class blog for JMC 562, Media Studies and Culture, Fall 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Reading questions for 11/5/09: Jenkins, Chapter 5
Please post reading questions for Jenkins, Chapter 5 (due 11/5/09) as comments to this post. You can also post questions for the optional chapter 4 here, if you would like to get credit for those as well.
On page 178 of the chapter, the reading talks about The Daily Prophet, a Web-based "school newspaper." It is for fictional Hogwarts. It is said to have a staff of 102 children from all over the world. Is this number really looked at as being large?
Harry Potter is a international best seller all over the world. The books, movies and other consumer culture products have brought in million of dollars. I understand that fans are what have brought this new media to be so popular but, why is this so different from other books that become t.v. shows and movies. Some media that starts as book and than evolve into other media sources, don't bring in as much profit. Maybe I simply just don't understand the big deal about Harry Potter because I have not read the books, or scene the movies.
On page 194, Jenkins says that Warner Brothers differentiates between penalizing inauthentic fans and not authentic fans...what constitutes as inauthtentic and authentic fans?
Also,when Warner Brothers bought film rights, does that mean that the author has no more say in how her book is enjoyed by fans?If she still owns her rights to the book, can't fans say their ideas come from the book and not the movie?
The first thing that came to mind when I read the article was the similarity between this Daily Prophet newspaper and Second Life. It's a virtual community with people using avatars to express themselves and escape from reality. So is this more acceptable because kids are supposed to play make believe but adults aren't supposed to?
On page 207, Jenkins says "Wizard rock refers to a form of fan-generated music where artists often adopt identities and themes from Rowling's fictional universe; more than 200 such groups perform around the country, gaining visibility through cagey deployment of social networking and music sharing sites." This perplexed me because I could not think of anything similar in any other sort of medium. For bands to join together and take alternate identities seems like such a peculiar practice, and I was wondering whether this is psychologically viable?
On page 186 Jenkins quotes professor James Paul Gee where he calls these learning "cultures" "affinity spaces, asking, why people learn more, participate more actively, engage more deeply with popular culture than they do with the contexts of their textbooks." It seems to me that we are willing to learn more and participate more in what we are interested in, then a textbook that we are required to read. It's always more enjoyable for me to engage in things I'm interested in. This Daily Prophet Newspaper that is discussed throughout the chapter lets us see how people interact in a virtual type community that this specific audience is interested in. It let's us see how people participate and contribute to this paper as something they chose to engage in. Jenkins states on page 181, "The point of entry into this imaginary school was the construction of a fictional identity." So here we go back to the whole discussion about a "fantasy character" or a "fantasy world."
Would you contribute to a newspaper such as Lawvers? Do you see this paper as a type of virtual community? Are there certain things you contribute to or engage in such as something like this Daily paper on a frequent basis? Is it acceptable for adults to be a part of things such as this paper and second life or is it more acceptable for children or teens?
"Affinity spaces offer powerful opportunities for learning…because they are sustained by common endeavors that bridge across differences in age, class, race, gender and education level, because people can participate in various ways according to their skills and interests because they depend on peer-to-peer teaching with each participant constantly motivated new knowledge…" (177).
Although Jenkins is quoting the UW professor here, it seems as though Jenkins does adopt this reasoning as it pertains to "affinity places." Are affinity places really this democratic or as diverse as the author contends? I ask this because many popular culture texts attract very homogeneous audiences, so wouldn't it depend on the text as to its ability to join diverse groups?
On page 87 & 89 Jenkins talks about what it means to be an author and how this title and role is shifting in response to mass distribution via the internet. He says that this shift may lead to the "demystification of the creative process, and a growing recognition of the communal dimensions of expression, as writing takes on more aspects of traditional folk practices."
What does this "demystification of the creative process" mean for creatives both new and seasoned?
What are some positive outcomes of having authorship and publication more accessible to the average person? To children?
On p190, Jenkins stated that "Many adults wory that these kids are 'copying' preexisting media content rather than cerating their own original works." Many forms of art take aspects from other artists previous work that has inspired him/her. How is the fan fiction different from this to make people "worried" and if children's reading and writing skills are so low, wouldnt it be great that they are writing anything no matter where they are getting their inspiration from or "copying?"
I noticed in a couple of the profiles that the children mentioned some form of dramatic experience occurring to one or both of their parents (dying of cancer, father leaving). I do know that Harry Potter's parents died and he was given to his aunt and uncle to raise him, but are these misfortunes copying his experience or do these children use the web-site as a form of escape to copy with their reality?
On page 175, Jenkins touches on the lack of main female characters in Harry Potter as well as the gender stereotypes with Hermione. This makes me curious as to how many Harry Potter fan fiction writers are female? Sine girls and women are less represented in these books, is fan fiction a way to explore the texts according to their own lives? Is the fan fiction writing experience more about tailoring the story to reflect a girl's perspective? This becomes a little confusing when taking into account that the books were written by a woman from a boy's perspective. Still makes me curious. Jenkins defense of the books annoyed me a little when this came into question.
Also, I was curious about what Heather is doing now. She still keeps archives of The Daily Prophet (about which there was a SXSW Film Festival movie made in 2008) and a blog of her own:
@Danielle -- by "inauthentic fans" the Warner Bros. executive is referring to people trying to profit from the HP world. Warner Bros. owning the rights to the film means that they have the right to control the film and its uses. Rowling still has rights to the characters, etc. as well as the books themselves, although they are of course published by a company that owns rights, too.
On page 178 of the chapter, the reading talks about The Daily Prophet, a Web-based "school newspaper." It is for fictional Hogwarts. It is said to have a staff of 102 children from all over the world. Is this number really looked at as being large?
ReplyDeleteHarry Potter is a international best seller all over the world. The books, movies and other consumer culture products have brought in million of dollars. I understand that fans are what have brought this new media to be so popular but, why is this so different from other books that become t.v. shows and movies. Some media that starts as book and than evolve into other media sources, don't bring in as much profit. Maybe I simply just don't understand the big deal about Harry Potter because I have not read the books, or scene the movies.
On page 194, Jenkins says that Warner Brothers differentiates between penalizing inauthentic fans and not authentic fans...what constitutes as inauthtentic and authentic fans?
ReplyDeleteAlso,when Warner Brothers bought film rights, does that mean that the author has no more say in how her book is enjoyed by fans?If she still owns her rights to the book, can't fans say their ideas come from the book and not the movie?
The first thing that came to mind when I read the article was the similarity between this Daily Prophet newspaper and Second Life. It's a virtual community with people using avatars to express themselves and escape from reality. So is this more acceptable because kids are supposed to play make believe but adults aren't supposed to?
ReplyDeleteOn page 207, Jenkins says "Wizard rock refers to a form of fan-generated music where artists often adopt identities and themes from Rowling's fictional universe; more than 200 such groups perform around the country, gaining visibility through cagey deployment of social networking and music sharing sites." This perplexed me because I could not think of anything similar in any other sort of medium. For bands to join together and take alternate identities seems like such a peculiar practice, and I was wondering whether this is psychologically viable?
On page 186 Jenkins quotes professor James Paul Gee where he calls these learning "cultures" "affinity spaces, asking, why people learn more, participate more actively, engage more deeply with popular culture than they do with the contexts of their textbooks." It seems to me that we are willing to learn more and participate more in what we are interested in, then a textbook that we are required to read. It's always more enjoyable for me to engage in things I'm interested in.
ReplyDeleteThis Daily Prophet Newspaper that is discussed throughout the chapter lets us see how people interact in a virtual type community that this specific audience is interested in. It let's us see how people participate and contribute to this paper as something they chose to engage in. Jenkins states on page 181, "The point of entry into this imaginary school was the construction of a fictional identity." So here we go back to the whole discussion about a "fantasy character" or a "fantasy world."
Would you contribute to a newspaper such as Lawvers? Do you see this paper as a type of virtual community? Are there certain things you contribute to or engage in such as something like this Daily paper on a frequent basis? Is it acceptable for adults to be a part of things such as this paper and second life or is it more acceptable for children or teens?
"Affinity spaces offer powerful opportunities for learning…because they are sustained by common endeavors that bridge across differences in age, class, race, gender and education level, because people can participate in various ways according to their skills and interests because they depend on peer-to-peer teaching with each participant constantly motivated new knowledge…" (177).
ReplyDeleteAlthough Jenkins is quoting the UW professor here, it seems as though Jenkins does adopt this reasoning as it pertains to "affinity places." Are affinity places really this democratic or as diverse as the author contends? I ask this because many popular culture texts attract very homogeneous audiences, so wouldn't it depend on the text as to its ability to join diverse groups?
On page 87 & 89 Jenkins talks about what it means to be an author and how this title and role is shifting in response to mass distribution via the internet. He says that this shift may lead to the "demystification of the creative process, and a growing recognition of the communal dimensions of expression, as writing takes on more aspects of traditional folk practices."
ReplyDeleteWhat does this "demystification of the creative process" mean for creatives both new and seasoned?
What are some positive outcomes of having authorship and publication more accessible to the average person? To children?
On p190, Jenkins stated that "Many adults wory that these kids are 'copying' preexisting media content rather than cerating their own original works." Many forms of art take aspects from other artists previous work that has inspired him/her. How is the fan fiction different from this to make people "worried" and if children's reading and writing skills are so low, wouldnt it be great that they are writing anything no matter where they are getting their inspiration from or "copying?"
ReplyDeleteI noticed in a couple of the profiles that the children mentioned some form of dramatic experience occurring to one or both of their parents (dying of cancer, father leaving). I do know that Harry Potter's parents died and he was given to his aunt and uncle to raise him, but are these misfortunes copying his experience or do these children use the web-site as a form of escape to copy with their reality?
On page 175, Jenkins touches on the lack of main female characters in Harry Potter as well as the gender stereotypes with Hermione. This makes me curious as to how many Harry Potter fan fiction writers are female? Sine girls and women are less represented in these books, is fan fiction a way to explore the texts according to their own lives? Is the fan fiction writing experience more about tailoring the story to reflect a girl's perspective? This becomes a little confusing when taking into account that the books were written by a woman from a boy's perspective. Still makes me curious. Jenkins defense of the books annoyed me a little when this came into question.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I was curious about what Heather is doing now. She still keeps archives of The Daily Prophet (about which there was a SXSW Film Festival movie made in 2008) and a blog of her own:
http://www.dprophet.com/
http://www.heathershow.com/
@Danielle -- by "inauthentic fans" the Warner Bros. executive is referring to people trying to profit from the HP world. Warner Bros. owning the rights to the film means that they have the right to control the film and its uses. Rowling still has rights to the characters, etc. as well as the books themselves, although they are of course published by a company that owns rights, too.
ReplyDeleteI was wondering what Jenkins meant by authentic fans vs. inauthentic fans like he talks about on page 194 refering to Warner Brothers?
ReplyDeleteI was also wondering about the whole Second Life thing, and why or why not the concept of the game and its users are so controversial to people?
@ Dustin -- see my reply to Danielle above re: authentic vs. inauthentic fans
ReplyDelete