Showing posts with label PhD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PhD. Show all posts
Tuesday, 6 December 2011
Lit Review: Section Two
After all that stressing about the encoding/decoding section of my PhD I had a meeting with my supervisor today and I don't need to meet with him about this section again! He's quite happy with it and I can move on to the next one. Fanfic, here I come.
Sunday, 6 November 2011
On Anti-fans
A few people said they wanted to hear more about anti-fans after one of the last posts I made so I thought I'd copy and paste that section from my lit review. I did refer to anti-Fowley fans elsewhere in lit review but I haven't copied that here (I can if anyone wants to see them). Hopefully what I've got here will make sense (though further changes will be made to it after the last meeting with my supervisor) and you'll find it interesting.
So far, I have discussed preferred meanings and how fans of a show decode meanings in a variety of ways and dependent on a range of factors. Before I begin the next section and examine the literature surrounding fan fiction, I wish to turn to anti-fans and non-fans of a series, and ask whether we can also learn something about a text from the ways in which they read it.
Jonathan Gray raises an important critique of reception studies, arguing that by focusing so intently on the fan it distorts our “understanding of the text, the consumer and the interaction between them. […] To fully understand what it means to interact with the media and their texts, though, we must look at anti-fans and nonfans too” (2003, p. 68). In his analysis of The Simpsons’ fans, anti-fans and non-fans, Gray proposes we imagine the text as an atom:
Moving further from the centre of the ‘atom’ we encounter the fan, who actively looks ‘outside’ the nucleus to intruders and intertexts, yet whom we can count on to be aware of and close to the text. And beyond the fan is the anti-fan, whom Gray refers to as ‘electrons’. Gray suggests that although fandom and antifandom could be positioned on opposite ends of the spectrum they perhaps more accurately exist on a Mobius strip: “many fans and antifan behaviours and performances resembling, if not replicating, each other” (2005, p. 845). He further argues that the anti-fan can provide an “interesting window to issues of textuality and its place in society” (p. 71) as anti-fans, as well as fans, construct an image of the text – and moreover an image strong enough to cause them to react against it. In discussing The Simpsons’ anti-fans, he notes that he
Catherine Strong, in her paper on Twilight anti-fans, suggests that one useful application of the study of anti-fans is in “examining the role they play in enforcing the dominance of certain taste cultures” (2009, p. 5). She argues that cultural hierarchies are not created just through certain forms of culture being praised, but also by the denigration of other forms. Anti-fans’ attitudes to Twilight, for example, naturalise the position of feminine culture at the bottom of the cultural hierarchy (2009, p. 10). The taste cultures enforced in X Files fandom are, I would suggest, intelligence, scientific enquiry, critical thought and liberal ideals. Yet anti-fans of the series seem consider the show’s fans to be gullible, paranoid conspiracy-theorists who believe willy-nilly in ghosts, UFOs and hidden government agendas. Richard Dawkins said, in his 1996 Richard Dimbleby Lecture:
Similarly, David Whitehouse in his review of Fight The Future suggests that science in the series is weak and critical thinking is pushed aside but that is okay “just as long as you stop being gullible in the real world which I am afraid is what many X-Files fans fail to do” (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/146482.stm). This image of The X Files (and X Files fandom) constructed by anti-fans contrasts sharply with that constructed by fans, but it is interesting in what it tells us about the perceptions of anti-fans. As Gray notes, “a study of antifandom and what it ‘does’ to the text […] could illuminate fandom and nonfandom too, allowing us to place and distinguish their own characteristics and textualities” (2005, p. 845).
So far then, Gray considers anti-fans to be those who actively dislike a cultural item. I would suggest that further to this idea of anti-fans of a programme, we should also examine anti-fans of aspects of a programme. As a member of The X Files fandom I know viewers who identify as fans, and who have attended conventions, collect memorabilia and have read the X Files novels and comic books, yet who have never seen seasons 8 and 9 and have no desire to do so. I would contend that these fans are anti-fans in the sense that Gray discusses them (that is, they engage in ‘distant readings’ of the seasons and respond to texts which have not been viewed) but they do so with an intimate knowledge of the prior seasons and the paratexts surrounding the series.[2] I would suggest that this is different to the “angry or upset fan discussion [which] often bordered on antifandom” that Gray noticed in his study of the Television Without Pity forums (2005, p. 847). The fan relationship with a text is a complex one and, as I have discussed elsewhere in this chapter, fan decodings of texts may result in readings which fans are unhappy with. I contend that fans respond to those readings by recoding meaning using meta, picspams, fan vids and fan fiction. The ‘anti-fan fans’ that I am discussing here, however, fail to engage with the text even in order to reclaim it – they are aware of the text through discussion with other fans, reviews or fan fiction, but have not and will not view the source text itself.[3]
Another category of anti-fan which must be discussed in this context is one which I have previously referred to – the fans (mainly shippers) who hate Diana Fowley. Of all the characters in the series she is perhaps the most vilified, and while these kinds of anti-fans are closer to the upset or angry fans of Gray’s study I would suggest they transcend those labels because of the amount of vitriol they direct at Fowley. Fans who are upset or angry at a turn a series takes often take that frustration out on the shows’ producers. Derek Johnson in his study of Buffy the Vampire Slayer fandom noted that many fans vilified Marti Noxon, who managed Buffy’s sixth season while Joss Whedon (Buffy’s creator) worked on Firefly. Noxon was criticised for producing ‘angsty and depressing’ episodes akin to soap opera and melodrama, and “assigned the blame for the series’ perceived dalliances in devalued, feminised storytelling forms” (2007, p. 292). With The X Files, however, anger at Fowley is directed at the character herself.[4] Examining why, as I will do later in this thesis, would prove fruitful in understanding what anti-fans of an aspect of a programme can tell us about readings of that programme.
Gray also argues that the attitudes of non-fans to a text should lead scholars to assess the impact this has on the study of texts, for
For Gray, non-fans are those are indifferent to a text but still (occasionally or frequently) view it. I would argue that by its very nature The X Files interrupts the ‘dip in, dip out’ form of viewing. Johnson notes that the series “combined one-off ‘genre’ episodes centred on a single investigation, with an ongoing and increasingly complex ‘mythology’ narrative” (2005, p. 105). While she does then go on to argue that “this dual narrative structure enabled the series to be accessible to the casual viewer, while simultaneously rewarding the loyal viewer with character and story development” (ibid) I would argue that the series blurred the lines between the stand alone ‘monster of the week’ episodes and the underlying ‘mytharc’ narrative, thus resulting in the viewer requiring a greater deal of knowledge about the series than could be gleaned from infrequent viewings. Instead I would argue that non-fans of the series are aware of it predominantly through references to the show in pop culture. It has been widely noted that The X Files was a pop culture phenomenon, with references made to it in The Simpsons, Felix the Cat, Bones, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and many other popular texts (Delasara, 2000; Gradnitzer and Pittson, 1999; Kozinets, 1997). At the height of its popularity in the 1990s it would have been difficult for most in the Western world to be unaware of the series, even if their awareness of it reached only as far as an understanding of the series as a show about aliens. As Gray notes, many programmes are part of a common language, and they grow through media talk to something “more than just the moment(s) of viewing” (2003, p. 76). References to The X Files’ in song, television drama, cartoon series and newspaper headlines all tell us something about the perception of The X Files in the world outside of fandom.
___________________
[1] I would suggest that the ‘close reader’ does not exist within fandom, but instead in a professional relationship to the show/s – those academics, critics and reviewers who focus on the text itself rather than fans who engage with fan communities and paratexts. Indeed, many reviews of The X Files discuss its strong female character, yet this notion of Scully is widely contested within fandom itself.
[2] Interestingly, urban dictionary defines anti-fans as “any fangirl/boy who purports to be a fan but who is actually engaged in dissing down, covertly or overtly, the object of a fandom, often for hidden agendas of their own” (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=anti-fan) while fanlore notes that anti-fans were sometimes “fans who became increasingly disenchanted and finally angered or repelled by canon or fanon developments” (http://fanlore.org/wiki/Anti-fan).
[3] A study of fanfiction written by fans who have not seen seasons 8 and 9 would, I suggest, prove fruitful in understanding how these fans respond to what they perceive to be the problem with the text.
[4] Chris Carter is blamed for bad writing by some fans, but these seem to be fans who have some sympathies with the character.
So far, I have discussed preferred meanings and how fans of a show decode meanings in a variety of ways and dependent on a range of factors. Before I begin the next section and examine the literature surrounding fan fiction, I wish to turn to anti-fans and non-fans of a series, and ask whether we can also learn something about a text from the ways in which they read it.
Jonathan Gray raises an important critique of reception studies, arguing that by focusing so intently on the fan it distorts our “understanding of the text, the consumer and the interaction between them. […] To fully understand what it means to interact with the media and their texts, though, we must look at anti-fans and nonfans too” (2003, p. 68). In his analysis of The Simpsons’ fans, anti-fans and non-fans, Gray proposes we imagine the text as an atom:
Right at the very centre of the text, in its relatively stable nucleus, first we find the aptly named ‘close reader’[1] […] such a reader ignores the text’s outlying regions and interactions with other texts, and chooses instead to remain in a realm of supposed denotation and stability, determined that here, at the very centre of the text, lies the key that will unlock the entire work, answering the multiple mysteries of the atom. (2003, p. 69)
Moving further from the centre of the ‘atom’ we encounter the fan, who actively looks ‘outside’ the nucleus to intruders and intertexts, yet whom we can count on to be aware of and close to the text. And beyond the fan is the anti-fan, whom Gray refers to as ‘electrons’. Gray suggests that although fandom and antifandom could be positioned on opposite ends of the spectrum they perhaps more accurately exist on a Mobius strip: “many fans and antifan behaviours and performances resembling, if not replicating, each other” (2005, p. 845). He further argues that the anti-fan can provide an “interesting window to issues of textuality and its place in society” (p. 71) as anti-fans, as well as fans, construct an image of the text – and moreover an image strong enough to cause them to react against it. In discussing The Simpsons’ anti-fans, he notes that he
found a fascinating near-perfect correlation between loving or disliking The Simpsons and seeing it, respectively, as critical of America and American life, or as yet another symbol of crass American cultural chauvinism. This correlation had little to do with differences of culture or predispositions to America, but rather to a difference in the text itself as perceived by close or ‘distant’ readers. Particularly for anti-fans who have not watched the show and yet judge it so vehemently, a textuality is born into existence in large part separate of what might be ‘in’ the text as produced. ‘Oppositional’ readers in Hall’s terminology are one thing, but anti-fans may not even be viewers in the sense of people who have watched a show. Thus while much analysis of texts is steadfastly stuck to close reading, if we can show that people engage in distant reading, responding to texts that have not been viewed, and more importantly if we can track exactly how the anti-fan’s text or text stand-in has been pieced together, we will take substantial steps forward in understanding textuality and in appreciating the strength of contextuality. (2003, p. 71)
Catherine Strong, in her paper on Twilight anti-fans, suggests that one useful application of the study of anti-fans is in “examining the role they play in enforcing the dominance of certain taste cultures” (2009, p. 5). She argues that cultural hierarchies are not created just through certain forms of culture being praised, but also by the denigration of other forms. Anti-fans’ attitudes to Twilight, for example, naturalise the position of feminine culture at the bottom of the cultural hierarchy (2009, p. 10). The taste cultures enforced in X Files fandom are, I would suggest, intelligence, scientific enquiry, critical thought and liberal ideals. Yet anti-fans of the series seem consider the show’s fans to be gullible, paranoid conspiracy-theorists who believe willy-nilly in ghosts, UFOs and hidden government agendas. Richard Dawkins said, in his 1996 Richard Dimbleby Lecture:
soap operas, cop series and the like are justly criticised if, week after week, they ram home the same prejudice or bias. Each week The X Files posts a mystery and offers two rival kinds of explanation, the rational theory and the paranormal theory. And, week after week, the rational explanation loses. But it is only fiction, a bit of fun, why get so hot under the collar? Imagine a crime series in which, every week, there is a white suspect and a black suspect. And every week, lo and behold, the black one turns out to have done it. unpardonable, of course. And my point is that you could not defend it by saying: “But it’s only fiction, only entertainment.”
Let’s not go back to a dark age of superstition and unreason, a world in which every time you lose your keys you suspect poltergeists, demons or alien abduction. (http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dawkins/lecture_p12.html)
Let’s not go back to a dark age of superstition and unreason, a world in which every time you lose your keys you suspect poltergeists, demons or alien abduction. (http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dawkins/lecture_p12.html)
Similarly, David Whitehouse in his review of Fight The Future suggests that science in the series is weak and critical thinking is pushed aside but that is okay “just as long as you stop being gullible in the real world which I am afraid is what many X-Files fans fail to do” (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/146482.stm). This image of The X Files (and X Files fandom) constructed by anti-fans contrasts sharply with that constructed by fans, but it is interesting in what it tells us about the perceptions of anti-fans. As Gray notes, “a study of antifandom and what it ‘does’ to the text […] could illuminate fandom and nonfandom too, allowing us to place and distinguish their own characteristics and textualities” (2005, p. 845).
So far then, Gray considers anti-fans to be those who actively dislike a cultural item. I would suggest that further to this idea of anti-fans of a programme, we should also examine anti-fans of aspects of a programme. As a member of The X Files fandom I know viewers who identify as fans, and who have attended conventions, collect memorabilia and have read the X Files novels and comic books, yet who have never seen seasons 8 and 9 and have no desire to do so. I would contend that these fans are anti-fans in the sense that Gray discusses them (that is, they engage in ‘distant readings’ of the seasons and respond to texts which have not been viewed) but they do so with an intimate knowledge of the prior seasons and the paratexts surrounding the series.[2] I would suggest that this is different to the “angry or upset fan discussion [which] often bordered on antifandom” that Gray noticed in his study of the Television Without Pity forums (2005, p. 847). The fan relationship with a text is a complex one and, as I have discussed elsewhere in this chapter, fan decodings of texts may result in readings which fans are unhappy with. I contend that fans respond to those readings by recoding meaning using meta, picspams, fan vids and fan fiction. The ‘anti-fan fans’ that I am discussing here, however, fail to engage with the text even in order to reclaim it – they are aware of the text through discussion with other fans, reviews or fan fiction, but have not and will not view the source text itself.[3]
Another category of anti-fan which must be discussed in this context is one which I have previously referred to – the fans (mainly shippers) who hate Diana Fowley. Of all the characters in the series she is perhaps the most vilified, and while these kinds of anti-fans are closer to the upset or angry fans of Gray’s study I would suggest they transcend those labels because of the amount of vitriol they direct at Fowley. Fans who are upset or angry at a turn a series takes often take that frustration out on the shows’ producers. Derek Johnson in his study of Buffy the Vampire Slayer fandom noted that many fans vilified Marti Noxon, who managed Buffy’s sixth season while Joss Whedon (Buffy’s creator) worked on Firefly. Noxon was criticised for producing ‘angsty and depressing’ episodes akin to soap opera and melodrama, and “assigned the blame for the series’ perceived dalliances in devalued, feminised storytelling forms” (2007, p. 292). With The X Files, however, anger at Fowley is directed at the character herself.[4] Examining why, as I will do later in this thesis, would prove fruitful in understanding what anti-fans of an aspect of a programme can tell us about readings of that programme.
Gray also argues that the attitudes of non-fans to a text should lead scholars to assess the impact this has on the study of texts, for
the very nature and physicality of the text changes when watched by the non-fan, becoming an entirely different entity […] Until now, media and cultural studies have often been content to ask what power or effects a text may have, how an audience might resist a text or what role context plays, but non-fan engagement with the televisual text denies us the existence of the solitary, agreed-on text with which to anchor such discussions. (2003, p. 75)
For Gray, non-fans are those are indifferent to a text but still (occasionally or frequently) view it. I would argue that by its very nature The X Files interrupts the ‘dip in, dip out’ form of viewing. Johnson notes that the series “combined one-off ‘genre’ episodes centred on a single investigation, with an ongoing and increasingly complex ‘mythology’ narrative” (2005, p. 105). While she does then go on to argue that “this dual narrative structure enabled the series to be accessible to the casual viewer, while simultaneously rewarding the loyal viewer with character and story development” (ibid) I would argue that the series blurred the lines between the stand alone ‘monster of the week’ episodes and the underlying ‘mytharc’ narrative, thus resulting in the viewer requiring a greater deal of knowledge about the series than could be gleaned from infrequent viewings. Instead I would argue that non-fans of the series are aware of it predominantly through references to the show in pop culture. It has been widely noted that The X Files was a pop culture phenomenon, with references made to it in The Simpsons, Felix the Cat, Bones, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and many other popular texts (Delasara, 2000; Gradnitzer and Pittson, 1999; Kozinets, 1997). At the height of its popularity in the 1990s it would have been difficult for most in the Western world to be unaware of the series, even if their awareness of it reached only as far as an understanding of the series as a show about aliens. As Gray notes, many programmes are part of a common language, and they grow through media talk to something “more than just the moment(s) of viewing” (2003, p. 76). References to The X Files’ in song, television drama, cartoon series and newspaper headlines all tell us something about the perception of The X Files in the world outside of fandom.
___________________
[1] I would suggest that the ‘close reader’ does not exist within fandom, but instead in a professional relationship to the show/s – those academics, critics and reviewers who focus on the text itself rather than fans who engage with fan communities and paratexts. Indeed, many reviews of The X Files discuss its strong female character, yet this notion of Scully is widely contested within fandom itself.
[2] Interestingly, urban dictionary defines anti-fans as “any fangirl/boy who purports to be a fan but who is actually engaged in dissing down, covertly or overtly, the object of a fandom, often for hidden agendas of their own” (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=anti-fan) while fanlore notes that anti-fans were sometimes “fans who became increasingly disenchanted and finally angered or repelled by canon or fanon developments” (http://fanlore.org/wiki/Anti-fan).
[3] A study of fanfiction written by fans who have not seen seasons 8 and 9 would, I suggest, prove fruitful in understanding how these fans respond to what they perceive to be the problem with the text.
[4] Chris Carter is blamed for bad writing by some fans, but these seem to be fans who have some sympathies with the character.
Sunday, 23 October 2011
Research and The Big Bang Theory (though not necessarily at the same time)
I've had a really productive couple of weeks research-wise. I sent the second draft of my lit review section on encoding/decoding off to my supervisor last week (and got a reply today asking if I'm free to meet Thursday). It's now up to 18,000 words and I'm pretty happy with it. It's a lot better than the first draft and I think I've got some things in there that could be really useful for my work. One of the things I was looking at while reading was anti-fans, and I posted a poll to the LJ X Files comm asking people about their opinions of fic by people who haven't seen all of the series. What I've argued in the lit review is that what I think Jonathan Gray leaves out in his work on anti-fans is the fans who are anti-fans of a specific aspect of a series - the Fowley anti-fans, or end-of-series anti-fans, for example. They have in-depth knowledge of the series, write fic, engage with fan communities, but dislike (or even hate) specific things about the series. I think they are different to the anti-fans Gray talks about, and I think they're really interesting in terms of studying what fans can tell us about the series they watch. I'm still formulating some of my ideas on this, but I think it could be an interesting area, especially when it relates to fans who write post The Truth or post series (or post S7) fic when they haven't seen S8 and 9. (If anyone's interested I can go into more detail on what Gray says about anti-fans.)
I've also been thinking about The Big Bang Theory. I've recently, as I mentioned before, started watching it and am actually enjoying it. But there are some things I find very problematic.The first of these is the trans-bashing we get in a few episodes. For those of you who haven't seen the series, before Penny moved in opposite Leonard and Penny the apartment was occupied by a black transvestite. This is referred to a couple of times in a few episodes, such as:
Leonard: Anyway, I went upstairs and knocked on the door.
Large Black Transvestite: Yeah?
Past Leonard: Dr. Cooper?
Transvestite: No, you want the crazy guy across the hall.
Leonard: In retrospect, that was clue number two.
And I really don't like the suggestion that a trans person should be the crazy one. I was reading a few blogs earlier today, and one of them said The only ep of the show I ever caught had trans-misogyny and the character being mocked was Black. I couldn't believe I had friends who think themselves "allies" who raved about how great this show was. I would consider myself an LGBT ally, and I do not find the trans references at all funny. Other aspects of the show I do, and so I'm trying to reconcile my dislike of this kind of humour with the show itself. I think it's possible to do so - as long as you're aware of the problems with what you're watching and recognise that for all you enoy it there are issues - but it is something I've been giving a lot of thought to
Another thing I really, really dislike is Howard and his attitude towards women. Partly I dislike this because it conforms to the 'geeks are socially awkward misfits who can't get girls' stereotype and up until S3 there's very little character development, but mainly I dislike it because I find it offensive. Lines like
“Love is not a sprint, it’s a marathon. A relentless pursuit that only ends when she falls into your arms. Or hits you with the pepper spray.”
“Sit with her. Hold her, comfort her. And if the moment feels right, see if you can cop a feel.”
“There’s a whole new crop of female grad students about to put on just enough winter weight to make them needy and vulnerable.”
are supposed to be funny but I think they end up alienating quite a few people - mainly women - who find no place for themselves in TBBT just as they find no place in the predominantly male geek culture of the real world.
And in The Killer Robot Instability, where the following exchange takes place between Howard and Penny
Penny: I am saying it is not a compliment to call me doable. It’s not sexy to stare at my ass and say, “Ooh, it must be jelly ’cause jam don’t shake like that.” And most important, we are not dancing a tango, we’re not to’ing and fro’ing. Nothing is ever going to happen between us. Ever.
Howard: Wait a minute. This isn’t flirting, you’re serious.
Penny: Flirting? You think I’m flirting with you? I am not flirting with you, no woman is ever gonna flirt with you, you’re just gonna grow old and die alone.
the audience are supposed to feel sorry for Howard because his feelings have gotten hurt. (Penny does actually apologise to Howard towards the end of the episode, after which he tries to hit on her [again] showing a distinct lack of character development and pissing me off even more.) I am enjoying the bulk of the series, don't get me wrong, but I wish they'd lay off the trans jokes and the misogyny and give us some cool female geeks. The audience would thank them for it.
I've also been thinking about The Big Bang Theory. I've recently, as I mentioned before, started watching it and am actually enjoying it. But there are some things I find very problematic.
Leonard: Anyway, I went upstairs and knocked on the door.
Large Black Transvestite: Yeah?
Past Leonard: Dr. Cooper?
Transvestite: No, you want the crazy guy across the hall.
Leonard: In retrospect, that was clue number two.
And I really don't like the suggestion that a trans person should be the crazy one. I was reading a few blogs earlier today, and one of them said The only ep of the show I ever caught had trans-misogyny and the character being mocked was Black. I couldn't believe I had friends who think themselves "allies" who raved about how great this show was. I would consider myself an LGBT ally, and I do not find the trans references at all funny. Other aspects of the show I do, and so I'm trying to reconcile my dislike of this kind of humour with the show itself. I think it's possible to do so - as long as you're aware of the problems with what you're watching and recognise that for all you enoy it there are issues - but it is something I've been giving a lot of thought to
Another thing I really, really dislike is Howard and his attitude towards women. Partly I dislike this because it conforms to the 'geeks are socially awkward misfits who can't get girls' stereotype and up until S3 there's very little character development, but mainly I dislike it because I find it offensive. Lines like
“Love is not a sprint, it’s a marathon. A relentless pursuit that only ends when she falls into your arms. Or hits you with the pepper spray.”
“Sit with her. Hold her, comfort her. And if the moment feels right, see if you can cop a feel.”
“There’s a whole new crop of female grad students about to put on just enough winter weight to make them needy and vulnerable.”
are supposed to be funny but I think they end up alienating quite a few people - mainly women - who find no place for themselves in TBBT just as they find no place in the predominantly male geek culture of the real world.
And in The Killer Robot Instability, where the following exchange takes place between Howard and Penny
Penny: I am saying it is not a compliment to call me doable. It’s not sexy to stare at my ass and say, “Ooh, it must be jelly ’cause jam don’t shake like that.” And most important, we are not dancing a tango, we’re not to’ing and fro’ing. Nothing is ever going to happen between us. Ever.
Howard: Wait a minute. This isn’t flirting, you’re serious.
Penny: Flirting? You think I’m flirting with you? I am not flirting with you, no woman is ever gonna flirt with you, you’re just gonna grow old and die alone.
the audience are supposed to feel sorry for Howard because his feelings have gotten hurt. (Penny does actually apologise to Howard towards the end of the episode, after which he tries to hit on her [again] showing a distinct lack of character development and pissing me off even more.) I am enjoying the bulk of the series, don't get me wrong, but I wish they'd lay off the trans jokes and the misogyny and give us some cool female geeks. The audience would thank them for it.
Sunday, 15 May 2011
PhD Meeting
I met with my tutor on Wednesday to go over the first draft of the encoding/decoding section of my lit review. He was broadly pleased with it, which was good. He's said a couple of times now that I won't have a problem with the writing itself, I just need to a) be more critical and b) be more assertive in locating my work. I've got to submit another draft in June/July and that'll be it for this section. He's also wangled it so that I don't have to submit a methodology essay in June. It doesn't make sense for me to do it now because I'm a part time student so while the full timers will be moving onto the methodological work next academic year, I won't be doing it for another 18 months or so. It makes more sense for me to concentrate on my lit review now. I'm very pleased by that.
Friday, 29 April 2011
First World Problems
Writing lit reviews is hard! I don't want to write mine anymore. I want to go sit outside in the sun and read some fiction not go over critiques of Stuart Hall's encoding/decoding model and work out how to fit them all into an 8000 word section.
In other news, my pony is too small and my diamond-encrusted saddle rubs my arse when I ride.
In other news, my pony is too small and my diamond-encrusted saddle rubs my arse when I ride.
Sunday, 12 December 2010
PhD Presentation
I've at least done some work for the mid-year presentation my PhD group has to give to the department. The presentation is on which theory covered in our theory module will be of most use to my PhD. It's clearly Stuart Hall's Encoding/Decoding essay, though I'm having to find critiques of it and ways in which it's been adapted for use in studying TV drama as the original text is about news and advertising. But nonetheless, it's still more useful than anything else (and my supervisor has said he's more than happy with a) that assesment and b) me using it in my PhD). I've only got to give a ten minute presentation so I've got the Powerpoint going and have the first two slides sorted. I know what example I'm going to give (we have to use the theory in the presentation so I'm going to give a short clip from TXF - possibly the Pilot, and the scene in the motel room. You know, that scene - put in a quote from CC about there being no relationship between Mulder and Scully, and then put in an excerpt from fanfic showing there very obviously being a relationship between the two. All of which will be useful in my Erotic Adaptations paper), so really I just have to write the other five minutes or so. Which hopefully won't take long. Or at least won't take long once I stop potching on the internet.
Oh, one thing before I go though, I finally put my signed XF poster up!
I'm so happy with it. Also, can you see my cardboard cutout?!
Oh, one thing before I go though, I finally put my signed XF poster up!
I'm so happy with it. Also, can you see my cardboard cutout?!
Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Supervision Meeting
But I'm not making a post like the last one I made *g* I was actually a little bit worried about the meeting, but that's because after much umming and aahing I decided it would be better for me if I could do the PhD part time. I was very naïve (stupid?) when I first applied and thought that I'd be able to work full time and study full time (after all, I did it for the last half of my MA) but I hadn't realised the sheer amount of work I'd need to do. Reading about fan fiction and The X Files alone just isn't enough-there are so many other areas to read around and theories to learn, and coming at this from the academic background I have means I'm playong catch up while studying. So I decided that doing the PhD part time would be better because I'd be putting the same amount of work in but would have much longer to write everything up. I'd emailed Matt to ask if we could discuss it and the response was positive but I was still a bit nervous.
Anyway, come today it actually went well. We talked about the fact I have to work because at the moment I have a £20 a week budget and that has to cover food, train travel and all other odds and sods. £20 is what I have left after my bills, etc have gone out, and I get my pay and help from my parents for those. So Matt's suggested I email our department head to ask about the possibility of teaching hours in the next academic year to supplement my income. He asked how much I was working, and I must have pulled a face because he said he wouldn't be pissed off if it was full time, he just needed to know. So I told him it is full time, and I work late every night to make up for the time I lose on a Wednesday morning (because work wouldn't grant me study leave). He said that it's impossible to work and study for a PhD and if I keep doing it I'll only get more stressed and harm my candidacy because there's no way I'll be able to complete to a high standard in 3 years. Which I agree with. So I'm going to email the department head, explain my situation and see what he says. Matt can't see any problem with me going part time; the only issue may be that I might have to pay back some or all of the grant I was given by the university, but we'll cross that when we come to it. So I'm going to send the email when I get home and go from there. I do feel like a weight has been lifted since making that decision though, and I'm glad today's meeting went well.
In other news, I can't believe a week ago I was on a train home after New York! I don't know where the time goes.
I'm presenting a paper at the Fangbangers conference next week and am freaking out about it! I haven't actually written the paper yet, and I don't want to go anymore! Except I have to so I will.
Oh, and it looks like my writing therapy article is going to be published as they've asked for a bio, and I've had an article on tattoos accepted for a new literary tattoo magazine, which makes me happy.
Anyway, come today it actually went well. We talked about the fact I have to work because at the moment I have a £20 a week budget and that has to cover food, train travel and all other odds and sods. £20 is what I have left after my bills, etc have gone out, and I get my pay and help from my parents for those. So Matt's suggested I email our department head to ask about the possibility of teaching hours in the next academic year to supplement my income. He asked how much I was working, and I must have pulled a face because he said he wouldn't be pissed off if it was full time, he just needed to know. So I told him it is full time, and I work late every night to make up for the time I lose on a Wednesday morning (because work wouldn't grant me study leave). He said that it's impossible to work and study for a PhD and if I keep doing it I'll only get more stressed and harm my candidacy because there's no way I'll be able to complete to a high standard in 3 years. Which I agree with. So I'm going to email the department head, explain my situation and see what he says. Matt can't see any problem with me going part time; the only issue may be that I might have to pay back some or all of the grant I was given by the university, but we'll cross that when we come to it. So I'm going to send the email when I get home and go from there. I do feel like a weight has been lifted since making that decision though, and I'm glad today's meeting went well.
In other news, I can't believe a week ago I was on a train home after New York! I don't know where the time goes.
I'm presenting a paper at the Fangbangers conference next week and am freaking out about it! I haven't actually written the paper yet, and I don't want to go anymore! Except I have to so I will.
Oh, and it looks like my writing therapy article is going to be published as they've asked for a bio, and I've had an article on tattoos accepted for a new literary tattoo magazine, which makes me happy.
Wednesday, 27 October 2010
I'm Determined Not to do This...
...every time I have a meeting with my supervisor but indulge me this once.
THERE IS SO MUCH TO DO AND SO MUCH TO LEARN AND I HAVE SO LITTLE TIME IN WHICH TO DO IT!
Ok, that last part is probably not true. A PhD takes at least 3 years (and I'm ignoring the fact I need to write a 20,000 word lit review by this time next year) but the first part is. I had a meeting today to talk about the notes I made when reading Carol Clover's Men, Women and Chainsaws, and lots of ideas came out of it (it was a 1 hour meeting that lasted for 2 hours) but there are so many more areas to examine than I first thought and so many books to read and ideas to organise. I actually spent part of the meeting telling myself it would be a huge waste of money to drop out this early but given we're only a few weeks into the term wouldn't I at least get some money back. Which isn't the way I want to think at all but this is really overwhelming. There's definitely a part of me that wishes I was just writing about TXF on my own, with no pressure to get a PhD or get published or present papers. But then that's definitely countered by the sheer enthusiasm I've encountered among fans who want to be interviewed and think this is really interesting and want to know more. I love studying TXF and talking about it. It's all these new theories I'm less sure about.
THERE IS SO MUCH TO DO AND SO MUCH TO LEARN AND I HAVE SO LITTLE TIME IN WHICH TO DO IT!
Ok, that last part is probably not true. A PhD takes at least 3 years (and I'm ignoring the fact I need to write a 20,000 word lit review by this time next year) but the first part is. I had a meeting today to talk about the notes I made when reading Carol Clover's Men, Women and Chainsaws, and lots of ideas came out of it (it was a 1 hour meeting that lasted for 2 hours) but there are so many more areas to examine than I first thought and so many books to read and ideas to organise. I actually spent part of the meeting telling myself it would be a huge waste of money to drop out this early but given we're only a few weeks into the term wouldn't I at least get some money back. Which isn't the way I want to think at all but this is really overwhelming. There's definitely a part of me that wishes I was just writing about TXF on my own, with no pressure to get a PhD or get published or present papers. But then that's definitely countered by the sheer enthusiasm I've encountered among fans who want to be interviewed and think this is really interesting and want to know more. I love studying TXF and talking about it. It's all these new theories I'm less sure about.
Friday, 8 October 2010
Training, Meetings and Suchlike
So today I had my starting out as a researcher training event and my first formal meeting with my supervisor. The training was good, even though some of it was obvious, some of it too long and some of it information we'd been given previously. There was an overview of our rights and responsibilities, detail on the graduate schools and a (very nice) free lunch.
The morning session I'm sure was designed to freak us out. Cardiff (and a few other UK universities from what I've heard) are very keen on students completing in 3 years, and that 3 years is going to go very quickly. That did scare me, especially as I have so much to learn and not much spare time in which to learn it. They are very good with things like interruptions to study and so on though, so if I run out of money or decide to do the course part time instead I think they'll be able to accommodate that. But still-there was an element of 'Oh. My. God' to it.
The afternoon did go better, though I'm sure part of that was the free food, and I did an online IT literacy thing that tells you where you need development on research skills, intellectual property right and copyright, and plagiarism. I scored above 90% in all of them which is apparently very good and means I don't need to worry so much.
After that was the meeting with my supervisor, which was both good and overwhelming. The first thing he told me was don't freak out, which was reassuring! There're a few of us without a cultural studies background so I shouldn't compare myself with those who know theories I don't. That's something I have been doing so it was nice to be told I'm an individual, will be treated as much and will do just as good a job. We then talked about the literature review, which should be 20,000 words, due in a year's time. My lit review is going to look at representations of gender in the media, audience studies, fanfic and a bit on TV (creation of characters, etc) so a lot of stuff to cover. I'm going to look at the gender side first, so I've got to read about Clover's 'final girl' and make detailed notes for our next meeting. We'll have fortnightly meetings for the 1st semester at least, which I am happy with because this is going to be a steep learning curve for me.
He did caution against accepting any more conferences this year given I'm going to have so much else on, and would probably like me to not do the gender one I'm at in November, though did say not to drop out because I've already agreed to it. That means I probably won't do the erotic adaptations one, which I really am gutted about because it's so interesting! But it makes sense because I have so much to learn and read about and I am a bit scared that I'm working, doing conference papers and learning BA level theories while writing this! On the plus side though, in a year or so I'll be able to submit chapters I'm writing to conferences, journals and even books, and be seen as an expert in my field rather than the girl who does this, that and the other (my words!).
He did say he's a really hands on supervisor and will give detailed feedback, so that's good. Given the review I had for the journal article I mentioned previously I'll be much happier with detailed feedback! We also broke my thesis down into more easily manageable parts (5000 words for intro, 5-10,000 for methods, etc. means half's written before we come to my actual research!) and I'll be writing a chapter on Mulder, which pleases me (and makes sense given you can't really talk about on without the other)! He did say it's a lot of work and he expects me to put in the time and effort, but he also thinks it's got the potential to be a really cool thesis when I'm done. So overall it was a really encouraging meeting, even with a bit of a 'walk before you can run' caveat!
The morning session I'm sure was designed to freak us out. Cardiff (and a few other UK universities from what I've heard) are very keen on students completing in 3 years, and that 3 years is going to go very quickly. That did scare me, especially as I have so much to learn and not much spare time in which to learn it. They are very good with things like interruptions to study and so on though, so if I run out of money or decide to do the course part time instead I think they'll be able to accommodate that. But still-there was an element of 'Oh. My. God' to it.
The afternoon did go better, though I'm sure part of that was the free food, and I did an online IT literacy thing that tells you where you need development on research skills, intellectual property right and copyright, and plagiarism. I scored above 90% in all of them which is apparently very good and means I don't need to worry so much.
After that was the meeting with my supervisor, which was both good and overwhelming. The first thing he told me was don't freak out, which was reassuring! There're a few of us without a cultural studies background so I shouldn't compare myself with those who know theories I don't. That's something I have been doing so it was nice to be told I'm an individual, will be treated as much and will do just as good a job. We then talked about the literature review, which should be 20,000 words, due in a year's time. My lit review is going to look at representations of gender in the media, audience studies, fanfic and a bit on TV (creation of characters, etc) so a lot of stuff to cover. I'm going to look at the gender side first, so I've got to read about Clover's 'final girl' and make detailed notes for our next meeting. We'll have fortnightly meetings for the 1st semester at least, which I am happy with because this is going to be a steep learning curve for me.
He did caution against accepting any more conferences this year given I'm going to have so much else on, and would probably like me to not do the gender one I'm at in November, though did say not to drop out because I've already agreed to it. That means I probably won't do the erotic adaptations one, which I really am gutted about because it's so interesting! But it makes sense because I have so much to learn and read about and I am a bit scared that I'm working, doing conference papers and learning BA level theories while writing this! On the plus side though, in a year or so I'll be able to submit chapters I'm writing to conferences, journals and even books, and be seen as an expert in my field rather than the girl who does this, that and the other (my words!).
He did say he's a really hands on supervisor and will give detailed feedback, so that's good. Given the review I had for the journal article I mentioned previously I'll be much happier with detailed feedback! We also broke my thesis down into more easily manageable parts (5000 words for intro, 5-10,000 for methods, etc. means half's written before we come to my actual research!) and I'll be writing a chapter on Mulder, which pleases me (and makes sense given you can't really talk about on without the other)! He did say it's a lot of work and he expects me to put in the time and effort, but he also thinks it's got the potential to be a really cool thesis when I'm done. So overall it was a really encouraging meeting, even with a bit of a 'walk before you can run' caveat!
Monday, 4 October 2010
Research and University
I spent yesterday researching for my papers, filling out my expression of interest form for teaching next year, reading Midnight Sun (Twilight from Edward's point of view and it's just as bad!) and generally pottering about. Speaking of research, I now have my first typed notes! They're not very long, but I think they're relevant. I hope they're relevant! The conference schedule is also up and I'm presenting in one of the last panels of the day. My name (my actual name!) is the first one out of the three of us so I don't know if that means I go first or what. I'm on the same panel as my friend though so that's making me feel better. Oh, and there's a conference budget in uni that'll pay for it =D
I have a meeting about teaching in uni tomorrow (though I'm not teaching this semester), followed by my first seminar (on semiotics, which I get more than I did but I'm still not sure I fully understand) on Wednesday and a training course and my first formal meeting with my supervisor on Friday. A busy week but I'm really looking forward to it.
I have a meeting about teaching in uni tomorrow (though I'm not teaching this semester), followed by my first seminar (on semiotics, which I get more than I did but I'm still not sure I fully understand) on Wednesday and a training course and my first formal meeting with my supervisor on Friday. A busy week but I'm really looking forward to it.
Wednesday, 29 September 2010
PhD Stuff
I had my PhD induction yesterday. It was so cool! I have been a bit freaked out lately about the amount of learning I'm going to have to do, coming from an English/Religous Studies background; the huge gap between MA and PhD work; my general intelligence levels and the like. So I was a bit nervous about the induction. Turns out I shouldn't have worried though! Only two out of eight students have a cultural studies background. The rest come from areas like English, politics and history. So we're all pretty much in the same boat when it comes to learning new things. Paul, our postgrad director, is also lovely - really chilled out and he has a sense of humour! Given he's teaching most of our theory modules over the next semester I think that's going to be a good thing.
There is a lot of work involved. The assesment for the theory module is a short presentation on how we will use the theory that is most relevant to our PhD project (plus submission of handouts and/or presentation notes) and a 3,000 word essay on the same topic. That'll be due someime in December. The topics we're going to cover are:
Semiotics
Encoding/Decoding
Gramsci
Althusser
Orientalism
Foucault
Habermas
Discourse Theory
Postcolonialism
Deconstruction
And I think semiotics is going to be one of the main theories I'll be using. I'm going to be in the States for the Orientalism and Foucault seminars (wonder if there's anyone in the States who can fill me in on Foucault?!) and at the vampires conference for the Discourse Theory seminar, but reading will be posted to our online learning centre and I'm planning on doing a lot of extra reading around the theories anyway.
The methods module is our second semester module, and that covers (funnily enough) methods of research. The assessment for that will be similar to the assessment for the theory module, so that's ok. At the end of the first year we also have to submit a 10,000 word essay covering pretty much what we've done in the first two assessments, plus a bit extra, and do a presentation to the department on the same thing. I'll have done one, probably two and maybe even three conferences by then though, so hopefully I can manage that!
Speaking of conferences, we also get a £400 conference budget so I'm applying to that to get some money towards the conferences I'm presenting at. I also got given a cheque for tuition fees, which I need to put in the bank.
So I'm feeling pretty good about the work. I'm still hoping I win the lottery so I can quit my day job, but my supervisor has said he's going to try and get me as many teaching hours as possible in the second and third years, and the current teaching is being reviewed and revised to allow all those who want to teach the chance to do so, so that's good.
My fellow students seem really nice too. The topics are incredible varied, though there is another girl looking at fandom who seems really cool! We spent ages talking about feminism/gender and the like; I rabbited on about TXF and she filled me in on Supernatural, which I'm going to have to start watching. We've exchanged email addresses too and are sending each other our proposals. I think we'll end up working closely on a few things. My supervisor, Matt Hills, also seems really nice. There was a wine and crisps thing after the induction where we got the chance to meet other PhD students and lecturers, so I spent a lot of that time talking to Matt. He seems pretty cool and I think we'll get on well. I have my first proper meeting with him a week Friday, and I'm hoping he'll tell me that the conferences I'm attending and the papers I'm writing will be enough to not be given additional work (like lit reviews!). We'll see. I'm also meeting one of the current PhD students who's looking at fanfic for a coffee and am really looking forward to that. A friend of mine from the MA knows another recently-finished PhD student who seems really nice, so I'm meeting her next week as well. Yay for meeting people and making friends!
I've got a training event a week Friday on starting out on a PhD, which is organised by the grad centre and is free. They run loads of training events for PhD students, all of which are free and all of which seem really useful, so I've got a few of those that I'd like to go on.
All in all I'm really excited now. I'm looking forward to starting my research properly and getting into seminars properly and generally being a proper PhD student. Yay!
There is a lot of work involved. The assesment for the theory module is a short presentation on how we will use the theory that is most relevant to our PhD project (plus submission of handouts and/or presentation notes) and a 3,000 word essay on the same topic. That'll be due someime in December. The topics we're going to cover are:
Semiotics
Encoding/Decoding
Gramsci
Althusser
Orientalism
Foucault
Habermas
Discourse Theory
Postcolonialism
Deconstruction
And I think semiotics is going to be one of the main theories I'll be using. I'm going to be in the States for the Orientalism and Foucault seminars (wonder if there's anyone in the States who can fill me in on Foucault?!) and at the vampires conference for the Discourse Theory seminar, but reading will be posted to our online learning centre and I'm planning on doing a lot of extra reading around the theories anyway.
The methods module is our second semester module, and that covers (funnily enough) methods of research. The assessment for that will be similar to the assessment for the theory module, so that's ok. At the end of the first year we also have to submit a 10,000 word essay covering pretty much what we've done in the first two assessments, plus a bit extra, and do a presentation to the department on the same thing. I'll have done one, probably two and maybe even three conferences by then though, so hopefully I can manage that!
Speaking of conferences, we also get a £400 conference budget so I'm applying to that to get some money towards the conferences I'm presenting at. I also got given a cheque for tuition fees, which I need to put in the bank.
So I'm feeling pretty good about the work. I'm still hoping I win the lottery so I can quit my day job, but my supervisor has said he's going to try and get me as many teaching hours as possible in the second and third years, and the current teaching is being reviewed and revised to allow all those who want to teach the chance to do so, so that's good.
My fellow students seem really nice too. The topics are incredible varied, though there is another girl looking at fandom who seems really cool! We spent ages talking about feminism/gender and the like; I rabbited on about TXF and she filled me in on Supernatural, which I'm going to have to start watching. We've exchanged email addresses too and are sending each other our proposals. I think we'll end up working closely on a few things. My supervisor, Matt Hills, also seems really nice. There was a wine and crisps thing after the induction where we got the chance to meet other PhD students and lecturers, so I spent a lot of that time talking to Matt. He seems pretty cool and I think we'll get on well. I have my first proper meeting with him a week Friday, and I'm hoping he'll tell me that the conferences I'm attending and the papers I'm writing will be enough to not be given additional work (like lit reviews!). We'll see. I'm also meeting one of the current PhD students who's looking at fanfic for a coffee and am really looking forward to that. A friend of mine from the MA knows another recently-finished PhD student who seems really nice, so I'm meeting her next week as well. Yay for meeting people and making friends!
I've got a training event a week Friday on starting out on a PhD, which is organised by the grad centre and is free. They run loads of training events for PhD students, all of which are free and all of which seem really useful, so I've got a few of those that I'd like to go on.
All in all I'm really excited now. I'm looking forward to starting my research properly and getting into seminars properly and generally being a proper PhD student. Yay!
Friday, 19 February 2010
Actual PhD Student!
I got an unconditional offer of admission onto the PhD in Journalism Studies at Cardiff University! My research topic: The G Woman and The Fowl One: Fanfiction Writers' Rewriting of Gender in The X Files.
This seems as good a time as any to start that blog I've always intended to write. Expect commentary on the PhD process, film and TV reviews, various other posts as and when they come to me, and general fangirl activity.
Next step, funding application forms.
This seems as good a time as any to start that blog I've always intended to write. Expect commentary on the PhD process, film and TV reviews, various other posts as and when they come to me, and general fangirl activity.
Next step, funding application forms.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)