In Defense of Aca-Fans

[caitri]

Candy and I have a short article on fandom and scholarship over at FlowTV.org.

Snip:

The question is still occasionally raised whether the fan academic can function objectively as a scholar while concurrently in an atmosphere of deep engagement with other fans. Is it possible or even necessary to maintain critical distance from a text while simultaneously discussing it with deep affection and even love? If one is tempted to shrug and answer, “Go ask a Trekkie,” we respond with “Go ask a Beowulf scholar.” Both texts involve a language removed from our own, a lengthy history of the text with multiple iterations and exhaustive commentary, and a tightly-knit group of followers who expect a high level of engagement and who will not tolerate sloppy errors or ignorance of the source material.

Comments

[gadgetorious.livejournal.com]

I admit, I've never really gotten the whole "you can't be a good academic in an area you're fannish about." If you can't love what you do, WHAT'S THE FUCKING POINT. Sure, I could see that people could be unprofessional about it, but that's true whether you're a fan or not.

[caitri.livejournal.com]

Seriously!! But there's this whole objectivity issue, and its really a part of some of the inherent insecurities of academia. There's also a not-insignificant element of gender divide as well, because not only are fans/fanworks overwhelmingly female, fan studies is an arena of academia that is vastly female, while across the board in disciplines men typically outnumber women. It's changed a lot over time, but initially fan studies was SO not welcome in a lot of areas. Hell, in SFS it's even more rampant because there's a vast number of people who want to stick to DWG history because 1) that's what they were trained in and 2) for so long they were on the margins of academia that not they have to marginalize others.

[morfin.livejournal.com]

Love the parallel to Beowulf scholarship :) People think a Trek fan who decorates their house with Trek items are strange, yet the man who edited the classic edition of Beowulf, Klaeber, was a monk who did nothing but study Beowulf in his cell, only venturing out to lecture on it.

Tolkien, who's essay on Beowulf is considered a classic in criticism, wrote LOTR with the idea that it was a place-setting for all the English legends he loved, so that in a way, LOTR is fanfic.

I think any serious, prolonged study of a work of literature or history is showing the love and devotion felt for the work that has distinct parallels to modern fandom.* They just use more footnotes ;)
-----------
*Note: The exception is those who study the works of John Donne. People study his works mainly as a form of self-flagellation to perform some type of penance for ills they believe they have done in this or another life. John Donne sucks big fat hairy rocks.

[gadgetorious.livejournal.com]

"so that in a way, LOTR is fanfic."

This is the greatest thing I have heard all day. It's only 9 AM, but my point stands.

[caitri.livejournal.com]

John Donne sucks big fat hairy rocks.
You haven't read any of my fanfic, have you? <_< I actually think that in order to survive in academia you absolutely HAVE to be a fan of your area of study. If you're not, it could never be worth it in terms of the amount of time given over to it, the crap you have to put up with, etc. etc.

[amine-eyes.livejournal.com]

Adding to this - if you're not a fan of something, you don't do your best work for it :D You can tell people who really love their job/hobby/lifestyle, cos they'll work their arses off, whine and moan about how much it takes over their lives, and at the end of the day, not only produce an awesome piece of work, but they'll be really proud of it too :D