For my second week of reading Understanding Popular Culture, I found myself inundated with theory
after theory in the final two–thirds of John Fiske’s text. Since the first
three chapters of this work were more contemporary in tone at the time of
Fiske’s writing, I was surprised by the historical mood of Chapter 4:
“Offensive Bodies and Carnival Pleasures.” While charting the evolution of
sports and recreation in England – and the public reaction to them – Fiske
adopts a tone akin to Foucault in The
History of Torture, as he provides both a historical overview of his
subject matter and an application of theory. Utilizing the work of historians
Robert Malcolmson, Gareth Stedman-Jones, and Hugh Cunningham, Fiske argues how
British sports such as football and cricket were able to be appropriated by the
English middle-class and made respectable (65).
When it comes to wrestling, thankfully – and this is where
Fiske’s discussion becomes timely for me – strategies of class-control are
ineffectual. Fiske writes, “Wrestling…is quite a different matter – here the
middle-class ethos has failed to control the professional sport to the extent
that it becomes doubtful if the bourgeois word sport is even remotely appropriate. In wrestling, probably more
than in any other ‘sport,’ the disorderly popular pleasures are given free and
public expression” (65). As the author then discusses the resisting “grotesque”
bodies of wrestlers, with an application of Bakhtin thrown in to aid his
argument, he states, “The grotesque is properly part of the vernacular of the
oppressed” (72). This comment, which articulates why wrestling fans loves their
disproportionately-musculatured heroes, instead of traditional square-jawed
paragons of masculinity, led me, in a linear-way, to wonder why fans of the
fictitious living dead choose to dress up like their decaying heroes and take zombie strolls. On the one hand, this carnivalesque public
expression of zombie fandom is undeniably egalitarian – as the issues of sex,
race, or bodily appearance becomes transformed and obviated by makeup showing
varying degrees of physical decrepitude. Thus, the grotesque simulation of death
becomes the resisting and destabilizing force against traditional notions of
bodily health and beauty. The majority of these zombie strollers, on the other
hand, are predominately middle-class, judging from the locations – towns and
malls – where they stage the spectacle of their “walks.” Nonetheless, in an age
of economic uncertainty, such expressions of resistance mimic anxieties
concerning a post-apocalyptic scenario where all social institutions – perhaps
all normal definitions of existence itself – have evolved into a distorted,
deathly mockery of middle-class life.
In Chapter 6, “Popular Texts,” Fiske likewise lends me a
finer understanding of how television opens itself up to the rigor of critical
interpretation once reserved for a novel: “The reader of a novel is often told in great detail of the
interior feelings and motivations of a character: The viewer of television has
to infer all of these from a raised eyebrow, a downturn of the corner of a
mouth, or the inflection of the voice as it speaks the cliché. By ‘showing’
rather than ‘telling,’ by sketching rather than drawing completely, popular texts
open themselves up to a variety of social relevances” (98). Last week, I
mentioned that I am currently working on a paper articulating Steven Moffat’s
development of the character of River Song and fan reaction to her evolving
characterization. Moffat is adept at conveying the depth of emotional feeling
taking place between the Doctor and River, but the fans still feel a sense of
ownership toward the characters, particularly River, as they closely watch and,
hence, rewrite, or appropriate
Moffat’s text when it lets them down and goes in a direction beyond their set
of expectations. With Fiske’s above comment in mind, then, I can better
approach fan interpretations of River in zines and user-generated tribute
videos on YouTube.
In the future, for my theoretical dissertation, which I
hinted at in my last blog, I potentially wish to explore anime fandom. Like my
comments concerning zombie strollers, this is relatively new critical territory
for me, but, if I simply posited myself as a Doctor Who or Star Wars
theorist, how ultimately effective would I be as a scholar and teacher? Going
outside my traditional objects of studies – and embracing more feminized
fandoms such as anime – will thereby help me to achieve a wider, gendered
overview of science-fiction, fantasy, and horror fandoms. Since anime is an
animated form – or cartoon – it can visually transcend the limitations of reality.
This thought leads me back to Fiske, who, in Chapter 6’s “Popular
Discrimination,” discusses Bob Hodges and David Tripp’s studies on modalities,
in that television news is a “high” (or more real) modality for children whereas
“cartoons… are of low modalilty [as] they work on the conditional mood, and
say, ‘The world would be like this if…’” (123). When I thus behold the elegant and
romanticized cartoon visuals of the anime series Chobits, the beautiful and action-oriented imagery of InuYasha, and the eclectic, kinesthetically
shifting anime styles for FLCL, I
understand why Japanese and American children, teens, and adult fans of these
narratives love escaping to worlds where the infinite possibilities of if are constantly in play.
Fiske’s concluding chapter, “Politics,” works well in
telling me that the term mass culture
is a misnomer as “such a process, if it existed…would be anticultural and
unpopular; it would be the antithesis of culture understood as the production
and circulation of meanings and pleasures, and of the popular as an
intransigent, oppositional, and scandalous set of forces” (141). This tension
between the forces of production and the consumers who purchase or reject
brands and goods should indeed be celebrated. Oppositional binaries, as Fiske
reminds us in his conclusion to Understanding
Popular Culture, are also the chaotic sort of energy that should channel scholarship:
“New knowledge is not an evolutionary improvement on what precedes it; rather,
new knowledges enter adversarial relationships with older, more established
ones, challenging their position in the power play of understandings, and in
such confrontations new insights can be provoked” (153). With Fiske’s
inspiration truth now in hand, I can more confidently forge ahead in my
evolution as a fan cultures scholar!
Your extension of Fiske, or the application of "wrestling grotesque" to zombie walks is interesting. This is exactly the kind of move one wants to make. I wonder if there isn't a further connection in a sense of irony or kitsch that some fans might bring to both? I'm less clear about your position vis a vis anime. Are you reflecting on the feasibility of developing analytical capacity towards a genre of popular culture for which you are not presently an insider? A pretty important issue .... I can imagine a good dissertation with a meta- reflective chapter that contrasts the kinds of analysis one can practice as a fan (i.e. one versed in a given form of cultural production).
ReplyDelete