"That’s a good story. But it’s not the end of the story. "

[nevanna]

This essay doesn't capture my exact experience as a Harry Potter fan (I don't think I ever actually wanted to go to Hogwarts even when I sincerely loved the books, or cared much what House I’d be in) but it talks about fandom in general in ways that resonate with me deeply.

When I talk about fandom, I’m not talking about the phenomenon of a story being popular. What makes fandom different from simply liking a book is not the degree of passion. It’s not the number of fans or the intensity of their interest. It’s the urge to share it with other people. It’s about community. It’s the drive to create a consensus reality which is no less true for the fact that it is not, strictly speaking, literally, actually, true. It is the same instinct that makes children play make-believe with strange kids they met five minutes ago – it’s a rehearsal of the sort of agreement on reality-making that is so vital for the one thing humans have always done best, which is to live in collaboration. Adults do this too, and the more alienated they become from one another, the more the play and practical sharing of fandom becomes a connective glue. And, crucially, it’s done almost entirely for free.

[...]

Fandom is what happens when people who were only supposed to visit a particular territory of the imagination set up camp there, form communities and start building janky, elaborate playgrounds and wild, strange gardens in the unoccupied spaces the creators never bothered to fill.

Those passages describe what fandom is supposed to be, much more than what it often is, but I still have a lot of respect and regard for what it’s supposed to be, or else I wouldn’t be doing it.

There’s a larger discussion of “problematic faves” to be had here, but I don’t want to go too far onto a tangent, and I think it’s often helpful to examine those faves (or former faves) on a case-by-case basis. So, in case anybody is wondering: I will always find J.K. Rowling's attacks on the trans community to be inexcusable. I don’t begrudge anyone their desire to distance themselves from anything she had a hand in creating. I haven’t written any fic - or spent money on anything - based on her work in years, and it’s unlikely that I ever will again. There have always been a lot of flaws in her storytelling, and even fans (myself included) were talking about them well before she went on her transphobic crusade. I do not object to the cultural re-evaluation of Harry Potter either before or since she revealed herself to be a vicious bigot; I think that, in many ways, it's been useful and necessary.

I don't think that it is useful or necessary, or even possible, to try and rewrite history by pretending the series (and all associated media) never had any cultural significance, as if retconning those things away will unravel its creator's present-day social power. I understand why that idea of cause and effect might be appealing, but I'm not convinced that it would ever work in reality. Besides, I’m a children’s librarian, and patrons still ask if we have the Harry Potter books; it would be professionally irresponsible of me to tell them not to read what they want to read (though I can and do keep a list of read-alikes on hand). Also, I still find critical discussion of both the series and the fandom to be pretty interesting. Still, although I'll probably still talk about both from time to time – and have often been tempted to ruminate on how I, specifically, interacted with both – I'll leave any in-depth discussion behind a cut, because I also understand that some people want as little exposure to this property as possible.

But if anyone tries to tell me “don’t talk about this thing you used to love or you’re going to perpetuate its Evil Energy,” then that’s just, well, magical thinking.

Comments

[lb_lee]

But if anyone tries to tell me “don’t talk about this thing you used to love or you’re going to perpetuate its Evil Energy,” then that’s just, well, magical thinking.

Ohoho I see what you did there.

In Madgic #4, which is being researched for, Mori argues that there are many relationships to various parts of a story (and therefore fandom) that don't or shouldn't involve the creator at all. We were mostly thinking of Piers Anthony, whose writing is overwhelmingly mediocre AND sleazy, and which nevertheless retains its hold over us, though in a weird way. But disavowing that work only got us so far; eventually, we had to dig into it again to understand ourself better.

This essay was very good and we're glad you linked it to us, because we didn't know it!

[nevanna]

Mori argues that there are many relationships to various parts of a story (and therefore fandom) that don't or shouldn't involve the creator at all.

Even though the phrase "separate the art from the artist" is often used to shut down criticism, I think that it would be a mistake to deny that, at the very least, detestable people can still create meaningful art (even if some aspects of that art are also detestable). Your relationship with the works of Piers Anthony is such a relevant example of how complex people's relationships with stories can be.

I'm glad that the essay resonated with you; it definitely did with me as well!

[someonefromthewater]

This was a great read-- thank you for linking.

The analogy to the Beatles seems particularly spot-on-- my father was probably too much of a hipster to have ever been a fan himself, but something pervasive enough to define a whole generation the way the Beatles or Harry Potter did is hard to ignore, and eventually kids growing up and trying to understand their parents are going to come back to it in the same ways.

[nevanna]

"Pervasive enough to define a whole generation" is a really good way of putting it.

[nightforest]

This is very well-said; I fully agree. I think everyone has the responsibility - and, perhaps more importantly, the freedom - to decide what level of engagement they're comfortable with when it comes to media created by people who have turned out to be awful in some way or other. I know many trans people no longer want to engage with HP at all, which I completely understand; I've seen at least one or two trans people on Tumblr who don't want to put money in her Rowling's pocket but feel free to keep reading and writing HP fanfic with the attitude of "Rowling being a shitty person doesn't mean she gets to take away this world that means a lot to me," which I think is also a totally valid and reasonable response. The same applies to any other fandom.

[nevanna]

I reblogged Chuck Tingle's "I don't know, CAN you?" post for a reason. (In general, I would love to find a way of talking about Problematic Media that does not involve chasing, granting, or withholding permission to enjoy.)