Observation; Comment?
Jan. 10th, 2011 03:36 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Skimming some stuff related to writing my paper for PCA. Came across the following from a 1992 essay by Constance Penley, discussing TOS slash:
I already knew then... that this was an almost all-female fandom, and had also been able to get an idea of the extent of the production and the number of fans involved: there are probably not more than 500 active, core fans, although they publish a tremendous amount, which is disseminated beyond the core group through mail order and convention sales of th zines...
Compare this figure with something like, say
jim_and_bones which publicly has over a thousand members, of which (according to the published mod polls) some hundred or so actively participate.
Just think that's interesting, is all.
I already knew then... that this was an almost all-female fandom, and had also been able to get an idea of the extent of the production and the number of fans involved: there are probably not more than 500 active, core fans, although they publish a tremendous amount, which is disseminated beyond the core group through mail order and convention sales of th zines...
Compare this figure with something like, say
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
Just think that's interesting, is all.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-10 09:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-10 09:45 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-10 09:52 pm (UTC)But assuming that ONLY people who attend cons or who publish 'zines are active in fanac is a major problem--i.e. lots of fans doing active things did not attend the cons she attended.
There is NO reliable demographic work (then or now) on fandom numbers, activities, etc.
Are there more people writing slash now than then--probably, due to the internet.
But citing hard figures on this kind of guestimate is likely to get more snickers than not -- Penley also has this notorious footnote (to me! I wrote about it in paper, but am snowed in at home so would have to dig up later) about how ONLY Australian and UK fans wrote that nasty BDSM stuff, and they weren't true TREK fans, just nasty sadomasochists.
She interpreted what she saw in the light of her own lens (as we all do) (i.e. I don't believe hurt/comfort is the HEART of slash/fandom!)
But numbers? She is guessing.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-10 10:05 pm (UTC)(Also, lol@the "true Trek fans" bit there. So much for IDIC, huh.)
Another interesting question, from a conversation I had with
Mostly I'm just thinking "outloud" cos it is gray and quiet.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-10 10:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-10 10:20 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-10 10:22 pm (UTC)The geeking is gonna be So. Epic. *is all a-squee!*
(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-11 02:57 pm (UTC)Of course, women write much more fandom then men do, but I wonder if among the male fan writers there's any statistical significance of men writing fan lesbian stores. Just off the top of my head, I would assume if any existed, they would just read like Penthouse Forum letters with a loose application of the series setting.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-11 04:48 pm (UTC)1) The vast majority of fan writers are female, seemingly always. The few male fan writers seem to tend towards nonfiction pieces or action-adventure stories as well; this is observed from Trek fandom and from Darkover fandom. Also interestingly is that men seem more likely to format their stories as scripts/plays than as prose narratives.
2) F/F stories ie femmeslash tend to on average be a very small percentage of most fan stories, with the exception of very specific fandoms, e.g. Xena fandom where they obviously make up a large bulk of the stories. They also tend to be less pornographic than M/M stories for whatever reason--R than NC-17. Not sure why this is at all.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-14 12:53 pm (UTC)Radio National (Australia) segment "The Book Show" - "Women Can't Write About Sex" broadcast 28 July 2009
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bookshow/stories/2010/2787456.htm
(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-15 07:53 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-14 12:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-15 07:20 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-15 07:53 pm (UTC)