Muggles. Gotta live with 'em.

[amanuensis1]

Whoa, are we all really that upset over that article in The Guardian about Lumos? I didn't find it negative, really; the article's written by someone who is not only NOT a fan but admits she hasn't even read the books or seen the films ("Well...some of them"). She's not a fannish type at all. She's gone into it frankly baffled by the whole concept of fans who sink into their medium so deeply. She is, to belabor the obvious, a classic mundane (which is what we called 'em before Rowling got Muggle into the OED). And she observes, and there's an air of "okay, this remains distant and odd to me," but, gosh, me, I don't expect anything else from mundanes. I thought the piece was presented with a reasonably neutral "not for me, and some of it's definitely strange to me, but, wow, there's a lot of devotion and variety here" air.

Given that the article didn't purport to be a detached record of the event, I think we got lucky that she didn't shriek "weirdoes weirdoes weirdoes!" all through it. Maybe some of you feel she did? Because she doesn't think Snape/Hermione is so much about empowering women as it is titillation? Because she thought some of the discussions/topics were lame or unfounded? Because the idea of HP bestiality got to her? Shoot, I think we got off light. And she does end on this positive note:

It's all amazing. And seeing anybody, let alone 1,200 people enthused with joy about anything is really quite uplifting. And not just anything. Books! It makes my girlish, swotty heart swell with pride.

Maybe that wasn't enough for fan readers. Perhaps a lot of you feel you've had enough of this kind of "not for me, but, whatever floats your boat" editorializing. Maybe in the same way I don't exactly want to see more films like Brokeback Mountain but rather am waiting for the gay James Bond to unapologetically flaunt the queer all over the screen.

Comments

[jenna-thorn.livejournal.com]

I thoght it was pretty good too . . . but then I was in the Star Trek fandom.

Bingo. I was press liason once for an anime convention. A local reporter, being funny, ran down the list I'd prepared of our guests and mocked them, along the lines of "Person XYZ- translator - What, maybe a translator for the UN? Ha! Not likely. Person ABC- actor. Gee, I've never seen him. That's because he doesn't actually show up in the film, just his voice. Voice actor. Ha ha!"

I spent about five minutes being hacked off - it's an anime convention and he's looking for UN translators? - before realizing that he had no idea of what was going on and writing about the goofy kid with the candles taped to his head or the six foot, two hundred pound male dressed as Sailor Mercury was easier than actually finding out. And gave him funny stories to make the girls at the frat house laugh.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

Yeah, see, I find the film Trekkies to be a fair (and delightful) treatment of the Star Trek fandom. I suspect it pisses off a lot of fans who look at that film and say, "They picked out the WORST WEIRDOES!" But though I think a lot of people may look at those particular uber-obsessives and laugh, I don't. I look at them and nod simply and say, "Yes. I know what that feels like. Maybe not quite to that extent and not over the same fandom but I do get it. So I was doing a lot of simple nodding and saying, "Yes," all through that article.

[ani-bester.livejournal.com]

have you seen the short fan film by Bruce Cambell at the end of erghhh first movie he was big . . with the book and the tree rape?

. . EVILD DEAD! ha!

Ok right, in the special edition of that movie as a bonus feature of Cambell at cons, he jsut goes around showing cons, and it one of the most honest looks at fandoms I've seen. He doesn't mock, but he doens't pretend like this won't like totally odd to others or that some people don't go waaaaaaay to far.

Way better tha the movie. I'm such a wimp. I wanted the trees taken away from my window do to me fear lobe screaming irrationally that they'd break in and turn me into an undead thing =P