When Henry Jenkin’s “Star Trek
Rerun, Reread, Rewritten” revealed fan fiction as an almost “exclusively
feminine response to mass media”, the existence of the Harry and Draco’s Loveshack forum thread at fanfiction.net finally made sense. As Jenkins states,
the goal of most fanfiction is to produce a counter text that caters to female
desire. In so doing, these writers reengineer the original text to rectify characterizations
that seem sexist or gender biased in when viewed in contemporary culture. Fanfiction’s
singular focus on character relationships seems to be a gender specific
phenomenon that Jenkins suggests is the result of men and women being raised to
interpret a text for different reasons. Citing a study by David Bleich, Jenkins
argues that men favor logical, narrative conclusion brought about by goal oriented
conflict while women seek to gain a deeper understanding of the characters for
psychological fulfillment and treat the overall plot as a secondary concern (476).
Naturally this raises the
question: if fanfiction provides women with the ability to cater to their own
desires, what is it that allows men to do the same? The constraint of working
explicitly with pre-existing material makes fan editing and remixing a perfect fit
for the masculine desires Jenkins highlights, and a quick Google search shows
that the vast majority of all fan edits seem to be made by men (or at least people
with usernames that imply they are men). While fanfiction writers claim a text
as their own by bringing it into women’s culture, fan editing appears to claim
a text by reorganizing it into a paradigm of masculine literary values. This is
achieved by similarly targeting the character relationships of a text. While
most fan edits begin in service of repairing plot holes or removing the
extraneous bits of a narrative, determining what should remain a part of the
final product is chiefly motivated by a character’s relationship to a given
scene, other characters, and the overarching narrative.
Perhaps the best example
of this is the ongoing battle between fans of Star Wars and the saga’s creator George Lucas. In many ways Lucas
could be considered a fan editor of his own films, he’s infamous for
rereleasing the original trilogy with minute changes to alter special effects
or erase continuity issues with the newer prequel films. In fact, there’s a
Wikipedia page dedicated to tracking the extensive list of hundreds of
alterations he’s made since 1977 and it isn’t even complete. What seems to get
the fans up in arms, however, are any of the changes he makes that affects
characterization. While the “Han shot first” debacle is probably the most well-known
of Lucas’ problematic characterizations, there has been considerable backlash
against the Anakin/Darth Vader character of the prequel films. Fans argued that
Obi-Wan’s description of Luke’s father as “a good friend” in A New Hope isn’t something he lived up
to in the later films. Consequently fan edits of the prequel trilogy are
generally structured around redefining Anakin and Obi-Wan’s relationship
because of the belief that their dynamic is the foundation of the entire
universe. One such edit, known as The
Phantom Edit, goes so far as to
remove young Anikin’s annoying “yippee” and “oops” in order to make him more
endearing to both Obi-Wan and the audience.
An avid Lost fan that goes by the name of
DriggyDriggs edited the fifth season of the show into a four-part miniseries
that has each episode focus on a singular character. The result is a shockingly
poignant look into the lives of the surviving islanders without the ridiculous
magic church and purgatory nonsense. Cosmology
is a film that combines footage from 2001:
A Space Odyssey, There Will Be Blood,
Jurassic Park III and a dozen other
films to create what the author, who goes by The Man Behind the Mask, calls “a
fanedit about us” that’s basically The
Tree of Life without Brad Pitt.
The list of fan edits that
center on recontextualizing character relationships is so large that I couldn’t
possibly list them all. The point is that although men and women claim
ownership of media in different ways, this “character control fantasy” certainly
isn’t gender restricted and the ways that men approach textual poaching
certainly supports Jenkins’ assertion that “fans are empowered over mass culture” (491). I wonder what other
forms of textual poaching there can be. Do Bollywood rip-offs count?
Hey Damian
ReplyDeleteGreat post! Your question about what other kinds of "poaching" there are reminded me of parodic dubs / subtitles placed over music videos and films. This is particularly interesting when the original product is in a language the intended audience cannot understand. Unlike the "Bad Lip Reading" series of videos, that take songs or film clips already well known to the audience, comedic subtitling / dubbing of foreign language videos removes the possibility for the general audience to view the original video in its intended context. When fans are empowered over mass culture in this way, what might be at risk? What kind of epistemic violence might one community do to another by poaching in this way?