Social Construct Theory Applied to Fandom
Aug. 29th, 2005 04:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
viciouswishesSocial Construct Theory Applied to Fandom: Why Both Negative and Positive Criticism of Fanfic is Vital to Our Community
Fandom is by and large a community of writers, readers, and general aficionados of a tv show, movie, book, comic, etc. Through LiveJournal, we talk about everything from our favorite quote from said fandom to what adorable thing our cat did. We learned from each other through fandom osmosis, i.e. there's a reason I know the big spoiler for the latest Harry Potter book without having read it myself. And together, we have largely unwritten rules and a set language of our own. This sense of community and community standards makes both the reading and writing of fanfiction the perfect example for social construct writing theory and also why feedback, both positive and negative, is so vital for fandom's growth.
Social construct theory believes that inside every society is a discourse community - a community of knowledgeable peers who share common assumptions, goals, methods of communication, and conventions. In fandom, we have made a fully active discourse community. We know that when we click on a NC17 fic that there will be explicit sex. We know the differences between canon and fanon.
Recent wankage and civil discussion of feedback has led back to the unspoken rules of fandom. In Buffyverse fandom (and no doubt others), there has been a silencing of negative or even slightly less than glowing comments on fanfic. It has been said that criticism ruins the "fun" of fandom. But mostly people are afraid to say something that could be perceived as negative; even a comment as slight as "you changed tenses mid-sentence" is considered a personal attack on the author. Some are even afraid to make fanfic recs as he/she might be perceived as favoring one author over another. And as![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
dodyskin (and a few others) have pointed out this is killing Buffyverse fandom. This is killing our discourse community, because there is no discourse.
Considering the gray, legal line that fanfic authors walk, authors who take every piece of criticism as a personal attack are taking too much credit for their work. Fanfic is already a derivative of a text created by another person(s), and most fanfic authors have read their fair share of fanfic and participated in the discourse community. How many Spike/Angel authors used "little one" in their fics after they readkita0610's fic? Personally, I know that I wouldn't even be writing Buffy/Gunn if ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-syndicated.gif)
twinkledru hadn't turned me on to the pairing. While many of us many sit by ourselves writing our fanfic, every piece of fanfic is a collaborative effort between the creators of the original text, our fandom forebears, our peers, our beta readers, and our readers.
When we post fanfic publicly, whether it's to a journal or a web site, we open ourselves up to criticism (both positive and negative) from our discourse community and we formally acknowledge that we have a real and active audience. I once had a writing instructor who said that if we never showed our work to anyone, we might as well be masturbating. (I know critics of fanfic claim that fanfiction is the sound of one hand typing. But hey, let's communally masturbate; it's more fun anyway.) In the communal masturbation known as fanfic writing, we are still going through the same writing process used by every author. "The act of writing is accomplished through a process in which the writer images the audience, sets goals, develops ideas, produces notes, drafts, and a revised text, and edits to meet the audience's expectations" (National Council of Teachers of English). And even though many readers may have been silenced by public shaming, we readers sure do have opinions and will continue to have opinions.
Our opinions obviously differ from reader to reader as we give reader-based feedback, not criteria-based feedback. "The two types of comments most often used when evaluating a paper [or a story] are reader-based and criteria-based. Although it is sometimes difficult to differentiate between the two, criteria-based comments are usually used in reference to how well the piece of writing measures up to some set of pre-established expectations and reader-based comments are designed to show what effect the writing has on the reader. In other words, criteria-based comments are made by a reader who is functioning as a technical 'expert' in the form and style of writing employed, and reader-based comments are the subconscious 'gut' reactions elicited in the reader" ("Reader-Based Feedback"). There is no formal form for fanfic, beyond containing the names (possibly misspelled) of the pre-constructed characters of our selected text(s), thus all feedback, beyond the grammatical aspects of writing, are reader-based reactions. So-called 'gut' reactions are important since we are a discourse community and no one truly writes alone.
In order for authors to step back from their work and accept criticism with a level head, we must give up some authorial control and realize that we write as a discourse community, not as an individual with fresh new ideas. There are no truly new story ideas, and you're not going to be the first author to have Spike refer to Tara as "Glinda" nor will you be the last. Social construct writing theorist, Lisa Ede writes, "Recognizing that authorship is a concept, not a physical activity, and then tracing how that concept developed can help us understand why collaborative learning, and our writing centers [read: fandom], have always been resisted, marginalized. For although we may be unaware of it, our effort to encourage collaboration and dialogue is inherently subversive -- not just of our traditional educational institutions [...], but of one of the more important, because most hidden and commonsensical, assumptions of our culture: that writing and thinking are inherently individual solitary activities" ("Collaborative Learning and Social Theories of Knowledge: A Theoretical Foundation for Writing Centers?"). In fandom, we must consciously acknowledge that we already know that writing and learning are collaborative activities. We all know from experience that our writing is greatly improved by having a good beta reader and without each other, who would be have to ask the make and model of Wesley's motorcycles?
Together, we created and are continuing to create a wonderful, vibrant discourse community where we share our thoughts, fanfic, meta, art, etc. about the texts which we are most passionate about. We all do this for free and for fun. No, it isn't fairy!Spike or physically impossible sex that's bringing Buffyverse fandom to an early grave; it's the lack of balanced communal discourse between the positives and the negatives. It's the inability to talk about fanfic, about ideas, without everything becoming personal. It's the idea that a particular author isn't mentally well enough, rich enough, physically able enough, etc. to receive a critical review of his/her fic. It's why when I ask a person if he/she is arguing that Buffy deserved to be almost raped in S6 that he/she suddenly thinks I'm calling him/her a rapist apologist or a misogynist instead of simply questioning the logic of the argument. Yes, the nature of LiveJournal brings us closer, brings our issues to the surface, makes us realize that everyone puts on his/her pants or trousers one leg at a time. But this shouldn't stop debate; instead it should make it more interesting. "Writing confers the power to grow personally and to effect change in the world" (National Council of Teachers of English). In the social construct of fanfic writing, we aren't going to grow or affect our corner of the 'verse if our discourse dies.
My own offer: As I wait for Buffyverse fandom to get its chakras aligned, I offer, blatantly - though the offer has always been there - to look critically at my own writing. I heard thatviciouswishes made Spike and Wesley dance in a department store and writes Gunn as her Mary Sue boyfriend. She also totally lacks in description, wrote three stories in one, and wrote two different fics with the same premise at the same time. Also she uses pretentious academic arguments to justify her dislike and criticism of fanfic she considers bad.
Fandom is by and large a community of writers, readers, and general aficionados of a tv show, movie, book, comic, etc. Through LiveJournal, we talk about everything from our favorite quote from said fandom to what adorable thing our cat did. We learned from each other through fandom osmosis, i.e. there's a reason I know the big spoiler for the latest Harry Potter book without having read it myself. And together, we have largely unwritten rules and a set language of our own. This sense of community and community standards makes both the reading and writing of fanfiction the perfect example for social construct writing theory and also why feedback, both positive and negative, is so vital for fandom's growth.
Social construct theory believes that inside every society is a discourse community - a community of knowledgeable peers who share common assumptions, goals, methods of communication, and conventions. In fandom, we have made a fully active discourse community. We know that when we click on a NC17 fic that there will be explicit sex. We know the differences between canon and fanon.
Recent wankage and civil discussion of feedback has led back to the unspoken rules of fandom. In Buffyverse fandom (and no doubt others), there has been a silencing of negative or even slightly less than glowing comments on fanfic. It has been said that criticism ruins the "fun" of fandom. But mostly people are afraid to say something that could be perceived as negative; even a comment as slight as "you changed tenses mid-sentence" is considered a personal attack on the author. Some are even afraid to make fanfic recs as he/she might be perceived as favoring one author over another. And as
dodyskin (and a few others) have pointed out this is killing Buffyverse fandom. This is killing our discourse community, because there is no discourse. Considering the gray, legal line that fanfic authors walk, authors who take every piece of criticism as a personal attack are taking too much credit for their work. Fanfic is already a derivative of a text created by another person(s), and most fanfic authors have read their fair share of fanfic and participated in the discourse community. How many Spike/Angel authors used "little one" in their fics after they read
kita0610's fic? Personally, I know that I wouldn't even be writing Buffy/Gunn if twinkledru hadn't turned me on to the pairing. While many of us many sit by ourselves writing our fanfic, every piece of fanfic is a collaborative effort between the creators of the original text, our fandom forebears, our peers, our beta readers, and our readers. When we post fanfic publicly, whether it's to a journal or a web site, we open ourselves up to criticism (both positive and negative) from our discourse community and we formally acknowledge that we have a real and active audience. I once had a writing instructor who said that if we never showed our work to anyone, we might as well be masturbating. (I know critics of fanfic claim that fanfiction is the sound of one hand typing. But hey, let's communally masturbate; it's more fun anyway.) In the communal masturbation known as fanfic writing, we are still going through the same writing process used by every author. "The act of writing is accomplished through a process in which the writer images the audience, sets goals, develops ideas, produces notes, drafts, and a revised text, and edits to meet the audience's expectations" (National Council of Teachers of English). And even though many readers may have been silenced by public shaming, we readers sure do have opinions and will continue to have opinions.
Our opinions obviously differ from reader to reader as we give reader-based feedback, not criteria-based feedback. "The two types of comments most often used when evaluating a paper [or a story] are reader-based and criteria-based. Although it is sometimes difficult to differentiate between the two, criteria-based comments are usually used in reference to how well the piece of writing measures up to some set of pre-established expectations and reader-based comments are designed to show what effect the writing has on the reader. In other words, criteria-based comments are made by a reader who is functioning as a technical 'expert' in the form and style of writing employed, and reader-based comments are the subconscious 'gut' reactions elicited in the reader" ("Reader-Based Feedback"). There is no formal form for fanfic, beyond containing the names (possibly misspelled) of the pre-constructed characters of our selected text(s), thus all feedback, beyond the grammatical aspects of writing, are reader-based reactions. So-called 'gut' reactions are important since we are a discourse community and no one truly writes alone.
In order for authors to step back from their work and accept criticism with a level head, we must give up some authorial control and realize that we write as a discourse community, not as an individual with fresh new ideas. There are no truly new story ideas, and you're not going to be the first author to have Spike refer to Tara as "Glinda" nor will you be the last. Social construct writing theorist, Lisa Ede writes, "Recognizing that authorship is a concept, not a physical activity, and then tracing how that concept developed can help us understand why collaborative learning, and our writing centers [read: fandom], have always been resisted, marginalized. For although we may be unaware of it, our effort to encourage collaboration and dialogue is inherently subversive -- not just of our traditional educational institutions [...], but of one of the more important, because most hidden and commonsensical, assumptions of our culture: that writing and thinking are inherently individual solitary activities" ("Collaborative Learning and Social Theories of Knowledge: A Theoretical Foundation for Writing Centers?"). In fandom, we must consciously acknowledge that we already know that writing and learning are collaborative activities. We all know from experience that our writing is greatly improved by having a good beta reader and without each other, who would be have to ask the make and model of Wesley's motorcycles?
Together, we created and are continuing to create a wonderful, vibrant discourse community where we share our thoughts, fanfic, meta, art, etc. about the texts which we are most passionate about. We all do this for free and for fun. No, it isn't fairy!Spike or physically impossible sex that's bringing Buffyverse fandom to an early grave; it's the lack of balanced communal discourse between the positives and the negatives. It's the inability to talk about fanfic, about ideas, without everything becoming personal. It's the idea that a particular author isn't mentally well enough, rich enough, physically able enough, etc. to receive a critical review of his/her fic. It's why when I ask a person if he/she is arguing that Buffy deserved to be almost raped in S6 that he/she suddenly thinks I'm calling him/her a rapist apologist or a misogynist instead of simply questioning the logic of the argument. Yes, the nature of LiveJournal brings us closer, brings our issues to the surface, makes us realize that everyone puts on his/her pants or trousers one leg at a time. But this shouldn't stop debate; instead it should make it more interesting. "Writing confers the power to grow personally and to effect change in the world" (National Council of Teachers of English). In the social construct of fanfic writing, we aren't going to grow or affect our corner of the 'verse if our discourse dies.
My own offer: As I wait for Buffyverse fandom to get its chakras aligned, I offer, blatantly - though the offer has always been there - to look critically at my own writing. I heard that
viciouswishes made Spike and Wesley dance in a department store and writes Gunn as her Mary Sue boyfriend. She also totally lacks in description, wrote three stories in one, and wrote two different fics with the same premise at the same time. Also she uses pretentious academic arguments to justify her dislike and criticism of fanfic she considers bad.