don't cross the streams
I just sent the email below to some RL friends, because we were talking about stuff. I'm in the midst of freaking out about it now, like, did I really just tell these people who I know FROM CHURCH about all this stuff?
/o\
I am uncomfortable about this much overlap between these two areas of my life. I think I'm moving in the right direction--sharing more of my thoughts with people I know--but still. Scares the shit out of me. So I thought I'd post the letter for you all to see--to see how I'm introducing you, right?
_____________
Dear folks:
I had some thoughts I wanted to share with you:
- with M-- because he asked about what a Quaker/fandom hybrid would be like. (P.S. I have no webcam for an interview.)
- with W-- because he twittered on zine culture and 1920s sf fandom.
- with R-- because I didn’t want her to feel left out (though I have no indication she is interested in this discussion).
- with A-- because she is currently my favorite Quaker (aside from Jesus*).
These are some links to my livejournal, [here!], which focuses largely on online fandom. It is what I do online instead of Quaker blogging. But, more I think about it, and thanks to insightful questions from M-- and W--, there are some uncanny overlaps. In terms of remix culture and postmodernism, it’s practice rather than theory, which means that there’s a ratio of 1:8 between widely applicable truths and blathering anecdotes about my life and television. Please be warned.
angels and band boys - On the power of remixing
things I think at Christmas - Why do spirituality and bandom overlap?
pretty much anything under the bandom tag [bandom=band fandom, my predominant fannish involvement right now]
Feel free to look around as much as you want. Please don’t link without permission, not that I think you would, but please don’t anyway. Please don’t use my real name anywhere there.
And the rest of this email is some discussion I wanted to share with you. So, here we go:
Quick and dirty intro to online media fandom
1. interactive informal online community currently hosted on journaling platforms like LiveJournal, Insane Journal, JournalFen, etc.
2. focusing on many forms of media and popular culture: TV shows, books, movies, bands and musicians, sports figures
3. forum for discussion and obsession, also for sharing of fan-created/transformative content like fanfiction, videos, art, and more
4. predominantly pseudonymous - because of copyright and legal issues, among other things
5. 85% sexually explicit content. Like, really explicit. I am not kidding. Remember your browser’s back button at all times if you do any exploring there.
Quakers + fandom?
On one hand, that question doesn’t need to be asked because we already know the answer. At the end of the day, much of Christianity history has been about being a Jesus fan-immersing yourself in all the source material you can find, making up crazy stories about him and what he did or didn’t do**, imagining what it’d be like if you ever actually got to meet him or if he lived in your hometown, sharing stories and geeking out over all this with people who share your obsession, etc. etc. etc. Or, putting it another way, Christians already interact with Jesus fannishly, with obsession and devotion far greater than, and largely inexplicable to, non-fans. And Quakers just the same, with an added side of George Fox / Margaret Fell / Rufus Jones. The fandom of Christianity comes in different flavors, sort of like all the storylines and sets of characters in DC Comics.
On the other hand, my brand of fandom (present day online media fandom) does have some distinctives about it. I don’t know if these distinctives have any light to shed on Friends dialogue or not. But here they are:
Fandom is transgressive. It talks about what is unmentionable in mainstream culture. (Mostly sex, but still.)
I was saying this to A--, asking what’s transgressive about this new spate of Friends dialogue. She said, “Talking about God.” Meaning that most people don’t, not really, even if they’re talking about religion or politics which often get conflated with God. She may be right-that may be the truest thing Quakers have to offer each other and others.
I think at times talking across liberal/evangelical boundaries in Quaker-dom has been transgressive, although frankly I think that activity is becoming a bit domesticated these days.
Fandom is sex obsessed.
If that’s all that fandom’s transgression is, then I don’t know what the Quaker corollary would be. Except maybe this: I think Christians need to talk about sex way more than we do. I don’t think we’ll ever be truly changed people if we don’t address sexuality as part of ourselves and our relationships.
Fandom is largely women.
I see fandom as a place that welcomes marginalized voices. Not that white middle class educated first world women are super marginalized, all told, but (a) that’s me and some others, but certainly not everyone in fandom (even if our demographics do skew in that direction, which I suspect they might) and (b) it’s not like women’s voices and perspectives dominate cultural dialogue currently, even if we aren’t being, like, materially persecuted. And it’s not just that fandom is theoretically welcoming, or intending welcome to a hypothetical audience-it’s the place where women have, in fact, gathered and built a community. It’s a place that is self-consciously an alternative to mainstream media and traditional media economics. It is articulate and self-reflective about its norms and values, defining itself in distinction to many mainstream venues (traditional sexuality, copyright law, market economics).
I leave it for you all to decide what the demographics of welcome or marginalization are in current Friends dialogue. Maybe I will have opinions on this later.
That's all. Thanks for reading. If any of this sparks thoughts in you, I'd be happy to hear them, now or later.
[Prophetic]
____
Argh. To f-lock or not to f-lock?
*decides impulsively*
____
*I am kidding. I don't think Jesus is a Quaker any more than I think he is a liberation theologian.
**This joke has been cracking me up all evening: “I Saw Three Ships Come Sailing In” = Christmas Day in the Morning, Pirate AU
/o\
I am uncomfortable about this much overlap between these two areas of my life. I think I'm moving in the right direction--sharing more of my thoughts with people I know--but still. Scares the shit out of me. So I thought I'd post the letter for you all to see--to see how I'm introducing you, right?
_____________
Dear folks:
I had some thoughts I wanted to share with you:
- with M-- because he asked about what a Quaker/fandom hybrid would be like. (P.S. I have no webcam for an interview.)
- with W-- because he twittered on zine culture and 1920s sf fandom.
- with R-- because I didn’t want her to feel left out (though I have no indication she is interested in this discussion).
- with A-- because she is currently my favorite Quaker (aside from Jesus*).
These are some links to my livejournal, [here!], which focuses largely on online fandom. It is what I do online instead of Quaker blogging. But, more I think about it, and thanks to insightful questions from M-- and W--, there are some uncanny overlaps. In terms of remix culture and postmodernism, it’s practice rather than theory, which means that there’s a ratio of 1:8 between widely applicable truths and blathering anecdotes about my life and television. Please be warned.
angels and band boys - On the power of remixing
things I think at Christmas - Why do spirituality and bandom overlap?
pretty much anything under the bandom tag [bandom=band fandom, my predominant fannish involvement right now]
Feel free to look around as much as you want. Please don’t link without permission, not that I think you would, but please don’t anyway. Please don’t use my real name anywhere there.
And the rest of this email is some discussion I wanted to share with you. So, here we go:
Quick and dirty intro to online media fandom
1. interactive informal online community currently hosted on journaling platforms like LiveJournal, Insane Journal, JournalFen, etc.
2. focusing on many forms of media and popular culture: TV shows, books, movies, bands and musicians, sports figures
3. forum for discussion and obsession, also for sharing of fan-created/transformative content like fanfiction, videos, art, and more
4. predominantly pseudonymous - because of copyright and legal issues, among other things
5. 85% sexually explicit content. Like, really explicit. I am not kidding. Remember your browser’s back button at all times if you do any exploring there.
Quakers + fandom?
On one hand, that question doesn’t need to be asked because we already know the answer. At the end of the day, much of Christianity history has been about being a Jesus fan-immersing yourself in all the source material you can find, making up crazy stories about him and what he did or didn’t do**, imagining what it’d be like if you ever actually got to meet him or if he lived in your hometown, sharing stories and geeking out over all this with people who share your obsession, etc. etc. etc. Or, putting it another way, Christians already interact with Jesus fannishly, with obsession and devotion far greater than, and largely inexplicable to, non-fans. And Quakers just the same, with an added side of George Fox / Margaret Fell / Rufus Jones. The fandom of Christianity comes in different flavors, sort of like all the storylines and sets of characters in DC Comics.
On the other hand, my brand of fandom (present day online media fandom) does have some distinctives about it. I don’t know if these distinctives have any light to shed on Friends dialogue or not. But here they are:
Fandom is transgressive. It talks about what is unmentionable in mainstream culture. (Mostly sex, but still.)
I was saying this to A--, asking what’s transgressive about this new spate of Friends dialogue. She said, “Talking about God.” Meaning that most people don’t, not really, even if they’re talking about religion or politics which often get conflated with God. She may be right-that may be the truest thing Quakers have to offer each other and others.
I think at times talking across liberal/evangelical boundaries in Quaker-dom has been transgressive, although frankly I think that activity is becoming a bit domesticated these days.
Fandom is sex obsessed.
If that’s all that fandom’s transgression is, then I don’t know what the Quaker corollary would be. Except maybe this: I think Christians need to talk about sex way more than we do. I don’t think we’ll ever be truly changed people if we don’t address sexuality as part of ourselves and our relationships.
Fandom is largely women.
I see fandom as a place that welcomes marginalized voices. Not that white middle class educated first world women are super marginalized, all told, but (a) that’s me and some others, but certainly not everyone in fandom (even if our demographics do skew in that direction, which I suspect they might) and (b) it’s not like women’s voices and perspectives dominate cultural dialogue currently, even if we aren’t being, like, materially persecuted. And it’s not just that fandom is theoretically welcoming, or intending welcome to a hypothetical audience-it’s the place where women have, in fact, gathered and built a community. It’s a place that is self-consciously an alternative to mainstream media and traditional media economics. It is articulate and self-reflective about its norms and values, defining itself in distinction to many mainstream venues (traditional sexuality, copyright law, market economics).
I leave it for you all to decide what the demographics of welcome or marginalization are in current Friends dialogue. Maybe I will have opinions on this later.
That's all. Thanks for reading. If any of this sparks thoughts in you, I'd be happy to hear them, now or later.
[Prophetic]
____
Argh. To f-lock or not to f-lock?
*decides impulsively*
____
*I am kidding. I don't think Jesus is a Quaker any more than I think he is a liberation theologian.
**This joke has been cracking me up all evening: “I Saw Three Ships Come Sailing In” = Christmas Day in the Morning, Pirate AU