverpool fans charged fans of the Italian team. That is known as the Heysel disaster of 1985.  ESPN also wrote an informative article about football violence from sports fanatics and how the English Premier League has since gone to lengths to try and combat it. Some young men would join gangs, and these gangs would usually defend their local teams with force. That, combined with a heavy drinking culture, meant drunken violence would often erupt among fans of opposing sides. While people would sometimes treat sports with almost religious devotion, fortuantley much of the hooliganism in the UK has been eradicated thanks to police intervention and heavy legal penalities.

"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy

[rainbow2]

Now, getting back to the matter at hand – I’m not sure what fandom is like in countries other than the US. Would fans in countries like Norway, reputed to be laid-back, be as vocal or as passionate? Would countries that don’t have the same high rates of consumerism or entertainment consumption display the same entitlement or overidentification? Would countries where being vocal is not  seen as desirable have such an engaged fan base? I don’t know. But I suspect not. I’m in no way intending to criticize American  culture. Fandom can achieve some very positive things – more inclusivity and better representation for example. This too, has a cultural aspect. You can see the connection between the Elsa campaign and a culture that values freedom of expression, diversity and individualism.

Each country has their own addiction,  we can call it that way, in Europe i would say Football, so sports is probably thing that makes fans go crazy,  but in terms of TV show and movie and books, there are no countries in fandom, for example, in ouat case, the most vocal fans  on twiter for adam, i would say are foreign fans, on tumblr, facebook, is the same, when comes to these international shows, there are no countries and the fandom is only one, on ouat case i would say since they air in more than 100 countries is very easy to lost from where is each fan, or each country has more fans, but i say one thing, u get Brazil to trend something( ouat or any other thing) and is enough to trend worldwide on twiter for hours, you dont even need any more fans of other countries.

[RumplesGirl]

^ excellent points about football/soccer from Slurpeez and Rainbow

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[PriceofMagic]

I think fandom is such a multi-layered thing but is stereotyped as being more at the extreme end of the spectrum. For example you can be fan of a show or a movie where you enjoy it and don’t miss an episode yet don’t feel the need to discuss it further beyond “that was really good!” or you can really get into it where the show becomes a big part of your life and you’ll happily discuss it online or collect memorabilia.

I think when it comes to fandom, the important question to ask to understand it is why. Why do some people engage in a particular show in such a way yet other shows completely pass them by without batting an eyelid? Why does a show gain such a large fanbase yet another one doesn’t?

There are loads of different reasons but the biggest reason is centred around the fan themselves: What do they get out of it? I think it’s fair to say that for most fans, whatever they’re a fan of is a source of escapism. For 1 hour or more, they can forget their problems in the real world and watch someone else deal with theirs. It can also be a social outlet. They can discuss their favourite thing with other like-minded people and not feel judged or rejected for it. This factor is especially strong if people have felt like social outcasts growing up or still feel like outcasts. Online forums centred around a show can give a fan a voice and a chance to express their opinion, something that they may not have the confidence to do in real life.

Characters are also a major part in the becoming a fan process. You want people to engage with your characters, you want them to identify with them and maybe even feel inspired by them. Nobody likes a perfect character. What people do like is a flawed character because nobody is perfect and they can identify with that. Having a character just get on with things instead of curling up into a ball despite their flaws can show that obstacles can be overcome. Using Elsa as an example, a lot of the LGBT community identify with her because they see Frozen as a Coming out story. If you ask anyone why they like a certain character, they’ll be able to rattle off a whole load of reasons and it will come down to either identifying with the character or liking something about the character that people wish they could do. Using Cruella as an example, she is one of the highlights of season 4. Why? Because she is snarky towards the main “heroes”. Zelena’s popularity shot up in season 5. Why? Because she was snarky towards the main “heroes”. Because the “heroes” have become a bunch of hypocrites, fans want them put in their place and the likes of Cruella do that. Why is RumBelle so popular? People identify with Rumple’s flaws (at least before he was made all about power)and they want to be loved despite those flaws. It’s why RumBellers constantly root for RumBelle to be happy together. They want Belle to accept Rumple for who he is yet they also want him to be able to overcome his flaws eg not be controlled by them. This can happen with villains as well, people taking a liking to them because of a trait or flaw the villain has that they can identify with. In fiction you can root for whoever you want, good or bad, and it won’t have any real world effect.

A downside to getting people so engaged with your characters is that, because they identify with them, they feel very protective of them. So when something tragic befalls them eg Robin’s death, people rush to their character’s side. In ship wars, people want who they think best for their character and disapprove of those characters that aren’t “good enough”.

I think Hook is an interesting example because he is very much a “base-breaker”. He’s like marmite- you either love him or hate him particularly when it comes to dealing screen time between the characters (poor Belle always gets the short end of the stick). Depending on whether or not you have engaged with Hook’s character, his traits can be bot positive and negative at the same time eg his romantic pursuit of Emma. Did he show determination in earning Emma’s love or did he harass her until she gave in? The list goes on with Hook.

I don’t think giving fans a voice and an opportunity to be heard is a bad thing, but I think it needs to be tempered. Creators need to listen to their fans but at the same time stand firm on the story they want to tell (Going by tumblr, if RumBelle wrote OUAT, RumBelle scenes would be very much R rated). HOWEVER, most importantly, creators need to be honest with their fans. A&E could very much do with this. Fans would be more willing to accept something if A&E were honest instead of trying to placate fans with crappy excuses and constant “next season” that they never get to.
A&E need to listen to their fans because what A&E say and what fans hear are two totally diferent things eg A&E get rid of lots of characters through various means, Fans interpret this as POCs don’t last long onscreen. A&E need to listen to that criticism and rectify it by adding a long running POC character instead of just throwing more POCs onscreen only to remove them again pretty swiftly. A&E also seem to be having trouble listening to concerns over the questionable concent situations which are swept under the carpet.

All in all, a symbiotic relationship is formed between fans and the media they consume. One cannot live without the other. Fans need their show to exist whilst shows need their fans to survive.

All magic comes with a price!

Keeper of Felix

[RumplesGirl]

I think when it comes to fandom, the important question to ask to understand it is why. Why do some people engage in a particular show in such a way yet other shows completely pass them by without batting an eyelid? Why does a show gain such a large fanbase yet another one doesn’t?

There are tons of reasons, and certainly the ones you pointed to. I think one of the biggest, for OUAT, is nostalgia. Not only for the Disney characters we all know and love but for “childhood,” even if we weren’t all children during Disney’s greatest eras (like the Disney Renaissance). Disney’s symbolic nature almost automatically invokes nostalgic feelings of childhood–of a time when we believed happy endings and magic not only *could* exist but *did* exist. Nostalgia is one of my favorite emotions because it’s caught between being good and bad. It’s a fond remembrance of days gone by but it’s also painful because you have to recognize that you’ll never get back to that state of being. Nostalgia literally, in Greek, means the pain from an old wound/longing for a “homecoming.” I think that’s what OUAT promised us at first: a chance to go back in time to watch these very classic, very old, very beloved tales (with a twist) that would allow us to escape back to childhood, to come “home” back to an age when we believed that magic was all around us, that happy endings could come to us, and that wishes do come true. That’s why S1 was so darn powerful–because we all recognized ourselves in the characters, be it the lonely orphan who was closed off after being rejected, the angry and scared woman who just wanted a happy ending, lovers separated by fate and circumstances, a father desperate to find his child….stories that were fantastical but grounded in human emotion and feelings that spoke to us with a promise that through magic, through faith, and through hope happy endings would come to them (and us by extension because of our ability to empathize with the characters).

He’s like marmite-

LOL–this is a British thing, yes? Americans don’t really have marmite here so I’ll take your word for it.

 

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[RumplesGirl]

Speaking of the fan entitlement conversation we’ve been having…

Rufeepeach had an interesting take in refute to a lot of the articles we’ve been linking.

Link to her tumblr for some language.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[Author]

Posts