Responses to random things I ran across on the intarwebs today.

[splash_the_cat]

1. Art does not create something from nothing. Art is created by building on the cultural context(s) the artist is steeped in. It is built on other art. The artist may work as an individual, but they do not create in a vacuum. Their medium is not just text or paint or clay, it's their experience as a member of multiple communities, and the

Comments

[_earthshine_]

Re 1: Well, I'd expand this statement to include Nature along with culture. A person "born on a desert island" could be capable of art, though arguably devoid of cultural input upon which to base it. Alternately, one could say that in all cases, the natural world (both outside us and within us) could be included within the definition of "culture" within this context. In either refinement, your point still stands; i was just adding it for "adding it"'s sake. :)

I'm guessing the #1 and #2 (and maybe #3, also?) were inspired by someone dissing on genre-/fan- fiction?

I'll admit that in the past, i used to wonder about its relative value myself... in part because i looked at the people i knew who wrote it, and knew a little about their imaginative capacity, and really wanted to see what a world entirely of their own construction would be like.

That interest in my friends' original-world is still in force, but i've long since answered my own question about the value of genre/fan fiction. These types of fiction provide a framework to start from -- established concepts, worlds, characters, etc. -- but putting those pieces together to form something new is no less creative than building the pieces yourself. The only difference lies in which part of the art one wishes to focus upon; a matter of working with wet clay or working with clay bricks, so to speak. Many musicians use (all-too-)well-worn timbres, scales, melodic idioms and chord structures to no end; others invent entirely new ones of their own. Neither art is more creative or viable than the other, just appealing to different tastes and intellectual explorations.

So, yeah... just thought i'd share. I, for one, say cry havoc and let slip the lawn gnomes of WAR! (um, or just ignore the mean people.)

[splash_the_cat]

#2 was in reference to someome bashing on genre literature (SF/F specifically).

#1 was actually in reference to comment on a feminist weblog about whether dressing up/following fashion could count as a means of artistic expression. The commenter disagreed with this idea, and did so by making both a poor feminist argument and a poor asthetics argument.

That interest in my friends' original-world is still in force, but i've long since answered my own question about the value of genre/fan fiction. These types of fiction provide a framework to start from

And not only that, but they act as analytical commentaries on the source text. Occasionally crude and simple commentaries, but nonetheless they are a means of engaging finctionally and critically with a source text. As I said elsewhere recently-

As for the fanfic thing, that's not really uncommon these days. When you consider how much viral marketing and hype and discussion goes out for movies or tv shows today, the viewer is already immersed in the canon before the pilot even airs. That preview marketing becomes part of the text, and fans engage with it much like they do with the actual episodes, to the point that many shows now premier to a pre-existing fandom (Lost is another good example of that). I think the smarter Powers That Be are starting to realize that treating your audience as an actor in the transaction of consuming media rather than just a passive receptacle (i.e. the Snakes on a Plane phenomenon) is a benefit.

Fans who engage with media and text in mediums like fanfic or vidding do so for all the reasons you mentioned above, as well as for the possibilites that the canon will offer them. And modern marketing trends for media give them that window into the canon for those possibilites. If you're interested, you might want to read this blog entry by Henry Jenkins, who studies media fandom. In it he talks a lot about fanfic as a method of critical engagement with and critical commentary on texts, which ties into fans engaging with preview marketing for shows. In their mind the are engaging with the show.