blog315 - Tumblr blog

[blog315]

Intimacy

Dominic Pettman speaks of an Otaku as a man who flirts with a digital version of a woman. When I looked up otakus, I found that it is a little more broad than that: someone who is an obsessed fan of something or collector, similar to what we call a nerd or a geek. I’m sure it is a bit more than that. The way I have seen some people obsess over anime is not something I can relate to, and half my world revolves around Harry Potter and Game of Thrones, so yeah, it’s extreme. The digital woman element disturbs me for so many reasons. My reasons seem to conflict with a lot of Pettman’s statements about this new technological “love.”

The film her portrays a very believable relationship. The reason we accept Samantha is because she exhibits human characteristics, such as emotion, personal growth, free will, and rationality. I think Pettman would see Her as a glimpse of the future, and based off of his exchange with “Kari,” I’d say it’s a glimpse into the very distant future. Pettman seems to support this new trend of being in a relationship with a computer based non-human. However, there are problems with his reasoning. First, there is a big difference between Her and otakus today. Simulated girlfriends in our world are not conscious beings. They are computers without an awareness of self and cannot adapt or grow as we do. We are led to believe that Samantha is a conscious being so we accept it, however, I questioned if she was simply programmed that way the entire film. In Westworld on HBO, a character who is a Host (a robot) thinks she is breaking away from the people who created her and even goes into the system to change her own and others’ personalities. In the end, it’s revealed she was programmed to rebel. That’s what I couldn’t shake from my head in Her. A simulated human is not a human.

A couple examples of Pettman’s justification are “all sex is cyber sex,” because it is the result of preprogrammed communication, and “intimacy has always been digital,” because it responds to yes, no, on, off parameters. First of all, the inherent nature of “sex” is a physical act and not a form of communication—even if it involves the latter. Also, aren’t most interactions a result of pre-programmed communication? Second, if yes, no, on and off parameters mean that intimacy is digital, what about all the other things that operate within those parameters? Are they digital too? I don’t think this is a very good argument for intimacy with computers. It sounds more like a desperate attempt at an explanation. With intimacy, there needs to be conflict in some form, even in sparse quantities. We are programmed to grow out of conflict. We need relationships that challenge us or they become bland and unfulfilling.

In Her, there was tension from Samantha’s lack of a body, but it’s different than what Pettman discusses. There was something raw and vulnerable about the characters facing this dilemma, whereas Pettman speaks of Japanese people or men exchanging messages over text to avoid getting hurt. I decided to look up a Japanese cyber relationship. A journalist from the BBC talked with two men who had girlfriends on little handheld computers. The girlfriends’ responses to them were scripted and generic. It led me to believe that this whole trend might be more of a mental illness involving delusion than the next step for human intimacy. Maybe the reason we accepted it in Her was because subconsciously, we KNEW that was a human. It was a familiar voice (Scarlett Johansson) and with human inflections. What if Samantha’s character had the same responses, ideas, and emotions, but her voice was that of Siri’s? Robotic and unnatural. Would we buy the love story the same?

When I read Manghani’s article, I got depressed. It did not have the effect it was supposed to—I could tell what I was feeling was not what Manghani was aiming for. I didn’t really buy into these two different, fluid ways of communication affection. Instead, I just thought, my god, we’ve made ourselves into computers. After a couple pages, I thought I’d try to text my boyfriend at work with a tanka. I couldn’t. I didn’t even know where to begin. I realized how generic textual “love” has become. And the constant interacting—no breaks longer than a few hours—what could I possibly even have to say to him that’s meaningful? My “I miss you, I love you, hurry up and come over” texts just seem so utterly void of depth. Somewhere we’ve managed to become bodies without substance. The opposite of Samantha. I think it’s entirely possible now that technology is ruining intimacy, not bringing it to a higher stage of evolution.

[blog315]

Online Activism

There are so many sides to the internet—almost like separate worlds. One of them is online activism, and another Is cats. Just cat videos and memes. Ok, there are many others, but in my head, those are the two most prominent. In a TED Talk, Eli Pariser mentioned that he always thought of the internet as a place that would bring the world together. Evgeny Morozov echoes this when she states, “[the new internet] enables average citizens to participate in national discourse…” However, the information available is not limited to accurate political and educational websites and articles. Anyone can take part online, and anyone can produce a website, a blog, comment on posts, share posts, and post videos—cat videos.

Morozov discusses in depth the expectations that people had with the telegraph, and then goes on to echo this with the invention of the radio and television. People who thought these would be tools for good and productivity were soon after disappointed with what the side effects were. We apparently do not learn from history. It was completely obvious that any technological advancement would not turn out to be used for only good. It’s completely public. And the biggest difference between the internet and the technologies that preceded it is that the internet can be altered and added to by any of us, like I said before. Not only that, but it has absorbed television and radio. Podcasts, YouTube channels, and even radio stations and television stations—all online. It’s only to be expected, then, that at times, there is way too much information available for anyone to focus on one thing for too long, not too mention all of the false information and activism that nearly drowns everything else out from an average person’s view.

I consider myself an average person. As a student, I have access to more articles and information that are scholarly and thought-provoking than most other people, but still, the majority of what is within my scope is what everyone else online sees. Online “comment” fighting is probably the biggest form of “activism” I see. It basically comes down to people arguing each others’ views until name calling ensues and no one changes their mind. Another form is “thoughts and prayers.” This always makes me gag. It’s worth nothing. One comedian whose name escapes me spoke about this. He said it’s basically people’s way of saying, “don’t forget about me today.” The other day, I saw a Lord of the Rings meme. It had Aragorn saying, “Gondor calls for aid!” Below was a picture of Theoden reading, “my thoughts and prayers are with Gondor. Sending positive vibes.” Below that was another picture of Theoden with the flag of Gondor overlaid on his face, and said below, “Theoden has added a temporary profile picture.” I loved this. It showed the uselessness of this empty activism. Part of this phenomenon is, I think, caused by an over abundance of things to care about, and wanting to look like you are concerned and “doing something” about each one that crosses your path. All your friends are watching you online, after all.

Sarah Jackson and Brooke Foucault Welles spoke about the shootings of unarmed black men in their article, #Ferguson is everywhere. These two women have a great point about the wave of online Activism being able to reach the highest levels of office, and yes, even with my critique on Activism a minute ago, this is absolutely true. Our role in society has expanded; we’ve been given a voice that can even reach the president if there are enough of us. Like they said about networked publications infiltrating media, we are powerful in numbers in way we never have been before. However, the same problem still exists here, as well. There are too many things being tackled at once that our attention is easily diverted to the next crisis. It is for this reason, I think, we have little control which issues stay relevant and for how long. In regards to Ferguson, the issue of police brutality and the movement that followed (Black Lives Matter) was able to stay at the forefront of the Activism spectrum for a long time, and is still not out of our sight. It has, though, through the internet and the idiocy that infests it, gotten a bad wrap as a violent group, which is utter crap, but that’s the internet. Everyone has an opinion. Everyone is right. The problem with this particular movement, though, was that the solution lies in the police department’s refusal to fire officers and the court system not charging or prosecuting them, and that isn’t something that can be easily tackled. At a civil discussion on campus the other day, Professor Bruschske said, “it took 150 years to get from all men are created equal to Brown v. The Board of Education.” We still have a ways to go, and it will take us a while to get the hang of it on this relatively new platform—the internet.

[blog315]

Labor

The workforce has always been an inherently discriminatory practice. A late friend of mine who, in his life, once owned his own business told me that if he had a male and female candidate vying for the same job, he’d always hire the man, because women “could get pregnant or something else preventing her from doing her job.” As the world transitions into the digital age, you would think the labor force and things relating to it would have created a more equal playing field as people begin independently creating their own means of work, but that apparently is not the case.

Brooke Erin Duffy talks about the notion of doing what you love, and how it undermines class distinctions. Not everyone has the opportunity to peruse what they love. However, I do not believe that the idea or desire to do what you love should be completely discarded. I, personally, refuse to peruse a career that doesn’t entail something I love. On the accounts I follow, these people are also doing what they love. I am not sure how lucrative it is, particularly for Winter is Coming and Watchers on the Wall. These sites do employ females, though, another one of Duffy’s critiques on labor. Lisa Nakamura also delves heavily into the misogyny of labor and free labor. She asks which is worse, women of color in less developed countries working to make computer chips in sweatshops or the Silicon Valley workers performing venture labor, where they work for free at times for their employers. The answer to that is clearly women in sweatshops. However, she also discusses free labor as people online commenting on shows, or things similar, I’m sure. She states, “we [women] are your unwaged labor.” That might be true in sweatshops that consist of mainly women, but the social media and online communities who engage in “free labor” consists of both men and women.

In creating new content and labor online, Duffy states that the implication is that digital labor is male. This might be the case sometimes, but as we see with”SciBabe’s” blog, it’s not always. I have always assumed there were more female bloggers than male, and I don’t know if that is necessarily true, but in this case, she shows us how successful one woman can be. Sci babe is still putting out content on her website, and I have to say, it looks really interesting. I am aware of “food babe,” the woman she challenged. As someone who at one time made it my life’s mission to take down (or try to) every anti-Vaxxer I could find, I find people like food babe dangerous and thoroughly annoying. But as despicable as food babe is, she is more well known than sci babe, so the same point can be made for her (even if it hurts to think of her in this context): she is a woman achieving success online. When I think beyond blogs, to perhaps Alt Shift X, one of the accounts I am following, I can’t fathom how he does what he does. I don’t know how to compose a product like the videos he creates, and I don’t think any woman I know does either. I can, however, name a handful of men I know, off the top of my head, who could create content like that without a problem. Men are more inclined to be computer savvy, and therefore more likely to excel in labor ventures online. Maybe the problem then doesn’t actually lie on the surface, but in the societal structure that clearly favors men for work with computers.

As for the free labor that exists in rating restaurants, reviewing posts, and other things like that, it is totally voluntary and more of a way for us to engage in dialogue, than “labor.” It does create free advertising in a way, especially on Facebook, where everything you comment on for “like” is shown on your friends’ walls. Bringing it back around to gender, one thing I thought of while reading the material was of a post that, whenever shared on any Game of Thrones social media account, creates a mass division between male and female fans. It is a quote from Maisie Williams (Arya Stark) about the word “feminism,” and how it should be just called “humanism.” Every man on there becomes a social justice warrior, bad mouthing feminists and branding them “man-haters.” While almost every woman comments back, defending our position in demanding equality and rejecting objectification. Recently, this has started again—the division of genders with Harvey Weinstein and the multitude of sexual harassment and assault allegations against him. Most men commenting seem to think these women are lying for the “publicity” and asking, “Why didn’t the women come forward earlier?!” They think it’s more likely half of Hollywood is lying than a man in a position of power harass beautiful women whose careers he has in the palm of his hand. The problem with this on social media is everyone is there, and it usually the worst people who are the loudest. Social media and the internet definitely have the potential to be the vessel of change that we all need to push us more towards gender and racial equality. If only we could persuade people on Facebook with logic, it might be possible

[blog315]

Fans & Amateurs

Game of thrones has an enormous fan base, in which parts of it have evolved from the emerging convergent culture into “amateurs and professionals.” This is allowed by the melding of a corporation like HBO’s intellectual property and fan’s abilities to create clothing, videos, websites etc. Jenkins first mentions a spoof fan film which was based on George Lucas and Shakespeare in Love. This film’s dvd, which was released on Amazon, made more money than episode 1 of Star Wars. Game of Thrones fan culture is just successful as Star Wars fan culture. The accounts I am following are part of this “participation culture” phenomenon. However, I feel that we as a fan community have gone beyond simply participating. In some ways, accounts like the ones I am following, spoof videos that are making rounds on the internet, podcasts, and shows like “After the Thrones,” which did a season on HBO during season six, are keeping Game of Thrones relevant and at the forefront of our minds between seasons and books. Of course there are fans of the show or books that don’t need to anyone to keep GoT relevant, because they are so into it, but there are millions of others that are probably way more involved than they would have been had there been no fan community pushing out material on social media.

What is kind of amazing about Game of Thrones is that it is a fan venture. DB Weiss and David Benioff were two men (with obvious experience in the “industry”) that went to George RR Martin and asked if they could make his books into a show. Perhaps that’s why the show is so good, I always find that fans of source material do better work and more justice to the books they are adapting than “corporate guys” trying to make a buck. Look at Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings and Game of Thrones. The films that are the weakest here are the Harry Potter franchise, because the producers, more than anything, saw Potter as a money sign. They weren’t fans. When Fuchs talks about corporations always being in control, he might be right, but when it comes to certain aspects of this world and this industry, the executives ARE fans, but with a lot more resources and money than the fans making youtube videos. But who is to say even those people won’t be the next big guys in entertainment.

Youtube channels like Alt Shift X are actually making money off Game of Thrones. Apparently, for every million views, they get paid $2000. I don’t know when intellectual property laws come in here, because his account is allowed. So are others who are simply showing clips of GoT, and those who are creating spoof videos and birthday rap battle videos with these characters. But when a 13 year old girl created a piece of art that stated “winter is coming,” and became involved with redbubble, HBO felt the need to step in. I mean, to be fair, HBO and Martin don’t own winter. Winter is coming right now. It’s Fall. I think the corporations in this case are just choosing their battles. Or maybe to some degree, it’s just too big for them. Season 7 of Game of Thrones was pirated over one billion times, not to mention there were more leaks for that season than I have ever seen for anything.

So what is a fan, amateur and professional in these contexts? Well, I consider myself a fan, unless someone starts paying me for this blog, then I guess I’ll be promoted to amateur. I’m this world of fandom, you have to do more than simply participate in the culture to be an amateur. So many of us have Facebook fan pages, instagram fan pages, videos, blogs etc. but if they’re not getting any views, I don’t think we count as amateurs. To be an amateur, you have to put something out there that people see and experience. To be an amateur is inherently to be a beginner of something. So a beginner of what? What are you heading toward? People like Alt Shift X put out 4-5 videos a month. That’s around 8-10 thousand dollars a month. Is he an amateur or a professional? I mean, he’s making 100K a year, but he’s not adding anything to the production. He is simply recycling the books and show into his own analysis. Maybe to be a professional, one has to produce something original or partially original. To me, with this genre, mass and popular culture are kind of interchangeable or at least blending together. One is producing and one is consuming, but then the consumers are in turn producing and the original people who produced material are consuming that. Like HBO giving us GoT, but then also employing fans to put on a show once a week to nerd out on each episode. It’s pretty amazing.

[blog315]

Online Minorities

I’ve noticed every so many years, a fresh, loud, obnoxious batch of raucous racism rears its head for the world to see. The 90s saw the Rodney King beating, and recently we have witnessed multiple police shooting, beating and killing black men with few, if any, consequences. That’s not to say racism goes dormant in between these blasts of media coverage. Like Cisneros and Nakayama state, social media and the internet have given racists a platform, but where they hint at the anonymity of users possibly being a cause of their nerve to speak like that in any context, I also wonder if these social media users are so often surrounded by like-minded people that they somehow think it’s normal behavior. That sounds like a stretch a bit, because it’s delusional, but isn’t being a racist bigot also delusional? The fact is, these online racists, like the ones who claimed an Indian-American woman was “Arab,” “a terrorist,” and “not American,” have expelled any notion that racism is behind us. This awareness, however, has allowed the more tolerant population an opportunity to speak up against racism on an equally public stage. And that’s where it all gets really tricky. The thing is, white privilege is real, as the theory of post-racism suggests, and in entertainment, white washing is prevalent. However, with the surge of awareness of racism online, many jump to call racism and white-washing without thinking it completely through. A few months ago, maybe longer, there was an article on one of the accounts I am following. The topic was Game of Thrones being “too white.” I couldn’t go far back enough to find the piece, but I remember it well enough. “Where are all the people of color?” Was a question that was emphasized. People were becoming offended before examining the elements of Martin’s world. The story and places in it are heavily borrowed from Europe and European history. Some have even theorized so far as to assign countries to territories as they think Martin drew inspiration. Dorne is Spain, Casterly Rock is England, Winterfell is Scotland, The Reach/ Highgarden is France, etc. Even the shape of Westeros is the United Kingdom with an upside down Ireland on top. Like in our world, the farther south, or closer to the equator you go, the darker skin tones will be, so Dornish people are darker—totally consistent with reality. Essos, to the east, is inspired by many different people including the Huns, Native Americans, middle Eastern’s, etc. these people are also darker. Some people in comments suggested that certain characters (from westeros) be black. Like Tyrion should be black and Cersei, his sister, white with golden hair. This might work for some people, but to me, this is excessive and distracting. People of the same region and families should resemble each other, I’m suspending disbelief enough with dragons (Arya and Sansa looking totally unrelated still bothers me). Cisneros and Nakayama note “new racism denies the significance of race,” and inserting random darker-skinned actors where it doesn’t belong makes no sense and denies the significance of race in the show, like the unsullied (who heavily represent the atrocities of slavery), the dothraki, and other players from Essos. Race plays a role in the show, and mixing it up without logic takes away from that.

Speaking of denying significance, jumping to scream “racism!” Or “white privilege!” All over the internet where it doesn’t necessarily belong takes away from the significance of combatting real racism, as well. This plays into stereotyping, racist people see this and jump at the opportunity to call us all snowflakes or something else equally meaningless. In class we talked about Ellen Pompao, and I researched the tweet and the responses that followed. A&E had changed the name of a program about the KKK to something more appropriate and she praised them, followed with black hand-clapping and thumbs up emojis. Someone responded and Ellen clapped back about racism being everyone’s problem, which is true. Maybe she could’ve elaborated more, but it’s 140 characters, and let’s be serious, her message and intent were blatantly obvious. People with problems about her tweets were perceiving them the way they saw fit, in order to insert racism where they could argue about it. One woman mentioned her being a privileged white woman, which begs the question, can white people who inherently have privilege not show solidarity and compassion for a cause that is not “directly” theirs? These attitudes add to the divide; they don’t encourage anything positive. Another woman tweeted her to inform Pompaeo that her [black] husband and children were not props. I found this the most offensive tweet on either side. She never mentioned her family, but this woman, who was black, attacked them anyway, even though it was obvious they were on the same side. My boyfriend is half black. My half sister is half black. My niece and nephew are black. If anyone accused me of using them as props without my mentioning of them, I’d be fuming to the point that I would be dangerous. So who does this racist problem belong to, if not all of us? When I was reading Sarah Florini’s piece on “signifyin’,” I was reminded of what I was telling my boyfriend about subcultures not actually “belonging” to anyone. If I want to wear cowboy boots, I can (I don’t, though). I don’t have to listen to country. If I want to dance to hip hop (again, not my thing), I can. I don’t have to be black. So when she mentioned the language patterns that belong to the culture of black twitter, I thought, hey, I kind of want to look up these hashtags and make fun of Drake, but, I guess I’m not allowed? The whole thing is kind of confusing to me. I get that their identity is important, and having that culture is imperative to their identity, as is all of our cultures and subcultures. But like with Game of Thrones, when someone who is new to watching the show shows up in the comments jumping on a thread, trying to get in on the inside joke, they’re still welcomed-- maybe shamed slightly, but in fun. Not really. I’m not trying to compare the importance of these two subcultures. Clearly, one is more important than the other. But like I said before, sometimes things can become divisive when they shouldn’t. It’s a complicated road to combatting racism while appreciating differences—a road filled with eggshells. I, myself, have no problem stepping right on them.

[blog315]

Gender

There is not really a debate when it comes to gender roles in the media. As Rosalind Gill points out in “Postfeminist Media Culture,” “[women’s] femininity is defined as a bodily property rather than a social, structural, or psychological one.” Females are portrayed normally with their appearance and sexuality at the forefront and anything else they have to offer being portrayed as secondary. As I am following the accounts of three Game of Thrones fan pages, and Game of Thrones being in the film/television realm, I think it is important to mention The Bechdel Test. The fact that a test like this even exists is a testament to how women are portrayed in media and film. It works like this: in order for a film or television show to pass The Bechdel Test, two female characters who are important enough to the story to have a name and a purpose have to have a conversation about something other than a man or men. It is truly shocking how many films don’t pass the test. Media and film really are male-centered.

Game of Thrones is an interesting show to observe accounts on when discussing gender. I have heard several people who have not seen the show or have seen a few episodes brand the show as “misogynistic” or as “objectifying women,” with little else to offer besides sex, boobs and blood. I find this ironic. Game of Thrones definitely has its fair share of sex and nudity, however, it also offers a plethora of strong women. Not just sidekicks, either. Daenarys Targaryen and Cersei Lannister are two of the most important characters in the series, equal to the two male leads in their importance—Jon Snow and Tyrion Lannister. And although both have had sex on the show and shown their bodies (although, Cersei for non-sexual purposes), it doesn’t define either of their characters. These are just the two female leads. Olenna Tyrell is, in my opinion, more fierce and independent as any man, and Yara (Asha in the books) Greyjoy is a great example of postfeminist culture being represented in media, however not exactly how Gill points out, not that she’s wrong. Yara is the epitome of a woman feeling empowered to explore her sexuality, but not in a way that say Carrie Bradshaw from Sex and the City does—it is not central to her character. Yara is a powerful, intelligent woman, who in many ways is more important than and influential to the men around her. Her sexual nature comes secondary to her. When discussing self-surveillance and self-monitoring, we are essentially talking about women working within constraints and censoring themselves and their personalities for the sake of what is expected of them, usually by other men. Well, when something is natural, like sex, we should also not shy away from it, or censor it for the sake of character development. Game of Thrones is honest. And Yara is a sexual person. It is in no way the postfeminist trick that is being played elsewhere, where we are being led to believe it’s empowering, but it is really disguised objectification. One of the pages I am following, “winter-is-coming.net,” posted an article that mentions sex and The Bechdel test. Apparently only 18 of the 67 episodes pass the test. However, the article’s author, as well as I, disagree with this. The Bechdel Test’s standards are vague, and as I said before, Game of Thrones is an honest show. To censor men out of conversations for the sake of doing so is offensive. Instead, the test should measure in what context women are talking about men. In season six, Cersei and Olenna have a conversation that is difficult to forget. A famous line from it is Olenna’s when she tells Cersei, “I wonder if you’re the worst person I’ve ever met. At a certain age, it’s difficult to tell.” But because The High Sparrow and King Tommen are mentioned, this episode does not pass the test, even though it features two women in stronger positions and with more pivotal and complex roles than The High Sparrow or Tommen.

Many of these pages are guilty of taking Game of Thrones and creating beauty contests out of the female characters in memes—asking viewers to rate which one is the hottest. A perfect example of femininity as a bodily property. However, the three I chose to follow don’t seem to post things like this. My three accounts reflect the integrity of the show. Women are strong, and it’s not ever questioned or brought to attention that these female roles might not be normal. The way George RR Martin wrote his women must be indicative to how he views them—as human beings, capable of as much as any man. I would like to see more of this in the media. There is no effort to objectify women. If it’s there, it is because it is organic or necessary to the character (for example, one of Littlefinger’s prostitutes). That does not mean, however, that commenters can’t resort to these lows. Oddly enough, this has happened most recently with a male character, although, Gill does mention men face something similar with masculinity. We, as viewers, just met Rhaegar Targaryen for the first time. As Daenarys’ brother and Jon Snow’s father, he is an important, albeit dead, character and many people had an idea of what they wanted Rhaegar to look like. He ended up looking like Viserys, only less scrawny. To book readers, this made sense. Viserys envied his older brother and wanted to look just like him, but viewers who had not read the books commented frequently about how disappointed they were in Rhaegar. They wanted a gorgeous, brooding man with long blonde hair and sexy armor. There are even several memes about it. Before this assignment was even brought to my attention, I had compared the way people speak about Rhaegar to the way women are treated everyday in all forms of media, and let’s face it, real life.

In "Virtual Feminisms," Keller speaks about girls taking a stand, getting involved in political and feminist discussions. It is interesting to me that it's something that needs encouraging. This should be normal. In Game of Thrones, women are in the thick of politics. As bloody as GoT is, it truly empowers women in an honest way. It's too bad we can't show it to our children just yet. We have a difficult line to decide which side to be on. On the one hand, bring this postfeminist culture to light and discuss it till our tongues bleed, or on the other hand, just let be what is natural and normal be and stop subscribing to magazines, shows, films, etc, that perpetuate this gender-gapped culture. If only that were as easy as it sounds.

[blog315]

Friendship

There is a lot of buzz around social media lessening attention spans and degrading morality and friendships. Chris Bloor touches on this in “What are Friends For?” When he mentions our social network benefits becoming fragmented. However, although I agree with him to a point, if we are thinking about it in a general sense, I also do not believe one can generalize something like Facebook, because it encompasses so many different people, pages and agendas. It is our world in cyber form. We are defined by the way we interact with the world around us, and more importantly, by relationships, including, and maybe most prominently, friendships, and there are so many different kinds, all of which exist on Facebook. My accounts are all centered around Game of Thrones. While these accounts are not people I can track and observe friendships with, friendship is central to the world of fandom that allows and necessitates the existence of said pages. Yes, friendships have been altered by Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc, and if one is focusing on the vapid need for “likes” and followers, there is a valid point that friendships are changing for the worse. But how is this different than a pre-internet age popular girl in school who's collecting friends and compliments as if it were a legitimate hobby? Alt Shift X, the creator of some of the best Game of Thrones theory videos I have ever seen has brought a million plus people together in a common love. Most of us will never meet or speak; we cannot consider ourselves friends, however the opportunity to interact is there. Less so than the other two predominantly Facebook pages, but it’s there. Outside of the cyber world, his videos have sparked conversations and bonding experiences through sharing the videos on Facebook or showing them to another person in real life. Every time Alt Shift X posts a new video, I can count on my friend DJ to text me immediately, notifying me and waiting for me to watch it so we can have a discussion about it. Bloor and also William Deresiewicz in “Faux Friendship” bring up the modern social norms in comparison to the past, where people were brought together through religion, family, or another common goal. This still exists, though. Thousands everyday are brought together to Winter-is-coming.net and Watchers on the Wall, both on Facebook. We read, comment and respond to one another. More to the point of friendship, many of the comments include only a tag. One tags an existing friend so that person can see it too. I have done this myself with people I considered acquaintances, and a deeper bond followed due to the story or post I wanted them to see, because I knew we loved the same thing—Game of Thrones. I have also observed, for this post, that interactions in comments can get quite in depth. There is a difference in the type. We engage for information, sometimes. "Tell me about Jaqen Hagar and the Maesters." This is an intro to a instrumental friendship, should the conversation continue. There are also comments that thread on where people talk about theories, joke around about "GoT inside jokes" for so long, you'd think the people were already close in real life. These friendships do not echo those of an instrumental quality, they seem genuine and fun.

Stories go back to the dawn of man. There is nothing more natural for us than to tell and share stories. Facebook is a different medium than cave drawings or a Renaissance tavern, but the core of it is there. What it comes down to is this, in the 21st century, religion is waning, conventional families are becoming fewer, and what we are inherently gathering around now is our love for what we “worship” together. In my case, it’s Game of Thrones. Maybe the way we are interacting in friendships now is the way we are actually hard wired, once you take all of the conservative expectations away.

[blog315]

Introduction Blog

The theme I will be examining throughout this semester is Game of Thrones fan pages. I have chosen three accounts that are pretty well known and that go above and beyond the usual fan account’s memes and repostings of others’ works. The first and my favorite of the three is “Alt Shift X,” who is present on Facebook, but is primarily known for his YouTube channel, which deals almost exclusively with Game of Thrones videos. Alt Shift X has over 700,000 followers, yet most of his videos receive more views than that—usually around one million, so he is getting quite a lot of viewers who don’t officially subscribe to his channel. I am one of them. Alt Shift X is someone who reads the A Song of Ice and Fire books, on which Game of Thrones is based, and knows the content inside and out. He creates organized, in-depth videos with a plethora of visuals that take the viewer through theories, such as “Who is Azor Ahai?” And also a breakdown video for every trailer and episode of the show, while incorporating material from the books, show, and basic logic and deduction. The second account I will be examining is “Watchers on the Wall.” This is fan website who also do a lot of work on Facebook, which is how I know them. They are possibly the most informed and credible source of Game of Thrones information that I am aware of, outside of official HBO accounts. They post original articles fairly often, which either delve into theories about the storyline, or information about filming details and the show. The most recent original post delves into the entirety of season seven of the show, and there are several writings like this one that talk about each episode. Two women, Petra and Luka, have a conversation that is transcribed and then posted on Facebook. There are also plenty of fun videos posted that show how special effects on the show was achieved, pictures of original story lines written by George RR Martin, himself, and other things to keep a fan occupied for hours on end. The last account is “Winter-is-coming.net.” Winter is coming is another account that is a website, but gets most of their content seen through Facebook. They are very similar to Watchers on the Wall. They review episodes and go over theories, as well as post fun pictures and videos. Some of the more recent postings are things like, “did Beric Dondarrion die on the season finale?” And they have an interview posted from the actor. Another recent post is a video about how Game of Thrones has used color over the seasons to tell a story. I haven’t watched this one yet, but it looks like something I would enjoy. All three of these sites delve into Game of Thrones, the story as well as behind the scenes, except Alt Shift X, who focusses on story only, but does occasionally have a goofy video. One examined Ser Pounce’s (Tommen Baratheon’s cat) chances of becoming Azor Ahai, or “The prince who was promised.” Another looked into (and likely mocked) the Game of Thrones themed porn “Game of Bones,” however most are quite earnest in their content. I am most interested in the theories that emerge from all three of these sites as well as how fans respond to the posts and interact with each other in the comments.