Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
If you’re interested in all topics then here’s a couple more.
1) Pat Flynn’s ‘Smart Passive Income’. He goes into all kinds of ways of making a passive income. Even if it’s not something you’re interested in at the moment, it’s fascinating to hear people’s stories and learn about the options available these days.
2) Shawn Stevenson’s ‘Model Health Show’. Shawn and his co-host Jade present high quality health information in an entertaining manner. Definitely not preachy; Shawn’s attitude is very relaxed and he encourages everyone to choose what’s right for themselves.
[adrotate group="5"]– Queen Regina and Mayor Mills
– Visitors
– Something evil in Storybrooke
– Light and darkness
– We are one
– Hyde and Seek
– The Return of the Queen
The other part of this is, of course, that the writers really don’t see why anyone would dislike the scene (unless you’re just an “angry shipper”–which I am not, I didn’t ship OQ). Adam will acknowledge that some people are upset but his rebuttal is always, “but some people liked it a lot, I’m sorry you didn’t.” So even with proper time allotted, I somewhat doubt that we’d have a change of venue .
To his critics, Adam replied,
“There’s nothing we cannot abide!
Resolution by macguffin
Or sex on a coffin,
We write it all with great pride!”
If you’re interested in pop culture, there’s NPR’s ‘Pop culture happy hour’. Also, if you haven’t already done so, check out Amanda and Brittany’s special interest episode on fanfiction (ep 57). In my opinion, it’s their best ever ep. They include an overview of fanfiction and then have some interviews with highly popular OUAT fanfic writers. The second interviewee has recently published her AU fic.
I just don’t understand why the writers would choose that particular place for a reunion. Setting is everything, and in fiction, it always means something, whereas it doesn’t in real life. Maybe…Emma could have gone to the docks, and sat there until nightfall. Then Hook could have shown up. That would have been more appropriate as the docks would be a place connected to Hook and far removed from Robin. And it would have been nice for her to have some time to reflect…on everything.
Yeah, I’ve only dabbled myself – just enough to scratch the surface. But the hosts are all old hands and they agreed about not having seen significant bullying. It is difficult to believe though. I know enough to know that there is enough quality in the fic world to get consumers hooked in the all the same ways we discussed above. Plus, psychologically speaking, it’d be even easier to hurl abuse at a nameless, faceless author than at a showrunner.
Thanks for the info on football, Slurpeez and Rainbow. This has been a stimulating discussion.
I heard something interesting in a podcast today and thought I’d throw it out there as we’ve been discussing bullying. Apparently there isn’t too much bullying in fanfiction communities. Is this even true? Or are the sites just very strictly moderated? Given the highly personal nature of fanfiction, I would have thought attacks would be common.
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.
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.
Again, thanks for the link @RumplesGirl.
And so we have these three elements – one old as fandom itself, one rooted in technological advances and one impacted by the corporatization of storytelling – coming together in such a way to truly break fandom.
I don’t know if these elements are the sole contributers to the fan behaviour described in the article.
I’ll use a parallel sports situation to illustrate my point. I’m an avid cricket fan. In one cricket playing country, you see eerily similar examples of extreme fan behaviour. The entitlement is present, the death threats, effigy burning, house stoning, social media bullying and overidentification with the team to the point where even the slightest criticism is taken as an insult to national pride. The game of cricket, like the entertainment industry, has changed over the years (becoming more commercial) and fans from all countries frequent social media. Yet, this extreme behaviour is nowhere near as prevalent in other cricket playing countries. The point I’m trying to make is that it is driven by cultural and socio-political factors more so than technology.
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.
So my (tentative) conclusion is that fan behaviour is strongly influenced by culture, more so than technology and might be seen as a microcosm of the society it is based in. I also think that the article is being overly dramatic when it says that ‘fandom is broken’.
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.
