fandom

Fandom At A Different Level

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com and Steve’s Tumblr.  Find out more at my newsletter.)

After my post on the dangers of “Gray Goo” Media, serdar had his own detailed response. His response is worth reading – he also has some alternate ideas to my wishes worth considering – and he then notes it’s important to explore why and how we like things over specifics. He then proposes a most interesting exercise.

Sometimes I imagine we can cultivate this by way of exercises. Get together a slew of people who have divergent and vibrant interests, sit in a circle, start with one person, and have that person talk about some specific aspect of a specific thing that gets their attention. (“The reason I like Emma: A Victorian Romance is the attention to detail.”) Then the next person picks up from that thread. (“Something I like that has attention to detail… but here’s what else I like about it, the fact that it is a deeply humane story.”) And on to the next person. (“The thing I like that has a humane element…”)

This idea intrigues me enough that I’m thinking of using it under various circumstances, and suggesting it to other groups like a local book club, cons, etc. I also find it illustrates an important point about sharing media.

A lot of what we like about media can get very specific. I relate to this character, I like this specific story element. The become, intentional or not, exclusionary. If someone does not take to a given element or character, people have trouble connecting to you – indeed, a passionately stated enthusiasm can seem to be exclusionary. We don’t want to offend someone saying “not for me.”

Instead this method is about the commonality of how we relate, not what we relate to specifically. We discover our shared interests not in media specifically, but what we are interested in and how we share that. A group of people can each be passionate about good worldbuilding, and discuss how they love it, while completely not being interested in everyone else’s choices.

This may not save the world, but it gives us a lot to think about. Maybe it’s a method that can lead we passionate people to help others bridge gaps and find common grounds, which we could certainly use more of.

Steven Savage

What’s Next For Cons

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com and Steve’s Tumblr.  Find out more at my newsletter.)

When I spoke at Kraken Con last week, it was a bittersweet experience because the convention is shutting down for the time being.  Cons come and go, but this smaller con had a special place in my heart for its positive attitude, precise organization, and fan focus.

The Bay Area has seen many cons change lately, from cancellation to hiatus to restructuring.  It’s not surprising – we’ve got several dominant big cons, and some areas are damned hard and expensive to host in (like San Francisco).  Smaller cons face unique challenges.

I began thinking about how smaller cons have some problems in the Bay Area, and also considered their social role – smaller, more relaxed, more intimate experiences.  This led me to another question – what if we re-think cons, especially smaller ones.  What are “con-like” activities we could have that fulfill the social needs of smaller cons?

So first, let’s ask what these smaller cons provide:

  • The provide a more relaxed setting.
  • They provide a more social setting.
  • They may be specialized in ways larger cons couldn’t be.
  • They can fit into various niches as they’re smaller.
  • For some vendors and artists they may be cheaper to be at.
  • They can experiment.

With that out of the way, allow me to brainstorm some ideas of “con-like” activities that give us the benefits of smaller cons.  These also have an eye towards being easy to do.

Back To Relaxacons – This is something I dearly miss, small one-day cons at hotels where people just hung out.  Some people get hotel rooms, a big convention room is rented for videos, and you hang out.

One-Days – Some cons I’ve seen just do one day now.  Maybe having more micro-cons may provide the needs for the above.  In fact, imagine a con held once a month or so?

Dealer/Artist Get Togethers – Imagine a con (probably one day) that is ONLY local dealers and artists.  Give people a chance to get exposure in an easier way.  I’ve seen various flea markets and events here that operate out of cars in a parking lot (legaly, of course)

Wandering Cons – This is a weird idea that I’ve thought of on and off, but what if you had a small con (say one day) that wandered about every few months, each run by a different team.  There’s still logistic challenges.

Hang At A Hotel – This is something I’ve done before.  Just have people get together at a hotel and hang out.

House Party – Imagine a wandering con that’s basically a small house party.  Sure space would be limited, but people may also come in and out.  A few dealers could attend as well (not sure what the legal issues are here).  Hell, done right in a big area, say the Bay Area, it could be weekly.

Online – There have been attempts at online cons, and this could work well with proper coordination (and no hotel fees!).  Mix webcasts and video feeds and other services, and you can do cosplay and panels at the very least!  Also imagine if you did it right it might be a con that’s going on constantly.

There’s my ideas.  I’d like to hear other ones!

– Steve

Psycho Mobs 100: Fandom Is Neutral

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com and Steve’s Tumblr.  Find out more at my newsletter.)

Serdar and I have been having an on-again, off-again discussion on fandom and it’s value.  I offered that it could be limited, and he responded with a deeper analysis of fandom that included speculation on pathological fandoms and our inabilities to identify them.

Eventually I found out pretty much any fandom you could name was rife with this sort of insularity. Many folks cared more about the label, about what belonged inside it or not inside it, than they did about the possibilities that could be awakened by whatever was tagged with the label. I know now, full well, that a lot of circles of fandom are not like this. But I find the best way to defend against that is to start with the person rather than the interests.

No fandoms are perfect.  I can pretty much find a wank battle anywhere in fandom with a bit of surfing, and between reddit and Tumblr it’s probably easy for anyone to do so.  But I think we still consider fandom a good thing overall.

After Serdar’s comments, I began thinking of my own fandoms and interests.  I realized that I treat a fandom as a good thing by default, as long as it’s not a fandom of something obviously bad.  I did this due to my own positive experiences in fandom, often ignoring my own experiences that were negative.  Sure my experiences were on the whole positive – but not entirely.

Thus, I think we should consider fandom a phenomena.  It is something that happens, and it is not necessarily good or bad.  Often it has been a good thing – I think it’s been more a good thing or bad – but that’s because we made it into something good, often without thinking of it.  It can easily be misused and messed up as we’ve also seen.

This may seem a bit sad to say as many of us have had positive experiences, and because it reinforces the cynciism we often see about enthusiasm.  But it’s more a reminder to be responsible for what we do and take this pheomena and make it into something good.

Fandom can be a good thing.  It often is because we’ve made it such.

It’s up to us to figure out how to make it good, keep it good, and make it better.  It’s up to us to take this human phenomena and make it work for us.  There’s no magic to fandom – just what we make.

– Steve