beccatoria (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
beccatoria) wrote2010-08-24 06:14 pm
beccatoria) wrote2010-08-24 06:14 pm
Thoughts on "On the Prowl" [VVC vid] and wider fandom.
I'm not entirely sure it's a good idea to post this (all the best posts start this way...) but in the interests of not having my head explode with thinking, I figured why not. I was going to flock it but that seemed kind of cowardly. Not that I feel particularly brave right now. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but...I have an opinion, so I'm going to try and state it, hopefully without it seeming like I'm the type of person who likes burning kittens for fun.
I would also like to acknowledge that my opinion is based on the discussions I've seen around fandom regarding this vid, but I would be shocked if that were anything approaching exhaustive. If I've missed anything or am labouring under some misapprehension, I apologise and welcome further information.
So, to get on with it, On the Prowl is a VVC vid that got heavily recced around fandom, so I watched it. It deals with the sexualisation of violence against men, and was completed for the "self-portrait" challenge.
When I first saw it, it didn't really connect with me, basically because that's not a portrait of me, or of an area of fandom I find particularly interesting. I don't find men getting beaten up hot, and generally I identify with and am more invested in female characters. Which was fine, because I know that there is a large chunk of fandom that likes pretty boys and hurt/comfort and that's who this vid was for. But I didn't get it, and frankly, wasn't sure I was well-enough versed in the tropes and "language" of that section of fandom to be equipped to get all its nuances. Which again, is as it should be - I certainly don't expect every vid I love to mean something equally deep and compelling to someone unfamiliar with either the source or the fandom to which it's speaking. This is especially true with meta vids which are often part of, or in response to, larger conversations.
So, that's cool, it's a vid that's not really aimed at me. The reason I'm posting this though, is the general tone of wider discussion of the vid, and the presentation of its arguments and the nature of its importance in wider fandom. And here's where we get to the bit I'm slightly afraid of posting, especially since I'm not a VVC attendee and therefore am not overly familiar with the conventions of that culture either, but equally I want to say something.
In general I've felt the overall tone of fandom-wide discussion has presented this vid as:
1) a socially important issue that we need to examine and that shows a need for self-examination.
2) an Important Vid that You need to watch even though it will be Uncomfortable; essentially, a vid that comments on fandom; an equation of people for whom this vid does function as a portrait with fandom at large.
I have a few issues with this. All of which tie in with some issues I have with fandom and its attitudes to gender generally, so I own that, which is why it's the way this vid plays in wider context that I'm commenting on.
The Socially Important Issue Thing.
To address the first point, there's an awful lot of self-questioning about why brutalised men are sexy, whether this is acceptable, whether women are cast as the perpetrators of violence, whether the shows are allowing or encouraging that. Whether it's acceptable to be turned on by it. I've seen it compared to the flip side of "Women's Work" (a famous vid by one of the same vidders about (arguably sexualised) violence against minor female characters as a matter of course in SPN) in several places. Likewise, I have seen several comments about how this is a long overdue criticism and it's high time we took a Good, Long, Hard Look at Ourselves.
Now, there are a boatload of ways this can spin out regarding gender in the wide world and how chicks get the short end, and whether this is reclaimation, if two wrongs make a right, or if it even counts because LJ is largely female, or if LJ being largely female is the only reason it's a space where this reclaimation can occur and sure, I have opinions on all these things, and I'm not trying to say it's not a conversation to have, especially not for those who watched the vid, and did get it, and are now moved to wonder why they feel this way and whether they're comfortable with it. But I do think it misses a really big point:
Brutalisation of major male characters to further their own storylines and our sympathy for them =/= brutalisation of minor female characters to further the storylines and our sympathy for male characters.
That's a fundamental difference in the way most male and female characters get beat up on TV.
So while I'm not against anyone wondering what this pattern of violence to male heroes (or their attraction to it) means, I guess I am very much against equating it with the very real representational issues regarding women as victims of violence in our media. Or that a priority for fandom (which already spends an extraordinary amount of time and effort on male characters - in turn perhaps because of what we're offered, but again, this is another, complex debate), should now be to turn around and defend these male characters who are already privileged both narratively and in terms of fandom's attention.
The Fandom Portrait Thing.
I think maybe I can be a bit more succinct on this bit.
I am in fandom. This vid is not a portrait of me. I am not particularly unique in my interests within fandom. I did not need to see this vid to learn anything about myself. I did not need to see it to know that a certain section of fandom appreciates violence in its h/c boyslash.
Above I detail why I'm not sure the way a certain wider reading of this vid is a valid social criticism of fandom attitudes (i.e. because I do not think the arguments about what this says about the unfair treatment of men by the media/fandom hold water).
But here I'm trying to say...even if they did hold water, I don't think they'd be as broadly applicable as is being suggested in places.
The Other Important Things Thing.
There are a few other things I think it's important to say:
- I have seen various responses to this vid; I absolutely don't want to present the prevalent "vibe" I've been getting as the only discussion out there. And it's great that people are discussing it: hey, look, here I am doing the same thing!
- I really, really have no issue with this vid as a self-portrait, or with people fascinatedly trying to find their own line within it. I know I already said this, but it bears repeating. I really do understand why, to people who identify with it, it would be a fascinating vid.
- I do not want to assume the intentions of the vidders in making this vid. As far as I'm aware it was always presented by them as a self-portrait and I would not want to presume to ascribe any further motivations to them.
I would also like to acknowledge that my opinion is based on the discussions I've seen around fandom regarding this vid, but I would be shocked if that were anything approaching exhaustive. If I've missed anything or am labouring under some misapprehension, I apologise and welcome further information.
So, to get on with it, On the Prowl is a VVC vid that got heavily recced around fandom, so I watched it. It deals with the sexualisation of violence against men, and was completed for the "self-portrait" challenge.
When I first saw it, it didn't really connect with me, basically because that's not a portrait of me, or of an area of fandom I find particularly interesting. I don't find men getting beaten up hot, and generally I identify with and am more invested in female characters. Which was fine, because I know that there is a large chunk of fandom that likes pretty boys and hurt/comfort and that's who this vid was for. But I didn't get it, and frankly, wasn't sure I was well-enough versed in the tropes and "language" of that section of fandom to be equipped to get all its nuances. Which again, is as it should be - I certainly don't expect every vid I love to mean something equally deep and compelling to someone unfamiliar with either the source or the fandom to which it's speaking. This is especially true with meta vids which are often part of, or in response to, larger conversations.
So, that's cool, it's a vid that's not really aimed at me. The reason I'm posting this though, is the general tone of wider discussion of the vid, and the presentation of its arguments and the nature of its importance in wider fandom. And here's where we get to the bit I'm slightly afraid of posting, especially since I'm not a VVC attendee and therefore am not overly familiar with the conventions of that culture either, but equally I want to say something.
In general I've felt the overall tone of fandom-wide discussion has presented this vid as:
1) a socially important issue that we need to examine and that shows a need for self-examination.
2) an Important Vid that You need to watch even though it will be Uncomfortable; essentially, a vid that comments on fandom; an equation of people for whom this vid does function as a portrait with fandom at large.
I have a few issues with this. All of which tie in with some issues I have with fandom and its attitudes to gender generally, so I own that, which is why it's the way this vid plays in wider context that I'm commenting on.
The Socially Important Issue Thing.
To address the first point, there's an awful lot of self-questioning about why brutalised men are sexy, whether this is acceptable, whether women are cast as the perpetrators of violence, whether the shows are allowing or encouraging that. Whether it's acceptable to be turned on by it. I've seen it compared to the flip side of "Women's Work" (a famous vid by one of the same vidders about (arguably sexualised) violence against minor female characters as a matter of course in SPN) in several places. Likewise, I have seen several comments about how this is a long overdue criticism and it's high time we took a Good, Long, Hard Look at Ourselves.
Now, there are a boatload of ways this can spin out regarding gender in the wide world and how chicks get the short end, and whether this is reclaimation, if two wrongs make a right, or if it even counts because LJ is largely female, or if LJ being largely female is the only reason it's a space where this reclaimation can occur and sure, I have opinions on all these things, and I'm not trying to say it's not a conversation to have, especially not for those who watched the vid, and did get it, and are now moved to wonder why they feel this way and whether they're comfortable with it. But I do think it misses a really big point:
Brutalisation of major male characters to further their own storylines and our sympathy for them =/= brutalisation of minor female characters to further the storylines and our sympathy for male characters.
That's a fundamental difference in the way most male and female characters get beat up on TV.
So while I'm not against anyone wondering what this pattern of violence to male heroes (or their attraction to it) means, I guess I am very much against equating it with the very real representational issues regarding women as victims of violence in our media. Or that a priority for fandom (which already spends an extraordinary amount of time and effort on male characters - in turn perhaps because of what we're offered, but again, this is another, complex debate), should now be to turn around and defend these male characters who are already privileged both narratively and in terms of fandom's attention.
The Fandom Portrait Thing.
I think maybe I can be a bit more succinct on this bit.
I am in fandom. This vid is not a portrait of me. I am not particularly unique in my interests within fandom. I did not need to see this vid to learn anything about myself. I did not need to see it to know that a certain section of fandom appreciates violence in its h/c boyslash.
Above I detail why I'm not sure the way a certain wider reading of this vid is a valid social criticism of fandom attitudes (i.e. because I do not think the arguments about what this says about the unfair treatment of men by the media/fandom hold water).
But here I'm trying to say...even if they did hold water, I don't think they'd be as broadly applicable as is being suggested in places.
The Other Important Things Thing.
There are a few other things I think it's important to say:
- I have seen various responses to this vid; I absolutely don't want to present the prevalent "vibe" I've been getting as the only discussion out there. And it's great that people are discussing it: hey, look, here I am doing the same thing!
- I really, really have no issue with this vid as a self-portrait, or with people fascinatedly trying to find their own line within it. I know I already said this, but it bears repeating. I really do understand why, to people who identify with it, it would be a fascinating vid.
- I do not want to assume the intentions of the vidders in making this vid. As far as I'm aware it was always presented by them as a self-portrait and I would not want to presume to ascribe any further motivations to them.
Re: my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok
Clearly this is just my personal opinion, but I believe that to be 100% true. And exactly what you say: it's proud of and protective of its history (IMO somewhat damagingly so).
I think you're spot on--it has grown a lot in the last five or so years (I talked to people at the con who discussed a marked shift beginning in 2005). Online I saw a lot of mixed feelings about that expressed, but AT the con, I only seemed to run into people who found the evolution a good thing. (Probably virtue of the fact that I hung out predominantly with the 'new' crowd!) The really really marked thing for me at the con though was the con comm were overwhelmingly in favour of evolution from what I could tell. It seems like there IS a state of tension between preserving the con's origins (legitimately so! it has a proud tradition and I wholeheartedly respect the need to maintain that, and learning more about it was a positive part of the con for me) and embrace change and reach out to a much wider vidding and fannish world. So maybe the fact that it's evolving beyond its slash roots may be the reason you feel participants may disagree. Though IMO I think that would be a minority of attendees. Really! There's a high level of consciousness about this (and deep respect for the slash origins) at the con.
There was also much conversation at the con about how the way VVC is portrayed online is very different to the reality once you're there. Summation: a lot of bullshit and very little straight talk occurs online. ;) You have no idea how good it made me feel to find heaps of con attendees who felt the same way I did!
(Also: HI HONEY! I am back on the internet! Which is very yayful and means I can actually, like, talk to you again! JOY!)
Re: my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok
Welcome back online! It's nice to hear you happy to be online. :)
Re: my kink is not your kink but your kink is ok
LOL, that makes one of us. I *TOTALLY* thought people would be unwelcoming!
Like it's perceived as a different "level" of vidding in some way, when really it's just for a different type of audience?
*nod nod* Trust me, plenty of con participants hate that. Yes, exactly, it's just a SMALL con with a small, specific (if vid-obsessed) audience (and that was said almost verbatim by the con comm in the welcome session). And well, you know that whole discussion in my journal a year ago was all about that. I think there are some people who really do believe/peddle the theory that it is the best of the best. I don't think it's as many people as it seems online (one thing I've really learnt from going to a con is that the loud people online are not representative of a community even if they make themselves out to be). Also I honestly believe half the problem is that it's the only known, dedicated vid con. There should be more. :)
Thank you! I am excited. :) I get to read your posts and watch your vids. :) I know it sounds absurd but I couldn't even reply to your last email (I'M SO SORRY!): I just went into complete shutdown. :(
Also, sympathy on the 'just go, you'll love it!' message. I had that for years and it was frustrating. I decided to go on my own terms but I still recall the frustration, believe me! I could easily have taken another path and having been I feel doubly validated in that--like going CONFIRMED to me how small and specific (if also AWESOME) it was and therefore that it was completely fine to ignore it if I chose to. For me personally, this made me far more comfortable with it and had the reverse psych effect of then making me really in to it. *does not respond well to perceived coersion* :p