Karen Hellekson

March 30, 2008

To the axis mundi

Filed under: con report, essay, media studies — Tags: , , — Karen Hellekson @ 4:06 pm

Introduction

On Saturday, March 22, Karen Hellekson and Craig Jacobsen were the hosts for a special lunchtime presentation held at ICFA-29 in Orlando, Florida, entitled “To the Axis Mundi: ICFA in the Pull of the Magic Kingdom.” The hour-long PowerPoint presentation was the first in an ongoing project we’re calling DWORPF: Disney World Ongoing Research Project in the Fantastic. We plan follow-up presentations in the future.

We visited the Magic Kingdom on Tuesday and took about 280 pictures between us. Even these were not enough. In addition to the images below, we found a few on the Internet, mostly of attractions that we were unable to photograph, such as the interior of sets, and of attractions that exist only virtually, such as little green CGI monsters. We were at the park from the time of its opening at 9 a.m. to the time of its closing at about 1 a.m., after which we had an entirely new kind of adventure: that of lost taxi driver desperately trying to pretend he knows where he’s going.

Note: There are many images behind the cut. It may take a while for the full page to load. Because the large images were sucking down the bandwidth to an amazing degree and my Photobucket account was complaining, I have provided 300p previews, plus a link for you to click on to view the beautiful full-size version. If you can’t view the big images, it’s because Photobucket shut me down again. Sorry! Sorry!

(more…)

Fandom Wank and history

Filed under: con report, media studies — Karen Hellekson @ 12:36 pm

At ICFA-29, I presented a paper entitled “Fandom Wank and History.” Here’s its abstract. The same basic information has been accepted for publication in an edited volume about community and online tools. I plan to expand the essay greatly by adding in a discussion of The Ms.Scribe Story to illustrate how blog-based historical texts are generated with the benefit of time and hindsight.

Abstract: Fandom Wank and history

Historical discourse is firmly situated in the realm of the trace: a document, be it a bill of sale or the registry of a wedding, provides unmistakable proof that an event occurred, and historians study such traces to construct a narrative document based (one hopes) in fact. As the realm of res gestae (things done), history’s rhetorical activity is one of telling the truth. However, the Internet muddies this historical trace by permitting deliberate rewriting and obfuscation: blog posts can be rewritten; Web sites can be taken down; online comments can be edited.

One site that dramatically illustrates the possibility of this activity in the realm of fandom is Fandom Wank, a blog-based online community that exists solely to describe—and mock—fandom blowups. Descriptions of altered traces abound: offending entries edited, entire blogs deleted, entries locked or deleted, comments disabled. Yet next to these descriptions of altered traces may sit proof of the original text: damning screen shots, IP address traces, links to archived Web pages. The wank I used to illustrate my paper, chosen because it was recent, because it has sensational elements, and because it illustrated all my points, is called How NOT to Date a Celebrity.

Fandom Wank foregrounds the activity of fans who use blogs to collaboratively write a kind of history of an event as it happens by tracking elements of the trace even as the trace is being erased and literally rewritten, thus constructing a new form of historical writing, with its own rules of acceptable proof of the trace. I argue that fan blogs discussing current events in fan culture are actually historical writings that are imbued with community-specific meaning. The point of such an activity is to create a collaborative text that brings together relevant traces, documentation, and testimony in an effort to construct a persuasive document.

March 29, 2008

Transformative Works and Cultures copyright clarification

Filed under: twc — Tags: — Karen Hellekson @ 4:02 pm

What copyright is Transformative Works and Cultures using?

TWC is copyrighting under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License.

In brief, everyone is free to reprint or remix, with attribution, without obtaining specific permission, as long as the original publication info is attributed and/or hotlinked back. We chose a noncommercial license because we think that enough people are making money off fan labor. If people are going to do so, we figure at least they ought to tell us, so we can tell the author.

Practically speaking, what does that copyright mean for the authors who publish in TWC?

It means that anybody can post full text of the articles, with attribution, as long as they don’t make money. Authors may therefore repost the entire content to their blog or Web site after TWC has been published. Likewise, random people can repost full text without restriction. As long as they attribute it properly, it’s all good.

If people want to make money off the text, perhaps by anthologizing the essay in an edited volume, then they must ask. This includes the author, because once an article appears in TWC, TWC owns the copyright.

We plan to grant permission to anyone who requests reprint, regardless of who they are (the author or not), without asking for money. We basically just want to know, so we can inform the author. If the author does not want the article reprinted, we are obliged to disregard the author’s wishes and permit the publication to go forward, as per our stated reprint policy (“Such permission is routinely granted for free”). We do this in the spirit of open access.

Why is TWC retaining copyright, not the author?

The journal retaining copyright is standard in academic journal publishing. Everyone in the industry understands it. We’re thus in line with general practice. Production editors at presses seeking reprint permission will automatically come to TWC, not the author. Requesting payment for reprints is one way that academic journals make money. However, TWC, because it is associated with the Organization for Transformative Works, a nonprofit organization, and because we want to retain the spirit of open access, will never ask for money to reprint articles.

Our main reason is a purely practical one: TWC retains copyright to protect its ability to grant reprint permission in case the author disappears.

Further, we are committed to open access. If we released copyright to the author, the author could choose to abrogate that by refusing to grant reprint permission. This is not in line with TWC’s mission and goals, which are focused on the free dissemination of ideas.

What about reproduction of copyrighted or trademarked material in TWC?

As part of the essays we will print, TWC will publish screencaps, manips, original art based on copyrighted or trademarked characters, short vids, and other artworks based on copyrighted material.

As TWC’s Web site notes in the section on Online Submissions,

We believe images, including images altered by an artist to create a derivative artwork, and song lyrics may appear in TWC under fair use under U.S. copyright law. Such images and lyrics are fair use because:
1. They are lower in resolution and quality than the original.
2. They do not limit the copyright owners’ distribution rights.
3. They are being used in the context of academic analysis in a manner that contributes meaningfully to our culture.
4. They represent only a tiny fraction of the whole artwork.
5. They are hosted by the OTW’s servers, and the OTW is a nonprofit organization.

This reading of fair use means that we will permit reproduction of images that most other scholarly journals would never consider. We hope that this will inspire authors who have resisted writing such works because they knew they would basically be unpublishable.

If authors wish to reprint untransformed copyrighted texts that are not artworks, such as bar graphs or charts that were originally published in another academic journal, the author is responsible, as is standard in the industry, for contacting the journal to obtain permission, paying any fees, and providing the TWC editors with copies of the relevant paperwork.

March 2, 2008

Remember: An analysis of Torchwood 2.05 “Adam”

Filed under: essay, media studies — Karen Hellekson @ 11:49 am

This is cross-posted to my LiveJournal blog here. Feel free to comment in either space.

Remember

An analysis of Torchwood 2.05 “Adam”

Contains major spoilers!

1. Analysis of memory and forgetting

[1.1] In Torchwood 2.05 “Adam,” the Torchwood team has a new colleague: Adam. He’s their new best friend: Jack’s confidant (he recruited Adam 3 years ago!), Tosh’s lover (it’s the 1-year anniversary of their first kiss!), all-around great guy. He’s even in a clip or two in the show’s opening credits. But despite all their memories of times shared, our heroes have only known him for 2 days. Adam is an alien who only has reality when others have memory of him. He feeds that memory into people by touch, and by so doing, he constitutes his own existence.

[1.2] Torchwood 2.05 “Adam” is interesting to me because of the ways it explores the fascinating historical idea of the trace. In addition, it explores the idea that memories comprise the person, and if one alters, so the other necessarily must. The character of the aptly named Adam takes this one step further: memories literally create a person, and without them, he is literally nothing. He would disappear, his existence restricted, doomed to drift in the Vortex. To exist, he must construct false memories in others, thereby creating a false reality in a house of cards that, as we learn, can’t be sustained for long.

[1.3] Paul Ricoeur, in Memory, History, Forgetting, notes that there are three kinds of trace: the kind of trace associated with our brains, which can be analyzed by brain scans and neuroscientific analysis; the trace of affect, or the inscription of something onto the soul; and the more usual documentary trace, which comprises written records, archives, and writing. In “Adam,” all three kinds of trace are in evidence, with the last kind, documentary trace, resulting in Adam’s discovery and downfall. (more…)

March 1, 2008

Book featured at RCCS!

Filed under: media studies, self-promotion — Karen Hellekson @ 4:19 pm

The book I coedited with Kristina Busse, Fan Fiction and Fan Communities in the Age of the Internet, was selected as a title for review at RCCS for the month of March. Check it out here. Kristina and I had the opportunity to respond to the reviewer’s comments, and our response is there as well.

Here is the blurb from the RCCS:

each month, the resource center for cyberculture studies (RCCS)
publishes a set of book reviews and author responses:
http://rccs.usfca.edu/booklist.asp. books of the month for march 2008
include:

Cybersounds: Essays on Virtual Music Culture
Editor: Michael D. Ayers
Publisher: Peter Lang, 2006
Review 1: Lori Landay
Review 2: Shintaro Miyazaki
Review 3: Marc W.D. Tyrrell
Editor Response: Michael D. Ayers

Cyberspace Romance: The Psychology of Online Relationships
Authors: Monica Whitty, Adrian Carr
Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006
Review 1: Rhiannon Bury
Review 2: Michele Hammers

Fan Fiction and Fan Communities in the Age of the Internet: New Essays
Editors: Karen Hellekson, Kristina Busse
Publisher: McFarland & Co., 2006
Review 1: Lan Xuan Le
Author Response: Karen Hellekson & Kristina Busse

The Virtual Window: From Alberti to Microsoft
Author: Anne Friedberg
Publisher: MIT Press, 2006
Review 1: Christy Dena
Author Response: Anne Friedberg

enjoy. there’s more where that came from.

david silver

Blog at WordPress.com.