Calling All Fans: Strategies of Persuasive Fandom
Since 1895
Name: Nathalie Bank
Adres: Israel Queridostraat 5HS 1064 RS Amsterdam
Telephone: +31(0)641725107
Student Number: 5877873
E-mail: NathalieBank@gmail.com
Advisor: A. Kustritz
Second Reader: C. Birdsall
Course: Career Oriented specialization Television and Cross Media (Master)
Department: Graduate School of Humanities University: University of Amsterdam Date of Completion: 21 June 2013
ABSTRACT
This study has set out to investigate in what manner different fandoms have functioned in moments of crisis throughout history. Four case studies have been performed. The fandom surrounding Sherlock Holmes and the response in during the Great Hiatus is investigated, revealing that fan strategy, word of mouth motivation, and letter writing campaigns to those with monetary interest may prove sufficient in persuading the owner. In the sixties and seventies, Star
Trek fandom became very popular, eventually proving persuasive enough to
start making movies about the narrative. In the early twenty first century, the popular shows Firefly and Veronica Mars were taken off the air, under great protest from its fans. Both fandoms eventually attempted to buy the rights to the show. This investigation finds that both narrative content and historical context prove important in the motivation for persuasive action taken by the fandoms. Fandoms also use all technology available in order to motivate their
communities, as well as use it for their benefit when in need of persuasive action. Last but not least, historically, there appears to be an initial response of attempting to appeal directly to the owner of the object of fandom. Only when that has failed do fandoms strategize and function differently in attempts to keep their narratives alive.
1. NUTS FOR FANDOM... 7
2. FAN STUDIES – RIDING THE WAVE(S)... 15
2.1EARLY FAN STUDIES... 16
2.2NOT WHAT IT SEEMS... 20
2.3THIRD WAVE: WE’VE BEEN EXPECTING YOU... 21
2.4POLITICAL IDEOLOGY IN AND WITH (FAN) TEXT... 22
2.5EXPRESSION OF IDEOLOGY BY FANS... 26
3. ELEMENTARY FANDOM, MY DEAR. ... 29
3.1WHY,SHERLOCK? ... 29
3.2WHAT’S(ON) THE STORY? ... 30
3.3A MEANS TO AN END?... 31
3.4GOOD MOURNING... 31
3.5TRADITIONAL FANDOM AT ITS CORE... 34
3.6CITY SAFETY WITH SHERLOCK HOLMES... 35
4. STAR TREK: BOLDLY GOING WHERE NO FAN HAS GONE BEFORE... 39
4.1THE ERA OF STAR TREK... 39
4.2PERHAPS A FIRST IN FANDOM... 42
4.3TO THE THIRD SEASON AND BEYOND... 47
4.4THE PERSUASION... 50
5. CONTEMPORARY PERSUASIVE FANDOM: WHAT HAVE THEY LEARNED AND WHAT ARE THEY LEARNING?... 51
5.1A NEW MEDIASCAPE FOR FANDOM... 51
5.2FIREFLY:LIGHT IN THE DARKNESS?... 53
5.3PRODUCERS ARE FROM VENUS,FANS ARE FROM MARS... 57
5.4NEW MEDIA, OLD SYSTEM? ... 59
6. FANDOM: ANNO 1985... 61
6.1RIGHT TIME, RIGHT TEXT... 61
6.2NEW TOOLS, BETTER CARPENTRY? ... 63
6.3PRODUSAUTHER? ... 65
6.4TIC TAC, WHAT’S YOUR TACTIC? ... 66
6.5FAN STUDIES –TACTICS... 68
1. Nuts for Fandom
During a recent episode of The Graham Norton Show, first aired on 05-03-2013 on BBC 1, the British talk show host had filled his couch with two actors who had come to promote their latest film, named Star Trek: Into
Darkness (2013). Chris Pine, who plays Captain Kirk in the action packed film,
and Benedict Cumberbatch, portraying the role of Khan in the movie, chatted with Graham about their experiences on the movie set, and had a grand old time. Before long, the topic of conversation came to the respective fandoms to which the two actors are subject. What makes this appearance relevant to this study is that both actors are part of the fandom surrounding the Star Trek franchise, as they both hold starring roles in the much anticipated latest movie installment. Additionally, Benedict Cumberbatch portrays Sherlock Holmes in BBC’s latest Sherlock Holmes series, aptly named Sherlock (BBC, 2011) Secondly, the conversation and events occurring during the broadcast are incredibly telling of why fandom and its study are relevant in today’s society.
The reputation of being a fan is established early in the episode, during Graham Norton’s monologue. After taking a jab at a slightly overweight man in a form-fitting Star Trek uniform, he continues to say ‘It’s a stereotype that Star
Trek fans don’t have girlfriends. Not all Trekkies go to bed alone, no no.’ The
comment is followed by a picture of a male Trekkie, whom does not necessarily meet conventional standards of handsomeness, and poses in his Starfleet
uniform with his teddy bear (00.02.47). Although two of the actors of the latest
Star Trek film are waiting in the green room for their cue to come on stage,
Graham Norton has no scruples about ridiculing the fans that have made the franchise what it is today. He makes fun of the fans without whom Pine and Cumberbatch would have no job and without whom Graham would have no guests. However, the actors show absolutely no response to the jokes when they do come on, and the audience’s laughter hints that they too find the remarks very funny even though they are slightly misplaced. This single joke establishes the position of the Star Trek fandom in today’s society: Trekkies take Star Trek way too seriously, are single, unattractive males, are considered abnormal in their behavior and are asking to be made fun of. This is not the only reference to
fans that is made throughout the episode. The following example will show that different kinds of fans are viewed in different ways.
After some irrelevant chatting about the upcoming movie, Norton introduces the topic of fans to the two actors. He asks Cumberbatch and Pine what their fans call themselves. Chris has absolutely no problem with this and immediately answers the question. Fans of the actor apparently call themselves ‘Pine-nuts’. This term is appropriate because being nutty about something means that one is crazy for something, and of course ‘pine nut’ is an existing noun. Chris is excited to perceive that some of his Pine-nuts are in the audience, and he cheers them on as they cheer for him (00.14.00). The attention of the host then moves to Benedict Cumberbatch. Before answering, he takes a pregnant pause. He turns his head away with a look that seems to be a mixture of coyness and shame. Cumberbatch finally answers ‘The…the Cumbercollective’
(00.14.05). The crowd erupts in a cacophony of laughter and jeers while Norton points out to Cumberbatch that he is lying. The actor then proceeds to argue that he will not say it, because ‘this is the BBC.’ Pine takes over and blurts out that the fans call themselves ‘Cumberbitches!’ (00.14.21), a term referring both to the actor as well as to the fans’ own gender. By adopting this name, the fans position themselves as both subordinate to the actor, by using the derogatory term bitches, as well as identify their gender. Cumberbatch proceeds to say about this topic that ‘I don’t think they meant to insult themselves when they called them that…(mumbles)…I do worry about how feminism has been set back’ (00.14.26). The reaction of Cumberbatch to the fans’ self-titled name also shows that although they are admiring fans that place themselves in a position subordinate to the actor, Cumberbatch has no control over them or influence on how they call themselves. If anything, going by all the cheering coming from the audience it could be argued that the women derive pleasure from instigating emotion in Cumberbatch, even if it is a somewhat negative one.
The situation even goes one step further. After laughter at Cumberbatch’ unease has settled, Norton takes to the audience to see where they came from to see their favorite stars. In the next few minutes he approaches several women. He asks them where they traveled from to see the actors, and if he finds that the trips they took were long enough he proceeds to guess their fandom, simply by looking at them. A woman who ‘took a twenty hour bus to London’ from
Germany is rewarded with a hug from Cumberbatch, after which several more travellers follow. After having spoken to a few Cumberbitches, Norton finally finds a Pine-nut, who immediately gets a hug from Pine. Pine then continues to walk further into the audience to hug two girls that Norton hadn’t initially considered to have traveled far enough to warrant a hug. The second girl was a Cumberbitch, who mouths to Cumberbatch as she’s being hugged ‘I’m a Pine-nut now’ (00.20.04). Once Pine has come back to the sofa, Cumberbatch re-claims his ownership: ‘He just kissed one of my bitches!’ (00.02.17).
Cumberbatch goes from being bashful about the derogatory name the women gave themselves to being possessive over his fans without missing a beat. He quickly corrects himself by adding a request for one big happy family of fans, called Pine-bitches, but according to Norton that would just make them all Trekkies and not make much of a difference (00.20.32).
Of course, The Graham Norton Show is a talkshow known for it’s over-the-top interviews and host, as well as silly shenanigans often going down between the guests and the audience. However, the events described above tell us a lot about how fandom is perceived. The status of Trekkies has already been established earlier in the show. However, the treatment of these women is very different than the ridiculing the Trekkies underwent. First of all, it is clear that Norton only approaches women. In fact, he does not even consider the thought that there might be actual Trekkies in the audience, which would not at all be unlikely considering the fact that two actors of the much anticipated movie are the main guests. The women he approaches are rewarded or punished by the sincerity of their fan behavior. Ones that traveled from far (Germany, Hong Kong or even Japan) are rewarded by hugs, while the fans that came from nearby (Kent) are punished, as he considers them to not have been serious enough in their fandom. Norton does not give them the chance to win a hug from their fan-objects (luckily for them, Pine noticed and does end up rewarding their fandom with a hug, but does this under much protest/jeering from Norton). In this case, Norton seems to judge fandom by how far people will go (literally, in this case) for their fan-objects – even if the fans can’t really help it if they are from Kent and not from Hong Kong. In the same episode however, he judged the Trekkies for taking their fandom’s too seriously, and doesn’t consider the presence of the Trekkies throughout the episode whatsoever. In other words, the
fandom of a female for a male is judged differently than the fandom of a person for a narrative.
Additionally, the names the fandoms have given themselves are ultimately feminine. There is no doubt that the members of the fans are
infatuated with their fan objects, as the terms ‘nuts’ and ‘bitches’ both indicate unstable yet strong emotions towards Pine and Cumberbatch. Although the women semantically position themselves below the actors, they do not necessarily act as though they are. They convince the actors to hug them and derive pleasure from instigating feelings in Cumberbatch.
The way the rest of the audience and Norton respond to the fans shows that fandom is acceptable and considered common in our society, but holds a multiplicity of reputations. On one hand, they hold the reputation that they are something funny: fans are ridiculed by Norton in the opening monologue, the audience laughs when they see the response of the fans when they are hugged by their idols, and both Norton and the audience express incredulity when they hear how far or long the fans have traveled. On the other hand, the women also seem to be considered cute, funny and deserving of a reward. The longer they
traveled, the more they deserve the hug. Of course, there is also a clear divide between the fans of the actors and the fans of Star Trek, as the latter are not given a voice in the show, perhaps because they are not considered to instill enough feelings of sympathy in the viewers. A lot can also be said about Norton’s attempts to guess the fandom simply by looking at the fan, as if
feelings of admiration or fandom are something other than internal feelings, and can be seen from the exterior.
This episode of The Graham Norton Show is an interesting introduction to the topic of this investigation because it shows us how fandom may function within today’s society. Not only is it a case that somewhat uncovers the
reputation of fans, but it also reveals some of the tools fans use to perform their fandom. The fans needed internet in order to find out about these performances from across the globe. Additionally, the globalization of today’s society means that the fans understand the English language, as well as modern transit making it simpler and more affordable to fly to the other side of the world. The fans also use internet to form the Cumberbitch and Pine-nut communities, as the different examples the show provided shows that the fans are dispersed, and come from
different backgrounds and cultures. Without these new media tools, they may have never been aware of the existence of their idols. The agency the fans hold towards their fan objects, as well as the modern world’s digital and
technological advances, allow fans to actually interact with as well as influence them.
These observations lead to the relevance and importance of the question this investigation will answer. How have fandoms functioned and what
strategies have they applied in order to gain agency over a fan-object in critical condition, in three time periods during the last 120 years? In order to answer
this call, the study takes on four case studies in which fandom proved at least partially effective in influencing the path their objects of fandom would take. First and second hand sources concerning the persuasive fandoms surrounding the case studies, as well as historical sources to provide historical context to the events, will be analyzed in these case studies. In order to fully understand why fans undertook persuasive action the way they did, each case study will attempt to answer what underlying ideological significance both the narrative content and productional context hold for fans.
The first case study will treat the fandom surrounding canon of Sherlock
Holmes as written in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century by Sir
Arthur Conan Doyle. After having written a few installments of the very
populair Sherlock Holmes stories, Conan Doyle decided to focus on other, more important, forms of writing and killed off his protagonist. After years of rallying by the fans of the stories, the writer finally caved and continued to write about the detective. What resulted was one of the first and most traditional forms of organized fandom the world had ever seen. The era in which these developments took place make for an interesting time period. It entails a time during which communication technologies were at a minimum, especially in comparison with the 21st century. The most accessible mode of mass communication or mass media was the newspaper and simple word of mouth advertising or organizing of the fans. However, the actions fans took to convince Arthur Doyle to continue writing suggests a great level of organization and persistence, and the worldwide reach the novelist (and the death of his protagonist) had had never before been seen. As well as investigating the actions undertaken by fans, chapter three sets out to investigate the historical context as well as the content that may explain
why such fandom ensued from this text. This will be a red thread throughout the investigation.
The second case study investigates fandom around a text that was born about 65 years after fans had convinced Conan Doyle to pick up his pen again. After WWII, the fifties saw a short up rise of television programs that were very progressive for their time. However, the early sixties quickly reigned in the progressive media and television turned to a state of blandness that would be appealing to all and offensive to no one, if possible (Boyer 838, 839). In 1967, after two pilots, NBC aired the first episode of the television series Star Trek. After two seasons, the series was threatened to be taken off air, but the series held on for one more season after a fan organized letter writing campaign. After the third season the series was taken off the air. However, from the early
seventies onwards, the show saw a tremendous increase in fandom. The first
Star Trek film was made in the late seventies and the latest film came out in
June 2013. Fandom of Star Trek is as present today as it was in the seventies, eighties and nineties and the franchise is a solid player in today’s media scape, as they still release movies, television series, games, merchandise and much more. Not only the letter writing campaign, but also the rise of fandom throughout the seventies make Star Trek fandom an interesting case study for this paper. The historical context and the narrative combined offer an
explanation for the explosive love people have for the series. Chapter 4 investigates the rise of the fandom, Star Trek today, and the impact of world events such as the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights movement had on Star
Trek, and vice versa.
Last but not least, this study looks at a more contemporary fandom for a final chapter. There are several great examples of how fandoms function within the cross media, networked era in which the Western world now finds itself. One of these fandoms is one that calls itself ‘Browncoats’ has surrounded the short lived sci-fi series Firefly, created by geek-god Joss Whedon, since it first aired in September 2002. The series was short lived because it was taken off the air before the fourteen episodes that had been made even aired. Eventually, Fox had aired all the episodes, but mostly out of order and on poorly publicized days and times. The amount of fans of the show increased over time, and the rallying of fans even resulted in a Firefly movie in 2005, named Serenity after the show’s
‘space ship’. The movie was not enough for the fans, and Browncoats still show incredible persistence in their attempts to have the show continued. In addition to the Browncoats, the actors of the show also continue to show their support in favor of a continuation of the popular science fiction series.
However, chapter five also looks at other fan attempts to bring to life media texts that could have been long forgotten, but are not. Some of these attempts prove more effective than the attempts of the Browncoats, such as is the case with fans of the teen detective-series Veronica Mars. In 2013, the makers of the series used crowd-funding website ‘Kickstarter’ to gather funds to make a Veronica Mars movie. They were more than successful, and chapter five investigates the relationship between the fan, the distributor and the producer in such instances, as new media has allowed it to change very much from anything that would have been possible during the first two case studies. In short, chapter five looks at successful and unsuccessful contemporary attempts to change the course of a media texts’ life.
Chapter six will bring the conclusions drawn in chapters three through five together. By comparing the different historical, technological and media landscapes in which the fandoms have acted, conclusions may be drawn to answer the main question, explaining how fandoms functioned and held agency in three instances throughout the past 120 years in which their fan-objects found themselves in critical state. Throughout the investigation it will become clear that external developments such as globalization, industrialization and
informationalization, as well as political developments such as war and peace, crisis and prosperity greatly influence the behaviors of sub cultures such as fandoms, regardless of the ease or difficulty of (mass) communication.
Additionally, constant struggles between authors, fans and distributors remain a recurring theme throughout the three case studies, suggesting that although the practice and meaning of fandom is ultimately a cultural practice, the fan-object ultimately remains a product of consumerism and capitalism.
As the three case studies concern texts of different media, time periods and narrative content, their analyses will be present in differing context. Chapter three, studying Sherlock Holmes, will be structured according to its narrative, fandom, social context and historical context. Chapter four, concerning Star
to the narrative, its critical reception and fandom, and lastly the social-historical context of war in which the fandom grew. The last case study, taking a look at more contemporary examples of persuasive fandom, first considers the
technological context of the modern age before introducing the case studies and their respective contexts and motivations. The reason for this inconsistent structuring lies in the information the individual analyses offered up, and proved to be the most beneficial way to present the findings.
However, first it is up to chapter two’s to set out to explain the
development of fan studies since it was first introduced to media studies in the 1950’s. It investigates three waves in which fan studies can be regarded, which shine an interesting light on the case studies and the more recent examples of persuasive fandom, as well as offer an explanation for the importance of
investigations such as this one. The information offered in chapter two provides a basis for the context in which the analyses of chapters three, four, five and six are to be understood. Additional theory about creating meaning in and with popular culture through the concept of ideology can also be found in chapter 2. This information proves important throughout the knowledge, as it will become apparent that the creation of ideology in popular culture motivates the actions of fandoms, both in their growth as well as in their persuasive actions. Other theories that may be needed in order to understand the case studies can be found in their respective chapters.
Although the case studies may seem to be unrelated to each other and may be considered unrealistic partners in an investigation, it will become clear throughout the study that these three fandoms do indeed have a lot in common, and function as some of the milestones of the history of persuasive fandom. It is very important to acknowledge, however, that the case-studies presented are in no way indicative of the way in which all fandoms perform. These case studies are just examples of how fandom’s have behaved over the past 115 years. There are many different fandoms; political and non-political, profit and non-profit, independent and organized, and especially ideological fandom’s, not all of which this study will address.
2. Fan Studies – Riding The Wave(s)
Fan studies often refers to audience studies, but also contains textual analysis as well as production studies. With a meta-approach, fan studies often prove to be useful within socio economic studies as well as psychoanalytic approaches of subcultural behavior.
In order to explore the necessary theory to analyze the case studies, it will be useful to ask the question that Jonathan Gray, Cornel Sandvoss and C. Lee Harrington asked themselves in their text ‘Why Study Fandom?”, which served as an introductory paragraph to the book Fandom (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 2007). Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington propose to think of fan studies as three waves. Although the three waves of fan studies occurred in chronological order and they often build on each other, they sometimes depart from theories or accepted ideas of earlier waves, and in some cases even
completely deny validity of already established theories. The waves as described by them are also non-exclusive, and it is possible for acedemicians to have written scholarship that existed outside the norms of said waves.
When using Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington’s proposition in this investigation, it is important to remember that the case studies are analyzed in context of the different waves and the outcomes of the analyses need to be considered within context of each other in order to establish a trustworthy conclusion in answer to the research question, which asks how persuasive moments of fandom has changed and influenced producers over the years and what fan strategies were applied to encourage these influential moments in history of fandom.
This chapter can be considered to offer a form of meta analysis of fan studies, using Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington’s texts as a guideline. It will be drawing in other fanstudies in order to formulate a theoretical framework by which the three case studies will be analyzed. By the end of this chapter, the reader should have a solid understanding of the importance, development, and key ideas of fan studies.
2.1 Early fan studies
One of the most important relationships to understand when considering fan studies is the relationship between the fan and the producers. The first wave of fan studies, which occurred in the 80’s and even the early 90’s, occupied itself with analyzing this relationship. In order to do so, it considered fan communities as a form of subculture.
Often, fan studies insisted fans were ‘easily manipulated by mass media’ and ‘largely undifferentiated’. The behavior of one fan vs. the next was pretty much the same, and they were behaving as such as they were being instructed by the makers of their fan object. According to John Fiske, one of the world’s leading fan theorists, in the book, to which he contributed a chapter, ‘The Adoring Audience’ edited by Lisa A. Lewis, fans ‘selects from the repertoire of mass-produced and mass-distributed entertainment certain performers,
narratives or genres and takes them into the culture of a self-selected fraction of the people’ (30). He believes fans do find their own agency in selecting their fan objects, but their choices are limited to that which mass production has to offer. They do not get a say in that which is produced and therefore their agency is severely limited. Mass produced texts are chosen by how well they fit into a subculture, according to this text. Additionally, Fiske argues they are ‘associated with the cultural tastes of subordinated formations of the people, particularly those disempowered by any combination of gender, race, class and age’ (30). By saying this, Fiske infers that fandom is a form of empowerment for minorities or other forms of subordinated, disempowered subcultures. Examples of this could be women, racial minorities or even just teenagers. Fiske is leading the first generation of fan studies, as these statements imply that popular culture and media are a site of power struggle.
This take on fandom uncovers the necessity of the behavior of the fan. Fandom becomes a ‘guerilla style tactic of those with lesser resources to win this battle’ (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 2). Fandom was a community effort to create a site in which subcultural practices could find a way to use mass produced texts as a tool to become more empowered within the system. This way, the inferred meaning (may) differ from the preferred meaning as wanted by
the producers, therefore offering the subcultures a chance to empower themselves. In this, the insistence that fans were largely undifferentiated and practiced fandom for the same reasons is obvious. Notable is that Fiske was not the only academic with such a take on fandom, and texts by academics such as Roberta Pearson, Henry Jenkins, and John Tulloch, among others, showed a similar approach to studying fans (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 3). However, once again it is important to note that although some of these academics took such an approach in some of their texts, it doesn’t necessarily mean that
approach was always taken. An example of this is Henry Jenkins, as will be seen in the next paragraph.
However, these early texts of fan studies were quickly criticized for their one sided approach. The texts were considered one sided because of their
tendency to resort to ‘Othering’ in order to analyze the fans. The Other is a term extensively treated by Edward Said, who is a professor of English and an expert in post-colonial studies, in his text Orientalism. Although this text doesn’t necessarily apply directly to the school of media studies, it has been widely influential in multiple academic schools of thought, as the concept of Othering appeared applicable on much more than the relationship between the Occident and the Orient to which Said applied it. In short, the idea of Othering is the creation of knowledge about something that is not oneself, without necessarily having been part of/to the thing that is Other. The meaning of the Other becomes part of the definiton of the Same. The idea of Othering is applicable in the way in which early fan studies approached sub cultures of fandom.
Academics of fan studies approached the Fans as Other. They were not a part of fan communities themselves. Additionally, they mainly focused on the ‘duality of power’ in their theses (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 3). Because the Other is always a ‘reflection and a projection of themselves’ (Said), other theorists argued that in fact the gaze of Othering is in fact a gaze of longing (Stallybrass and White). Later academic works within the first wave
acknowledged this.
Many of the same academics continued writing about fandom, but now gave fans a voice within their theses. Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington refer to this as the ‘fandom is beautiful’ phase. Fans were placed in a binary structure against the producers or the normal viewer. Fans were often supported by the
academics writing about them, almost being marked as some sort of underdog for which one should root, as it concerned minorities empowering themselves. Fans were analysed in their explicit fan behaviors, such as going to conventions, writing letters and fanfic, and creating fan art. Some academics even partook in the practices without ‘pulling back’ in the end in order to draw some new kind of conclusion about the ‘Other.’ Doing so, they didn’t deconstruct the binary structures in which fan studies had place fans in the first place, but they did attempt to differentiate the definition of the structure. Whether or not this was a complete way of addressing and studying the fan becomes apparent in the conclusions that were drawn following these developments.
Later texts in the first wave attempted to avoid the Othering that was so detrimental to earlier, more one-sided texts. However, they managed to omit a very important player in fan cultures, that may have told them more about fandom and fan behaviors than any of their textual studies of the explicit fan had. This differentiation between groups of fans and practices of fandoms may have been overlooked because, as mentioned earlier, the early fan studies were not strong in differentiating amongst fans. This group they omitted were the non explicit fans. The audiences who never miss a show, watch every episode and proceed to discuss the episodes in work or home environments. These fans may have been overlooked because they do not leave trace of their fandom’s, but became incredibly important in the next developments of fandom and fan studies.
Recognition of the implicit fan led to changes from the production side of the media texts. As distribution systems changed, broadcasting became narrowcasting and ‘the fan as a dedicated consumer had (sic) become a centerpiece of media industries’ marketing strategies’ (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 4). Fans were not only considered to contain a wealth of knowledge of a narrative, but also proved to be creative and useful for producers in finding new angles for stories. Mass media producers began to use fan productivity for their own gain, often eagerly accepted by the fan but leaving them without much other than appreciation.
Academics noticed this shift. Being a fan was no longer something that was under attack, which it had been earlier when fandom was treated as Other. Now, it wasn’t the fandom itself but the object of fandom that counted and
mattered (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 5). Roberta Pearson writes an interesting article concerning this notion in her chapter ‘Bachies, Bardies, Trekkies and Sherlockians’ in Fandom (2007). She poses the question of semantics of fandom. Taking off from the idea that the object of fandom
matters, she suggest that the name of the fan also has meaning. For example, she states ‘Do the words “fans”/ “Enthusiasts” / “devotees” / “aficionados” /
“Cognoscenti” / “connoisseurs” signal different degrees and kinds of
engagements with the beloved object?’ (Pearson, 99). She endeavors on posing questions that attempt to differentiate between different kinds of fans, or otherwise attempt to understand why varying kinds (and nomers) of fans are already being differentiated between. Besides questioning why differentiation between fan objects exist, she also ties the labels people choose to apply to themselves as fans directly to the object and fan behavior. For example, fans of the series Star Trek differentiate between ‘Trekkies’ and ‘Trekkers’. To some, the difference between the two lies between being a first generation or next generation fan. To others, the difference can be found in how seriously the Trekkers or Trekkies take their fandom. Yet others, usually outsiders, appear to think that Trekkies is the (derogatory) name given to Star Trek fans when fandoms were less respected, and Trekkers is the response of the fans, giving themselves a more serious name in order to stand strong in their fan practice. She continues to note that differentiations of fandom, fan objects and naming may be drawn in direct relation to race and class associations of the fans themselves, which is a notion that becomes particularly interesting during the second wave of fan studies.
All in all, the conclusion can be drawn that the first wave of media studies focused mainly on the assumption that subcultural fan groups acted as an undifferentiated agent out of desire for empowerment within a structure where they were marked as a minority. These thoughts largely came forth out of Michel DeCerteau’s ideas about strategies of the powerful versus the tactics of the disempowered in The Practice of Everyday Life, where fans are considered the disempowered and fandom their tactic. When critique rose about the
Othering with gaze of desire that came forth in these texts, fandom studies tried writing while giving fans a voice, and moved towards a new meaning of fan within the binary structure in which they had been put. In this new meaning,
being a fan was no longer a low brow activity, and implicit fans were also recognized. The latter became valued by the media industries as new
technologies arose that allowed for narrowcasting. Thus, fandom studies shifted from studying the fan as an undifferentiated group of disempowered minorities to studying the object of fandom, which brought academics to the second wave of fan studies.
2.2 Not what it seems
In 1984, French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu republished a work that was first released in 1979, presenting the idea of La distinction. In this he argues that ‘the powers that be’ in society decide aesthetic concepts such as taste. Because classes function as society, this means social class and social distinction dictate interests and the likes. Additionally, Bourdieu argues that because the working class can only define itself in relation to the ruling class, taste is always dictated by the latter.
Because the first wave of fan studies had already found that fan cultures and subcultural groups function as societies, the second wave of fan studies took off from Bourdieu’s ideas about La distinction. They considered the fan culture a specific habitus, which is defined by Bourdieu as the way in which we
interpret the world around us through observation, thought and acting within a social field so we can maintain ourselves and advance within our societies. With this approach, fan studies found a ‘replication of social and cultural hierarchies within fan - and subcultures, ads the choice of fan objects and practices of fan consumption are structured throughout habitus as a reflection and further manifestation of our social, cultural and economic capital’ (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 6). In other words, second wave fan studies found that their
conclusions of earlier fan studies may be incorrect. Whereas they used to believe that sub – and fancultures acted separate from their social distinction, as a way of empowerment, using Bourdieu’s distinction they came to realize that
structures from their real life habitus were reflected and thus carried through in the fan cultures, as class and taste are related. This meant that fan studies
became important in a new manner, as studies of behavior within fan cultures could be used for studies of behavior in other societies from which the fans come.
This also means that the role of the fan has changed. Fans are no longer a ‘counterforce to existing social hierarchies and structures’, no longer the
underdog using interpretation tactics of mass media to empower themselves (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 6), but instead a sort of continuation of existing hierarchies. Now that this idea had been uncovered, there no longer really seemed a reason to study fans, as they no longer represented a group of subversives. However, fan studies quickly moved on from the hierarchy of fans, to analyzing the pleasure, motivation and the ‘why’ of fandom (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 7).
2.3 Third wave: we’ve been expecting you
Nowadays, it seems impossible to imagine a world of fan studies where the academics omit asking the question ‘why’. Many scholars now commit their time to investigating what aspects of fandom delivers pleasure to the fan,
whether it be debating (future) storylines, writing slash, attending conventions or merely being a dedicated viewer. The third wave of fan studies seemed
inevitable. After years of texts trying to distinguish what fandom is and how a fan- or subculture functions, scholars had finally arrived to asking questions about pleasure, motivation and reasoning behind putting energy in practicing fandom.
Where the first wave of fan studies followed the ideas of DeCerteau about tactics of empowerment by the disempowered, the second wave concerned itself with questions of sociology in fandom as instigated by Bourdieu’s remarks on class distinction, the third wave is recognized by its preoccupation with psychoanalytic and aesthetic questions of fandom. This in part takes off from the first and second waves because the audience as fans couldn’t necessarily relate to the vision the first 2 waves had of fandom as extremely organized forms of fandom. Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington argue that the academic scope of fandom broadened, on both ends. On one end, the newer studies were able to draw focus to the society end of fandom, as technology allowed people to
become drawn into the plethora of online fandom platforms, fandom became more integrated into our society, and globalization of fandom took place as location of fans became less important. On the other end, the studies paid more attention to the ‘why’ end of fans, analyzing desires, motivations and pleasures derived from fandom by individuals as individuals, and not as part of a larger subcultural groups. Fanstudies distinguished between these by approaching fandom on micro level, such as Thomson (1995) when he analyzed the
intrapersonal relations between fans and their fan objects, or macro level, which approaches fans’ readings, tastes and practices as tied to larger social structures (Harrington and Bielby, 2005). Additionally, fanstudies in this era also
considered the changing position of the producer versus the position of the consumer. Vincent Miller used the term ‘produser’ in Understanding Digital
Culture to refer to the blurring line between the consumer and the producer.
The third wave of fan studies, of which texts adhering to that school of thought will be appearing throughout this investigation, opened up fan studies from being an “object of study in and for itself” to uncovering “fundamental insights into modern life” (Gray, Sandvoss and Harrington, 9).
2.4 Political ideology in and with (fan) text
Now that some clarity about the development of fan studies throughout the years has been established, it is important to understand the political ideologies that exist within the texts that present the objects of fandom, and within the texts that are produced by the fandoms. The idea of the existence of political ideology within texts is well established and often discussed by prominent participators of media studies. Before investigating the nuances of ideology, it might be useful to establish the meaning of ideology within mediastudies. According to John Storey in his book Cultural Theory and Popular Culture, there are more than one accepted meanings to the term. Not all of these meanings are particular to this investigation, but it must be understood that ‘first, ideology can refer to a systematic body of ideas articulated by a particular group of people’ (2). Storey argues that ideology is presented by something as a truth, and therefore may be taken as an ideal or a reflection of its ideas about the social, economic and
political. This idea of ideology is applied in macro and micro to media within the discipline.
Two of the most important ideology thinkers are Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Engels took over Marx’ work after his death in 1883, and expanded on the former’s thoughts in order to make it more understandable and applicable to our lives in the 20th century. Marx says that ‘the mode of
production of material life conditions the social, political and intellectual life process in general. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but on the contrary it is their social being that determines their
consciousness’ (3). This definition of ideology suggests that the body of ideas may go hand in hand with what Storey calls a certain masking or concealment (2). The way in which life is perceived by the people is determined by the mode of production of their lives. An example of this is the balance between the base and the superstructure of their society. The base is the mode of production, and the superstructure is the way in which the mode of production is reproduced in the structure of life. This can be seen in its institutions, such as school, police, and family. However, Marx and Engels argue that within this system, neither do the powerful consider themselves exploiters, nor do the powerless consider themselves exploited. In short, they argue that the ideologies produce a false consciousness for the entire society involved. Although these ideas of ideology within society are later further developed and amended, Tony Bennet claims in ‘Popular Culture: Themes and Issues’ that the thought that ‘the flow of causal traffic within society is unequally structured, such that economy, in a privileged way, influences political and ideological relationships in ways that are not true in reverse’ is one that remains the main claim of Marxism (81).
Building on the Marxist thoughts on ideology are the ideas of German playwright Bertolt Brecht in On Theatre. Although Brecht writes about (political) ideology in the context of theatre pieces, his ideas can be applied to other media products. Supporting his arguments are the ideas first set by Marx and later expanded by Engels, arguing for the existence of the false
consciousness as a result of ideological expressions by the existing powerful. In the case of a play, Brecht says that ‘good or bad, a play always includes an image of the world. There is no play and no theatrical performance which does not in some way affect the dispositions and conceptions of the audience. Art is
never without consequences’ (150). In other words, a text cannot be presented without it containing some view of how the world is or could be. As such, it always contains a (political) message.
Stuart Hall continues on Brecht’s argument, but considers it to be true for all popular culture, and not just theatre. According to Hall in ‘The
rediscovery of ideology: the return of the repressed in media studies’ popular culture presents a place where ‘collective social understandings are created’ (137). One text may reiterate or confirm the political ideologies of another, popular culture thus working together to create a confirmed ideology. The ideologies can be used in the process of ‘politics of signification’, in which the texts attempt to convince the audience of their particular view or ideology of the world (137). Earlier in his work, in his renowned text ‘encoding/decoding’, Hall confirms that this does not necessarily mean that the audience simply takes over whatever ideology is spit out by the text. Raymond Williams suggested in
Problems in Materialism in Culture that a text can present a multiplicity of
voices. It can be drawn in different directions by the plethora of contextual, historical and production forces through which it is created. Storey says that ‘how these elements are articulated will depend in part on the social
circumstances and historical conditions of production and consumption’ (8). An important notion is that Williams not only acknowledges the production of ideology in production, but also in consumption. Hall expands on this thought by creating the encoding/decoding model. In this he suggests that there are three different reading positions a reader can take throughout a text. A reader can take a subordinate position, in which he or she will accept whatever ideology is carried by the text. On the other hand, a reader may, according to Hall, also assume a dominant position, in which his or her own ideology remains the one to which the reader adheres. Lastly, a reader may negotiate with the ideology of a text. Stuart Hall thus expands on thoughts instigated by Marx and Engels, concerning the repressed and repressive, Brecht, concerning the political content of each text through his politics of signification, and Williams, by assuming that ideology is not only created in production but also in consumption, and an audience is not just passively accepting all that is expressed in ideologies.
David Morley found that Hall’s encoding/decoding model posed interesting qualities. He took it an expanded on it by taking into account
‘discourse and subjectivity: seeing reading as always an interaction between the discourses of the text and the discourses of the reader’ (Storey, 9).This means that not only does the context and interests of the production side matter in the ideological content of a text. Additionally, the (historical) context, existing cultural discourse and knowledge of the reader also contain an ideology. These ideologies in themselves perform an interaction or dialogue in order for meaning to be given to the text. This means the ideology one reader may find in a text is not necessarily the ideology found by the next.
In British Cultural Studies: An Introduction Graeme Turner states that “Popular Culture is a site where the construction of everyday life may be examined. The point of doing this is not only academic – that is, as an attempt to understand a process or practice – it is also political, to examine the power relations that constitute this
form of everyday life and thus reveal the configurations of interests its construction serves” (6).
In short, this means that as popular culture presents the dialogue between the powerful and powerless, it is political. Examining it will not only reveal the construction of everyday life, but also the parties that benefit or are served by the ideologies.
In order to fully understand the vast concept of ideology, Roland Barthes must be taken into account, who investigated the level at which ideologies operate. Although the former theories may make it seem as though ideologies are explicit and easily read, quite the opposite is true. Barthes argues that ideologies (or myths, as he calls them) operate on a second, connotative level. Texts and practices unconsciously carry ideological meaning, and they are not necessarily constructed solely to convey a subliminal political, social or
economic message. Barthes identifies this as ‘the attempts to make universal and legitimate what is in fact partial and particular; an attempt to pass of that which is cultural (i.e. humanly made) as something which is natural (i.e. just existing)’ (Storey, 3). He says that although (or perhaps because) ideologies exist on a connotative level, they perform in such a way that a reader will not consciously accept or reject the given ideologies, but will subconsciously take them to him or herself as though it were a natural occurrence that that which is said is a logical event.
2.5 Expression of ideology by fans
This knowledge about the way in which ideologies perform, as well as are internalized by the audience, is tantamount to understanding why fandom functions as it does. It can be considered the politics of fan appropriation and it is important to always note the difference between ideological significance of content versus the ideological significance of context of production and
circulation. In this study, it will become clear that although the two often build on each other, they are not the same thing.
The underlying ideologies of the narratives, the ideological significance of content, will prove to often be the motivation for a fandom to exist. However, the ideological significance of context of the production and circulation – such as for example historical contexts of the time period in which a narrative is first published – will prove to be tantamount in the attraction that the content of narrative holds for the fan. Throughout the three case studies, the perceived ideologies in the fan objects can be considered motivational for the resulting fandoms of said texts. Throughout this study it’s important to remember that all texts contain ideologies. This means that ideologies aren’t only created in the text itself, on the production side. They are created again on the receiver end, as well as in the productive fandom about the fan-objects. Additionally the
ideologies about these fan-texts also contain ideologies on both ends. This means that the performance of a fandom is not necessarily a united behavior, but instead offer a multiplicity of meanings given to a text, that are then expressed, shared, and interpreted again within a fandom. The case studies will uncover the different ways in which this has happened throughout the years. Additionally, it will uncover the manner in which these fandoms act strategically to influence the production side of their fan-objects. The relationship between ideology and popularity will therefore be a pattern in all case studies.
A very important term to understand what fans do with their fan-objects is bricolage. A term used by Dick Hebdige in his 1979 publication Subculture:
The meaning of Style, it gives an explanation of the process in which fans take a
text and appropriate it for their own use. This is not a one sided process. It consists of (in Hebdige’s case Youth-) subcultures taking a text and rearticulating it for their own use, often in opposition with that what the
producer intended. However, eventually this oppositional and original re-articulation by the subcultures will manifest itself in a producer that now uses this ideological appropriation in order to exploit it and market the subcultural resistance for profit. The youth cultural styles “end by establishing new sets of conventions; by creating new commodities, new industries or rejuvenating old ones” (96). The process of bricolage suggests that the producer cannot escape the readers own appropriation, but in turn the user cannot escape the power the producer has over its text. In the three case studies we will see in very explicit instances how the two sides sometimes work together and sometimes oppose each other. As a result the fan is able to influence the path their fan-object will take, and how different fandoms, in different times, have approached these situations in different manners.
The case studies in this investigation concern the way in which fans interfere with the production process, in an attempt to continue the production of their fan objects. However, the concept of ideology remains significant because it explains the ways in which fans take persuasive action, as well as the context to which the fandoms’ growth is explained. The latter is specifically important in chapter four discussing Star Trek, as the huge rise in fans in the 1970’s was largely caused by the ideological content of the series’ narrative.
3. Elementary Fandom, My Dear.
Chapter two offered a lot of knowledge on fandom and ideologies. This knowledge will be applied and needs to be kept in mind during chapter 3. Chapter three explores the early fandom surrounding the world famous stories written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. First, the chapter will introduce the key aspects of Conan Doyle’s narrative, or ‘canon’, as it’s commonly called. It then moves on from the narrative to the Great Hiatus, which is a period of 8 years in which Conan Doyle refused to write any more Sherlock Holmes stories. Fans undertook action to convince Doyle to continue writing, something they eventually managed to achieve. The chapter also investigates what narrative content and historical context, and attraction in ideology, may have moved fans to undertake action, how fans perform now and why Sherlock is still a traditional and noteworthy fandom today. This information all serves to answer the
undertakings of
3.1 Why, Sherlock?
“It’s always 1895” is a phrase commonly considered the golden rule amongst true Sherlock fans, referred to as Sherlockonians in the United States of
America (and in the rest of this study), and Holmesians in Britain. It refers to the state of mind that true Sherlockonians hold in which one pretends Sherlock and Watson have really existed, and within the stories of Sherlock, original or newly written, social rule and as in 1895 prevails. Sherlockonian fandom practices are still common today, and although they present some similarities to other kinds of fandom practices, the ‘it’s always 1895’ mindset seems to keep them from playing the exact same game. This may have something to do with the age old roots of fandom found in readers and fans of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s
detectives. Conan Doyle wrote 4 short novels and 56 short stories in which world renowned detective Sherlock Holmes solved mysteries in and around London. Since Conan Doyle’s death, many narratives borrowing his hero have been produced. Not just fan fiction, but also movies, games and tourist
attractions were born from the 120 year old detectives first published in UK magazine The Strand. All these derivatives of the original present the same core
characteristics that were once laid out in the first short novel, A Study in Scarlet
(1887). Exactly these developments stemming from one author and the events
surrounding the progress of the writing of the stories are what makes Sherlock
Holmes and its fans of the 1890’s an interesting case study.
3.2 What’s(on) the story?
The main characters and narratives of Sherlock Holmes are world renowned. The stories are written as a portrayal of Dr. Watson’s point of view. Dr. Watson describes adventures and mysteries solved by the deductive wits of Sherlock and the medical expertise of Watson himself. This means that almost all the stories are frame stories, in which Watson’s perception of what are Sherlock’s most important adventures is key in the narratives. All of the stories begin and end in London, in their famous 221b Baker Street address. Other characters, both male and female, make regular appearances in the stories. Amongst others some of recurring characters are the housekeeper, Mrs. Hudson, Sherlock’s love interest the cunning Irene Adler, London chief of Police Lestrade, and last but certainly not least, Sherlock’s brother, Mycroft Holmes. All these characters present specific positive and negative forces in Sherlock’s life, that allows his complicated, layered and interesting character to be uncovered in the stories. Sometimes, people look for Sherlock’s consultation on mysteries or crimes that have been committed in their lives. Often, very specific pieces of information or even one specific word will motivate Sherlock to take on the case. Sherlock is eccentric to say the least. His way of life could not be more opposed to his manner of investigation. As hinted at by the novels and stories, Sherlock in modern day would likely be considered a hoarder, probably with his own episode of the cheap reality program of the same name at that. The narrative hints that Sherlock is often behind on his correspondence, cannot throw away documents, and has a very odd system of keeping his important objects. These habits are often complained about by Dr. Watson, whose personality and cleanliness are quite unlike Sherlock’s habits.
3.3 A means to an end?
As mentioned above, the stories appeared in parts in the periodical magazine
The Strand. Sherlock Holmes quickly gained popularity, and the magazine saw
its subscription numbers rise as more people became fond of reading the detective stories. However, Conan Doyle wrote more stories than just the Sherlock Holmes adventures. By 1883, Conan Doyle was looking for new inspirations and wanted to have more time on his hands to write more serious novels. It was thus that he decided to stop writing the Sherlock Holmes novels. He deduced that stopping the writing of the stories would be easiest if his main character simply ceased to exist. It was thus that when Conan Doyle visited Austria with his wife and went to the Reichenbach Falls, he devised a way to end his most elaborate and most talked about story thus far. In order to satisfy the fans, Conan Doyle created the most evil character he could possibly imagine. Moriarty, a man with plans so evil that Sherlock would surely never face worse. Indeed, in The Final Problem, Sherlock tracks down Moriarty, meets him in Austria, at the Reichenbach falls, and the confrontation ends in a struggle. Eventually, Sherlock takes Moriarty and pushes him down the cliff of the falls. However, just as Watson arrives at the scene, Moriarty pulls him along, and they both fall into deep nothingness. With this sudden ending, Conan Doyle hoped to make time for serious writing, as well as satisfy his readers by giving Sherlock a foe to end that could never be equaled in evil or cunning.
After The Final Problem was published in 1893, Conan Doyle stuck to his word and started writing other stories. These too were published in The
Strand. The stories were well read, but never regained the popularity and
following that he had gotten with Sherlock Holmes. This was something he was constantly reminded about by his publicists and The Strand, but most of all by his readers.
3.4 Good Mourning
Conan Doyle’s fans were far from satisfied with Sherlock’s end and the end of
fans that the western world has ever seen, to this day. Fans undertook action all over England. Many other nations in the world even followed example and cried along with the British for a sequel to the detectives readers had so come to love. The way in which fans banded together, eventually to avail, is one that needs to be carefully considered in order to fully understand the persuasive power
fandom can have, even in a time when phones were uncommon and internet was not yet invented.
The first response after the news hit that The Final Problem would in fact be the last Sherlock story is one that can be seen in numbers. Over 20,000 people canceled their subscriptions to Strand magazine, almost overnight. Not a good morning to wake up as an owner of the periodical, of course. Aside from the dramatic decrease in subscriptions, overall sales of the magazine also went down significantly, as having the names ‘Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’ or ‘Sherlock Holmes’ on the cover of the magazine would usually result in an extra turnover often exceeding 100.000 more copies sold than usual. This means that not only Conan Doyle, who had continued writing the stories for the money in order to pay his wife’s medical bill, but also The Strand suffered large losses in their bank account balances. This means that without it having been an organized fan action, the readers’ boycotting of The Strand had immediate impact.
What happened next was something no one, including Conan Doyle, saw coming. Conan Doyle had been receiving fan mail for Sherlock since the first novel had come out. However, very often this fan mail was not addressed to him, but to Sherlock or Watson. People treated the novel’s characters as if they existed in real life, and the letters often contained advice for Sherlock or shared grievances with Watson. Before Conan Doyle had decided writing Sherlock was no longer enough of a challenge, the writer had even sporadically indulged in responding to such letters as if he were Watson. These occurrences may explain how the following events could have happened.
After it had become clear the The Final Problem was the last story, newspapers had their front pages covered in the news. Entire articles were devoted to Sherlock’s death and Conan Doyle’s reasoning behind it.
Internationally, the news spread quickly and obituaries for Sherlock’s passing were printed in newspapers and periodicals all over the world. Never had the world seen such a global response to the death of a fictional character.
Professional writers and press seemed to be just as fond of the detectives as the readers were.
It was the readers that made the fandom of Sherlock so incredibly remarkable. It is unclear where the source of the movement now known as ‘the black arm band affair ‘came from, but many readers and fans of the canon took part in a sort of mourning for the character’s death. Fans and readers of Sherlock all throughout Britain took to the streets. They wore black arm bands around their arms, a sign of their feelings of loss for the detectives. Entire funeral processions could be seen in London, making a statement to The Strand and Conan Doyle. They had suffered a loss and were not willing to stand idly by and let it happen.
In the meantime, Conan Doyle kept writing his other, more serious and historical stories. He assumed that the fans’ and press’ heavy response would eventually taper out and did not pay much attention to it. He stood behind his choice to end the series, as he had come to detest his character about as much as he loved him. However, he could not have been more wrong. Around the same time the marches of mourning started, letters came streaming in. Not only written directly to Conan Doyle, but also to the publishing offices of The Strand. Some of the letters were angry ones, threatening to kill Conan Doyle if he didn’t start writing the stories again. Other letters literally begged Conan Doyle to continue writing, or offered him obscene amounts of money to pick up the pen. The publishing offices of The Strand were not happy about these developments, and also started pressuring Conan Doyle to publish more stories. Although the pressure and pleas of the public did not lessen, the author stuck to his word and for many years continued writing his ‘more serious’ stories.
Eight years after publishing The Final Problem, Conan Doyle finally caved and wrote The Hounds of Baskerville (1901). The story was received with much enthusiasm by all the readers. The story took place before the death of Sherlock at the Reichenbach falls, so Conan Doyle hoped to get away with not writing another story after it, because Sherlock was technically still dead. However, after many please from the publishing offices and his readers, as well as a nice financial boost after The Hounds of the Baskerville, Conan Doyle devised a loophole narrative that allowed Sherlock to rise from the dead. Conan Doyle continued writing the detective’s stories until two years before his death,
and allowed Sherlock to retire in the countryside after decades of loyal service to the mysteries of London.
3.5 Traditional fandom at its core
The fan behaviors displayed by the fans and readers of Conan Doyle are telling of the incredible popularity of the series. Not only did it present one of the first large cooperative moments of persuasive fandom, but it also gave way to one of the first official fan society. However, this fan society wouldn’t be founded until quite a few decades after Conan Doyle decided to once again pick up his pen for
Sherlock Holmes. It was called the ‘Baker Street Irregulars’ (BSI), after a gang
of street children Sherlock would sometimes enlist for help in the stories. BSI presented the first form of organized fandom and would later be followed by many other forms of organized fandoms for many other narratives.
The BSI was started in 1934 by Christopher Morley, the editor of the Doubleday, a newspaper. It still exists today, with many daughter or sister groups, or scions, later founded around the world that are endorsed by the BSI. The BSI still meet once a year in New York City, where they practice their fandom and discuss developments within the Sherlock Holmes narrative. BSI set the tradition for how Sherlock fandom is practiced, and membership is
considered to be an exclusive status not available to just any fan. Serious contributions to the existing scholarship are necessary in order to even be considered as a member. Although the scions around the US and the world do not necessarily depend on the BSI and do not carry the same rules for
membership, they too are considered to greatly contribute to the tradition of Sherlockonian fandom.
Interestingly, the BSI didn’t allow women to join their fan culture until 1991. The ‘Adventuresses of Sherlock Holmes,’ or ASH was founded in the late sixites as a counterfan culture to the males’. These fan cultures still produce Sherlockonian scholarship, as started before the BSI during the great hiatus.
Both ASH and BSI, which now all accept both genders as members and count a large number of overlap in membership, have taken off from remaining occupied with just the canon from Conan Doyle himself. As years progressed,
retold all over the world. Its characters or its characters’ traits are recurring in many different popular media, anywhere from House and Psych and one and one could even argue for Sherlockonian deductions and references in The
Rescuers and The Mickey Mouse Club. Whether it can be argued that these texts
pursue the fandom and subculture of Sherlock that was started in 1895 is another question for another paper. However, it can surely be said that the rallying of
Sherlock fans during The Great Hiatus laid the foundation for what is now
considered one of the oldest and most traditional fandoms. The next section will investigate what how historical context and narrative content work together to present the motivation there may have been in the 1890’s, as well as now, as a possible explanation for the explosive popularity of Sherlock Holmes from its very beginnings.
3.6 City Safety with Sherlock Holmes
In understanding the immense attraction Sherlock Holmes held for its readers, it is useful to understand the historical context in which these fandoms operated. This historical background serves to understand the motivation of the fans in their large undertakings of persuasive fandom.
By 1870, Britain entered its second industrial revolution. The United Kingdom saw an incredible rise in the industrial production of coal, indicating the rise of new manufacturing and infrastructure technologies being used. As a result, over half of Britain’s population in 1901 was employed in jobs
concerning either manufacturing or construction. These jobs were often found in the big cities, and thus massive urbanization occurred during the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Chambers et al. 741-743). Simultaneously, knowledge expanded. Scientific theories became prevalent, and discourse about religion, progress and ethics no longer occured without the mention of scientific
discoveries. According to The Western Experience, ‘The scientific establishment of the laws of nature rekindled hope that laws of social development might similarly be discovered and beneficially applied’ (Chambers et al., 744). The growing knowledge of science led to a striving to better understandings of social developments, such as urbanization.
These historical growths of industrialization, scientific knowledge and urbanization are recurring themes in Sherlock Holmes. As people moved from rural to urban areas, the social structures of their lives changed dramatically. Where they used to be able to spot a stranger in their village out of hundreds, because everyone knew everyone, the city now offered only strangers and few to no familiar faces. Trading had to be done based on trust, in stead of knowledge of a business partner’s reputation. Crimes could (and would) be coming from any direction, without warning. The city offered none of the knowledge and safety that urban areas had offered, and in stead seemed a source of crime, strangers, and the fear of the unknown. Sherlock Holmes’ tactics of deduction and knowledge of science offer a solution to the struggles of the new city in London in the late 19th century. Sherlock’s very unique way of investigating is no mirror of his housekeeping skills. Sherlock’s investigation techniques are the skill of logic and deduction. Sherlock supposes that when hearing a sound, say of a bus, and one has only ever heard the sound of a train, it is possible to still argue having heard a bus when having to choose between the two. The narratives often display events in which Sherlock shows off his skills for deductive reasoning, an aspect tantamount to the character of the Sherlock Holmes series.
In fact, in “Decoding the Industrial and Digital city: Visions of Security in Holmes’ and Sherlock’s London’, in Transmedia Sherlock, Anne Kustritz and Melanie Kohnen argue that Sherlock, using his scientific deduction to solve crimes, ‘thus provided assurance that the newly expanded industrial city remained understandable and therefore safe by shoring up faith that scientific skills and analytic mind can thwart the dens physical and sociological
geographies of Victorian and Edwardian London’ (2). This may offer one of the explanations for the attraction some fans felt for Sherlock Holmes.
As Conan Doyle uses science so his protagonist can rid the streets of crime, he carries an ideology that is very much welcome for the urban city in during the second industrial revolution. However, another aspect of Conan Doyle’s stories resound with its readers. During this time, sociological research was prevalent and desired, as mentioned above. One of those studies was that of criminal typologies, where genetics and composure might indicate whether or not someone was a criminal, or would have criminal tendencies. Sherlock
