INSERT INTO sites(host) VALUES('henryjenkins.org') 1045: Access denied for user 'www-data'@'localhost' (using password: NO) henryjenkins.org Estimated Worth $368,652 - MYIP.NET Website Information
Welcome to MyIP.net!
 Set MYIP as homepage      

  
           

Web Page Information

Title:
Meta Description:
Meta Keywords:
sponsored links:
Links:
Images:
Age:
sponsored links:

Traffic and Estimation

Traffic:
Estimation:

Website Ranks

Alexa Rank:
Google Page Rank:
Sogou Rank:
Baidu Cache:

Search Engine Indexed

Search EngineIndexedLinks
 Google:
 Bing:
 Yahoo!:
 Baidu:
 Sogou:
 Youdao:
 Soso:

Server Data

Web Server:
IP address:    
Location:

Registry information

Registrant:
Email:
ICANN Registrar:
Created:
Updated:
Expires:
Status:
Name Server:
Whois Server:

Alexa Rank and trends

Traffic: Today One Week Avg. Three Mon. Avg.
Rank:
PV:
Unique IP:

More ranks in the world

Users from these countries/regions

Where people go on this site

Alexa Charts

Alexa Reach and Rank

Whois data

Who is henryjenkins.org at org.whois-servers.net

Domain Name: HENRYJENKINS.ORG

Domain ID: D124632390-LROR

WHOIS Server:

Referral URL: http://www.godaddy.com

Updated Date: 2016-06-16T10:06:38Z

Creation Date: 2006-06-15T15:55:35Z

Registry Expiry Date: 2017-06-15T15:55:35Z

Sponsoring Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC

Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID: 146

Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited

Domain Status: clientRenewProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientRenewProhibited

Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited

Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited

Registrant ID: CR47796154

Registrant Name: Mike Mauro

Registrant Organization: USC Annenberg

Registrant Street: 3502 Watt Way

Registrant City: Los Angeles

Registrant State/Province: California

Registrant Postal Code: 90089

Registrant Country: US

Registrant Phone: +1.2137401290

Registrant Phone Ext:

Registrant Fax:

Registrant Fax Ext:

Registrant Email: mmauro

Admin ID: CR47796158

Admin Name: Mike Mauro

Admin Organization: USC Annenberg

Admin Street: 3502 Watt Way

Admin City: Los Angeles

Admin State/Province: California

Admin Postal Code: 90089

Admin Country: US

Admin Phone: +1.2137401290

Admin Phone Ext:

Admin Fax:

Admin Fax Ext:

Admin Email: mmauro

Tech ID: CR47796156

Tech Name: Mike Mauro

Tech Organization: USC Annenberg

Tech Street: 3502 Watt Way

Tech City: Los Angeles

Tech State/Province: California

Tech Postal Code: 90089

Tech Country: US

Tech Phone: +1.2137401290

Tech Phone Ext:

Tech Fax:

Tech Fax Ext:

Tech Email: mmauro

Name Server: pdns05.domaincontrol.com

Name Server: pdns06.domaincontrol.com

DNSSEC: unsigned

>>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2016-11-17T15:02:53Z <<<



For more information on Whois status codes, please visit https://icann.org/epp



Access to Public Interest Registry WHOIS information is provided to assist persons in determining the contents of a domain name registration record in the Public Interest Registry registry database. The data in this record is provided by Public Interest

Registry for informational purposes only, and Public Interest Registry does not guarantee its accuracy. This service is intended only for query-based access. You agree that you will use this data only for lawful purposes and that, under no circumstances

will you use this data to(a) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission by e-mail, telephone, or facsimile of mass unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations to entities other than the data recipient's own existing customers; or (b) e

nable high volume, automated, electronic processes that send queries or data to the systems of Registry Operator, a Registrar, or Afilias except as reasonably necessary to register domain names or modify existing registrations. All rights reserved. Publi

c Interest Registry reserves the right to modify these terms at any time. By submitting this query, you agree to abide by this policy.

Front Page Thumbnail

sponsored links:

Front Page Loading Time

Keyword Hits (Biger,better)

Other TLDs of henryjenkins

TLDs Created Expires Registered
.com
.net
.org
.cn
.com.cn
.asia
.mobi

Similar Websites

More...
Alexa鏍囬

Search Engine Spider Emulation

Title:Confessions of an Aca-Fan 鈥 鈥 The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins
Description:鈥 The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins
Keywords:Jenkins target_blank
Body:
Confessions of an Aca-Fan 鈥 鈥 The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins
Confessions of an Aca-Fan鈥 The Official Weblog of Henry JenkinsLatest Posts
Archives
About
Links
September 13, 2016
Asian-American Media Activism and Cultural Citizenship: An Interview with Lori Kido Lopez (Part One)
By Henry Jenkins Leave a Comment I recently announced the line-up of speakers for our Transforming Hollywood 7: Diversifying Entertainment conference to be held at USC on October 21 (You can still register here).
When we were putting together the conference, one of the first people who I considered was Lori Kido Lopez, a young faculty member in the Communication Arts Program at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a recent graduate from the USC Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism. Lopez had been an original member of my Civic Paths research group and her work on the race-bending movement which grew up in protest of the white-casting of the feature film based on The Last Airbender was a key influence on our work around fan activism. She entered that project through her interest in the collaboration between these fans and veteran Asian-American media activists who had for decades been struggling with issues of representational diversity and industry inclusion.
When I was asked to serve on her dissertation committee, I came to see her work on fan activism in a much larger context, which included everything from struggles over hateful stereotypes and racist jokes, to the efforts of Asian-Americans to use consumer power to put pressure on the advertising industry, to the emergence of YouTube as a space often more receptive to Asian-American performers. And earlier this year, she published her first book, Asian American Media Activism: Fighting for Cultural Citizenship, which is a first-rate contribution to our understanding of the current and historic struggles around diversity and inclusion in the media.
Unfortunately, Lopez can #8217;t join us for the USC event, having commitments to speak at another conference on the East Coast that same weekend, so I reached out to see if she would be willing to provide me with an interview as part of the lead-up to our conference. We cover a lot of territory in the interview which follows, yet it gives us glimpses into only a few of the richly documented and carefully interpreted case studies that run throughout her book. It is essential reading for anyone who is trying to follow these issues, and there #8217;s no question that the struggles over diversity and inclusion are one of the most powerful forces shaping the entertainment industry right now.
You begin the book with considerations of recent struggles over inclusion and representation within network television, focusing specifically on mixed responses from Asian-American audiences to聽Fresh Off the Boat聽and聽The Mindy Project.聽 Many in the television industry are watching responses to these programs, and others, such as聽Master of None, closely to see if they can figure out strategies for more diverse and inclusive programing that may nevertheless attract a 鈥渂roader鈥 audience. What insights would you like to see television executives take from the debates surrounding these and other recent programs?
聽
Some of my biggest goals for this book are to broaden our view of what should be done to improve representation of Asian Americans in the media, and to explain what makes media activism challenging. At this point, Asian Americans are still lagging far behind other minorities in nearly every area. There are no hour-long shows focusing on Asian American communities, Asian Americans are never nominated for acting awards, and movies routinely whitewash Asian leading roles and leave Asian actors the sidekick roles. I watched the movie Pitch Perfect 2 recently and was not surprised at all to see that Asian cultures were the butt of far too many jokes, and the one Asian American character is a soft-spoken weirdo. But listing problems is the easy part鈥攚hat鈥檚 harder is saying what we want the solution to be.
We are currently in a moment when we have more Asian American sitcoms than ever before, more Asian Americans in writers rooms and other production roles, more Asian American talent featured across alternative media platforms. Yet we still hear a lot of complaints and contradictory responses coming from Asian Americans. In this book I reveal the different stakeholders and participants engaged in the project of fixing these problems鈥攊ncluding volunteer media activists, regulatory and advisory boards, advertisers, YouTubers, fans, and other online participants. Once we recognize who all is working for this cause, we can start to see why their responses end up differing. That鈥檚 a pretty diverse group of people, they鈥檙e not going to agree about every little detail!
After explicating all of the different forms of media activism currently being undertaken, I would hope that what emerges for television executives is a clarity and sense of urgency about how dire the problem is and how they should be doing all they can to hire more Asian Americans at every level. They should then feel at peace with the fact that all of the media activists identified here will continue to criticize and ask for more, because they are tapping into a vibrant, long-neglected, politically engaged core of viewers who know better than to be satisfied with any one role, episode, or movie focusing on them鈥攖he battle will always continue as long as representations continue to be made, because racism persists and is at the heart of media inequalities and injustices. So I would hope that television executives can be sensitive to how complicated this situation is, while certainly affirming that every step they make in advancing the representations of Asian Americans is vitally important and desperately needed.
You argue that differences between Asian-American media activists have to do with different models of cultural citizenship. Explain this concept and outline some of the underlying models of cultural citizenship which have shaped debates around these programs.
We usually think of citizenship in legal terms, focusing on who is legally recognized as a member of a nation. But the idea of who belongs is also deeply cultural, and 鈥渃ultural citizenship鈥 is the idea that we also feel more or less like we belong within a nation depending on how we are treated, and how our identities and cultural practices are recognized. Asian Americans often are searching for a sense of belonging in the U.S. because they are always seen as outsiders, even though they were born here or lived here most of their lives. I connect this to media activism, because I think that when we are arguing about what kinds of representations we want to see of Asian Americans, we are really saying that we want the media to play a stronger role in contributing to Asian Americans feeling like they are cultural citizens.
But the concept of Asian American cultural citizenship means different things to different communities, and that causes disagreements even among activists. Some think that if we are cultural citizens then we will be treated 鈥渏ust like everyone else,鈥 not seen as different in any way. Others want to be recognized as a powerful group that deserves attention, particularly in terms of being able to wield economic and spending power. Others want to be able to control their own representations and make media on their own terms, no matter what that might look like. These different views on how cultural citizenship should be realized lead to different strategies when it comes to media activism.
You make the point in the introduction that a key difference between producers and activist is that activists see representation as a collective issue, whereas most of the mechanisms for thinking about media audiences within the entertainment industry stress individual consumer choices. Can these two perspectives be reconciled? Why or why not?
One way that the entertainment industry stresses individual consumer choices is through the idea that we have such a diverse range of media available, every individual can pick and choose a media diet that is particularly suited to their tastes. But at a very basic level, discourses of individualism are at odds with the fight for social justice. We have to be able to think beyond ourselves and our own desires in order to identify those who are being systematically disenfranchised, and do something to rectify that inequality at a broader level. This applies to Asian Americans media activists too鈥攖hey recognize that there is a widespread problem when it comes to representations of Asian Americans, and that we will have to work together in order to combat it. This often comes in two forms: encouraging media industries to cast more Asian Americans, and encouraging audiences to support works that represent Asian Americans well. If this is all there is, then the focus on individuals could be deployed by convincing individual producers it鈥檚 in their best interest to shift their casting practices, and convincing individual viewers it鈥檚 in their best interest to support Asian American media.
But one of the things that I work to reveal in the book is that there are a lot more ways we can impact change than just those two things, and there are a lot more people involved in media activism than just media producers and media consumers. For instance, we also need to consider the policies that are encouraging or discouraging media industries to shift their practices, the advertising agencies who work with corporations to identify consumer audiences and their needs, the wide array of producer-consumers who participate in the online arena. Once we expand our view of media activism to include these other sites, it becomes even clearer that media activism needs to take place at the level of the collective, rather than the individual. If we focus too much on the individual, we lose sight of the collective politics that have always animated antiracism on the part of Asian Americans.
What are some of the factors that led to the earliest forms of Asian-American media advocacy? How do these campaigns relate to the larger history of politics around race and representation in American media, going back to The Birth of a Nation, if not before? To what degree are the issues today the same as they were in the 1970s? What has shifted in terms of the models of change activists deploy to lobby for their cause? What has shifted in the industry鈥檚 responses to such campaigns?
聽
The history of Asian American media advocacy aligns with the rise of the Asian American identity itself. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, different Asian ethnic communities started coming together to protest the routine discrimination they collectively faced. In an act of self-determination, they called themselves 鈥淎sian American鈥 (marking 鈥淥riental鈥 as pejorative) and fought racism alongside Black, Chicano, and Native American activists. Issues of representation were always foundational to the Asian American Movement, in relation to both media and theater. In the 1970s we saw the birth of Asian American cinema, with independent filmmakers collectively documenting stories in Asian American communities and screening them at the very first Asian American film festivals. This was also the time when Asian American actors came together to fight against 鈥測ellow face鈥 and gain more roles in plays and movies, to resist harmful stereotypes, and to remove the use of slurs like 鈥渃hink.鈥
So we can see that as long as there have been 鈥淎sian Americans,鈥 there has been activism surrounding representations and media images. But if we look at the activist strategies deployed in these early days, we can trace a precedent all the way back to the African Americans who protested the racism of Birth of a Nation in 1915. And as you allude to, the general shape of media activism has remained the same since then: activists target the image鈥檚 creators, funders, or audiences. Sometimes they can push for legal repercussions. These are the same things that activists do today, largely because the same issues still exist, such as whitewashing, stereotypes, harmful depictions, a failure to hire minorities. But hopefully my book shows the way that even though this exact same form of activism is still around鈥攁nd plays a vital role in shaping media industries鈥攖here are also other forms of media activism available, and we need to recognize those as well.
Lori Kido Lopez is an Assistant Professor of Media and Cultural Studies in the Communication Arts Department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where she is also affiliate faculty in the Asian American Studies Program and the聽Department of Women鈥檚, Gender, and Sexuality Studies. 聽She is the author of Asian American Media Activism: Fighting for Cultural Citizenship and a co-editor of the Routledge Companion to Asian American Media.
Filed Under: Uncategorized
September 9, 2016
In a World Without Star Trek #8230;?
By Henry Jenkins Leave a Comment In case you #8217;ve been living under a rock, yesterday marked the 50th anniversary of the debut of Star Trek on American television, and as fans used to say back in the day, #8220;Star Trek Lives! #8221; A few weeks ago, I got contacted by Charlie Jane Anders from Wired, who asked me to contribute my thoughts for an article she was writing that asked the question, #8220;What if Star Trek Had Never Existed? #8221; I thought of it as a chance to do some speculative fiction about the alternative history of speculative fiction. Since her article has now appeared, I thought it would be interesting to share my full response with my readers. One always says more to reporters than ends up in the article, but in this case, I got more than a little carried away in true Trekker fashion.
First, I may be one of the few people who has seen multiple episodes of The Lieutenant, the television series which Gene Roddenberry made prior to Star Trek, and this series gives us some clue of what would have happened in his career if he did not produce Star Trek. Roddenberry always claimed that Star Trek was a way to inject serious ideas into network television and reflected his frustrations with what he couldn #8217;t do in a more realistic format. But in fact, The Lieutenant dealt consistently with the social issues of the time in the context of a serviceman drama in a more direct, less allegorical fashion. Roddenberry first worked with several members of the Star Trek cast on this series.Nichelle 聽Nichols, for example, was the guest star on an episode which dealt with racial discrimination and black frustration, getting more lines in that one episode than she got in Star Trek as a whole, and developing a much more complex character than Uhura.
So, we can imagine a cop series by Roddenberry as continuing along that same line, dealing with some of the controversial topics of his times, in much the same way that slightly later series such as Police Story and The Bold Ones did. I see Roddenberry as someone who took the #8220;ideas #8221; focused television drama of the 1950s anthology series (represented by someone like Rod Serling) and integrated them into genre television formulas at a time when the episodic series was becoming the dominant format on the medium. To me, this suggests that he might have been a significant television author even in the absence of Star Trek, where-as Roddenberry spent the rest of his career trying out other science fiction formats, trying to reinvent Star Trek. As much as I love Trek, it would have been interesting to see what Roddenberry was able to do in other genres.
Think about the state of science fiction as a genre in the 1960s. You are right that the Space Race was intensifying across this period, and there was a growing interest in science and technology, which would have been expressed via popular culture one way or another. Without Trek, these impulses were entering television in three ways. First, through the fantastic sitcoms #8212; ranging from the justly obscure It #8217;s About Time to the ever-rerun I Dream of Jeannie (both of which have astronaut protagonists) and extending out to things like The Munsters, The Adams Family, My Mother the Car, My Favorite Martian, etc. Second, through the Irwin Allen series #8212; which were also campy and spectacle-focused rather than ideas-focused: Lost in Space but also Land of the Giants, Time Tunnel, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea. And third, through anthology based series, such as Outer Limits and later Night Gallery, both of which are off-shoots of the ground-breaking Twilight Zone. None of these take us where Star Trek took science fiction on television #8212; adventures involving recurring characters which take us to new worlds that become vehicles for asking core questions about the nature of humanity.
We might also think about what science fiction in literature was during this period. Painting with broad strokes, the decade saw the emergence of social science fiction as a dominant subgenre (moving away from hard SF #8217;s focus on technological change) and with this shift, we are seeing a large number of works by feminist science fiction writers like Joanna Russ and Ursula LeGuin. More women are pouring into Science Fiction fandom which is why Star Trek fandom drew so many women in its foundational years (more on this in a moment). Part of what drew them was the social focus of many of the best Star Trek episodes, including recurring interests in accepting difference and some half-hearted representations of women in professional roles.
A second major trend in science fiction is represented by Harlan Ellison #8217;s Dangerous Visions anthology #8212; a generation of writers experimenting with the language of science fiction in highly reflexive ways, pushing for more literary respectability, and often exploring themes of alien sexuality. If we look at the science fiction writers Gene Roddenberry drew upon to write Star Trek, many of them come from this second group, including Ellison himself ( #8220;City on the Edge of Forever #8221;) but also Theodore Sturgeon ( #8220;Amok Time, #8221; #8220;Shore Leave #8221;) and Norman Spinrad ( #8220;The Doomsday Machine #8220;). So part of what Trek did was bring these developments in SF literature onto television and it is not clear which other producer of that period would have been able to bridge between these realms. Part of what made this work, though, was Roddenberry was also keeping the peace with older SF conventions #8212; especially a kind of technological utopianism, where improvements in communication, transportation, and manufacturing technologies have helped to resolve many of Earth #8217;s current problems. We can think about the communicator, the transporter, and the Replicator as magic devices which embody the possibility of technological enhancement as overcoming scarcity.
The 1960s is a more fertile period for science fiction in the cinema than many people recall, suggesting that we would have gotten to Star Wars and the improvements of special effects one way or another. But the trend there was towards a darker vision of the future, one which sees Earth #8217;s problems as deepening rather than being resolved through technological change. Some touchpoints here would include Panic in Year Zero, The Last Man on Earth, Crack in the World, Fairenheit 451, Fantastic Voyage, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Marooned, and especially The Planet of the Apes franchise. Extend this list just a few more years into the 1970s and you get The Adromeda Strain, A Clockwork Orange, The Omega Man, THX 1138, Silent Running, Soylent Green, and West World. Of these, Planet of the Apes was the most commercially successful and one that has only recently been relaunched to some critical or commercial success.
So, what if Planet of the Apes would have been the template for future SF rather than Star Trek? It would have been a bit goofy and larger-than-life though much less campy than Lost in Space at its worst Carrot people moments; it would still have dealt with core social issues, including racism and nuclear war, in an allegorical manner; it would have been a darker vision of what humans had become (including apocalyptic destruction) rather than the promise of a better world that Star Trek offered us. It seems a bit more far fetched but what if 2001: A Space Odyssey had become the template #8212; we might have ended up with something closer to Space: 1999, which was television #8217;s attempt to duplicate Kubrick #8217;s critical success without his artistic vision. It is cold, lifeless, and ponderous.
A final line of thought. Star Trek proved to be a watershed event in the development of modern fandom. Star Trek was the first media property to get a critical mass of fans, and thus, became the platform around which fan fiction and fan vidding developed. Star Trek drew in significant number of female fans who developed a distinctively different relationship to the genre than could be found in male-centered literary SF fandom. A particular set of ideas about gender and sexuality emerge there which were shaped both by feminist SF and Roddenberry #8217;s particular mix of genre elements and social causes. Roddenberry worked closely with those fans from the start #8212; previewing the pilot at World-Con and collaborating with them to develop the letter writing campaign that helped promote the visibility of the series and keep it on the air. In many ways, we can see this as the very start of the media industry #8217;s current fascination with #8220;fan engagement. #8221; So, for both fans and producers, Star Trek shaped what fandom looks like. The other series which generate this intense fan following during the late 1960s was Man From UNCLE. What would San Diego Comic-Con look like today if it had been organized around spies, cops, and detectives, as opposed to space operas and super-heroes? That really would have been an alternative universe.
Would most of these trends have developed one way or another? Sure, I don #8217;t think one series determines the evolution of popular media, but we would have a branching effect. Science fiction emerges as a popular genre, but perhaps with a different mix of genre elements, perhaps with a more pessimistic world view or a more campy tone, perhaps with a less active and creative fan community.
Filed Under: Uncategorized
September 8, 2016
Science Fiction World Building in a Capitalist Society: An Interview with Dan Hassler-Forest (Part Three)
By Henry Jenkins 2 Comments HJ: You write in your chapter on Battlestar Galactica and Game of Thrones: 鈥淔antastical capitalism instead expresses a worldview in which there is no outside, no future, no alternative. Its storyworlds aren鈥檛 utopian, because they lack the ability to imagine a future that is fundamentally different, let alone better. But they also aren鈥檛 traditionally dystopian, because their dark worlds aren鈥檛 warnings of what is yet to come. Instead, they constantly reiterate what is considered a basic truth of neoliberal capitalism: it鈥檚 a harsh world, in which nice guys finish last.鈥 Can you explain a bit more how and where this philosophy surfaces in these two series? In what ways might the focus on world-building and transmedia extension serve this function of closing off alternatives rather than simply expanding the scope of the story?
DHF: The reason I picked those two storyworlds as illustrations of 鈥渇antastical capitalism,鈥 which is my term for the kind of 鈥減ost-ideological鈥 storytelling we seem to be seeing so much of in the age of global capitalism, is that they both function as contemporary transformations of Tolkien and Star Trek. The ways in which they both foreground a kind of gritty visual realism, and feature plots full of abrupt narrative U-turns and surprise deaths, gives them what Raymond Williams would call a structure of feeling that resonates with the cultural logic of global capitalism.
On the one hand, we recognize and respond to the residual characteristics of the genres鈥 iconography and narrative patterns; but on the other, they have also attracted massive new audiences because of the uncanny ways in which they seem to reflect the social and political dynamics of our own increasingly precarious and unstable world. I think those elements are very obvious in both those franchises, and they seemed to me helpful lenses through which one might approach some of the ways in which fantastic fiction has come to absorb and reflect the cultural logic of global capitalism.
While there are of course big differences of tone, style, and genre between Game of Thrones and BSG, they both have a similar dynamic, at least in the sense that their popularity seemed to derive on the one hand from having richly drawn and appealing characters in a fantastic but very 鈥渞ealistic鈥 storyworld, and on the other from their thrilling ability to constantly upset audience expectations. Ned Stark鈥檚 beheading at the end of the first book/season of Game of Thrones served a very similar function as Adama being shot in the chest at the end of BSG鈥檚 first season: it radically undermines the sense of safety and stability that is so often grounded in patriarchal power as a signifier of continuity. Therefore, as fantastic transmedia storyworlds, I think they resonate so strongly with post-9/11 global capitalism because they reflect a social and economic context that is similarly unpredictable, crisis-prone, and precarious.
In terms of closing off alternatives, I think BSG is a very illuminating example of the paradoxical way in which transmedia world-building both opens up expansive imaginary empires while simultaneously diminishing fans鈥 meaningful participation: first, showrunner Ronald D. Moore ended up producing such an onslaught of supplemental material for the franchise that precious little time or space was left for fans to create their own expansions. (Suzanne Scott has very cleverly described this as fan culture鈥檚 transformation from 鈥淒o It Yourself鈥 to 鈥淒ownload It Yourself.鈥) And then of course they ended the series鈥 narrative with a finale that, again, seemed designed to seal off the storyworld from further expansion and interference. And thirdly, the show also appeared in a context of what Matt Hills has called 鈥渏ust-in-time fandom,鈥 where release and broadcasting schedules, the creation of transmedia supplements, and the constant tsunami of media news imposes severe limits on our ability to participate meaningfully, because we have to work so hard to keep up with everything.
HJ: In some ways this closing down of alternatives is ironically part of what allows people to describe such genre programs as 鈥渜uality television鈥: that is, it gets expressed through the moral ambiguities, fatalistic plots, and ensemble casts that often are what gets added to the mix to appeal to elite audiences. You provocatively describe this process as a kind of 鈥済entrification.鈥 Do other possibilities open up if we look at more 鈥渓ow-brow鈥 or even 鈥渢rashy鈥 programs? Your example here is Spartacus.
DHF: I do think so 鈥 or at least I really hope they do. After nearly two decades of ubiquitous 鈥渜uality TV,鈥 I certainly find myself growing increasingly skeptical and disenchanted with broadcasters鈥 transparent attempts to appeal very directly to the most privileged viewers. So whenever I hear someone saying that we live in a Golden Age of television, I hear in this the structural privileging of elitist notions of style, narrative forms, and media hierarchies. So in the same way that some of the most radical and subversive genre fiction was either produced outside of the cultural mainstream or appropriated by subcultural communities, I wanted to explore what a radical political perspective on less 鈥渢asteful鈥 genre fiction might yield.
I then became fascinated by the Spartacus TV show in the first place because it rejects the usual ways in which boutique cable dramas now give us sex and violence couched within an atmosphere of cultural and artistic legitimacy. So on The Sopranos or Deadwood or Game of Thrones, you鈥檙e guaranteed to get lots of boobs and blood, but it鈥檚 never presented as gratuitous.
Spartacus takes the opposite approach and really revels in elaborate images of sex and violence, but also always stages this in ways that comment on how the show shamelessly sells this back to you as entertainment. It really works in the same way as the best kind of pulp fiction: providing visceral and 鈥渢rashy鈥 thrills, while at the same time being very smart and political about it. So even though Spartacus clearly wasn鈥檛 made as a political text, its low-brow cultural status gives it a lot more opportunities for subversion because it鈥檚 sort of flying under the radar.
But then I also realized that this is also a limitation when you start looking at how fantastic fiction and popular culture can translate to political participation and anticapitalist activism. When you look at what鈥檚 going on within organized Spartacus fandom, it鈥檚 really all about those superficial elements of the show: the big fights, the romance, the costumes, etc. So while it鈥檚 a very interesting example of a certain kind of radical politics at work in a TV show, it鈥檚 also not something that鈥檚 being picked up outside of a certain very small circle.
HJ: You write, 鈥淭he storyworlds inhabited by zombies and cyborgs are post-historical in the sense that they lie not only beyond capitalism, but beyond traditional conceptions of human agency.鈥 So, can we imagine a politics without agency? Are these stories too abstracted from our current reality to enable us to imagine viable alternatives to them? Why do the human characters so often revert back to older, more patriarchal or tribal forms of social structure in response to the threat posed by these nonhuman agents?
DHF: I didn鈥檛 mean to suggest with this sentence that we can have political thought or action without agency, though I can see how it can be understood in this way. What I emphasize in this chapter on radical posthumanism is that the models of human identity and agency that we鈥檙e most familiar with tend to be embedded in the traditions of liberal humanism. Posthuman theory seeks to break away from those humanist traditions because of the oppressive binary structures they entail. In the book鈥檚 last chapter, I use the zombie and the cyborg not so much as actual alternatives to our social reality, but as fantastic ways of understanding and negotiating the posthuman turn.
Both those tropes offer very different but complementary perspectives on the concept of the posthuman. The zombie gives us the contradictory figure of the undead: animated flesh devoid of reason, and organized as a threatening horde that also represents a paranoid fear of (proletarian) collectives. Capitalist culture has a long history of vilifying and demonizing collective social forms and celebrating the individual, from Robinson Crusoe to Invasion of the Body Snatchers and The Walking Dead.
As a vital form of anticapitalist theory, posthumanism breaks away from the Cartesian subject and capitalism鈥檚 entrepreneurial individualism, and explores forms of agency and subjectivity that are multiple, diverse, contradictory, and collective. So the zombie presents both our anxiety about a posthuman future, as we see human survivors clinging desperately to older forms of social relations, while also sometimes exploring new alternatives and 鈥渮ombie consciousness.鈥
Still, I would say the zombie isn鈥檛 a very attractive role model if we want to think through the more positive implications of radical posthumanism. The cyborg, as an 鈥渋mpure鈥 hybrid of the organic and the mechanical, the 鈥渁uthentic鈥 and the 鈥渁rtificial,鈥 the human and the Other, is therefore probably a more relatable trope. Of course the cyborg is a familiar figure in queer and feminist theory, thanks mainly to Donna Haraway鈥檚 groundbreaking work.
But I also found it a particularly helpful example of radical political theory in the context of fantastic world-building, and drew in this chapter on Janelle Mon谩e鈥檚 series of sf concept albums, in which she is constantly in an in-between state, both as a human artist and performer and as her alter ego, a time-traveling android from the twenty-eighth century. In her work, you don鈥檛 see the constant retreat into older, more comfortable or even 鈥減rimitive鈥 human forms, but an embrace of technology, otherness, and posthuman multiplicity that I find very helpful and tremendously inspiring.
HJ: You correctly note that much writing on transmedia world-building #8212; including my own earliest definitions #8212; stress 鈥渃ontinuity鈥 or system building. But you end the book with appeals to hetroglossia and multiplicity as providing better models for realizing the potentials you identify in these series for social change. So, what models do we have for opening up more space for exploring alternatives? You talked about the 鈥渕uddled鈥 nature of many of these series, which some fans would argue comes about from the lack of attention to continuity and coherence. So, does the 鈥渕uddle鈥 make the contradictions visible? Do various forms of appropriation and remixing offer ways to more fully realize and engage with those alternatives?
DHF: That鈥檚 a great question 鈥撀燼nd a very difficult one! The process of writing this book actually began with an article that I wrote about Janelle Mon谩e and the Bakhtinian 鈥渉eteroglossia鈥 of her Afrofuturist storyworld. So one of my starting points was the idea that there is something fundamentally political about the creation of mappable, 鈥渞ationally鈥 organized, complex storyworlds with their various canons, narratives, characters, etc.
What I found so appealing about Mon谩e鈥檚 work was that all of it is profoundly multiple, always frustrating our desire to see order, structure, and reason. Studying her work, the cultural legacy of Afrofuturism, and alternative approaches to world-building helped me understand the political and ideological aspects of fantastic storyworlds a lot better, and provide a provocative and endlessly enjoyable puzzle without a solution.
But I also don #8217;t鈥 want to suggest that this more radical type of world-building, which I relate back to Philip K. Dick鈥檚 famous essay about worlds that are constantly falling apart, is the only model for exploring alternatives. Some of my favorite sf authors, like for instance Octavia Butler, China Mi茅ville, Kim Stanley Robinson, and Nnedi Okorafor, have created elaborate fantastic storyworlds that are politically radical in many ways, without necessarily becoming muddled or totally 鈥渃entrifugal.鈥 And as I try to make clear in the other chapters, most (if not all!) fantastic fiction is ultimately driven by a creative and imaginative desire to imagine social and political alternatives, which is hugely important cultural work irrespective of any individual storyworld鈥檚 politics.
So even though I think there鈥檚 something very interesting about those 鈥渕uddled鈥 storyworlds that refuse to make sense, either because authors like Dick or Mon谩e have designed them that way, or because of fandom鈥檚 uncontrollable participation, I don鈥檛 think that other forms therefore lack that kind of political potential.
What I鈥檝e tried to do with the different case studies in the book is to show how these storyworlds are grounded in contradictions, and that our interaction with them creates a dialectical movement that can be enormously productive. And even though I do think that fan culture currently seems to heading in a direction that is more collaborative than resistant, it is still up to us to correct that movement and find new ways to break free from Empire鈥檚 gravity. Like Hardt and Negri鈥檚 work on global capitalism, my book is also intended not so much as a critique, but as a call to arms 鈥撀燼nd I hope it will be read and interpreted in that way.
Dan Hassler-Forest works as Assistant Professor at Utrecht University #8217;s department of Media and Cultural Studies. He has published books and articles on superhero movies, comics, transmedia storytelling, adaptation studies, critical theory, Afrofuturism, and zombies. He co-edits the journal Science Fiction Film and Television聽with Sherryl Vint and Gerry Canavan, and the book series Transmedia: Participatory Culture and Media Convergence聽with Matt Hills.聽His most recent book,聽Science Fiction, Fantasy and Politics: Transmedia World-building Beyond Capitalism, will be published in August 2016. Dan loves to play the ukulele and still dreams of someday mastering the banjo.
Filed Under: Uncategorized
September 6, 2016
Science Fiction World Building in a Capitalist Society: An Interview with Dan Hassler-Forest (Part Two)
By Henry Jenkins Leave a Comment
HJ: Can you say something about the role that genre plays in your work, given you are writing here about texts that might variously be described as fantasy, science fiction, and horror? Do different genres raise different possibilities for thinking about these ideological concerns? You, for example, talk about pre-capitalism in terms of The Lord of the Rings, postcapitalism in the case of Star Trek, and even post-humanism in the case of The Walking Dead.聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽
聽
DHF: I鈥檓 fascinated by the different and sometimes contradictory roles that genre plays in our current media landscape. On the one hand, you might say our popular media have become very 鈥減ost-genre,鈥 at least in the sense that media producers tend to assume a very high degree of media literacy among the audience, and mix up often highly diverse genre elements into a franchise or even a single text. And on the other hand, genre fiction of the kind that has been described as 鈥減opular fantasy鈥 seems more visible and more dominant than ever.
The Marvel Cinematic Universe is a good example of both those aspects: we think of it as a superhero franchise, which is certainly perceived as a specific kind of genre with its own register, audience, industrial practices, et cetera. But at the same time, we see very clearly that the producers go out of their way to diversify the brand and include a wide variety of genre elements and registers. So if you compare Captain America: The First Avenger to the Netflix series Daredevil, we see huge tonal, aesthetic, and structural differences that we associate with very different genre traditions. Therefore, even though all these texts take place within a single storyworld and share a single brand identity, the franchise now incorporates elements from war films, film noir, martial arts movies, romantic comedy, action-adventure, conspiracy thrillers, and many more.
In this context it doesn鈥檛 make much sense to me to foreground the differences between traditional fantastic genres too much. Within Marxist criticism, which is largely the tradition I鈥檓 working from, there has been a tendency to privilege some popular genres over others because of certain assumptions about their respective political and ideological implications. So for instance, sf is still generally favored over fantasy because sf has been associated with reason and progress, while fantasy has suggested magic and conservatism.
While I can see where those distinctions come from, I鈥檝e never felt comfortable with them, and I think that the ease with which both media creators and audiences mix and match elements from across genres now makes it irrelevant, at least as a basic formal distinction. Therefore, I鈥檝e tried to show in the book that there are similar tensions that inform those different genre traditions across fantastic world-building.
When it comes to using terms like precapitalism, postcapitalism, and posthumanism, I can certainly see how we can intuitively associate them, respectively, with sf, fantasy, and horror in a sort of superficial way. But I also think it tends to break down once you start looking beyond the most obvious and easy examples. And even then, you have to ignore a lot of detail to hold on to that reading.
I do make that generalization in the book, associating Tolkien with a precapitalist fantasy and Star Trek with postcapitalism, just to get that ball rolling and establish what seems like an obvious relationship between these fantastic storyworlds and capitalism as a set of social relations.
But if you think about it, Star Trek is also obsessed with exploring 鈥減rimitive,鈥 precapitalist societies and comparing their possible developmental paths to their own, so it鈥檚 really much more layered and diverse than some might assume. And figures like Data and the Borg are obvious and complex ways of opening up discussions about posthumanism and organic-technological hybrids.
So I prefer to treat those assumptions about the political potential of specific genres as expectations that have accumulated over time, and therefore as flexible and contingent rather than as stable, transhistorical definitions. I therefore try throughout the book to approach fantastic world-building as something like a fuzzy set, with a variety of (sometimes overlapping) ways in which various genres, franchises, and brands deal with political and ideological questions.
HJ: You write early in the book: 鈥淭he triumph of geek culture and its 鈥渆verything is awesome鈥 mantra has in recent years created the seductive illusion that fans have graduated from consumerism to full participation in media production. But their actual degree of agency all too often resembles the quite limited movements available to a single player within a videogame: while experiencing the sensation of directing an avatar freely through an immersive and richly detailed environment, the player鈥檚 control is in fact limited by the design of the game to encourage and reward certain forms of behavior, while discouraging and even actively precluding others.鈥 Can you break this down for us? What roles are fans invited to play? What factors do you see as limiting and discouraging forms of viewer participation? What possibilities do you see as 鈥減recluded鈥 altogether?聽You certainly describe the way San Diego Comic-Con has become, in effect, an extension of the entertainment industry rather than a grassroots alternative to it, and I would agree, but you also point to examples of fan activism that have built upon the political themes of, for example, The Hunger Games as the basis for political mobilization and there are still many examples out there of fans writing counter-cultural alternatives to the mainstream depiction of gender, sexuality, and race.
DHF: I wanted to establish early on that I was approaching fandom from a critical perspective that presents them in the first place as participants in a political economy. It鈥檚 certainly a very polarizing way of introducing the nature of fandom, and probably one that will piss off a lot of readers!
It鈥檚 also obviously not the most nuanced way to describe fan culture, but I thought it was important to make this the starting point, and then try to weave back in more elements that still illustrate fandom鈥檚 remaining political potential. My main reason for taking this approach is that so much work within fan studies still seems to be about documenting and celebrating fan culture as a transformative and ideologically subversive set of practices. This is an idea that was of course established in your early work, especially in Textual Poachers but also to a large degree in Convergence Culture, and I can still see its attraction.
But as you have noted yourself in some of your more recent books, we are also becoming increasingly aware of the limitations of fandom and fan culture as a kind of model for social, civic, or democratic participation. In the twentieth century, genre fans had an outsider status that seemed to inspire a lot of creative and collaborative activity. These were so often provocative and subversive because they were reacting against a media industry that was much more monolithic and non-inclusive than our own.
Now that a lot of different factors have contributed to huge changes in media production and distribution, I no longer see those kinds of activities as having the same kind of political and ideological power. Instead, a lot of it seems to boil down to debates over representation and identity politics, which I certainly don鈥檛 want to disqualify, but which also align themselves rather easily with the cultural logic of neoliberalism. In other words: while debates about gender, race, and sexual identity in media are important discussions to have, they aren鈥檛 necessarily the most vital issues from an anticapitalist point of view 鈥 at least not unless you also explicitly see racism, sexism, and homophobia as interconnected aspects of capitalist exploitation.
If you look at what鈥檚 going on the big franchises, we see that the producers are only too happy to be more sensitive about questions of representation, and develop more roles for characters who aren鈥檛 necessarily white, straight, and male. But as happy as I am to see this happen, and in spite of the fact that there clearly still is a lot of work to be done, I found myself wondering about the endgame: supposing we win this culture war and we get wonderfully diverse casts in these franchises, and maybe even stories that move beyond our Eurocentric and teleological traditions 鈥撀爓hat then?
We鈥檇 be consumers of even better, and ideologically impeccable commodities, but we鈥檇 still mainly be consumers, stuck within capitalism鈥檚 unsustainable engine of endless accumulation.
This dynamic is also reflected in the digital infrastructure of Web 2.0: I think it鈥檚 safe to say that a lot more people are now creating and sharing fannish material about genre fiction than ever before. But it no longer functions as the kind of gift economy that used to typify fan culture. Instead, we鈥檙e creating free content for corporate media platforms that profit from our efforts.
So every time I share a meme or an animated GIF or a few snarky lines about the latest episode of The Walking Dead on Facebook, Twitter, or Tumblr, I am creating value for a corporation for which my material attracts other users, while they can also use my data to track my preferences and behavioral patters in order to monetize my online profile. This, I think, is a very scary change that entails not only the commodification of this type of 鈥渟haring,鈥 but that also imposes huge limits on the kinds of material that are being produced. The design of these platforms very strongly privileges material that is short, funny, and 鈥搕o use your own term鈥 highly spreadable.
Finally, one more thing I would mention is the sheer amount of material being produced, and the way in which fans are drawn into the media producers鈥 news cycle. Details about casting, plot, locations, sequels and franchising plans, reboots, and the strategic release of teasers, trailers, and leaked scenes now totally dominate film blogs and social media. There seems to be such a perfect alignment between media conglomerates鈥 increasingly canny release schedules and publicity plans and fans鈥 hunger for new information that it becomes a constant deluge of news that we鈥檙e all too eager to share.
So again, I think this really pushes the nature of participation away from creativity, subversion, and collaboration, and makes us willing and absolutely vital collaborators in the media industries鈥 publicity strategy.
HJ: I was interested in how you characterize your own role as a critic in terms of something close to a form of textual poaching. You write at one point, 鈥淚 am purposefully seeking out those Tolkienian elements that are worth salvaging from an anticapitalist perspective, while also identifying and critiquing the factors that impede or even contradict such a reading.鈥 Where fan fiction might go further into poaching is that they might construct alternative narratives which show us what might happen if we took the possibilities implicit in these texts further. 聽For example, you write, 鈥淕iven Star Trek鈥檚 political potential, it is remarkable how rarely it has explored the social, economic, and cultural implications of a world beyond capitalism.鈥 Yet, there are examples quite early on in ST fan fiction #8212; for example, Leslie Fish鈥檚 The Weight, which I discussed in Textual Poachers or Jane Land鈥檚 Demeter which I discuss in Science Fiction Audiences #8212; which do explore what alternatives to capitalism and patriarchy might look like. What might the academic equivalent of fan fiction contribute? 聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽
DHF: My two great passions are fantastic fiction and radical critical theory. And a large part of my inspiration for this book comes from the passionate and joyful ways in which fandom has engaged with and transformed fantastic storyworlds, which is something I鈥檝e known personally my entire life, and have always loved about your work.
But I鈥檝e also always been skeptical about the question whether fan culture really is changing the world for the better: I just can鈥檛 help but wonder whether at least some of those staggering amounts of energy, imagination, and creative ability couldn鈥檛 be put to better use. I suspect the development of my other great passion besides fantastic fiction derives in part at least from that feeling: what I love so much about radical critical theory is how it is fundamentally a project in which we try to see past the surface and better understand a deeper reality, while at the same time trying to imagine what another, hopefully better world would look like.
Although I therefore think that academic studies of fantastic fiction (and its fandom) has a lot in common with critical theory, they do often seem to run in opposite directions. Radical philosophers and political theorists for instance either ignore fantastic fiction, or only use it rather irresponsibly to illustrate a theoretical point they鈥檙e trying to make (as Slavoj 沤i啪ek so often does). By the same token, scholars working on fan culture or sf studies are often so invested in the specifics of their objects that they sometimes lose the bigger picture, or simply get carried away by their own enthusiasm for their research.
I also feel that those working in critical theory feel pressured to be critical about everything, using clever readings and complex theory to elevate themselves above the things they鈥檙e talking about; while a lot of those in fan studies, for instance, seem to feel the opposite pressure to come up with examples of productive transformation, subversion, and resistance, thus legitimizing both their research objects and their personal and professional interests. And as someone who feels like he鈥檚 got one leg in each of those worlds, I could really feel that tension as this project first took shape.
But while my original perspective was completely critical and quite negative about the current state of fandom, I soon realized that I didn鈥檛 want to write a book that would amount to little more than a grumpy Marxist鈥檚 critique of transmedia world-building as a purely political economy. Besides, I also felt I had already done something like that in my first book Capitalist Superheroes, which performs that kind of ideology critique in what I now tend to think is a fairly one-dimensional way.
So I thought this next book might benefit from a little more contradiction, imagination, and (dare I say it?) optimism. These were all things that I recognized and responded to strongly not only in Hardt and Negri鈥檚 work, but also in other huge influences like Jeremy Gilbert, David McNally, Jodi Dean, Steven Shaviro, and Mark Fisher.
In the end I realized that what I liked so much about all of their writing was that it not only helped me understand the world better, but also gave me a real sense of possibility for the future. So even though a book鈥檚 critical focus is on explaining some of the biggest problems facing us today, their energy is at the same time directed towards creating a sense of hope, even of infinite possibilities. I tried to let that sense guide my own thinking on this book: not wanting to pull any punches on the one hand, but also finding ways to resist the purely critical mode that feels like the main trap of radical critical theory.
Trying to find the right balance between the two was the hardest thing for me, and I have no idea to what extent I succeeded. But ideally, the book would reflect that wonderful Antonio Gramsci quotation: 鈥淚鈥檓 a pessimist because of intelligence, but an optimist because of will.鈥
Dan Hassler-Forest works as Assistant Professor at Utrecht University #8217;s department of Media and Cultural Studies. He has published books and articles on superhero movies, comics, transmedia storytelling, adaptation studies, critical theory, Afrofuturism, and zombies. He co-edits the journal Science Fiction Film and Television聽with Sherryl Vint and Gerry Canavan, and the book series Transmedia: Participatory Culture and Media Convergence聽with Matt Hills.聽His most recent book,聽Science Fiction, Fantasy and Politics: Transmedia World-building Beyond Capitalism, will be published in August 2016. Dan loves to play the ukulele and still dreams of someday mastering the banjo.
Filed Under: Uncategorized
September 1, 2016
Science Fiction World Building in a Capitalist Society: An Interview with Dan Hassler-Forest (Part One)
By Henry Jenkins Leave a Comment Most work on transmedia storytelling and world-building to date has come from a formalist perspective, asking how these techniques transform our traditional understanding of how classical Hollywood told stories. Or it comes from an ethnographic direction #8212; how do these techniques reflect the new interplay between media producers and consumers, with these relations often understood through the lens of a Fandom Studies approach. Or they are written from a production perspective #8212; how might a media-maker apply these techniques to his or her own work or how did a particular production evolve new approaches to serve the particulars of its content and market. All of these are important questions to ask about transmedia and all are approaches I #8217;ve featured on my blog in the past.
A few months back, though, I was delighted to get a chance to read an advance copy of a recently released book, Science Fiction, Fantasy and Politics: Transmedia World-Building Beyond Capitalism, which adopts a more ideological perspective. Here #8217;s what I wrote as a blurb for the book:
#8220;Science Fiction, Fantasy and Politics explores the intersection between world-building as practiced in speculative fiction and the desire to imagine (or constrain) alternatives to contemporary capitalism. He writes knowingly, affectionately, yet critically, about franchises as diverse as Battlestar Galactica, Game of Thrones, Hunger Games, and The Walking Dead, mapping the ways each embodies contradictions at the heart of neoliberal capitalism #8212; contradictions that surface in terms of their formal properties as transmedia franchises, their commercial contexts, and the consumer practices they inspire. #8221;
I will be honest that this was not always an easy read for me #8212; the book #8217;s author, Dan Hassler-Forest challenges many of the core assumptions that have governed my own work on these topics. I emerged from the experience a tad bruised, perhaps, but also recharged, full of new thoughts and perspectives I would have encountered nowhere else.
As my blurb suggests, this guy knows his stuff: he isn #8217;t sniping from a high altitude above the text, tossing theory in coke bottle down to the masses below, and he isn #8217;t cherry-picking awkward moments to skewer, and he isn #8217;t dealing with sweeping generalizations. He brings his critical apparatus to bear here but he also comes in as someone who has a fan #8217;s care for the nuances and particulars and a deep respect for the core building blocks of the genres he discusses. He knows his stuff and that #8217;s what makes his ideological critiques hard to ignore.
In the interview that follows, you will see us wrestling a bit with some of the core premises of the book. I push back where I feel I must, but in the spirit of trying to pull out his core assumptions. We cover a lot of ground here #8212; intellectually and culturally #8212; and there #8217;s sure to be something in all of this that will provoke you to reconsider some of your own cherished assumptions about 聽transmedia and world-building.
HJ: Most work in transmedia studies to date has approached world-building from a formal or production studies perspective, whereas your approach might best be described as ideological analysis. What do you see as the value of concepts such as transmedia, franchises, and worlds for understanding contemporary struggles over capitalism?
DHF: I think these concepts are enormously important for understanding both the economic and cultural logic of global capitalism. First, we鈥檝e seen how transmedia franchising and world-building has really surged over the past two decades, to the point where fantastic fiction seems to dominate the media industries and our cultural landscape more and more. For fans of these genres, it鈥檚 great in a way, because there is such a wealth of material being developed and produced in popular fantasy, and most of it caters directly to fans鈥 sensibilities and desires. At the same time, I also think this is ultimately bad for fan culture, because all this stuff is being produced by media conglomerates working in a very competitive environment, and the sheer amount of material seems to impact fans鈥 ability to participate creatively in any meaningful way.
I think this also illustrates the larger dynamic of global capitalism, where those who can afford it have access to cool technology and a wide variety of awesome entertainment, while we surrender control over these storyworlds to the corporations who claim ownership over properties that should be considered a form of cultural commons.
Second, I see in fantastic world-building a fundamental desire to imagine alternatives to the social and material realities of modernity, and therefore of capitalism. We do this by imagining and expanding complex and immersive fantasies about worlds that are pre-capitalist (as we see in a lot of fantasy) or post-capitalist (which defines a lot of sf), which gives world-building a very fundamental political direction. Even if we鈥檙e not necessarily aware of it, engaging in fantastic world-building helps us reflect on so many aspects of our world and how we understand it, and that鈥檚 an especially important cultural activity in our current context, where capitalism has become the only game in town. And since fantastic world-building developed historically as a highly participatory and collaborative cultural activity, it has a lot of political potential.
HJ: The central frame running through your book draws on Hardt and Negri鈥檚 notion of Empire and the Multitude. Can you explain these concepts for the reader? What is the underlying model of social and political change you are drawing upon across the book?
DHF:The major benefit of Hardt and Negri鈥檚 work on globalization and capitalism is that it provides a fairly straightforward and easy-to-understand set of terms for understanding the basic notion of fully global capitalism. Since I鈥檓 trying to bridge a gap between radical critical theory on the one hand, and fan studies, science-fiction scholarship, and transmedia storytelling on the other, I thought their work would make a nice fit.
Because even though their major works provide a lacerating critique of global capitalism 鈥搘hich they call 鈥淓mpire鈥濃 they are ultimately also optimists who have great faith in the creative, democratic, and collaborative potential of the people, for which they use the word 鈥渕ultitude.鈥 This term is so much more appropriate to our current era because it isn鈥檛 reductive and homogenizing in the way that more traditional Marxist terms like 鈥減roletariat鈥 can be. Instead, they emphasize that the multitude is fundamentally plural and radically diverse, both in the larger sense (allowing for an unlimited diversity of identities) and at the individual level (meaning that the individual subject isn鈥檛 singular but plural).
For anticapitalist theory and activism, this plurality is obviously both an obstacle and an opportunity: if we all see ourselves as unique snowflakes, preoccupied with our own special interests, it鈥檚 that much harder to develop empathy, solidarity, and the kind of collective action that would be necessary to overcome Empire鈥檚 hold over us, and develop postcapitalist alternatives.
But at the same time, the cultural, social, and technological changes that have facilitated the rise of global capitalism can鈥檛 be controlled by Capital itself: above all, Hardt and Negri see the multitude overcoming Empire not by retreating from digital culture and immaterial labor, but by reclaiming it for its own ends. So again, I see a lot of provocative parallels with transformative fan culture and the way it developed as a set of social and cultural practices that were also about embracing, appropriating, and transforming the products of powerful media corporations.
HJ: You are interested in identifying ways that popular narratives confront the contradictions at the heart of global capitalism, sometimes even introducing what you describe as 鈥渁nticapitalist elements that can contribute to the important cultural work of imagining viable political alternatives.鈥 How are you identifying what counts as an 鈥渁nticapitalist element鈥 and how do we think about the paradox of 鈥渁nticapitalist鈥 elements circulating within texts like The Hunger Games that are themselves generating profits for multinational media conglomerates?
DHF: This is one of the weirdest and most bewildering contradictions of mass media and commodified popular culture. Can culture be anticapitalist if it is produced, distributed, and consumed as a commodity within a capitalist system? Is there such a thing as anticapitalist culture, and, as Jeremy Gilbert asks in his terrific book Anticapitalism and Culture, would we even recognize it if we saw it?
In the twentieth century, before capitalism became truly global, we came to experience mass media as pretty homogenous and formulaic, and Marxist criticism saw in them the constant reproduction of a 鈥渄ominant ideology.鈥 So in that context, commercial culture was seen by many as a type of propaganda, where subversion and resistance was only really possible in 鈥渦nderground鈥 productions, and of course in fans鈥 transformative appropriation of these properties.
But in the twenty-first century, we鈥檙e seeing a much more diverse media landscape that has fewer restrictions in terms of its ideological contents. Things like Hunger Games and the TV show Mr. Robot are both good examples of popular texts that tap into a certain anticapitalist energy, even if there is also a lot of ambivalence and even contradiction within the texts themselves 鈥 as well as a wide range of readings in terms of their reception.
What I was very interested in exploring and ultimately foregrounding was the way in which some pop-cultural icons can suddenly cross over into political activism, like the 鈥淔rodo Lives!鈥 slogan used by protestors during the Vietnam War, the Anonymous mask from V for Vendetta, or anti-government activists in Thailand making the three-finger salute from Hunger Games. I think they show that these commercial franchises can also become part of a common cultural vocabulary, not because the texts themselves are necessarily anticapitalist or even entirely political, but because certain communities interpret them that way, and use the iconography in a context that makes those gestures and the texts they come meaningful as political symbols.
Dan Hassler-Forest works as Assistant Professor at Utrecht University #8217;s department of Media and Cultural Studies. He has published books and articles on superhero movies, comics, transmedia storytelling, adaptation studies, critical theory, Afrofuturism, and zombies. He co-edits the journal Science Fiction Film and Television with Sherryl Vint and Gerry Canavan, and the book series Transmedia: Participatory Culture and Media Convergence with Matt Hills. His most recent book, Science Fiction, Fantasy and Politics: Transmedia World-building Beyond Capitalism, will be published in August 2016. Dan loves to play the ukulele and still dreams of someday mastering the banjo.
Filed Under: Uncategorized
August 30, 2016
Break the Election: How to Learn Media Literacy by Remixing Political Advertisements (Part Two)
By Henry Jenkins Many educators may be concerned about the copyright implications of using remix in their classrooms. Some also confused remix and plagiarism. How would you address these concerns?
It鈥檚 really too bad when these concerns result in chilling innovative education, which includes using remix and technology in the classroom. Remix and plagiarism are of course not the same thing; plagiarism is trying to pass off someone else鈥檚 work as your own. Any good remix cites sources and/or uses original ideas to back up an argument, just as students are expected to do when they write a paper. A remix is really just a multimedia essay.
We have a LAMPlit resource guide about fair use, written with K-12 teachers in mind, but there are other resources out there too. I especially like Stanford University鈥檚 Copyright amp; Fair Use Center, American University鈥檚 Center for Media and Social Impact and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet amp; Society at Harvard University also has some great research plus a pro-bono cyberlaw clinic.
Some might argue that young people are being taught through many different channels to be cynical about political institutions. Is there a danger that these remix practices might contribute to cynicism? How do we distinguish between skepticism and cynicism?
For me, cynicism entails apathy. Skepticism entails constant curiosity. It鈥檚 easy to feel frustrated and bombarded in a media-saturated environment, and sure, confronting those media can potentially feed cynicism. But we try to focus on remix as an active means of critical expression, which is valuable in a way that sitting around and complaining just is not. If you can create an argument and back it up with facts 鈥 and, even better, point to a positive way forward 鈥 then your skepticism is healthy and useful. We think remix fosters this.
What have emerged as some of the common themes in student remixes and critiques of existing political advertisements?
One is authenticity. Students are aware that candidates are trying to appeal to the masses, and that in order to do that they need to seem likable in media. You can see those themes in this remix on Hillary Clinton and this one on Marco Rubio.
There鈥檚 also an interest in pointing out how emotionally manipulative the ads can be, like this one remix about Ted Cruz.
I should say there are a lot of great remixes we haven鈥檛 been able to post publicly because they don鈥檛 meet fair use standards. What makes them great is that the students are clearly very passionate. Fair use is really hard, and takes a lot of practice. We don鈥檛 always have as much time as we鈥檇 like in programs to go back and refine videos, but I鈥檝e been so impressed with our students鈥 ability in general to call out political ads for not being substantial enough. They see that publicity stunts, like dancing on Ellen or cooking bacon on a machine gun, happen at the expense of talking about the real reasons why people should vote for someone.
This campaign has shaped into one of the most negative in American presidential history. What should we be telling students specifically about the impact of negative advertising in the campaign process?
This is a great time for students to be learning the difference between feelings and facts. Negative ads often make us feel angry, but they don鈥檛 usually make us think too hard about facts, or think that we should question those facts in any way. I think it鈥檚 less about what we should be telling students about the impact of negative ads, and more about what we should be helping them ask and explore. Such as, what鈥檚 the difference between negative advertising and bullying? When it comes to negative ads, do you think the facts matter to people? Why would someone engage in, or specifically avoid, negative advertising?
The rhetoric in this campaign has been extremely negative but I think our job as educators is to not let that poison our young people鈥檚 interest in civic engagement. It鈥檚 getting harder and harder to convince people they should take part in such an imperfect democratic system, but I would never counsel a young person to sit out of voting, knocking on doors or forming and sharing an informed opinion. We鈥檝e already seen how remix can be used to powerful effect in this campaign, by the candidates themselves and by citizens. What I want to see is how it can be used to powerful effect in civic engagement for the future 鈥 no matter who winds up winning this election.
D.C. Vito co-founded The LAMP (Learning About Multimedia Project) in 2007. Since that time, The LAMP has brought media literacy training to over 3,000 youth, parents and educators, transporting equipment and facilitators directly to communities in need of its services. Under Mr. Vito鈥檚 leadership as Executive Director, The LAMP鈥檚 programming capacity has grown tremendously from serving roughly 75 students in the 2010-2011 school year, to serving over 850 students by the 2011-2012 school year. Mr. Vito worked as a community organizer for many years prior to The LAMP, having served in the Peace Corps in Mali, managing campaigns for City Council, State Senate and Presidential candidates, and spent eight years acting as Chairman of the Youth Services and Education Committee on Brooklyn鈥檚 Community Board Six. He currently sits on the Board of Directors for the聽National Association for Media Literacy Educators (NAMLE), is a member of the NationSwell Council and was in the 25th cohort聽at the聽Coro New York Leadership Center.
Emily Long has been with The LAMP since 2008, managing grant writing, project development, internal and external communications, special events, website and social media, strategic partnerships and The LAMP鈥檚 MediaBreaker/Studios video remix platform development project Emily earned her Masters of Fine Arts in Dramaturgy and Script Development from Columbia University in 2006. While at Columbia, she edited and catalogued hundreds of interviews and transcripts for the Oral History Research Office, focusing primarily on their 9/11 Project. She has extensive experience with numerous media through her work with Columbia鈥檚聽Rare Books and Manuscript Library,聽Atlantic Theater Company,聽Sesame Workshop聽and others.
Filed Under: Uncategorized
August 26, 2016
Break the Election: How to Learn Media Literacy by Remixing Political Advertisements (Part One)
By Henry Jenkins As we start back to school, many of us are going to be looking for new ways to provide our students with the media literacy skills and contextual background needed to make sense of the craziness which is the 2016 Presidential Campaign ( #8220;All Bets Are Off #8221;). One of the many groups working to address these needs is LAMP ( #8220;Learning About Multimedia Project #8221;) which describes itself as #8220;bringing 21st-century survival skills to all New Yorkers. #8221; They have adopted a hands-on approach where young people are encouraged to develop critical media literacy by breaking down, remixing, and commenting upon campaign commercials released by the various candidates, using their Mediabreaker Critical Remix tool. 聽I #8217;ve long advocated that appropriation represents a core cultural competency of our times and that schools should be doing more to build critical remixing into their instruction. I was thus delighted to learn of this great example and happy to be sharing it with my readers. What follows is an interview with聽D.C. Vito and Emily Long, two of the organization #8217;s leaders, as they share a progress report on Break the Election.
Interestingly, we are seeing more and more examples this election cycle where the campaigns or the PACS working on their behalf are actively appropriating and remixing media towards their own ends. Consider, for example, this video which juxtaposes clips of Donald Trump with bullies from 1980s comedies. Or this one which remixes various Republicans talking about Trump #8217;s tax returns.
The first adopts a playful approach to remix, using popular media to comment on real world political concerns, where-as the other raids the media archive, creating a new context for understanding previous statements. But both demonstrate how remix practices are being deployed by the campaign. What do we do now #8212; remix the remixes?
Give us some background on Break the Election. How did this project come about and what are you trying to achieve?
We first started thinking about Break the Election during the 2012 presidential race. Up until that point, we were using video remix in our programs for the purpose of remixing and talking back to commercials. We knew we wanted to develop our own video remix tool 鈥 up until that point, we used iMovie, which was too complicated for a lot of our students and teachers to learn quickly 鈥 but couldn鈥檛 justify doing it if the only media we were going to remix were commercials. We knew there were other applications for remix, and it was like a light bulb for us as we were iterating the new tool amid an environment saturated with political campaign ads.
The new tool, of course, was what is now MediaBreaker/Studios, a free online teaching platform built around our MediaBreaker video editing tool designed specifically for remixing third-party video. We鈥檝e done programming where students remix not just commercials and political ads, but also movie trailers, TV shows, music videos鈥ou name it.
One of our largest goals was to provide pathways for young people to become engaged in the election in a way that we hoped would be authentic to their interests. Break the Election allows our students who are still too young to vote to have a say about the issues, and with just every moment of the campaign trail being caught on video, they have plenty of material to use to make their point. It also challenges them to look at how public opinions are shaped by media, and ask some uneasy questions about the democratic process. Do we elect the candidate who is most capable, or do we elect the candidate with the strongest, best-funded media machine? How well do we really get to know a candidate, when our perspective is shaped by outlets trying to keep up with a 24-hour news cycle? These are tough questions, but they have to be asked in a media literate democracy.
Why do you think remix is an important strategy for developing critical media literacies?
Remix requires people to flex every muscle in the standard definition of media literacy, which is to 鈥渁ccess, analyze, evaluate and create鈥 media. You have to source your material, which means you need to be able to access it, but you also have to analyze and evaluate in the process of making critical statements and transforming the message 鈥 which happens to also be legally required, if you鈥檙e going to stick to fair use guidelines so you can share your work publicly. If you can鈥檛 remix, I don鈥檛 think you鈥檙e media literate. Remix really is the canary in the coal mine for critical media literacy.
聽
Why the focus on political advertisements?
One of the reasons we like remixing commercials in general is because of the form. Commercials are short, tight persuasive messages, and usually they鈥檙e entertaining so young people enjoy working with them. Since they鈥檙e only about thirty seconds long, they can be unpacked in a relatively short time, which is important for teachers who only have forty or fifty minutes in a class.
Political advertisements are also rich troves of messaging. They鈥檙e very challenging from an information literacy perspective, but they鈥檙e also designed to solicit really strong emotions about things that matter deeply, like the type of world we want to live in. Part of what we鈥檙e doing is teaching young people to not be indifferent to political ads 鈥 even though they are too young to cast a vote, they鈥檙e still part of a target audience, from now through the rest of their lives. Media literacy is hardly ever more important than when you鈥檙e using it to decide who should represent your voice, and you鈥檙e never too young to start practicing and applying those skills.
How might educators bring the Break the Election activity into their classrooms?
We have a series of free hands-on resource guides called LAMPlit, and we created one especially for Break the Election. It takes educators step-by-step through the process of teaching students to create critical remixes rooted in political advertisements, and includes a brief history of political campaign ads to help educators contextualize their unique form and purpose. The LAMPlit also has links to other resources to help educators find and select political ads to remix, and prompts from which educators can choose. And of course educators should feel free to adapt the activities in whatever way makes sense for their students and classrooms.
What advice do you have about creating the right atmosphere in the classroom for political remix?
We鈥檝e found it鈥檚 very important to emphasize that remixing a political ad isn鈥檛 meant to be an act of partisanship. You can, and should, remix ads based on their content, not based on the candidate you happen to support. The point is to be critical, and there is plenty to critique when it comes to political messaging whether you鈥檙e Democratic, Republican, Independent or something else. The focus needs to be on facts, not hyperbole, and healthy, respectful debate. If a teacher thinks the current election is too polarizing for a productive learning experience, we suggest he or she try looking at more historical material.
D.C. Vito co-founded The LAMP (Learning About Multimedia Project) in 2007. Since that time, The LAMP has brought media literacy training to over 3,000 youth, parents and educators, transporting equipment and facilitators directly to communities in need of its services. Under Mr. Vito鈥檚 leadership as Executive Director, The LAMP鈥檚 programming capacity has grown tremendously from serving roughly 75 students in the 2010-2011 school year, to serving over 850 students by the 2011-2012 school year. Mr. Vito worked as a community organizer for many years prior to The LAMP, having served in the Peace Corps in Mali, managing campaigns for City Council, State Senate and Presidential candidates, and spent eight years acting as Chairman of the Youth Services and Education Committee on Brooklyn鈥檚 Community Board Six. He currently sits on the Board of Directors for the聽National Association for Media Literacy Educators (NAMLE), is a member of the NationSwell Council and was in the 25th cohort聽at the聽Coro New York Leadership Center.
Emily Long has been with The LAMP since 2008, managing grant writing, project development, internal and external communications, special events, website and social media, strategic partnerships and The LAMP鈥檚 MediaBreaker/Studios video remix platform development project Emily earned her Masters of Fine Arts in Dramaturgy and Script Development from Columbia University in 2006. While at Columbia, she edited and catalogued hundreds of interviews and transcripts for the Oral History Research Office, focusing primarily on their 9/11 Project. She has extensive experience with numerous media through her work with Columbia鈥檚聽Rare Books and Manuscript Library,聽Atlantic Theater Company,聽Sesame Workshop聽and others.
Filed Under: Uncategorized
August 24, 2016
Update: Transforming Hollywood 7: Diversifying Entertainment, October 21, USC
By Henry Jenkins Earlier this summer, I posted a hold the date announcement of our upcoming conference, Transforming Hollywood 7: Diversifying Entertainment, which will be held at USC on Oct. 21. I am now able to announce many of the event #8217;s participants, though we still have some outstanding invitations we hope to resolve over the next few weeks and with luck, we will have some exciting new speakers to announce as we get closer to the event. As always, the Transforming Hollywood events bring together industry leaders, creative artists, academics, journalists, fans, and activists for important conversations about the futures of entertainment. Our panels are designed to dig deep and bridge divides. We hope you will join us for this year #8217;s event.
Transforming Hollywood 7: Diversifying Entertainment
October 21 Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism, University of Southern California
Sustaining Sponsor: AJK Foundation
Event Sponsors: Fusion/Univision, George Foster Peabody Foundation, Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism
Sustaining Organizers: Denise Mann, UCLA; Henry Jenkins, USC
Event Organizer: Stacy Smith, USC
9-9:20 Welcome聽
Ernest Wilson, Dean, Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism
Denise Mann, head of the UCLA School of Theater, Film and Television鈥檚 Producers Program
Henry Jenkins, USC Provost #8217;s Professor of Communication, Journalism, Cinematic Art, and Education
9:20- 9:50 State of the Field Report聽
Stacy Smith,聽Director, Media, Diversity, amp; Social Change Initiative, USC
9:45-11 Panel: 聽Why Does Inclusion Matter?
Moderator:聽Robeson Taj Frazier,聽Director of the Institute for Diversity and Empowerment at Annenberg (IDEA), University of Southern California
After hearing about the dismal representation of marginalized groups in entertainment, one question remains: what can be done? As the conversation on diversity and inclusion continues to escalate, several voices stand out from the crowd with solutions, strategies, and attempts to address disparities. This session brings together industry members and experts to discuss four essential topics. First, the panel will address why inclusive entertainment matters. Second, individuals will discuss the underlying causes at the heart of why under or skewed representation persists. Third, the group will overview what efforts are underway in Hollywood to effect change. Fourth, panelists will cover the challenges that remain and the work still needed to increase representation on screen and behind the camera.
Bertila Damas #8212;聽SAG AFTRA National Chair of the Ethnic Employment Opportunities Committee
Fanshen Cox DiGiovanni #8212; 聽Pearl Street Productions
Melissa Goodman 鈥撀燿irector of the LGBTQ, Gender and Reproductive Justice Project at the ACLU of Southern California
Danny Woodburn鈥擜ctor, Chair of Screen Actors Guild, Performers with Disabilities group
11:10-1 Panel 2 聽What Alternatives Does Social Media Offer?
Moderator: Denise Mann, UCLA
This panel explores social media as a powerful tool for artists, activists, and influencers to express their voices of diversity and dissent outside the Hollywood mainstream. Social influencers are a new breed of online creator whose ability to thrive in the platform economy depends on their facility with social media connectivity as a means to amass a dedicated following of online users. Fans, who become invested in the ideas conveyed by a favorite artist or musician, can help spread these messages of change across an exponentially wider circle of social media communities. However, the life of an online creator or influencer is not for the faint of heart. Hollywood鈥檚 writers, directors, and actors are protected by talent guilds and guided through the byzantine Hollywood system by thousands of development and marketing executives, who give dissenting opinions via an endless series of story notes and marketing positioning statements. While guaranteed a paycheck via 鈥渨ork-for-hire鈥 contracts, Hollywood talent lacks essential power and agency because they don鈥檛 control the copyright for their artistic work. In contrast, actor-creator-entrepreneurs like Freddie Wong and Issa Rae are running mini-studios of their own making and retaining part or full ownership of their creations. While building their 鈥渂rand鈥濃攖hemselves鈥攐ver weeks, months, and even years, they rely on a variety of resources: crowdsourcing, Adsense revenues, merchandising, branded content deals, and cross-promotional guest appearances in order to keep their voices heard above the din of clickbait and app fatigue. Therefore, online creators need powerful advocates鈥攖alent managers who know how to use social media to help under-represented artists escape from obscurity to become chart-topping celebrities. They also need tech startup experts capable of shepherding the engineers and coders who tweak streaming content aggregators, such as Spotify, Apple Music, and Tidal, so that they serve artists as well as platform founders. Additionally, online artists need powerful insiders鈥 showrunners, producers, and other allies鈥攚ho understand what it鈥檚 like to struggle against the tide of entitlement that prevails in the studio system, and who will help newcomers with alternative voices navigate the gap between the autonomous spaces of the Web and the heavily bureaucratic and hierarchical spaces of mainstream Hollywood.
Troy Carter,聽Founder/CEO, Atom Factory Music +Smash鈥檇 Labs, Global Head/Creator Services, Spotify
Bambi Haggins, Associate Professor of Film and Media Studies, Arizona State University (author of聽Laughing Mad: The BlackComic Persona in Post-Soul America)
Prentice Penny, Executive Producer/Showrunner, HBO鈥檚聽Insecure聽(based on Issa Rae鈥檚 webseries,聽The Misadventures of an Awkward Black Girl)
Freddie Wong, Founder, Rocket Jump Studios, online video pioneer and VFX artist
1-2 Lunch
2-3:50 Panel 3: How Do We Change the Script?
Moderator: Henry Jenkins, USC
Within the entertainment industry, genre conventions help to shape what stories get told and how productions get promoted and marketed to particular audiences. As we push for greater inclusion, we need to reconsider the ways that these genres encode old assumptions about race, gender, and sexuality, and the ways these scripts need to be reimagined to reflect more diverse perspectives. Many of today鈥檚 creators find themselves pushing against taken-for-granted assumptions and long-standing formulas, and as a consequence, often fall back on old tropes and stereotypes. These particulars look somewhat differently whether we are considering realist or fantastical genres but both offer opportunities for 鈥渃hanging the script鈥 but they also bring with them a 聽lot of historical baggage. The news media likes to focus on the white male backlash in fandom against some of the shifts taking place within genre entertainment, but we also know that many active fans are embracing these changes and indeed, modeling through their creative responses what an even more diverse form of genre entertainment might look like. And activists are holding producers feet to the fire, asking critical questions about the ways even more diverse and inclusive productions may fall short of our hopes and expectations. So, how do we change the script? How do we embrace new stories? How do we tell the old stories differently? And what role can the fantastical or speculative genres perform in imagining alternatives to current racial realities?
Grace Dillon #8212; Professor in the Indigenous Nations Studies Program, Portland State University; Editor, Walking the Clouds: An Anthology of Indigenous Science Fiction
Javier Grillo-Marxuach #8212; Writer/Producer,聽Lost, The Middleman, The 100, Xena: Warrior Princess
Nakul Dev Mahajan #8212; Dancer/Choreographer, So You Think You Can Dance
Dodai Stewart聽 #8212; Director of Culture Coverage for FUSION
Ebony Elizabeth Thomas #8212; Young Adult Writer; Assistant Professor, 聽Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania
Phil Yu #8212; Blogger,聽Angry Asian Man聽
4-6:15 Panel 4 How do We Move from Stereotypes to More Complex Characters?
Moderator: Maureen Ryan, Chief Television Critic,聽Variety
The challenge of creating more diverse representations often centers on the construction of characters. It is not enough to put diverse faces in front of the camera: we need to depict those characters with nuance and complexity, in ways that audiences will recognize from their own lives, in ways that inspire their imaginations. Where does the responsibility rest for generating compelling characters in contemporary popular entertainment? What roles do producers, writers, and actors play in defining who these people are, what they desire, how they react, what goals they pursue, and what relationships they form? And how should we respond when bad things happen to good characters, when subsequent production decisions undercut or marginalize characters whose presence is particular significant for under-represented segments of the population?
Evelyn Alsultany #8212;聽Associate Professor; Director of the Arab and Muslim American Studies Program, University of Michigan; Author of聽Arabs and Muslims in the Media: Race and Representation after 9/11
Effie Brown #8212; Director,聽Dear White People 聽
Kathy Le Backes聽 #8212; Vice President, Research and Development, Wise Entertainment
Melissa Silverstein #8212; Blogger, Women and Hollywood聽
Jeff Yang #8212;聽Vice President of Cultural Strategy at sparks amp; honey; Co-editor of Secret Identities: The Asian American Superhero Anthology
6:30-7:15 Keynote Conversation
Moderator: TBA
Melissa Rosenberg聽 #8212; 聽Executive Producer, Marvel鈥檚 Jessica Jones
7:15- 聽Reception
Registration for the event is now open on a first come, first serve basis. For more information, visit our website. Tickets are $40 for the general public and $10 for students, faculty, and staff of academic institutions.
Filed Under: Uncategorized
June 22, 2016
Save the Date #8212; Transforming Hollywood 7: Diversifying Entertainment October 21
By Henry Jenkins Transforming Hollywood 7: Diversifying Entertainment
October 21 Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism, University of Southern California
Sustaining Sponsor: AJK Foundation
Event Sponsors: Fusion/Univision, George Foster Peabody Foundation, Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism
Sustaining Organizers: Denise Mann, UCLA; Henry Jenkins, USC
Event Organizer: Stacy Smith, USC
The past few years in America have been marked by heated debates around issues of diversity (from the politics surrounding racialized police violence to the struggles around immigration reform) which have placed renewed emphasis on who is being represented through popular media and how. Social media #8212; especially the phenomenon of so-called 鈥渂lack twitter鈥 #8212; has created a space where people of color are organizing on-line to advocate for new kinds of new forms of entertainment content which more fully reflects their lived experiences. And new kinds of 鈥渟ocial influencers鈥 are emerging online, a group which includes a growing number of people of color amongst the top internet celebrities.
The response from Hollywood has been mixed: on the one hand, overall industry numbers measuring diversity in front and behind the camera has remained surprisingly static over time. Women and people of color remain grossly under-represented. On the other hand, there have been many high-profile efforts to feature mixed-race and minority-centered casts on American television. Scandal鈥檚 Kerry Washington was the first black actress to be the lead in a dramatic television series in three decades, and her success has led to other black actresses getting the leads or strongly featured in prime-time serials. We are also seeing minority experiences come to the fore on sitcoms, including Blackish, Fresh Off the Boat, Master of None, and Jane the Virgin. We are watching the major Comics Publishers DC and Marvel embrace more female protagonists, including most dramatically, an American Muslim youth of Pakistani descent becoming Ms. Marvel, and since the comics publishers represent a major pipeline into Hollywood production, some of these shifts are being felt in production decisions The debate around diversity in cinema has come to be short-handed by the hashtag, #oscarsowhite, that stands in for the failure of the film industry not only to expand the range of stories told and the people employed, but also the unwillingness to respect and award accomplishments from those who succeed despite the odds. Rightfully, the quality of these new representations are being hotly debated, again taking advantage of the affordances of new media, such as podcasts, blogs and social media.
As with our previous Transforming Hollywood conferences, we want to focus our attention on where change is taking place, bringing together key thinkers from industry, academia, and the public sphere, who have something to say in helping us to make sense of those changes. Diversifying Entertainment will be a day-long public conversation about diversity, inclusion, representation, and entertainment, one which spans developments in television, film, comics, games, and other popular media.
Tentative Schedule
9-9:20 Welcome
9:20- 9:50 State of the Field Report
9:45-11 Panel Why Does Inclusion Matter?
After hearing about the dismal representation of marginalized groups in entertainment, one question remains: what can be done? As the conversation on diversity and inclusion continues to escalate, several voices stand out from the crowd with solutions, strategies, and attempts to address disparities. This session brings together industry members and experts to discuss four essential topics. First, the panel will address why inclusive entertainment matters. Second, individuals will discuss the underlying causes at the heart of why under or skewed representation persists. Third, the group will overview what efforts are underway in Hollywood to effect change. Fourth, panelists will cover the challenges that remain and the work still needed to increase representation on screen and behind the camera.
11:10-1 Panel 2 What Alternatives Does Social Media Offer?
This panel explores 鈥渟ocial influencers鈥濃攁 new breed of online creator whose web-based productions and facility with social media connectivity has helped them amass a loyal following of fans. The top 1-2% of these creative entrepreneurs, dubbed 鈥渕illionaire influencers,鈥 are securing huge paydays from advertisers eager to access the hundreds of thousands of fans. Most social influencers seeking fame and big payouts will choose the path of least resistance by endorsing fashion and beauty products or by engaging with popular Hollywood media franchises. Instead, this panel focuses on a small, but passionate group of influencers who have chosen the path of most resistance by promoting diverse, inclusive representations of marginalized cultures using exclusively online transmedia storytelling tactics. By operating largely outside of the Hollywood mainstream, these activist influencers face a unique set of challenges: they must engage in the hard labor of producing weekly webseries while also reformatting this content for a diverse array of digital platforms (YouTube, Vine, Snapchat, Instagram, etc) #8211;often on their own dime. Paradoxically, if they want to scale their media empires in order to spread their message of hope, they must accept brand endorsement deals if they want to continue to engage, enlighten, and educate fans about the unique challenges of being a marginalized culture in today鈥檚 increasingly networked society.
1-2 Lunch
2-3:50 Panel 3 How Do We Change the Script?
Within the entertainment industry, genre conventions help to shape what stories get told and how productions get promoted and marketed to particular audiences. As we push for greater inclusion, we need to reconsider the ways that these genres encode old assumptions about race, gender, and sexuality, and the ways these scripts need to be reimagined to reflect more diverse perspectives. Many of today鈥檚 creators find themselves pushing against taken-for-granted assumptions and long-standing formulas, and as a consequence, often fall back on old tropes and stereotypes. These particulars look somewhat differently whether we are considering realist or fantastical genres: both offer opportunities for 鈥渃hanging the script鈥 but they also bring with them a lot of historical baggage. So, how do we change the script? How do we embrace new stories? How do we tell the old stories differently?
4-6:15 Panel 4 How do We Move from Stereotypes to More Complex Characters?
It is not enough to put diverse faces in front of the camera: we need to depict those characters with nuance and complexity, in ways that audiences will recognize from their own lives, in ways that inspire their imaginations. What roles do producers, writers, and actors play in defining who these people are, what they desire, how they react, what goals they pursue, and what relationships they form? And how should we respond when bad things happen to good characters, when subsequent production decisions undercut or marginalize characters whose presence is particular significant for under-represented segments of the population?
6:30-7:15 Keynote: TBD
7:15- Reception
To register to receive more information, go to聽http://annenberg.usc.edu/events/events/transforming-hollywood-7-diversifying-entertainment
Filed Under: Uncategorized
June 17, 2016
Connected Youth and Digital Futures: A Conversation with Sonia Livingstone and Julian Sefton-Green (Part Two)
By Henry Jenkins Today, we continue a conversation between Sonia Livingstone and Julian Sefton-Green (London School of Economics), Sangita Shresthova and myself (USC) about our two books that launched the New York University Press/MacArthur Foundation book series, Connected Youth and Digital Futures:聽 By Any Media Necessary: the New Youth Activism and The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age. This time, we move beyond the goals and contexts that generated the books to focus on some of our findings.
If you live in or near London, you have a chance to watch this exchange continue in real time. I am flying to England this weekend and will be participating in an event being hosted around the two books at the London School of Economics #8217; Shaw Library, Old Building on June 22 from 4-6 p.m. In addition to myself, Livingstone, and Sefton-Green, the event will also feature University of Nottingham Professor of Education Pat Thompson.聽To reserve a seat please contact Svetlana Smirnova at聽s.smirnova@lse.ac.uk.
So what did we learn through our research?
Henry and Sangita write of By Any Media Necessary:
We got lucky: many of these groups and campaigns have gained visibility and influence over the period of our study. We were struck watching some of the early Democratic Party debates this U.S. presidential campaign season that many of the core issues #8212; immigration reform, racialized police violence, income inequality, legalization of pot, among them #8212; were issues that these networks had been mobilizing around. Kony 2012, a video produced by Invisible Children, broke all records for internet circulation during the period of our research. The Harry Potter Alliance successfully boycotted Warner Brothers to get them to embrace fair trade policies around the chocolates they produced and sold at their amusement parks. And Obama took executive action to promote the interests of the DREAMers, undocumented youth seeking greater citizenship and education rights. So, we sought success stories and those successes turned out to be more dramatic than we could have imagined when our research began.
Across this research, we identified some core principles shaping this new youth activism as well as some obstacles that are blocking these groups from achieving their full potential. First and foremost, as the book鈥檚 title suggests, these groups are seeking to make change by any media necessary. Yes, social media platforms have generated lots of press because they represent the newest technologies for mass mobilization and media circulation.聽But we also saw them tapping into 聽street protest and print culture as needed to reach a broad range of potential supporters. These groups had limited access to resources so they used whatever they could get their hands on, though often the most impoverished groups were among the most creative and thoughtful in learning how to use these platforms and practices in new ways.
Second, our work has led us to a focus on what we call the 鈥渃ivic imagination.鈥 Any campaign for social change requires its participants to articulate a shared sense of what a better world would look like, the steps towards achieving this change, the political agency of participants, and often, some empathy for those whose experiences and perspectives differ from their own. Different cultures articulate what they are fighting for and what they are fighting against through different means. We were intrigued to see that, across these very different social movements, popular culture references played central roles in their rhetorical practices. Images from popular media #8212; superheroes, wizards, zombies, and the like #8212; are appropriated, remixed, reframed, and recirculated as a means of creating a common language amongst diverse participants.
Our book is cautiously optimistic about the ways these groups are impacting American politics. These movements model some ideal conditions for scaffolding young people as they transition into more active roles as citizens. These groups map ways that individual participation can add up to something larger. They direct attention to specific issues and propose ways that people can work together to bring about change. They train members to produce their own media and tell their own stories. They offer networks through which these media can circulate and reach an appreciative audience. Above all, they create a context where 鈥榯alking politics鈥 is a normal, ongoing part of social interactions. In this focus on the conditions that enable meaningful connections between different aspects of young people #8217;s lives, we are very much drawing on insights from the Connected Learning research. Young people are more likely to have both voice and influence when they connect with larger networks pursuing the same goals.
Of course, these networks are not open to all potential participants: there are systemic and structural biases in who can enter through these means; there is uneven access to technological infrastructure, mentorship, skills, and a sense of empowerment, all of which pave the way for new entrants. These groups do not necessarily breakdown on predictable class or racial lines: some of the most innovative and creative activism we鈥檝e seen came from undocumented youth, many of whom lack access, on an individual bias, to the basic tools they need to do their work but have taken advantage of opportunities offered by libraries or community centers.
And these groups, themselves, struggle with core paradoxes as they think through the value of supporting broad participation as opposed to more centralized control over messaging and in particular an emphasis on process as opposed to results. These groups do not always command the respect of political leaders with the power to act on their concerns. They often face various forms of surveillance and intimidation. Participatory practices can be deployed by hate groups just as readily as by human rights groups.
The book coexists with byanymedia.org or BAM, a resource that includes a large collection of original and curated materials related to the themes that emerged through our case studies. When we initially started developing it, we thought that BAM would effectively be a companion reader, a place where people could encounter media examples featured in the book. We ended up with a much more expansive resource that pushes far beyond our initial research to feature media created by a broad range of youth organizations, curated media, and original educational materials created through sustained partnerships we formed with companies like Participant Media and organizations like the Harry Potter Alliance.聽While we anticipate that various visitors may find their way to BAM, we did specifically focus on educators who want to explore youth driven participatory politics with their students. This is why we piloted and eventually rolled out BAM through collaborations with educators affiliated with National Writing Project and the National Association for Media Literacy Education.
聽
Julian and Sonia write of The Class:
It may be that when our class of British 13-year olds gets a bit older, they too will explore such civic possibilities as Henry describes above. But certainly when we hung out with them, they were taking only the most tentative steps towards the wider world 鈥 perhaps by joining Twitter to follow the adult worlds of news, sports or celebrity. For them, Harry Potter was definitely a focus for fandom but not yet a pathway to the civic.
Rather, our class was more concerned to sustain clear boundaries between home, school and peer group than to overcome these through digital or social networking. For example, the school devoted a lot of time being distressed by students鈥 use of Facebook, seeking ways to keep its 鈥渄rama鈥 out of the life of the school, just as students proved equally keen to protect their free time (not that there was much of it) and spaces (ditto) from prying adult eyes.
One of our driving questions was to understand how digital media were used at home and school and especially, given ever greater access to mobile digital technologies, whether this allows home and school to be connected in different ways. At school we noticed how the teachers鈥 appropriation of popular culture served to create shared values and norms within but not beyond the walls of the class. So in afternoon registrations the class often watched BBC News. A geography teacher used the model of voting from ITV鈥檚 X Factor to liven up math teaching. Role models from the media dotted the classroom walls. But rarely was there any discussion about how the media are produced or who controls them or how they are structured to convey particular messages. For example, films about slavery in Black History Month were tacitly treated as transparent 鈥渨indows on the world鈥, seemingly unrelated to the mix of black and white faces of the students watching the screen.
High culture received more explicit prominence, by contrast. The head-teacher favored a boy (who had private music lessons) who could play Chopin when the year group filed into assembly. Activities involving Shakespeare or great works of art were given prominence by the school. Kids learned classical music in school music lessons while enjoying something completely different in the home, and those who learned non-standard music at home received little recognition at school.
Moreover, attempts to use the media across the boundary of home and school were carefully policed. The school鈥檚 information management system worked really well as a form of digital surveillance, but all too often the Virtual Learning Environment didn #8217;t work or wasn #8217;t properly understood by teachers or students. Mobile phones, which could be very useful for learning, were forbidden in school (for reasons of concentration and safety). For all the talk about living in a connected world, the students didn #8217;t want teachers or parents to have access to their world; and the same was true of the adults.
Perhaps one of the most excruciating things to witnessed was the slow microscopic unfolding of misunderstandings, missed opportunities and social injustices experienced by the young people over the year. There was no shortage of high aspirations, good intentions and ambition but a lack of knowledge by the school about the actuality of the class鈥 day-to-day lives meant that the way the offer was organized, the way opportunities were constructed, were commonly at odds with how young people and families imagine what learning is good for. This led us to wonder: how would the school be different if teachers knew more about their students鈥 lives outside school? Why does the school choose not to know much about its students and why might they not want to reveal themselves to the school? In whose interests might greater, or lesser, connection across and between the social world of young people operate?
To return to the relation between our two books highlighted in this blog post, together they provide insights into both the extraordinary and ordinary nature of growing up in the digital age. While one book focuses on civic and political participation and the other on learning, together they capture the two key opportunities that adults hope young people will pursue, enabled by today鈥檚 digital and networked media. One book focuses on the exciting possibilities opening up, the other on how everyday realities favor practices of social reproduction that undermine the realization of such possibilities. It is surely now for society to work to bring more of the opportunities within the grasp of most, not just a few, of young people.
Filed Under: Uncategorized Next Page #x000BB;
Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture (Postmillennial Pop)
Buy at Amazon
Buy at Amazon (Kindle)
Buy at Powells
Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture
Buy at Amazon
Buy at Amazon (Kindle)
Buy at Powells
Reading in a Participatory Culture: Remixing Moby-Dick in the English Classroom
Buy at Amazon
Convergence Culture
Buy at Amazon (hardcover)
Buy at Amazon (Kindle)
Buy at Amazon (paperback)
Buy at Powells (hardcover)
Buy at Powells (paperback)
The Wow Climax
Buy at Amazon
Buy at Amazon (Kindle)
Buy at Powells
Fans, Bloggers and Gamers
Buy at Amazon
Buy at Amazon (Kindle)
Buy at Powells
Return to top of pageCopyright #x000A9; 2016 #x000B7; henryjenkins theme on Genesis Framework #x000B7; WordPress #x000B7; Log in

Updated Time

Updating   
Friend links: ProxyFire    More...
Site Map 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 610 620 630 640 650 660 670 680 690 700 710 720 730 740 750
TOS | Contact us
© 2009 MyIP.cn Dev by MYIP Elapsed:78.308ms