In Defense of Fandom

Alright so JK Rowling just came out and said that Hermione should have ended up with Harry.  This piece of news has caused the entire internet to collectively lose its shit.  All that shit it had?  Gone.

Now, there have been debates concerning whether anyone cares at all (since the books weren't about romance, but about heroism) and whether this is sort of anti-feminist (relegating Hermione to a "prize" [standard fantasy female treatment] and condemning her to a life playing second-fiddle to Mr. Back-from-the-dead-Chosen-One).  Fandom melts into a pool of, "I told you so!"s, "No!  It can't be!"s, and "Team Harry and Luna forever!"s (I'm on board with that last, but shhh...it's a secret).  Then we get the flare up of, "OMG fandoms, you don't own shit, you're so entitled! Saying you made things better is wrong and bad."

Historically, I've been on the side of the elitists.  The heavy lifting's been done by the author, and the universe wouldn't exist without them, so for someone to come along and expand that universe, in whatever fashion, and claim that they have done something creative seems incredibly lazy.  I was as appalled as everyone else over the 50 Shades phenomenon (I still am, actually, but for different reasons now).  However, after hearing more interviews with the author and seeing more of the fan universe of Harry Potter, I've begun to change my mind.  (As usual, the lead-up to this post has little to do with my actual thoughts, but I'm explaining how I got to this head-space - by picking fights with the internet people in the comments sections of articles like this.)

I will say that it's specifically Harry Potter that's started converting me.  Before I could even consider the fandoms, I had to lose faith in the god-author archetype in my brain, I guess.  Good ol' JK to the rescue.  I've lost a lot of respect for JK as a writer. Some of her statements on writing and the nature of fantasy novels have been quite disturbing.  (The "sex next to unicorns" thing steamed me up, in particular.  It's a small comment, but such a telling one.  It's clear she views fantasy as a realm of only children's literature and has no real respect for the genre [The next day, I wrote a story about lesbian sex next to unicorns, out of spite. It was largely unnotable, apart from the fact that the unicorns were named Kirk and Boris.]) I think the HP books were almost a fluke on her part, like when George Lucas tried to make that Flash Gordon movie and accidentally made Star Wars. Absolute cultural phenomenons, filled with amazing surprises and characters and emotions, yet neither artist has any idea what they've done or why their works have the staying power that they do, which is why any attempt on their part to improve or expand what already exists falls so flat. It's the fandom that's made the HP universe what it is. I don't often stand behind fandoms thus, but I think that in this case, the fandom actually did improve on the original work.  (Now, let me specify that I don't consider myself a part of the fandom - not for the purposes of this argument, anyway. I don't write the fic or do art or anything more creative than re-pin pretty pictures on the Pinterest.)

I would argue that the fans have a right to be entitled. 

JK is an ignorant fantasy writer, and much like the 50 Shades phenomenon, I think publishing/marketing tactics and controversy elevated these books beyond their natural level, if that makes sense. Having masses of parents accuse you of being an actual, real-life witch is a great way to make kids read your books.

Midnight release parties?  Brilliant.  

Publishing one book per year was genius-level.  Kids like me got to grow up with Harry.  We were 11 at the same time. My birthday, like his, was in the summer, so I waited impatiently for my birthday to come, because I knew that my Granny was getting me the next Harry Potter book.  I unwrapped it with glee.  I stayed up all night, reading the whole thing in one sitting.  My mom found me on the sofa at 8am the day after my 16th birthday (damn that extra-year-gap), crying over Sirius' death. I still reread the books, I own all the movies. 

But I recognize now how utterly unoriginal they are. My love of HP has less to do with quality and more to do with nostalgia, and that amazing experience of growing up with Harry. Now see them as your standard-issue children's fantasy hack writing - Magic school, fake Latin spells, "the chosen one," dues ex machinas up the wazoo...need I go on?  I'm not saying that she's a bad writer, I guess, just an unoriginal one.  The books themselves are good to read, in terms of prose, just not really anything special on the larger scene of children's fantasy.

If JK's writing was as cliched as I claim that it is, then what makes the fandom's work any less creative?
And Anyway, "originality" as a prerequisite for "creativity" is a relatively modern concept. Classical artists and writers were often judged by their ability to rework older art in new and interesting ways.

"The contemporary idea of originality is actually a relatively recent invention. Shakespeare, for instance, was not thought original in his time nor is it likely that he would have considered himself original. Originality, as we think of it today, developed hand in hand with the notion of genius: the belief that rare creative individuals are uniquely able to produce works without precedent, works that show no clearly discernible link with the past and which, therefore, must be the product of otherwise unaccountable gifts." - Jim Hamlyn

Even later - take the jazz age singers, for example.  there are a relatively few songs covered over and over by different singers, which are judged on their ability to take an already existing, already interpreted song and make it fully their own.

This idea of genius persists today, although I think that when people think about it, they're willing to say that everything comes from somewhere.  People are inspired by new and different things every day.  Who knows how many works are based on writers saying, "This is a great book! I wonder how it would turn out if this character did that instead?"  Maybe they use it as a writing exercise and it takes on a life of its own.  Maybe they just let the idea stew in their heads for a few months until it mutates and comes back to them.  Probably they didn't even know they were doing it.  I've certainly noticed similarities between authors who claim not to have been influenced by one another.  And we all know the Picasso quote: "Good artists copy; great artists steal."  

"Haha," we laugh, "very funny."

Modern retellings, reboots, retcons, etc. abound (some good, some utter shit), but we hate on fandoms? Why? Because they don't get paid?  Where's the line between fanfic and just fic?

Thomas Edison made his entire living by improving crap inventions - the light-bulb was shit before he got to it.  He barely had an "original" idea in his life.  Does that mean his contribution is garbage? Sure, inventing and improving are indifferent things, but I wouldn't say that one is worthless and childish, and the other is the height of art. If JK can be an artist (and she can - what would the world be without Harry Potter?), why can't the fanficers, shippers, and other realms of fandom be artists, too?

I can respect the fandoms, whatever form they take. They take something they love and breath a little more life into it. Call it a community art project if you will. Perhaps, to return again to Star Wars, we can call them "the extended universe."  Everybody's happy?