#what's wrong with enjoying a messy villain if they're entertaining? | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

onewomancitadel · 2 years

Text

Mainstream belief in fandom and the correctness of it or lack thereof

I remember I received an anon before that was to the effect of, if the audience at large wants Cinder dead, then the most emotionally carthartic story is her dying. I am simplifying it, but that was the basic assertion (with the implication that my assertions about the direction of her character were predicated upon the notion that it needed to be a mainstream opinion to happen. Which I had literally never said, only entertained the idea it might happen and that they were trying to seed some elements of sympathy to her).

It touched on a few interesting points, one of which being audience desires feeding into narrative decisions, and fan entitlement to storytelling - I posted a bit about that when Cherry (@branwyns) sent an ask about it. Another interesting implied point is that mainstream fandom interpretation tends to be more right, on the basis of shared and dominant opinion.

Obviously, I think the point of mainstream resonance is interesting, and is something I enjoy thinking about - which is a particularly messy topic in differentiating fan(atic)s from the General Audience at large. But I think mainstream fandom opinion is a place where you can really see the truth of the theory that what you bring to a story - your own personal biases and expectations - transforms the interpretation of a story, as much as a story might personally change you. (This is, separately, what I find very weird about people who think if you read the wrong sort of problematic thing, you'll start doing that shit in real life. It's more complicated than that, but from the get-go I find it hard to take seriously).

Because if you listened to what fandom mainstream opinion says (or said), you might erroneously be led to the belief that Walter White is actually a hero, not a villain protagonist (on Reddit or in YouTube comments, lol), that [redacted] from [popular fantasy series] is actually a tragic hero, not a tragic villain (I don't want to touch that fandom ever, at all, so I'm not even mentioning the name of the character, and no, I don't want you guessing), that Darth Vader died because he was too evil and Luke is some sort of archetypical good guy who kills people and isn't a space monk, that - well, what else, I'm sure there are other examples, but I'm trying to draw from non-R/WBY examples whilst also toeing around the fact that going against the grain in most fandoms is really fucking difficult, so I might be stepping on many toes at once.

Certainly, I think a lot of fandom beliefs memetically replicate past the point of personal blame, but by and large (obviously depending on platform...) it is actually really hard to go against mainstream fandom beliefs, practices, and methodologies. You get an effect where this affects fandom-to-fandom, a really great example being the reception of The Force Awakens on Tumblr: a lot of people thought it was going to be a Marvel film, with Marvel ethics (good guys kill bad guys and are super best friends who live in a tower together and one of them is weird and has an obsession with a branded food), and promptly forced those expectations onto the film, policed the fandom, and derrided anybody who didn't carry those same expectations. It was hellish. You can imagine the upset when The Last Jedi wasn't a Marvel film with Marvel ethics where they're all best friends who live in a tower and kill the bad guy for being evil. (This is even ignoring the fact that the Sequel Trilogy was bound to be controversial, no matter what happened).

When you get that fandom-to-fandom replication, it means that sometimes the conversation isn't just about, say, R/WBY. It's about other anime, and where you came from, and what fandoms you were in before it. It's what might set apart people who came to R/WBY from RVB from people who came to R/WBY through other anime fandoms. It's partly about platform (Tumblr used to be really bad - still bad, but less bad than Twitter and Reddit), it's partly about population (fandom is bigger than ever and mainstream now), it's got a lot motivating it and that's hard to tease out. But I think, say, specific to R/WBY, working against it is that it's anime but it's sort of not anime, and there are specific storytelling choices and structures that don't really mesh with mainstream anime expectations, despite the aesthetics (and to some degree tone) of said anime background (excepting the fact that anime actually has many narrative practices to it that I appreciate, and there are anime films with Jungian storytelling...)

What I am trying to say is that sometimes mainstream fandom attitude is not always about the text itself, but other works instead, other expected fandom behaviours, other expected styles of analysis, other beliefs, that are potentially countertextual and anti-thematic, which override the original work.

On the note of fan entitlement, if all storytellers simply wrote what fans wanted (and did not try to go a step beyond, or write something interesting they're committed to), it would be very stale and stupid indeed. On the note of Cinder, the trouble we've got currently discussing her story is that we are, effectively, only halfway through the story, and there's no telling how fandom may or may not shift next - though compared to other villainous characters afforded sympathy (e.g. Adam, Ironwood), she does have a long way to go in fandom.

But really I'm trying to discuss the notion of mainstream fandom beliefs, and whether the mainstream is more correct. What I am trying to ultimately convey is that mainstream fandom opinions can go beyond the text, or counter to the text, and trying to get to the heart of what's being said is most interesting to me. Irrespective of what any person said online about Reylo, Reylo was canon. It's my best example, because it was textually apparent to a portion of the fanbase, thematically consistent and sound, but Reylo was complete anathema within and outside the fandom at large (and really, a result of something greater than itself, and general fandom anxiety and politicking). With Reylo there is that great divide between fandom online and the General Audience as well, and so that further complicates the conversation about what is or isn't textually appropriate for audience expectations.

With mainstream fandom opinions, you do enter a chokehold of expected interpretation and behaviour. Look at some of the anons I've received on my blog: despite the fact that I keep to myself, and I don't expect anybody to agree with me, there is a received insult at the very small presence of my narrative beliefs. I can't even guarantee that I'm totally correct, but I would like to analyse R/WBY on its own terms and try to look at what it's actually saying, and try to differentiate bias in interpretation - and more broadly, what it is about my taste that makes me love a character like Cinder who is a figure of loathing to others.

So no, I don't think the mainstream nature of one's opinions guarantees one's beliefs are correct. It is very annoying when people of a mainstream belief take issue with those who challenge it - and, quite often as I see it, do so on the space of their own blogs on Tumblr. You have virtually the rest of the fandom to yourself. Lol.

Now, whether the authors have failed at their task (any work, any fandom) because of mainstream beliefs running countertextual is another discussion. I don't really think it's a case of pass/fail - because being wrong in itself can actually be fun/part of the experience, though if you take it too seriously, obviously it can be painful. As always, I think trying to trace where you went wrong is interesting (though can also be painful), but adjusting to new information is better than denying canon outright.

What I particularly appreciate about R/WBY is that they have an idea, and they are very much committed to it. Whether that looks like the exact way I would tell it doesn't come into it as such, but there is a lot I appreciate about it (and, really, part of that appreciation comes from the fact it's not something I could ever personally write myself). The ideas they explore sometimes run counter to the fandom's preconceived ideas about the text, and what reads to me as exciting and fun and thoughtful reads to some as boring and thoughtless. Tracing those differences is interesting, though I do generally prefer not to hold open discourse, because it does get tiresome, especially coming from such fundamentally different perspectives - like, say, someone whose analysis is rooted in narrative literalism.

So to me, a widespread belief does not make said belief correct, and the conversation is often about much more than you think it is. It is often difficult - no matter the fandom, wherever you are - going against those beliefs, because, I suppose, that's the nature of the human condition. I think also since fandom is emotionally high-stakes but is not all that serious, it's a safe place for people to be territorial. But I keep to myself, and post my criticisms here, and try not to ruin other peoples' fun. There's a balance between curating your experience, and still being able to outright criticise fandom trends and widely held beliefs without making it personal.

#stirring the pot #trying the .gif thing again

2 notes · View notes