Hmm - I've seen this comparison suggested before - synecdochic seemed to be referring to it indirectly in her post - but you lay it out clearly here, and it does make a lot of sense. Especially in how you point out the social aspect as well as the intellectual, because there are similar expectations of courtesy and preserving one's reputation. (The rivalries in scholarly papers amuse me terribly because they always have that veneer of civility - "my esteemed colleague is totally and indubitably WRONG"...)
I think the major problem in fandom is that there is no one standard. So every fan ends up bringing their own social expectations to the table - some are thinking of it as a hobby, others as a writing workshop, others as a literary pursuit. Concrit and negative reviews are rare enough in many fandoms that when they do occur, people misunderstand and assume the worst about them. To someone who thinks of fandom as a social activity, harshing on another's squee can only be conceived of as an act of deliberate malice; while as to someone who sees fandom as an intellectual activity, to not critique and analyze is denying the best part. I resist trying to fit all of 'fandom' into one particular mold, because any one model you pick is going to leave out the majority of fans, isn't going to be why most people joined fandom, only a particular subset.
And fandom isn't academia, either. But I think you're onto something, that aspects of academia are a good place to look for structuring certain basic fandom practices.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
winterfish
no subject
Date: 2008-07-28 08:46 pm (UTC)I think the major problem in fandom is that there is no one standard. So every fan ends up bringing their own social expectations to the table - some are thinking of it as a hobby, others as a writing workshop, others as a literary pursuit. Concrit and negative reviews are rare enough in many fandoms that when they do occur, people misunderstand and assume the worst about them. To someone who thinks of fandom as a social activity, harshing on another's squee can only be conceived of as an act of deliberate malice; while as to someone who sees fandom as an intellectual activity, to not critique and analyze is denying the best part. I resist trying to fit all of 'fandom' into one particular mold, because any one model you pick is going to leave out the majority of fans, isn't going to be why most people joined fandom, only a particular subset.
And fandom isn't academia, either. But I think you're onto something, that aspects of academia are a good place to look for structuring certain basic fandom practices.