PDA

View Full Version : The Philosophy of Fandom: A question about (post)structuralism and Naruto fandom


ninja88penguin
06-27-2007, 03:13 AM
Now I wasn't quite sure where to stick this post, since its more of a sociology/postmodern/psychological/law question more than a philosophy question, but this place seems as good as any so here we go guys, I got a lot to say.

First, a crash course in a few ideas about structuralism: every word within language consists of a two aspects, a signifier and signified. The signifier is the aspect of the word that consists of sounds and letters (its pronunciation, its spelling, its appearance in a book or how it sounds when spoken) which is tied to a signified, which is the object or idea that is being represented. So for the word "cat" the signifier is c-a-t and the signified would be the living breathing cat you may or may not be petting. Now in a similar manner, a book, TV show, movie, video game, or any other piece of media can be attributed to the same definition of "signifier" and "signified", or rather "work" and "text". Roland Barthes, a post-structuralist theorist makes the distinction between "work" and "text" by defining work to be the physical book where words are printed onto, or the filmstrip of a movie and its projection on a movie screen. The text emerges when someone, the reader, views that movie or reads the book, those words matching up with the mental images of those signifieds the reader has in his or her mind, and thus the text being the signified that corresponds to the signifiers within the film, TV show, book, etc. In simpler terms, the text can be thought of the interpretation the viewer or reader has of the work (although that definition is slightly sketchy).

Now onto the good stuff. Take a TV show like Naruto. A lot of us here on Narutoforums speculate on who's going to kick who's ass, who's going to date who, what will be happening in the future etc. Some of us write fanfiction. Some of us make AMVs. Some of us make doujinshi and fan art. Some of us draw dirty naughty pictures of Naruto and Hinata doing adult things to each other (perverts :P ). Whatever the case, a lot of us aren't merely "watching" the anime but interacting with it in some way. We watch the anime, digest it, interpret it, speculate, and through fanfiction, fan art, AMVs, or even simple forum discussion we are taking that "text" that we have watched and interpreted through watching, and in it create more "work" such as a fanfic or forum post or totally sweet drawing. But we aren't just simply "interpreting" text, but in a way re-interpreting text, using the text of Naruto to create more works that become more texts. For example, when writing a NaruHina fanfic we interpret a piece of subtext of the show, expand on it, flesh it out, and in the process create something new based on the old. In drawing a naughty hentai picture of Sakura someone is adding in a sexuality and blatant eroticism that is avoided and absent in the show. The result is that the simple text of Naruto becomes something I like to call an "exploding text", a TV show that spawns a multitude of other works that can be found in this wonderful site through forum posts, fanfics, AMVs, etc.

First off, do you even agree with some of the premises I'm presenting here? That work and text are distinct aspects of the same thing, that need to be studied separately (keep in mind the moment you engage with a work it becomes text, so in a certain sense work doesn't "really" exist smile-big )?

After that I want to ask this: Are fanfictions and AMVs also separate existing works with their own capacity to be texts, or are they merely part of the larger work/text of Naruto? In fact, what the hell is the larger work/text of Naruto? Just the show? The show and all the "officially released" bonuses? The manga? The show minus the filler (I actually consider filler non-canon, but that's another thread for another day)? The show and every single fan work that has ever existed?

Finally comes the question of that's applicable to the real world. This may seem all theoretical and such, yet this argument about fan works being separate texts is at stake when dealing with the big lumbering beast of copyright law. Fan works, such as Naruto: The Abridged Series on YouTube and fansubbers of various animes have been shut down or prosecuted or kicked off YouTube because they're using the copyrighted material of Naruto without "permission". Yet this very act of making a fansub or a YouTube parody is an act of interpretation, as much the viewing experience of Naruto as actually sitting down and watching an episode. Even erotic fanfiction functions as part of operating as "text", and this is why I save this question for last because some of you will disagree and say that erotic fanfiction of Naruto is not part of the "Naruto Universe" or whatever. Most corporations that have dealt with shows or movies with vast fan communities (star trek, star wars, xena) have a fear of both the shows clamping down and shutting down fan communities for reinterpreting their work and having fans take control of the show completely and steal the creative power from the original creators. Where does the responsibility of "creating" the text of Naruto lie?

Please don't intimidated by this huge wall of text (although by this point you probably have ran away), and I certainly skipped a lot of ideas (like almost all of structuralism, which I personally don't get fully myself) which makes certain ideas more vague and more prone to misinterpretation. But misinterpretation isn't bad, and neither is sounding like an idiot if you have something intelligent to say, so I what I want to hear is, what is your philosophy on the anime and manga of Naruto?

The Juggernaut
06-27-2007, 03:40 AM
interesting way of questioning copy right issues. In a sense you can say that reinterpeting the text should be viewed as creating a new text since historicaly every story ever told i just a reinterpetation with new material of other stories. but in this modern day and age the idea of intellectual property creates a problem when determining if something can be considered text since now ideas can be owned.

impersonal
06-28-2007, 05:37 PM
I don't know shit about structuralism, however I found your explanation strangely familiar.

What exactly did structuralism add to Kant's distinction between phenomenons (=text) and "things in themselves"(=work)? As far as your post is concerned, I don't see any difference at all. But then, my knowledge of Kant is a bit superficial, and my knowledge of structuralism is zero. Tell me what you know ^^

Edit: maybe the difference could be that Kant had a rather passive view of things (=things affect us, humans receive representations). Structuralism on the other hand seems to have a more active system: : "We interpret things, and create text".
A rather subtle difference anyway... There's probably more than that.



(keep in mind the moment you engage with a work it becomes text, so in a certain sense work doesn't "really" exist )?
Yeah, that line spawned an entire philosophic movement called "phenomenology" in the first half of the XXth century.

OK, let's move on to your points:


After that I want to ask this: Are fanfictions and AMVs also separate existing works with their own capacity to be texts, or are they merely part of the larger work/text of Naruto? In fact, what the hell is the larger work/text of Naruto? Just the show? The show and all the "officially released" bonuses? The manga? The show minus the filler (I actually consider filler non-canon, but that's another thread for another day)? The show and every single fan work that has ever existed?
I think it is "the show and every single fan work". However, the show has a much bigger importance than all the fan works together in defining the essence of "the text of Naruto".


Finally comes the question of that's applicable to the real world. This may seem all theoretical and such, yet this argument about fan works being separate texts is at stake when dealing with the big lumbering beast of copyright law. Fan works, such as Naruto: The Abridged Series on YouTube and fansubbers of various animes have been shut down or prosecuted or kicked off YouTube because they're using the copyrighted material of Naruto without "permission". Yet this very act of making a fansub or a YouTube parody is an act of interpretation, as much the viewing experience of Naruto as actually sitting down and watching an episode.
I disagree with the last sentence. I think you are missing a key element. Drawings and videos of Narutos are not works that can be interpreted in any way. They are designed to be interpreted in a certain way, using a variety of codes that are shared by all humans (or translated when they aren't).

So viewing Naruto is, indeed, interpreting. But to interpret it, you only have to follow the directions provided by the authors: your mind is acting like a mirror of the mind of the author; you think what he thought when imagining the story. (Or what he wanted you to think).

When you create a fanfiction, you are going beyond mirroring. You add your own personality to the personality of the author, and you create situations that you weren't supposed to imagine in the first place. You are no longer a passive mirror: you are a light, and your ideas will be reflected by those who read your works.

That's not a small difference!


Even erotic fanfiction functions as part of operating as "text", and this is why I save this question for last because some of you will disagree and say that erotic fanfiction of Naruto is not part of the "Naruto Universe" or whatever. Most corporations that have dealt with shows or movies with vast fan communities (star trek, star wars, xena) have a fear of both the shows clamping down and shutting down fan communities for reinterpreting their work and having fans take control of the show completely and steal the creative power from the original creators. Where does the responsibility of "creating" the text of Naruto lie?
If you add something of your own to the universe that the author created, you could pervert it. For example, if I see erotic fanfiction, I might never look at Hinata in the same way. Since the author created a universe, I think it's fair to say that it belongs to him.
Making fanfics that the author doesn't approve of is like spitting in the soup of a cook. [Obviously, if readers are able to make a strong mental distinction between the fanfics and the initial work there will be no harm]
Making money off it is simply stealing...


I hope this post was clear -_-

Freiza
06-29-2007, 03:23 AM
Uh, because people really like what they read?