Anyway, what I really wanted to note here was that last week, I went to a contemporary art museum with a friend, which had a very strange exhibit up. I didn't photograph the paintings, because I wasn't sure if that was allowed, but surely you can infer what it was from the placard:
Yup, fan art. I'm not really sure how to feel about the exhibit, honestly. I'm all for the "legitimizing" of fan works, I guess, but I don't really know if I should trust what's written on the placard. Are there people who find slash a subversive act? Is that your motivation, slash writers/artists on my flist? And if it is, where does it rank with regard to, you know, just being endlessly interested in the pairing? I guess my deal with this idea is, I obviously find fanworks skillful. There's technique, motivation, theme, analysis, and everything else behind these works. There is subversion and whatever the hell else that placard brings up at work, for sure--and I'm a lit person, I feed off this kind of stuff. It's what I'm in love with. I'm the kind of person who reads things specifically for their formal techniques, or their experimental stylistics.
But at the same time, the whole fandom idea is that we're making these things as artists of various mediums, lovers of that medium, but also as fans. So would it have been so hard to note on your placard, THESE IMAGES SERVE MY OWN SOCIAL AND HOMOEROTIC AGENDAS BUT ALSO THE AGENDA WHERE I JUST REALLY FUCKING LOVE STAR TREK?
To quote John Green:
“Nerds like us are allowed to be unironically enthusiastic about stuff… Nerds are allowed to love stuff, like jump-up-and-down-in-the-chair-can’t-cont
Also, this article is a recommended read: The Cosmology of Serialized Televsion. Fantastically written article, though ultimately I disagree with the value judgments that accompany this taxonomy. The more unstable the mythology, the more enticing I find it. Boo on Aristotle--embrace the clusterfuck that is contemporary storytelling!