Those of us who love literary theory, or possess a
reasonable amount of fear in approaching it, can agree that Jacques Lacan is a bona-fide
genius. Unfortunately, when fellow scholars abuse his words, extolling the
virtues of his theories to the point where they drown out all other critical
approaches, the long-winded result can be unsettling. (And I know anyone who
has been stuck in a classroom or conference situation with one of these devout
Lacanians can attest to this unholy truth!) Nevertheless, when Lacan is done
right, a reality that Stephen Hinerman accomplishes in his contribution to The Adoring Audience, “‘I’ll Be Here
With You’: Fans, Fantasy, and the Figure of Elvis,” I can believe in the theory of literary theory benefiting
scholarship. In a coherent manner, Hinerman situates his discussion of Elvis
fans by first defining Freudian psychoanalysis regarding the effects of fantasy
urges upon an individual and combining it with Lacan’s mirror theory, which
defines the process of a child learning how to integrate the differences
occurring in the “I/Not I” binary. When the author subsequently applies these
theories to his readings of Elvis fan narratives, I gained a more sympathetic
understanding of their mindsets and questionable testimonials of encounters
with this rock ‘n roll icon.
Editor Lisa A. Lewis’s chapter, “‘Something More Than Love’:
Fan Stories on Film,” offers an interesting reading of a particular sub-genre of
cinema appropriate for discussion in her collection: the obsessive fan film. Amongst
the films she discusses are I Wanna Hold
Your Hand, a movie centered on a group of Beatles fans, and Heartbreak Hotel, in which one Elvis fan
manages to kidnap the King. Speaking of Kings, however, Lewis’s discussion of The King of Comedy, a 1983
comedy-thriller (if I can call it that) directed by Martin Scorsese and
starring regular collaborator Robert De Niro as comedian Rupert Pupkin, is what
clicked for me the most as a reader. Like Scorsese’s underrated and
underappreciated thriller After Hours,
The King of Comedy offers a
psychological study of a lead character whose story unfolds in the urban
environs of Manhattan. In Pupkin’s case,
he wishes not only to connect with idol Jerry Langford (played in a
delightfully sardonic fashion by Jerry Lewis), but to use Langford’s clout as a
talk-show host as a means to achieving fame for himself as well. Lewis writes
about Pupkin, “His comedy instruction is a product of a fan’s imitation of the
star, but his producerly impulses have advanced him to the point where he has
developed his own act” (151). This
comment interests me since many successful actors, writers, and singers started
out as a fan of somebody. What, then, separates a talented fan who achieves
fame and success from one who genuinely possesses talent but does not find the
right “connection” or receives that “lucky break” that so many people who “make
it” claim to have experienced?
For Part III of The
Adoring Audience, Lewis groups the essays under the title of “Fans and
Industry.” Sue Browder, in “Fans as Tastemakers: Viewers for Quality
Television,” provides a thorough overview of a well-organized fan organization
called Viewers for Quality Television (VQR), weighing how their efforts define
what a “quality TV show” is during the
era of 1980s network television against the potential elitist ramifications of
these classifications. When it came to reading Robert Sabal’s contribution,
“Television Executives Speak about Fan Letters to the Network,” however, I
questioned its value as a worthy inclusion in the book as it simply offers a
short, curious transcript of a conversation that took place between Sabal and
three television industry representatives.
For Part IV, “Production by Fans,” Fred and Judy Vermorel’s chapter,
“A Glimpse of the Fan Factory,” is another oddity in Lewis’s collection as the
authors present official, unedited examples of fan letters written between 1977
and 1988 to such musical celebrities as Kate Bush, David Bowie, and Barry
Manilow. Although the latter fan missives humored me in their self-aware
application of salutary phrases like “In much Manilust as always” and “Much Manilove now & always,” I was left feeling as if I were a voyeur reading the
majority of the other letters. Maybe I
can attribute this feeling of guilt due to the fact that these fans’ vulnerable,
heartfelt, and, at times, depressingly disturbed expressions to their
respective stars were meant to be read by their idols alone, not by the
clinical eyes of academics and students who probably could never completely emphasize
with their fanatical mindsets.
The closing chapter of The
Adoring Audience, “‘Strangers No More, We Sing’: Filking and the Social
Construction of the Science Fiction Fan Community,” grants me the feeling I
have come full circle in my understanding of Mr. Jenkins’s theoretical
evolution, as he was on the eve of his pivotal work, Textual Poachers, being published. I enjoyed reading about his
thoughts concerning “filkers,” science-fiction fans who write, compose, and
perform (usually at conventions) folk-like songs containing comical lyrics on
such subject matter as the original Star
Trek crew experiencing a three-day shore leave blow-out and the lamented
cancellation of Blake’s 7 and how
these songs help add another intimate layer to convention-based fandom. I hit
early-Jenkins’s gold, however, with this quote: “Fandom is a ‘scavenger’
culture built from poached fragments of many different media products, woven
together into a coherent whole through the meanings the fans bring to these
fragments and the uses they make of them, rather than by meanings generated by
the primary texts” (232). As someone who has participated in Doctor Who fandom, engaging in or
appreciating fan art, costume contests, late-night karaoke performances, and
only occasionally entering into casual complicated conversations regarding the
show itself (DW’s “primary text”), I
can affirm and celebrate the wisdom of Jenkins’s astute observation on my
fellow fan-scavengers!
I wonder if there's a connection to be made between some of the themes in the chapter that mentions The King of Comedy and the chapter on fan letters; my recollection of the film is that there's a tragic sense of loneliness in the character of Rupert Pupkin -- highly akin to that of the character of Paul Aufiero in Big Fan. The character of Jerry Langford provides Pupkin with an imaginary friend, so to speak, and in so doing lends a degree of meaning to Pupkin's life. Along similar lines, I'm guessing there's a similar tragically desperate tone in the fan letters that "A Glimpse of the Fan Factory" offers. I'm reminded of a documentary on the Smiths in which a fan is interviewed about what he likes about the band; the fan goes on at length to explain that regardless of the difficulties he runs into in his daily life, he knows he can listen to the Smiths and know that Morrissey understands him and can sympathize. To an extent, all fans invent imaginary versions of the phenomena they idolize, but fan letters, fan fiction, and blogs seem to be taking that act of imagination to a new level, and in the case of the films mentioned above, there's frequently a tension between reality and what fans imagine to be reality.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of Doctor Who, this may account for the almost inexplicable phenomenon of 8th Doctor fans: because there's only one televised episode featuring this Doctor (and a handful of other texts that feature his adventures), fans have (more or less) a blank slate on which to project their hopes, fears, and anxieties. With respect to Jenkins' larger argument -- that “Fandom is a ‘scavenger’ culture built from poached fragments of many different media products, woven together into a coherent whole through the meanings the fans bring to these fragments and the uses they make of them, rather than by meanings generated by the primary texts” -- a problem arises when the "primary text" is reality. To put it another way, it's one thing for fans to twist fictional characters into forms that suit their emotional needs, but as films like The King of Comedy suggest, it's an entirely different proposition when fans attempt to force "real" people into roles they never agreed to assume.