Not having an in-depth understanding of the Buffy TV series is a critical hurdle in understanding the Slash fanfiction, but some important concepts do arise from reading it. For one, it highlights some concepts in Jenkins' piece on convergence: in an unprecedented way, fans have the technology to contribute to commercial media; also these contributions may inform the producers of mass media.
In Sean Griffin's blog post on Jenkins' site, he claims that commercial media is lacking in a broad scope of who is viewing the media in question - his counterpart, Robin Reid speaks of advertising for her favourite shows as targeting a completely different audience, for example. Fan culture may be changing this a bit, as the content of the shows may be reflecting the culture of the fans. I'm not sure whether or not, for example, Xena: Warrior Princess was slated originally to be a lesbian cult hit, but in its development, it played upon that idea quite a bit.
What Slash fiction brings to the table, though, is not necessarily informing the mainstream culture, but enriching the fan culture in the folk tradition. It is an expression of the immersion in mass media combined with personal experience.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Saturday, October 27, 2007
La Fille Sauvage
What is most immediately striking about "The Savage Girl" is how it reads like anime. Perhaps it's because of Chas' warped perfection, the goofy good-guy humour of Javier, or the outsider perspective of Ursula, or the near-Apocalyptic vision of the near future. These are recurring sorts of characters and themes in anime (of certain types anyway), culminating with Chas' bastard vision of the Lite Age. It makes a more interesting and moving story when the conflicts, personal and universal, are placed against the backdrop of the real life scheme of mass consumer culture.
Shakar extends the notions Hebdige formulated about style: individual expression (even in subcultures where there is an oppositionist ideology) is, in practice, a pattern of consumption of goods. These patterns were first explored in Bordieu's piece, but take on new meanings when applied to the choice of consumption beyond food and into nearly every facet of everyday life. In Chas' presentation of the Lite Age, he claims that only by acts of consumption do we remain free. If our only free choices are seen as what we buy, then those who are truly in control of our identities are those that sell us these objects. The revelation that Shakar brings us to, and Hebdige describes, is that we no longer need convincing that we need the objects. The question barely arises in our minds - it is simply that part of who we are is exemplified in what we buy, and the absence of that is the absence of self.
In this system, art aside, where is authenticity? It seems clear that, because of the appropriation of the Savage Girl's image, authenticity lies outside of the system of consumption, and it is the job of the industry to sell off that authenticity via decontexturalization of that authentic image, then mass reproduction. This model leads us to believe that the aura of the Savage Girl is what lures consumers to purchase the goods associated with the reproduction of her image, despite that the original is unknown to them. It's implicit that somehow consumers sense aura in reproduced items deriving from authenticity.
I can name one well-known example of this phenomenon, although the 'original' was well known - the grunge fashion in the early 90s. Had high fashion appropriated that image before Nirvana started selling platinum, would it have still been accepted for the bit of aura still left through the processes of decontexturalization and reproduction? Perhaps not in those days. What I propose, and I think Shakar may be implying, is that now we're trained to decode and adopt a processed form of authenticity to an unprecedented depth.
Shakar extends the notions Hebdige formulated about style: individual expression (even in subcultures where there is an oppositionist ideology) is, in practice, a pattern of consumption of goods. These patterns were first explored in Bordieu's piece, but take on new meanings when applied to the choice of consumption beyond food and into nearly every facet of everyday life. In Chas' presentation of the Lite Age, he claims that only by acts of consumption do we remain free. If our only free choices are seen as what we buy, then those who are truly in control of our identities are those that sell us these objects. The revelation that Shakar brings us to, and Hebdige describes, is that we no longer need convincing that we need the objects. The question barely arises in our minds - it is simply that part of who we are is exemplified in what we buy, and the absence of that is the absence of self.
In this system, art aside, where is authenticity? It seems clear that, because of the appropriation of the Savage Girl's image, authenticity lies outside of the system of consumption, and it is the job of the industry to sell off that authenticity via decontexturalization of that authentic image, then mass reproduction. This model leads us to believe that the aura of the Savage Girl is what lures consumers to purchase the goods associated with the reproduction of her image, despite that the original is unknown to them. It's implicit that somehow consumers sense aura in reproduced items deriving from authenticity.
I can name one well-known example of this phenomenon, although the 'original' was well known - the grunge fashion in the early 90s. Had high fashion appropriated that image before Nirvana started selling platinum, would it have still been accepted for the bit of aura still left through the processes of decontexturalization and reproduction? Perhaps not in those days. What I propose, and I think Shakar may be implying, is that now we're trained to decode and adopt a processed form of authenticity to an unprecedented depth.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Homology Between the Spaces
Although this article is an analysis of French culture in the late 70s, its main theme resounds in contemporary America: "...income plays an important part in determining distance from necessity." (Bourdieu 176)
Purchase is located in an area especially disparate between rich and poor. One can see this illustrated in three malls found in the city of White Plains. The Westchester is an unnecessarily large structure which houses dozens of expensive boutiques where one can purchase a simple commodity like a hoodie for $350. Nannies push strollers of other people's children, holding credit cards of their employers to purchase a new iPod for the young ones just old enough to know they want one. There's a crepe bar - exotic fare for a food court, or anywhere else for that matter, and, in line with Bourdieu's findings, light, naturally tasty, and filled with fresh fruit or salmon.
Down the road, past the Trump towers, is the Galleria. The white population is no longer the clear majority, nor is the physique and dress of patrons of the Westchester. A hoodie may only cost you $15. Still, Victoria's Secret and H&M reign supreme in size and traffic. The token going-out-of-business Bonsai Tree Shop is still there. The food court contains plenty of choices for pizza, ice cream, and fried foods, but almost nothing in the way of freshness, and definitely nothing too exotic.
Closer to the tracks is the discreet White Plains Mall. There's a uniform store, a hobby shop, a McDonald's, a Chinese grocery, a hardware shop, and a tiny parking area suggesting that its patrons probably don't drive. It's poorly lit, somewhat empty, and smells like the basement of the VA building at Purchase.
Whether or not the relationship of "opposites" is as true here as it is in France is definitely up for debate. Based on what I've seen, there are certainly trends, but I would need to see more statistical data and hear what people think. Bourdieu seems to want to show that it is the result of class division that different taste is created. In reality, though, I think the polarising factor in taste is just merely the extra time and money the upper classes enjoy, and there is no conscious "opposition" so to speak. Further analysis of these examples are superfluous for my purposes - if you read Bourdieu's article, you probably understand where I was going with all of this. And since I read it myself, I'll go back to the subject and share some thoughts.
I work in a restaurant that is located on a farm and serves mainly local produce in unpretentious ways... with an average per-person tab over $100 before tip. While there are some definite contradictions with the patterns recognised in Bourdieu's article, there are plenty of supportive examples. The wealthiest patrons don't drink as much, don't order the charcuterie plate, often eat fruit for dessert, and enjoy veal, salmon, lamb, and sweetbreads above all else- despite that the pork is local to the property of the restaurant itself. They bring along business partners and acquaintances. The restaurant owners invite their children's friend's families to dine. The culture and its tastes are right on par with Bourdieu's observations.
All this aside, there is plenty in this article that anyone exposed to American media will likely find intuitive correlations. The inverse relationship between waist size and income in women is telling, as is the security (in matters of appearance) of those of the upper-class. One only needs to look at a recent issue of Us Magazine's cover story of "Best and Worst Beach Bodies" to see this. The magazine (and countless others like it) is merely demonstrating what we all are supposed to believe: that fit is not only better, but it's integral to popularity and respect. Those with the worst beach bodies are the subject of ridicule, despite their celebrity status, to the readers - who are made up largely by women who are not upper-class, if my presumption is correct. If it isn't, some one correct me. And if it isn't, the readers are certainly no more than petit-bourgeoisie by Bourdieu's definition, if only by taking pleasure in some one else's physical shortcomings and therefore reflecting their own insecurity.
One closing note on Bourdieu's petit-bourgeoisie: the description sounds eerily similar to the condition of Dostoyevsky's Underground Man. The Russians, apparently, were onto this long before the French formalised it.
Purchase is located in an area especially disparate between rich and poor. One can see this illustrated in three malls found in the city of White Plains. The Westchester is an unnecessarily large structure which houses dozens of expensive boutiques where one can purchase a simple commodity like a hoodie for $350. Nannies push strollers of other people's children, holding credit cards of their employers to purchase a new iPod for the young ones just old enough to know they want one. There's a crepe bar - exotic fare for a food court, or anywhere else for that matter, and, in line with Bourdieu's findings, light, naturally tasty, and filled with fresh fruit or salmon.
Down the road, past the Trump towers, is the Galleria. The white population is no longer the clear majority, nor is the physique and dress of patrons of the Westchester. A hoodie may only cost you $15. Still, Victoria's Secret and H&M reign supreme in size and traffic. The token going-out-of-business Bonsai Tree Shop is still there. The food court contains plenty of choices for pizza, ice cream, and fried foods, but almost nothing in the way of freshness, and definitely nothing too exotic.
Closer to the tracks is the discreet White Plains Mall. There's a uniform store, a hobby shop, a McDonald's, a Chinese grocery, a hardware shop, and a tiny parking area suggesting that its patrons probably don't drive. It's poorly lit, somewhat empty, and smells like the basement of the VA building at Purchase.
Whether or not the relationship of "opposites" is as true here as it is in France is definitely up for debate. Based on what I've seen, there are certainly trends, but I would need to see more statistical data and hear what people think. Bourdieu seems to want to show that it is the result of class division that different taste is created. In reality, though, I think the polarising factor in taste is just merely the extra time and money the upper classes enjoy, and there is no conscious "opposition" so to speak. Further analysis of these examples are superfluous for my purposes - if you read Bourdieu's article, you probably understand where I was going with all of this. And since I read it myself, I'll go back to the subject and share some thoughts.
I work in a restaurant that is located on a farm and serves mainly local produce in unpretentious ways... with an average per-person tab over $100 before tip. While there are some definite contradictions with the patterns recognised in Bourdieu's article, there are plenty of supportive examples. The wealthiest patrons don't drink as much, don't order the charcuterie plate, often eat fruit for dessert, and enjoy veal, salmon, lamb, and sweetbreads above all else- despite that the pork is local to the property of the restaurant itself. They bring along business partners and acquaintances. The restaurant owners invite their children's friend's families to dine. The culture and its tastes are right on par with Bourdieu's observations.
All this aside, there is plenty in this article that anyone exposed to American media will likely find intuitive correlations. The inverse relationship between waist size and income in women is telling, as is the security (in matters of appearance) of those of the upper-class. One only needs to look at a recent issue of Us Magazine's cover story of "Best and Worst Beach Bodies" to see this. The magazine (and countless others like it) is merely demonstrating what we all are supposed to believe: that fit is not only better, but it's integral to popularity and respect. Those with the worst beach bodies are the subject of ridicule, despite their celebrity status, to the readers - who are made up largely by women who are not upper-class, if my presumption is correct. If it isn't, some one correct me. And if it isn't, the readers are certainly no more than petit-bourgeoisie by Bourdieu's definition, if only by taking pleasure in some one else's physical shortcomings and therefore reflecting their own insecurity.
One closing note on Bourdieu's petit-bourgeoisie: the description sounds eerily similar to the condition of Dostoyevsky's Underground Man. The Russians, apparently, were onto this long before the French formalised it.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Fallumn
OK, so it's pretty cold at night, now. Although the past two years have been light-coat weather up until Thanksgiving break, we might be breaking the streak and finally sticking it to Al Gore and his cleverly-packaged media hustle. So, to celebrate the cold weather, I urge each and every one of you to wear a scarf and mittens and buy a pack of cloves and hide in the Fort Awesome breezeway. No better way to Purchase it up in the Fallumn.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
