Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture [Henry Jenkins] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The twentieth anniversary. Textual Poachers has ratings and 34 reviews. Sarah said: I loved this book and am currently fangirling Henry Jenkins. Which is something I would like. Review: Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture by Henry Jenkins. Gregg Rickman. FILM QUART Vol. 46 No. 4, Summer, (p. 63) DOI: .
|Published (Last):||15 June 2004|
|PDF File Size:||16.23 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||2.97 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture – Henry Jenkins – Google Books
That would be nice. Henry Jenkins basically has the career I want — an academic scholar on media and fan culture studies.
His section on filks is very limited, ‘the early part of the hook is excellent! Maybe, because of his book, a few more people get turned on to the idea of slash. This well written and highly readable book has done a great service in single handedly promoting the possibility of academic fan studi This short review is also posted on my blog at http: For the reissue of the book, Suzanne Scott, a rising young fan scholar, did an extensive interview with me, in which she posed challenging questions about what has happened to fandom and fan studies textuao the past twenty years.
This book also presents a concrete answer to the eternal question, “Why is Star Trek attractive to so many people?
Then the newly-published book, “Textual Poachers,” arrived at the university library where I work. A lot of fans I know like his book quite a bit better. As an academic you speak with a certain degree of authority.
Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture – Fanlore
These characters are meant to stand in for the hundreds of fictional figures who have inspired fan devotion and creativity since Textual Poachers first appeared. The book’s focus is on media fans as an “interpretive community” that “poaches” media texts in order to subvert their intended meaning and reclaim ownership of popular culture from massive corporate interests.
Rejecting stereotypes of fans as cultural dupes, social misfits, Refresh and try again. I love that title! Textual Poachers guides readers through difficult questions about popular consumption, genre, gender, sexuality, and interpretation, documenting practices and processes which test and challenge basic assumptions of contemporary media theory.
I especially enjoyed reading about the different aspects of fan production in the pre-internet days, e.
What if we switched applicant pools for two jobs nobody wants: So anyway, I read this book primarily for fun. It totally begs the question of why fandom? What I deplore is the fact that Jenkins didn’t chose to contrast this particular Saturday Night Live sketch with the earlier one starring Elliot Gould, but then that particular one was about the programme, not its fans and therefore not useful for this study.
And similarly, it’s rather informal in regards to its ethnography.
Confessions of an Aca-Fan
If you are offended by slash, you might want to skip those chapters. Personally, I couldn’t jenkihs less if they want to write about it academically, as long as they get approval for direct quotes. I’m also pretty unhappy with the ways Jenkins fails to push this “poaching” model — he’s a media studies guy, and he never once questions the models of commercial ownership and audience disenfranchisement implicit in his own damn title. In Jenkins’ words, the book “documents a group insistent on making uenkins from materials others have characterized as trivial and worthless.
One of the books by an author that was one of the Pioneers into Fan studies, its a must have for anyone who is interested in the field.
One of my best friends as an undergraduate just about died of cancer, and I didn’t know it. I agree that the recent influx of fanboy characters reinforce old stereotypes more frequently than they challenge or complicate them, but as you note above the comparative scarcity of fangirl representations – Liz Lemon on 30 Rock aside – suggests that while the industry is beginning pozchers take fanboys seriously as a demographic, fangirls or women, generally are still considered a surplus audience.
Fans interpret and mould their understanding to suit their own purposes. Apr 01, Jamie rated it really liked it. And as a filkerI found the chapter on Filk right on target — it postulated stuff I’d never thought of, and it felt right!
Trump would have no trouble with old homophobic twee… https: So, because of his book a few more people think we are weird. Jenkins steers a realistic middle course between the get-a-life stereotype and the rose-colored view that fandom is an extended ideal family.
The things people accomplished without the internet, in the 70’s and 80’s, is startling to today’s audiences. We share most of those thoughts and are agreed or disagreed with. Feb 10, Pansity Collins rated it it was amazing. In his discussion of various fan activities, Jenkins used examples of then-current fandoms and fannish moments that now offer a glimpse into history:.
One reason I don’t talk about the private lives of fans in Textual Poachers was, even though that’s something that as an ethnographer I’m trained to want to find out, poachrs anchor this in social experience and so forth, was, it seemed to me rude, it violated the textuall of fandom, a sense of the way fandom conceived itself, and I was uncomfortable with a lot of the generalizations that Camille makes in her book about personal life, because I think she crosses that line.
Preview — Textual Poachers by Henry Jenkins. What I liked the most is that the author explored a number of types of fandoms SF but also texutal and fan activities such as slash, filking, and video making. It seems so illogical. However it remains a sympathetic and insightful book about media fans and our creative community.
Yay for this jenkihs. Of course, my own view is somewhat prejudiced–I come from videogame and comic fandom, both of which have rather spotty, rather shameful, track records when it comes to accepting and treating women decently and equally. Also, I would like the Jenkinses to invite me over to watch Blakes7. Yes, a book does lend an air of validation that is often spurious, but the books have provided interesting controversy in and of themselves.