![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Fanworks and Irony
Jun. 8th, 2015 10:13 amA thought that’s occurred to me lately…
It seems like when I see transformative works that are acknowledged as “artistic” or similarly virtuous (not to mention legally legitimate), they always have this kind of hipster irony about them. They’re sort of a sly deconstruction, or they mix artistic/realistic registers so as to critique the illusion, or something like that.
And that kind of irony doesn’t particularly interest me.
Not saying it’s not valid and a valuable tool and a good stance for the people who are drawn to it, but I’m just not drawn to it most of the time, and I think fandom (fanfic-land), while inclusive of it, doesn’t have that kind of ironic default stance.
Which is good. Given that irony seems to enable the above-mentioned validation, to engage with the source unironically is courageous, IMO.
Of course, “unironic” does not mean “uncritical,” and it can offer its own kind of subversion. Irony seems to shoot above and below at the same time: it suggests a kind of intellectual superiority over the source but doesn’t presume to challenge it on its own ground. On the other hand, a fan-creator who engages unironically with the source is potentially claiming a position of equal seriousness and dignity with the original creators — looking them in the eye and saying “I am just as good as you and I have just as much right to shape this material in my own way.”
Which is pretty damn courageous and subversive. And personally, as a stance from which to create transformative work, I find it more interesting. (At least most of the time.)
It seems like when I see transformative works that are acknowledged as “artistic” or similarly virtuous (not to mention legally legitimate), they always have this kind of hipster irony about them. They’re sort of a sly deconstruction, or they mix artistic/realistic registers so as to critique the illusion, or something like that.
And that kind of irony doesn’t particularly interest me.
Not saying it’s not valid and a valuable tool and a good stance for the people who are drawn to it, but I’m just not drawn to it most of the time, and I think fandom (fanfic-land), while inclusive of it, doesn’t have that kind of ironic default stance.
Which is good. Given that irony seems to enable the above-mentioned validation, to engage with the source unironically is courageous, IMO.
Of course, “unironic” does not mean “uncritical,” and it can offer its own kind of subversion. Irony seems to shoot above and below at the same time: it suggests a kind of intellectual superiority over the source but doesn’t presume to challenge it on its own ground. On the other hand, a fan-creator who engages unironically with the source is potentially claiming a position of equal seriousness and dignity with the original creators — looking them in the eye and saying “I am just as good as you and I have just as much right to shape this material in my own way.”
Which is pretty damn courageous and subversive. And personally, as a stance from which to create transformative work, I find it more interesting. (At least most of the time.)
