Fandom: The Meritocracy

[sistermagpie]

In the discussions on the last post there was a lot of discussion on interacting socially and creating art, and it made me think about the ever-present angst in fandom about BNFs and popularity.



skelkins did a great essay on “meritocracy” called Nel Question #10: Elitism. She writes:

I tend to view this as the great fallacy of "meritocracy," the idea that it has anything to do with "merit" in the sense of moral virtue at all. I assume that by saying that the Dursleys do not "deserve" their social status, you mean that they don't deserve it because they are nasty and selfish, because they lack a sense of noblesse oblige, because they will not use their privilege for the benefit of others -- in short, because they are ethically deficient.

That is all quite true. For all we know, however, Vernon Dursley may be a very good salesman. He certainly would seem to be skilled at earning money. And that is the skill that the "meritocracy" of the system in which he lives privileges, just as the "meritocracy" of Hogwarts privileges magical, athletic and academic talent.

There is no "merit" here, if you mean merit in the sense of moral virtue. In the Potterverse, as in our own, you don't ascend the social ladder by virtue of being a decent person. You ascend the social ladder by virtue of possessing whatever innate talents the particular system in which you are operating happens to value the most highly. "Meritocracy" has no more to do with moral virtue than aristocracy by blood does.

Fandom is a social system just like anything else, and it seems like it shouldn’t take long for a newcomer to figure out what innate talents (or talents people take for innate) this system values most highly. These are the things I've noticed have some value:

Writing talent
You can be funny, or good at plot, or good at porn, or good at angst, but whatever you do, if you do it well there's a good chance people will notice. That will require actual skill on your part, and a basic grasp of things like structure and grammar and spelling. It's not that these things are admired in themselves, it's that they're sort of a required minimum (with allowances made for language differences). Your story's going to have *some* ability to draw the reader in and make it seem real. Different styles will appeal to different people, but there's a reason that even fics criticized as being overrated are probably going to have a basic technical skill. It was suggested in one of the earlier posts that someone being unable to put a sentence together well should not stand in the way of what they're trying to say, but of course the harsh reality is that it does. Nobody wants to listen to someone write badly any more than they want to listen to a kid play a violin badly. Maybe he's playing Mozart, but it's painful to listen to when he plays it. Technical problems remind you it's a story, and fandom has little interest if they can't enter into the story, imo.

This applies to social writers too, I think. A person writing to be part of the social community may not put the same level of importance on linking the characters to canon or having a plot without holes or having a particular voice, but they're still trying to sketch out a situation to which people are supposed to react. Look at what to me seems like a very social interaction: drabbles. People probably don't put the same amount of thought into 100 words than they will into a longer fic--maybe they just react to a challenge and spit them out as an exercise. And sure enough, the more technically skilled writer will get more attention, write more effective drabbles.

Artistic talent
Very much like writing talent, I suppose. The better the picture, the more there is to talk about, the more reason to go back to it again, the more reason for someone to return to your lj. A good piece of fanart can easily as good or better than a good fanfic.

Something to say about fandom-related subjects (and the ability to communicate it)
With the creation of DS and QQ it's even easier for people to have discussions about canon or fics or fandom or art and again, that's what it is, discussions. If you write something that people enjoy reading because it makes them think things about canon or gives them plot bunnies, that's valued. If you write something that makes people want to argue or expound on it, that's valued.

Providing a service to help fandom run
Setting up archives or messageboards, offering fic recs. It's helpful to people. They come back for more.

When you look at that list, none of it's very surprising. Fandom is about engaging others through a source material, and all of those things are things that help people engage the source material and talk to others about the same source material. Yet periodically there will always be anger against BNFs for having earned attention this way, when there are other perfectly nice people in fandom that "nobody cares about,” falling into that "fallacy of meritocracy." Not only does being a "good person" not make you a BNF, but calling someone a BNF doesn't imply one is a good person. It just means you have skills that you were born with or learned, that are valued by the community.

Yet people continue to think BNF=Great Person in some way, so either complain that BNF X *isn’t* a good person or that SNF Y is a good person so why aren’t her fics applauded? Even amongst people just writing socially, writing social fics people want to talk about, and saying things about them that other people want to respond to, is valued over bravery at posting something without spellcheck. Really, fandom could not be more clear on this. Which is probably why the attitude towards criticism will remain unchanged. There's just not much wiggle room in this meritocracy. A newbie who started her fandom career by giving out money to other fans would probably still sink into obscurity.

Comments

[ishtar79.livejournal.com]

You know, I can't find anything to add, because you're pretty much described all the requirements for fandom popularity. There's probably a certain element of right place right time, who you know, and how much people are willing to promote their fics, but without some sort of talent, and the ability to produce something appealing to popular choice, then you're not getting anywhere.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yup, probably putting yourself anywhere near the center of the hub is going to make things happen more quickly. Somebody could write the best stories ever on an lj and never have it discovered, after all!

[valis2.livejournal.com]

You can be funny, or good at plot, or good at porn, or good at angst, but whatever you do, if you do it well there's a good chance people will notice. That will require actual skill on your part, and a basic grasp of things like structure and grammar and spelling.

I have one teeny little add-on comment.

There is a story on ffnet that I saw some time ago, with tremendous plot problems, canon characters who act OOC, and main OC characters who are quite obviously author self-inserts. However, this fic has "inspired" over a thousand reviews, and even spawned a website in its honor.

I have noticed that (at least in my perception) if you write well, you will attract the attention of other writers who write well.

If you write poorly but with much flair and energy, you oftentimes attract others who do the same. The fandom audience is so large that there are many different splinter divisions that rally around each other. Those who write with poor SPG skills often get reviews written in the same poor style.

Just as there is a hierarchy of fic writers, there is a hierarchy of fic readers, some skilled, some unskilled.

Certainly at some point the skilled writers should attract the attention of both the experienced and inexperienced readers, but that isn't always the case.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Oh, very good point. I think I'm probably looking at things with tunnel vision, thinking of the center of fandom as being the fans I most often hear described as such, but of course there are plenty of other people out there as well!

And actually, isn't that one of the quirks of fandom too--there's always the monsterous, strange story that has a big group of fans hanging on the author's every word, like a fandom within the fandom. It often really doesn't have anything to do with its being better written than other things--in fact, often it might not be. It just has something that bring people to it.

[gillieweed.livejournal.com]

Which brings in the "hype" aspect. I have stopped reading fics for the sole reason that once a fic makes it to the point of being "recced" you can absolutely guaranteed it had nothing to do with the writing and everything to do with the pimpage. Some of these fics are better (as in written in a readable language as opposed to netspeak or teen grammah) than others for sure, but I guarantee all of us could name at least 5 "big name fics" or "definitive fics" that are lauded all over the fandom despite being absolute crap by any measure. I've become tired of authors whinging about not getting any reviews for the sole purposes of gathering reviews. I'm tired of people who rush to give these authors reviews, thus spawning more reviews that are nothing more than mindless squeeing and all too often end up spawning a colony of sycophants who wouldn't dare say anything constructive lest it start the whinging cycle all over again.
I compare fic reading to watching a TV ad for some gut-busting fast food. You don't want it, you know it's going to taste bad and likely contribute to some sort of lethal disease but the sheer repetitiveness of the ads and the hammering in of YOU SHOULD LIKE THIS EVERYONE ELSE DOES has you grabbing the car-keys to hit the drive-thru before that late-nite closing time.
For an hour or so you think, "Yum! What have I been missing! I think I'll have some more!" That soon wears off, indigestion sets in and you realize you've been duped. Again.

[wordplay.livejournal.com]

Yes, this is pretty much as I see these things, too. Another way to look at this beyond the concept of meritocracy is that all of these activities encourage interaction and familiarity. I mean, when I am shocked because someone whose writing I admired is a complete ass in person, I'm not necessarily shocked because I expected good writing = good person. I'm shocked because I have been building this sense of rapport with this person's characters, whom I liked and in some way identified as part of the writer. (And I won't build rapport with characters in a badly written story, because I'll back out of there in a heartbeat.) I know that's a subtle distinction, but it's a real one, I think. Similarly, working with other people to keep a fandom resource running (and I'm thinking here of FA for pretty obvious reasons) is a communal activity, so it reinforces that sense of community and status within it. I mean, to me, this was part of what happened back in the last big fandom blowup - there was a girl who needed help and seemed perfectly nice, but when it was put to people why they hadn't given her money, the response wasn't "but what has she written?" it was "umm, who is that again?" At any rate, I'm not sure that these are really all that different ways of looking at this, but it seems like it's the same thing just through a slightly different lens. Or something.

I do think that the rightplace/righttime factor is rather critical, as ishtar79 mentioned. To speak personally, I am a content no name fan and I rather like it that way, and I would also consider myself a social fic writer - I get an idea and I write it and it's cool if people read it and like it, but it's certainly not a craft I'm working on in any real way. I mean, I'd like to get better, but I'd also like to be a princess, so, you know. *shrug* It's not something I think a lot about or expend a lot of energy on, is what I'm saying.

But the first couple of little things I wrote were H/D, which is just this huge THING with all its own energy. And, frankly, my fics were not very good. They were clean technically and they were alright but the very first one had some structural problems and in general my characterizations were fine but shallow. And not all THAT many people read them, but some did, and hurrah.

And now I'm writing this Hermione/Percy series, and I actually think it's much better but there are maybe 6? 7? people reading it, just because... well, who cares about Hermione/Percy? :)) And that doesn't bother me, but I'm certainly well aware that if I ever decide that I for some reason need fandom popularity (but will it clean my house and pay my bills, I ask you) I'd better find another couple to write about.

[chrysantza.livejournal.com]

But the first couple of little things I wrote were H/D, which is just this huge THING with all its own energy. And, frankly, my fics were not very good. They were clean technically and they were alright but the very first one had some structural problems and in general my characterizations were fine but shallow. And not all THAT many people read them, but some did, and hurrah.

And now I'm writing this Hermione/Percy series, and I actually think it's much better but there are maybe 6? 7? people reading it, just because... well, who cares about Hermione/Percy? :)) And that doesn't bother me, but I'm certainly well aware that if I ever decide that I for some reason need fandom popularity (but will it clean my house and pay my bills, I ask you) I'd better find another couple to write about.

You make a good point. Yes, good writing does help one towards "BNF'dom" quite a bit. But - and it's a big BUT - I've seen well-written stories that don't necessarily get the recognition they deserve because they are about an era, a subject, or a pairing that is not "popular." Likewise, there are mediocre fics which are about popular pairings or subjects and they get recognition.

Yes, good writing helps a lot. But good writing + unpopular or obscure pairing or subject = less recognition than the author deserves, in many cases.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Oh, I can totally understand feeling like you're interacting with an author through their characters--especially in fanfic, I think, where we all start with the basic characters of canon and then put them through our own lense. It seems like it really should tell you about a person.

And that kerfuffle was very much like this. I thought it was very silly for people to act like people not giving money to the person in question was really based on anything but familiarity. Hell, the main way she got the attention she wanted was by setting herself up as an alternative to someone that was well-known. I don't think there was any reason for anyone to feel guilty about reacting with, "I'm sorry, who are you?"

And now I'm writing this Hermione/Percy series, and I actually think it's much better but there are maybe 6? 7? people reading it, just because... well, who cares about Hermione/Percy? :)) And that doesn't bother me, but I'm certainly well aware that if I ever decide that I for some reason need fandom popularity (but will it clean my house and pay my bills, I ask you) I'd better find another couple to write about.

That's true--and especially when it's a series, too, because that can be another stumbling block if you miss the beginning. Fanfic is a weird tradoff. On one hand you've got a built-in audience because people like the characters already. Otoh people go looking for what they want to read rather than just looking at what's there.

[shusu.livejournal.com]

And RPGs?

My favorite spot in fandom, ever, is Minkland -- they were among the first to start writing Ronin Warriors yaoi. As in, before RW yaoi existed; before, I believe, the Internet was anyone's hangout, much less fans. It's so nice because the core group met each other *before* fandom, and then drew more and more people via fandom. Because of the social structure coming first, they have and always will have a "no bull" policy about fandom politics. You act like an intelligent human being or you don't. Most of the fandom itself has moved on, but as far as I know, most of that group is still on good terms.

Most fandoms grow their social structure the other way around. I agree with like attracting like. You may not be able to discern much about canon from a fandom, but looking at the kind of people it attracts and what kind of social structures are supported are a great measure of a work's emotional draw.

Fandom is like water in a limestone cave. If the cave's still "growing", then the social structures may still expand and change. When it dries up, your real friends are rock solid.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Ah! What at thing to forget, especially given my fangirling of NA. I think I thought of it as a form of writing, but it's definitely important.

And I love your metaphor with the cave.:-)

Fandom is like so many things that way--the most visible people often really do set the tone for everything else. New people coming in fit themselves into the way things work probably without even realizing it.

Not a meritocracy, it's a popularity contest

[starkittyn.livejournal.com]

I'm here via friends friends and I do see merit in what you're saying. Unintentional irony there.

I think there's no question that there are driving forces in fandom, leaders if you will who tend to emerge from the herd, whether what makes them a leader is a "classic" fic or a website or the ability to blog meaningful essays that others are interested in. I can think of at least three people on my own flist who serve the latter role in particular. I like to know what's going on in my fandom of choice and so I tend to friend (aka read) the blogs of certain people who seem to me to be "in the know".

However, I tend to shy away from the idea of a "meritocracy" as you put it for a couple of reasons. A friend of mine mentioned what she particular disliked about "awards" for example. Fic awards strive to gather nominations of readers and then from those readers glean the most popular (and therefore we assume the best) in various categories.

But, in my short time in the HP fandom for instance, I have found that readers tend to run in circles. By that I mean, if I say to several of my more well informed friends, please reccommend to me the five best Harry/Draco fics, the chances are the lists of those fics may very well march quite closely. Does that mean that only those five authors are writing quality fanfic? Or does that mean only those five authors are *known* to be writing quality fanfic.

You see what I'm saying?

I'm "quote" a newbie to the fandom and despite the headway I'm making in getting my name out there as someone who writes a certain kind of fic with a certain style and blah blah blah, it's obvious to me that there's tons and tons of readers who have no clue who I am.

I could have written the greatest fic ever but many people would know nothing about it because nobody knows who calixta9 is and most people dont' read anything they haven't had recommended or that isn't writtey by someone they know. .

So, to my mind, fandom isn't a "meritocracy", it's often instead a popularity contest. I.E - who knows who, who recs who, who has role played with who, etc. And some of that populartiy contest seems to me to be by rote. Everybody always recommends certain stories, does that mean they are that good or does that mean, that's what everybody does?

Please don't take what I'm saying as being some big ego. I'm a good writer and I'm not going to hem and haw and say I'm not. That's insulting to you and to anybody else that reads this. By the same token, I don't think I've written some "classic" story yet either. In fact, I don't think I'll ever manage anything novel length. I like the smut too much. ;)

Thanks for a thought provoking post.

Re: Not a meritocracy, it's a popularity contest

[pauraque]

Poo on the "it's a popularity contest" response. Though there is undoubtedly a certain tendency for people to pimp their friends (we've all done it), I think most in fandom can see when the emperor has no clothes. Someone who can't put a sentence together can be pimped by BNFs all day, and still not gain any general recognition.

I started out in this fandom as a complete unknown. I had no friends here. So I brought some fic, I drew some pictures, I talked about canon. I pimped myself a LOT. I friended lots of people. When people started reccing me, it wasn't because I was their best buddy, it was because they liked what I was doing. And no, I'm not a grand BNF, but I am known in most of the circles I care about.

Frankly, it pisses me off when people suggest that anyone who's known is known because they've benefited from some kind of conspiratorial nepotism. People know me because I've worked at fandom. I work hard on my writing, and I work hard to come up with fun and interesting fandom activities that people will enjoy. I don't think I could have gained the same degree of respect and known-ness that I currently enjoy just by schmoozing with some big names.

It's true that there are meritorious writers who aren't known. In my experience, it's because they don't write very often, or because they don't do a very good job of pimping themselves, or both. Writing a lot of good stuff and becoming known in fandom may not be a priority for them, and that's fine. But you can't have your cake and eat it too: Either you stop complaining that no one knows you, or you do the work you need to do to get known.

Re: Not a meritocracy, it's a popularity contest

[thalia]

I'm "quote" a newbie to the fandom and despite the headway I'm making in getting my name out there as someone who writes a certain kind of fic with a certain style and blah blah blah, it's obvious to me that there's tons and tons of readers who have no clue who I am.


This is partly because of the size of the fandom; there's no way you're ever going to be known by everyone. I'm mostly on the Snape slash side, and there are H/D BNFs whose names I barely recognize. I mean, I've heard of Cassie Claire, but just in passing, and I wouldn't know where to find her stories even if I wanted to read them, which I don't. When I see other H/D BNFs mentioned, my reaction tends to be, "Who?" I think the best you can hope for is to make some friends and have fun. If your stories are good, word will get around in the appropriate circles.

[malafede.livejournal.com]

I don't think there's really a correlation between "good" and "popular". Thinking about it in terms of Vernam diagrams, the only attribute in the overlapping zone could be "liked by many". But then... "liked by many" isn't a guarantee of quality. Most people don't have such a great taste. One in maybe ten big fics is big because of the really good writing, the other nine are possibly there because they hit on some collective kink (popular ship, popular sexual kink, popular fanon characterization). 90% of everything sucks, etc.

As someone said above, it's a popularity contest. I don't attach any particular moral judgment to this in one sense or the other. It's not good, it's not bad, it's just the way things work when the focus is writing directed to an audience, which fanfic is by definition, since you're writing for your fellow fen. Really any activity directed to an audience - even Vernon Dursleys being a good salesman. Isn't that the point? His product probably isn't the best around, but he sells it well. It's true that if you're good at pimping yourself, then you'll be more popular, but that still doesn't make you a good writer. It makes you a good pimper.

On the other hand, this also means that you can't revert the law as to mean "popular" = "shitty". If there is no correlation then of course some of those popular writers are good.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think I may have mistakenly made it seem like I was saying popular=good. It's not that it's necessarily a sign that something is objectively of better quality than something else--not at all. I just mean it's something that for whatever reason people got interested in.

So maybe somebody has contributed a fic that I think is really dreadful--but it's got lots of readers. I would still consider that person to have risen in the meritocracy the same way anyone else had, through writing stories people like. I don't think it's correct to say that what fandom appreciates is always the most well-written stories any more than one could say that what popular culture appreciates are the most well-made movies--sometimes they like schlock!

The problem I have with the idea that it's a popularity contest is that sometimes people say that as if popularity is a quality in itself. I mean, nobody can arrive in a fandom with popularity. You gain popularity because you've got something that makes you popular. What makes you popular seems to always have something to do with being seen as contributing something to fandom, even if what you're contributing is negative. For instance, there are people who are well known in fandom, so BNF-ish in their own way, simply for wank!

It's true that if you're good at pimping yourself, then you'll be more popular, but that still doesn't make you a good writer. It makes you a good pimper.

True, but there are many people who pimp all over the place and don't get popular, and I suspect plenty of others who just put their stories up on one archive and eventually achieve popularity through word-of-mouth.

[tinderblast.livejournal.com]

People in fandom *are* really weird towards BNFs in general, and much of it probably stems from the name itself. But what's really funny is that many of the popular authors and stories aren't that great, which replicates popular culture in such an interesting way. The creators of everything from pop music to reality tv are criticised for pandering to people's low-brow and base tastes, as well for being overly commercial and sacrificing artistic credibility for money but really, isn't there a reason why these items sell? It's the same in fandom, where genuinely bad stories are massively popular and what's interesting is that there's not the same ability to write off success as being all about marketing, or whatever.

You can be funny, or good at plot, or good at porn, or good at angst, but whatever you do, if you do it well there's a good chance people will notice.

I'm not sure if I agree with this, unless by 'people' you mean the three like-minded folk in fandom who respond? I've seen too many good authors and stories getting overlooked to think that this statement holds true. And then, being noticed is different to being validated or complimented for one's work which, as we all know, the HP fandom is notoriously bad at.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

But what's really funny is that many of the popular authors and stories aren't that great, which replicates popular culture in such an interesting way.

Yes! Exactly! It'd be silly to suggest that fandom was always this high brow activity and all we're in it for is fine writing talent--how could anybody say that with a straight face when fics can get well-known for so many things other than that!

I'm not sure if I agree with this, unless by 'people' you mean the three like-minded folk in fandom who respond? I've seen too many good authors and stories getting overlooked to think that this statement holds true.

I don't mean to say that if you're a good writer you'll be popular, because there's a lot of other factors involved. Are you writing a pairing or a subject that people want to read? Are you writing a type of characterization lots of people are going to like?

But there is a good chance that people that whatever you're doing will have some effect on fandom. For instance, you said plenty of good writers get overlooked and that's true--but I'll be you're not the only person who thinks they're good and overlooked. What they're doing is appreciated, they just aren't doing "what it takes" to be hugely popular--by which I don't mean they're not writing well enough, they're just not writing whatever the majority of people really want to hear at the moment, like with pop culture.

*drives by*

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

You scored as Draco Malfoy. Spoilt and proud, you place high value on the purity of wizard blood and look set to follow in your father's somewhat shady footsteps. </td> Draco Malfoy 75% Severus Snape 70% Remus Lupin 70% Ginny Weasley 70% Hermione Granger 65% Harry Potter 65% Sirius Black 60% Ron Weasley 60% Albus Dumbledore 50% Lord Voldemort 40% Your Harry Potter Alter Ego Is...? created with QuizFarm.com

Aw, look, didn't have to cheat or anything. Chilling.

Re: *drives by*

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Wow! I'm impressed. You're the first Draco I've seen!

[ackonrad.livejournal.com]

What an interesting discussion. Trust you to come up with it! :))

For me, fandom popularity and how exactly to gain it isn't something you can write rules about and promote them. As many said before me, writing a certain pairing/main character will make your fic more popular than a fic by someone who writes unpopular ships or characters, no matter which writer's writing is better. Then there is the plugging issue - I had the possibility to notice how some from the currently most popular H/D fics became what they are now, and if it hadn't been for the BNFs' pimping, these fics wouldn't be as popular as they are now.

Reccing fics is a tricky issue, at least for me, but I have to admit that I'd rather click on a fic by one of my favourite authors than on a fic by a newbie I don't know. Some from the most popular fics in the fandom are certainly overrated, but the privilege their authors have is that their fics have been online since the fandom wasn't that crowded and there weren't that many good fics around. What I want to say is that popularity has a lot to do with the time whenever a certain author has entered the fandom. It's a lot more difficult to become popular now, when people wouldn't blink if they see a novel-length Filch/Ginny, than at times when the first H/D fics have produced something like a little furor in the fandom.

Oh, and I think that if someone doesn't want to get popular, then he/she won't, no matter how good he/she writes or draws. There are ways to achieve that. I wouldn't say that the opposite is true as well, though - not everyone who wants to be popular can get popular, at least not in the way he/she surely would want to. :))

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I really don't there are rules you can follow, though probably if you look at people who become popular you'll begin to see a pattern, like that they write pairings that people like.

But, for instance, if you look at the fact that many big fics wouldn't have been big if a BNF hadn't recced it, then there's still the fact that any fic can, potentially, get recced by a BNF. It's not that there's no connection, but if you break it down a lot of it does go back to wanting something from fandom. Like, the BNFs get a rep for reccing good stories, people assume they know what their talking about, especially if they think the BNF is a good writer herself etc. I think the problem with the "popularity contest" idea is it implies that so-and-sos fic was only recced and read because she's a pal of BNF girl when we're all here on the 'net making connections through fic and writing, you know? It's not like the BNFs her cousin so she got access to her while another unknown writer didn't.

It's not that it's completely fair, obviously, or that the best fics always become the most popular or get recced a lot, but everybody starts out the same way. It's just some people contribute in a way that gets them noticed and others don't get seen as contributing as much.

[jlh.livejournal.com]

I know you've elaborated on this a few times, but since that was my first reaction to this post I have to reiterate: I don't think it's just talent or contribution in the way that you talk about it. Part of it is pimping yourself, absolutely, especially these days when no one can sift through everything that is going on.

But I think it takes writing talent PLUS writing something people want, to go to the show as they say. If you aren't writing about Harry, it probably isn't going to make much of a dent, unless you are S/R. I mean, you can absolutely be very calculated about this: Write an interesting, somewhat romantic but also angsty pairing of the moment. Pimp in the right places. Befriend the right BNFs. Be the right mixture of thoughtful and amusing on your LJ. It isn't, you know, difficult. It's just that only tangentially does it have anything to do with talent.

And I think what people are saying when they talk about BNFs and feeling jealous is that they want to be simultaneously true to themselves (and write that Neville/Luna epic) and also be a BNF. Sorry, not going to happen. And because BNFs are seen as being fairly true to their own interests, it seems more unfair than not--like, why when I read the books didn't I want to write endless Harry/Draco stories, or Snarry, rather than some ensemble thing that mostly featured Seamus?

Me, I'd rather follow my star. I've clawed my way to middle management, as it were, and I'm content to just stay here. (The middle can actually be worse, for various reasons, but I'm used to it.) But to say that "give 'em what they want" isn't a HUGE part of becoming a BNF is the same as back in the day when folks complained about inner circles and someone said, hey, just get involved! It isn't that simple. You have to get involved in the right way.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

That's very true--it is good for people to point that out (I may edit and add it, actually). Because that's part of giving fandom what it wants. In fanfic people go looking for what they want and the author that's giving it to them is going to get more hits--and people generally want pairing/angst/smut/favorite characters more than they do quality writing.

You have to get involved in the right way.

Yeah, that's really the thing, isn't it? And I think that's where it starts seeming like the personality contest thing, because some people are just better at it than others. They get more attention from less pimping, get attention from the right people. It's not that it's difficult, but for somebody who doesn't naturally do it, it must be very hard to understand.

[geoviki.livejournal.com]

I have to say that my experience in the past year and a half makes me agree with what you've said entirely.

I think the currency of fandom is the written word or image (in the case of art): either you create new fic/art, you recommend, organize, or deconstruct existing fic/art, or you communicate with those who do.

I can say I truly came from a position of knowing no-one and nothing about online HP fandom to a place now where people read my LJ and my fics to a much greater extent than I would have thought possible. Some of you here know me; some are going: WTF are you? And all I offered up initially was a short, gen Snape story on FA. Where it was picked up and noticed. And I followed up. Was it luck? Talent? Can't say.

I think "pimp" has a mixed connotation. I use the word lightly, in passing, to mean advertise, or connect, or follow up. Others seem to think it's somehow unseemly. I disagree. I tend to think of "popularity" with respect to fandom, anyway, as another word for connection. We want to be noticed, to feel as though we make a difference. But if you don't offer up any of the fandom currency - words or images - then you are in danger of slumming on someone else's good graces. I think it's just basic logic that you would want to feed back into the system you want to be a part of. As for me, I try to respond to every comment in my LJ, every speck of feedback left for any one of my stories. Because it's a two-way street: they're trying to talk to me, and they're entitled to an answer.

Ms. Magpie, you are a great example. I see you around LJ, making intelligent comments that I read and absorb. You participate, you contribute, you think and respond.

Many of my closest fandom friends do not write much, if at all. But they've made enormous efforts in other areas: painless_j recs fics, cordelia_v and cathexys write terrific meta analyses, others of you set up communities or tributes to those in times of personal distress ( and yes, this includes pauraque). There are as many ways to contribute as there are fans.

But to those who feel that they need to leave the fandom because all the fics suck and the writers/artists get more than they deserve: maybe you do need to take a break. No one should feel such negativity about what should be a pleasurable hobby. Myself, I've found an enormous wealth of talented authors and artists (I mean, look at the fundraising going on for the tsunami victims), devoted reccers, and sincerely interested and committed fans to keep me happy.

And I hope to meet some of you at The Witching Hour this year.

[cordelia_v]

I'm a fandom friend? *blushes and looks pleased*

But more seriously: what's the Witching Hour? Sounds like a con. You're attending?

[quidditchmaster.livejournal.com]

You can't discount the dumb luck factor; being in the right place at the right time can be insanely helpful to someone's campaign to progress up fandom's social ladder.

I am also of the idea that in fandom, like many other groups these days, it isn't as much what you do, but who you know. With the HP fandom being progressed as far as it has, it's no longer a matter of the active, "popular" ones appreciating each other's work; real-life friendships, connections, et cetera can now come into play. For example, if you share a lot of interests with X BNF, talk on AIM/YIM every day, et cetera, odds are you'll have a much easier time progressing yourself. This is not to say that "the barnacle factor" alone guarantees you your own fans; the exposure and inherent relations to other XNFs will give you a better chance at mass recognition than if you started out alone. . .

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yes, it's true especially now that the fandom's so big that there's probably more ways than ever of getting to know the "big" people. It's not like there's one little group that everyone wants to know. Any few people can start something on their own.

Still you're right, being in the right place at the right time or catching the eye of the right person can get you put somewhere that immediately makes you seen. It's like geoviki said, there's not always something to explain it. It's not quite as simple as being somebody's best friend is going to make you important (if it were, movie stars' entourages would all be famous!) but it can point you to the right connections.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, I tend to also agree with the "it's who you know" theory. The truth is, there's a lot of great authors out there who just don't get discovered because they don't post on 20 million websites, nor do they have 100 friends who all plug the fics.

But I don't think it really matters; I'm not a BNF, and as long as I write my fics and some people read it, it's all cool. Does it hurt when one gets no reviews? Absolutely. But it is often a case of who you know.

That's not to say it's always that - the BNF's had to have been very good in the first place.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

It's true I totally left out the pimp factor--though of course some people just put the right story in the right place at the right time and, voila.

Sometimes, too, though, I wonder if it's more that people assume that a new author is known by BNFs when they're not--they just happen to have that BNF come across their story and rec it. Which still comes down to lucking out by getting that rec, but the person didn't actually have an in with the BNF to begin with.

Also getting into the whole social thing, we should probably remember that when people have a relationship with someone they might be more likely to review them, whereas someone might read a story by an author they don't know they might feel less "pressure" to post feedback.

[impinc.livejournal.com]

Very interesting! This is pretty much what I've been thinking about for awhile, but you put it way better than I ever could.

I don't really pay attention to who is a BNF and who isn't. Just whether I like their fic, them or both. :)

Personally, I think reccers are tremendously underrated.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I always just click on a story that sounds interesting to me for whatever reason. The first fanfic I remember reading was Commencement by Aja, and I loved it--but I know I didn't know anything about who the author was, because when I went back to look it up I couldn't remember her name for a while. (Me: Mansfield Park? No, that's not it. Vanity Fair! That's it!)

And it's true, it's hard for gen to compete with smut.

[skuf.livejournal.com]

Well said :o)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Thanks!;-)

I read meritocracy as mediocracy first

[no-remorse.livejournal.com]

It's like a Freudian mis-read, obviously.

Yet people continue to think BNF=Great Person in some way, so either complain that BNF X *isn’t* a good person or that SNF Y is a good person so why aren’t her fics applauded?

Actually I never seen that one. All I ever see when it comes to BNF bashing is questioning the quality of the BNF's contribution to fandom. "Her Draco is OOC" or "her writing is mediocre" etc etc.

I don't think that you are completely right though. There are certain areas, I don't think you have covered. I can think, for example, of certain people who became BNFs for doing something that many people hated, yet was supported by a substantial number of other people. It wasn't the original contribution that elevated the fan to BNF, it was the hatred that it incurred.

And there is also an element of social interaction that is required to become a BNF. You simply don't become a BNF by hiding on your LJ and posting the world's greatest fic - the Salinger number doesn't work in fandom, you need to interact in the fandom. Even the BNFest of BNFs' comment count goes down if he ceases to take part in the social interaction.

I think there might also be a reverse effect, that someone who is around a lot, will be recognised much more easily, regardless of the quality of this person's contribution.

But opposed to the talents you have and use, this thing is somewhat controllable. If you have interesting content, you'll attract fellow fans. The question is: how do you handle that?

If you are handicapped with a self-esteem problem of the size of the Atlantic Ocean or are incredibly shy, then I guess, you might have encountered a problem on your way to BNFdom that has nothing to do with your talents and everything with your personality.

Re: I read meritocracy as mediocracy first

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

You're right--this thread has pointed out a lot of areas that I haven't covered, especially since people get known in fandom for contributing things people really hate. Not even just fics people don't like but just being a general jackass, for instance.

And there's also often a big social component. Some people do post a fic and get it recced by a BNF...but then that person is profiting from someone else's social skills and power. If they keep that connection going it gets them an advantage.

I was thinking of maybe even doing a post and asking people about just this aspect--what are mistakes that fans make who want to be well-known but are just annoying, and how do other people seem able to get into circles that seem exclusive to others?