Ray Kyooyung Ra – Core Response #3 (Week 6)

Researchers are quick to present the definitions of the ideal fandom and its behaviors-but then, how do we engage with the ‘anti-fans’ that fall out of that definition?

Within the academic endeavors, fandoms are often represented as an entity with flat and homogeneous intentions. This seems to be a strategy frequently employed out of necessity, and often critically viewed by media audiences, as explored in Seiter’s discussion of researcher and audience relationships. Per the comment I made in response to Maddie’s post: if we are to observe a fandom, unless you are a member of that fandom, the only way to access their cultural, social capital is through tangible, visible representations of their interests. Unless one is relying on ratings and demographic statistics, interviews of the members of the fandom as well as analysis of the fandom’s creative, cultural activities have been the go-to subjects for research.

Both Andrejevic and Jenkins imagine the ideal audience. They run on two ends of the spectrum where one conceive of the fandom as those willing laborers in participatory submission and one envisions them as empowered readers that produce grassroots resistance. Relying on the visible, productive fraction of the fandom, these approaches overlook a vast majority of fans that do not necessarily engage in such activities—these ‘anti-fans’ that do not engage in the writers’ ideal manner of creative productivity are effectively erased in such limiting definitions of fandom, the ‘anti-fans’ that do not behave according to the researcher’s defined intentions and ideal fan behavior. What about the fans that stay dormant and define themselves as fans that derive the simple pleasures of viewership? What about creatives such as amateur cover artists that might jump on trending hashtags for a certain track or dance sequence to gain popularity for themselves? What about the majority of K-pop fans that, as mentioned in response to Maddie’s post, actively wish to remain anonymous and not take credit for their creative endeavors. Are they and should they be considered the outliers?

Structures of power between the dominant mass culture texts and its audience is a premise that needs to be recognized in observing fandom engagement, yes, but Andrejevic and Jenkins, in focusing on the readily visible aspects of such engagement, fail to see a wider spectrum of fan activities and forms. I would be very much interested to read on fandom studies that delve into power structures within the fandom, how opinion leaders form within the creative fan communities, how fans diverge amongst themselves depending on their intentions and purposes of engagement with the popular text, etc.