dawnfelagund - Tumblr blog

[dawnfelagund]

Hi!!! I was at the Tolkien conference today and I loved your paper!!! I was too nervous to ask during the Q&A, but I was wondering how the Catholic belief that you should not grieve the dead because they're in a better place had effected Tolkien's writing about death and grief. Especially in the context of his own life, and how he writes death as something to be celebrated and that it is a gift from the Valar.

Thank you so much!!!!

I'm glad you enjoyed the paper and thank you for asking about it! The paper Grief, Grieving, and Permission to Mourn in the Quenta Silmarillion is on my website (and the SWG), for anyone who is interested.

Whether or not there is a connection between Catholic belief and Tolkien's idea of "the gift of Men," I cannot say. There might be! But I think it's also important that Tolkien's eschatology for Mortals was emphatically not consistent with Catholic doctrine. At first it was. The Book of Lost Tales describes an afterlife for Mortals that Christopher Tolkien identifies as strongly parallel to the Catholic ideas of Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory. Christopher calls these lingering parallels "disconcerting." (This can be found in his commentary on the chapter Of the Valar and the Building of Valinor in BoLT1.)

In the published Silmarillion ("Of the Beginning of Days"), there is some degree of uncertainty still, among the Elves, about exactly what "leaving the Circles of the World" actually means: "It is one with this gift of freedom that the children of Men dwell only a short space in the world alive, and are not bound to it, and depart soon whither the Elves know not." This has always struck me as a very Elven perspective: They know that they are bound to the world and will receive no reprieve from it and will grow weary in its confines. It's a typical manifestation of the aphorism that "the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence." To Mortals, who are subjected to this mysterious leaving of the world—often prematurely, from their perspective—this doesn't seem a great deal. We see this in the Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth, where we actually get the Mortal perspective, and later in the unease of the Númenóreans about their fate. (Conveniently, any Mortals who don't go along with the Elven perspective are "confounded" by Melkor. Mmmm, right.)

But, importantly I think, these Mortals are not going on to a reward in their afterlife, like the Catholic conception of Heaven. They don't know what lies beyond the Circles of the World, and neither do the Elves. The Elves just think, whatever it is, it must be better than their own fate. It actually reminds me more of the Hindu concepts of samsara and moksha: release from the travail of constant rebirth, constant life. From the Elven perspective, Mortals just get to take off for the weekend; Elves are stuck always on the graveyard shift.

Now do I think that the Elven conception of Mortals getting the better death might explain why only six of sixty-four named Mortal characters in the Quenta Silmarillion are grieved or mourned. It is very possible that an Elven narrator saw these deaths as going off to something better ... but we know clearly that Mortals don't see it that way, so why Pengolodh doesn't report more frequently on the grief of Mortals for their lost friends and family remains an open question that I think is probably explained by bias: not so much political bias in this case but the bias of a long-lived being to the perceived ephemerality (and inconsequence) of shorter-lived beings.

Elven grief really has no parallels with Catholicism that I can see at all. While one can make the argument that death is the natural outcome for both Tolkien's Mortals and in Catholic belief, it is not the natural outcome for Elves, and "death" is an unnatural and certainly painful separation for them.

Finally, as for grief more generally, I think there are also two different things happening in how Primary World humans experience grief. I am not Christian and so cannot speak to Christian or specifically Catholic teachings around what is or is not appropriate in terms of grief, beyond what I can observe of the people around me in a culturally Christian country. But I wonder if "the Catholic belief that you should not grieve the dead because they're in a better place" is a different thing from grieving someone because you ... simply miss them. Even if you believe that you will be reunited in the afterlife with them at some point. But again, for Mortals in Tolkien's world, even this is confounded by the fact that there is no certainty of this; there are much larger questions for them than for faithful Christians around what happens when they die.

[dawnfelagund]

At the Tolkien at UVM Conference this year, I presented a paper on Grief, Grieving, and Permission to Mourn in the Quenta Silmarillion. The paper is now posted on my website and the Silmarillion Writers' Guild. Here are some highlights:

The Quenta Silmarillion is a dangerous time to be alive! Eighty-eight named characters die ninety deaths in its pages. While some demographics are slightly better off than others, the key word there is slightly. No one is safe.

War is the number one cause of death in the Quenta Silmarillion.

There is a surprising lack of grief and mourning, and what exists reflects the bias of the narrator Pengolodh.

Characters disfavored by Pengolodh (or his patrons) don't receive grief and mourning, which draws attention away from their humanity and toward their deeds as explanations of the history of the First Age. (The Fëanorians, Aredhel, and Maeglin are prime examples here.)

Those who receive the most grief and mourning are those not just favored by Pengolodh and his patrons but often those whose deaths raise moral and ethical questions that threaten their legacy. In particular, Pengolodh likes to attribute some power beyond the grave to kings who make choices that threaten their people's safety but who, politically, are not subjects for his condemnation: Fingolfin, Finrod Felagund, and Elu Thingol. This piling on of grief shows that these kings' people regard their legacy as positive, and the posthumous after-effects negate the argument that they endangered their people with their choices. Instead, they are permitted to protect and restore from beyond the grave.

The complete paper has the full details!

[dawnfelagund]

I wrote this article for my monthly Tolkien fandom studies column, Cultus Dispatches as part of the OTW's "ten things about fandom" challenge for International Fanworks Day. Normally, my Cultus column begins with a gnarly soup of data, and I often don't even know what (if anything!) will come out of analyzing it. This month, due to the relative lack of data, I thought I was giving myself an easy month of writing. I just needed to come up with ten things, right?? Ha! I think this might be the most challenging article I've written for this column to date.

Here are some fun facts I learned while researching these 10 Important Moments in Tolkien Fanfic History:

Tolkien fanfic is older than Star Trek fanfic.

The first known Tolkien fanfic was an alternate-history Sauron redemption fic.

The first Tolkien fanfic archive was a slash archive.

Three out of four archives opened after the LotR films left theaters used the eFiction open-source script.

The first Angbang story was posted in 2002 (though it wasn't called Angbang yet).

Want to know more? Go read the article! And I'd love to hear what I didn't include that you'd add to your own list. (Or if you make your own list, let me know!)

Many, many thanks to all of the people who talked with me about their work for this article and to those involved in the discussion on the SWG Discord's #fandom-studies channel about this topic.

[dawnfelagund]

Meet & Greet Matryoshka Prompt

Anyone seeking a prompt for the @silmarillionwritersguild's Meet & Greet Matryoshka challenge, here you go!

Prompt: A favorite place.

[dawnfelagund]

I'm not 100% sure what would help you here, so I'll contribute what I can but feel free to DM me if you need more.

Are you asking for academic sources after 2010 that address demographics similar to how CentrumLumina did with the AO3 Census? If so, the closest match I have for that is the chapter on demographics in Abigail De Kosnik's 2016 Rogue Archives. Unfortunately, the methodology is a bit unusual: She selected 50 participants who were archivists and other influential fans. Based on a quick count I just did, 38% of her participants identified as queer women ... but again, this is going to be a different demographic than you'll probably find from something like the AO3 Census, and I'm not sure if all participants were fic writers or may have been involved with archives in other ways. (Check my work here; it's been a minute since I read the chapter closely. I can send the chapter if you don't have it and want it.)

If you asking if peer-reviewed work cites CentrumLumina's work ... yes, I have. Here is one. A quick search of Google Scholar turned up others as well.

As for discussions of CentrumLumina's work or the idea that most fanfic writers are queer women, I don't know of any, unfortunately.

Help!

Hi, my people! I came here quickly to ask for recs! Is there any recent (aka from 2010 until now) paper that talks about how nowadays writers of fanfic are mostly queer women? i know the census done by @centrumlumina suggests that, but i need an actual paper that deals with it! Yes, this is for my thesis! I'm finishing it in the next couple of days and I need any help pls!

[dawnfelagund]

What is better than fandom data? MORE FANDOM DATA!!! This month's Cultus Dispatches column offers a rough, taken-with-a-huge-grain-of-salt comparison between the 2020 Tolkien Fanfiction Survey and the recent OTW 16th Anniversary Survey.

The surveys offer a few points of glancing comparison: time active in fandom, attendance at fan conventions, and use of fandom platforms. The latter offers some particularly interesting conclusions, offering evidence that Tolkien fans go all Galadriel when it comes to migrating from Lothlorien to new fandom sites and adopting new technology.

You can read "Duel of Surveys" here.

[dawnfelagund]

Tagged as @silmarillionwritersguild but replying as me ... hi, anon! I'm mentioning this because, if you don't know us and want to hang out with a bunch of Tolkien nerds, you're very welcome on the SWG. (We also have a Discord. Registered members on the site can access it through the site; anyone else feel free to DM or email me or any of the other mods for an invite.)

My first recommendation, once you've read LotR and The Hobbit, is The Silmarillion. This is the history that lies behind LotR and The Hobbit; it is also Tolkien's life's work, begun when he was a twenty-something in the trenches in WWI and still underway when he died.

Three important things to realize about The Silmarillion that I wish I had been told when, stoked at having just finished LotR and wanting MORE, I pulled it off a bookstore shelf:

It is nothing like The Hobbit and LotR. Tolkien was steeped in medieval history and literature, and it much more follows that tone and style, which can be ... jarring ... when you're expecting something more novelistic. I speak from experience.

It's a difficult book. Most people read it several times before they feel like they're really getting comfortable with it.

Tolkien didn't write the published Silmarillion as we know it; that was done by his son Christopher, who took all those decades of drafts and notes and did his best to honor what he felt was his father's final word on the story. I mention this only because, the deeper you go into Tolkien fandom, the more often you're going to encounter some of us having conversations about the works that make up The Silmarillion. And this is why.

The Silmarillion will show how we arrive at the point of the story in LotR and many details of that book (Why are Aragorn and Arwen so special as a couple? Why do Dwarves and Elves not get along? What's the story behind the notable objects and weapons?) will make better sense with The Silmarillion.

Now if you've read The Silmarillion, where to next? Where in that pile of dozens of books to begin?

Unfinished Tales. As it says on the tin, this book contains unfinished texts that expand on LotR and The Silmarillion. They're generally more readable than some of the History of Middle-earth (HoMe) material can be. Which brings me to ...

The History of Middle-earth. This is a twelve-volume series that I often describe as Christopher showing his work for how he put together The Silmarillion. It is many (though not all) of the texts and drafts that make up that book. Now it's twelve volumes, so where to begin in the HoMe?

The Book of Lost Tales (Volumes 1 and 2) are the very oldest stories that would eventually become The Silmarillion. Composed in the late 1910s, Tolkien was very young when he wrote them, and they are quite different in style from The Silmarillion. While the first texts are completed stories, eventually they trail off into notes and outlines in the second volume that can be trickier.

The Lays of Beleriand (Volume 3) are poetic tellings of some of the "Silmarillion" stories. Like the Lost Tales, these are very early texts, from the late 1910s through early 1930s.

The "Silmarillion" materials before LotR (Volumes 4 and 5) is where we really see Tolkien beginning to develop the "Silmarillion," written mostly in the 1930s. He wrote recursively, developing many drafts of the same content that evolved over decades. For those of us interested in The Silmarillion, this is an amazing resource. For those reading for a new story, you should be aware that you're going to encounter a lot of repetition.

The history of LotR (Volumes 6-9) shows how Tolkien developed LotR, back when Aragorn was a Hobbit. Like Volumes 4 and 5, this is going to be mostly of interest for those who want to see how the published text developed; you're not necessarily going to get a lot of new story here.

The "Silmarillion" materials after LotR (Volumes 10-12) show Tolkien continuing to develop the story that would become The Silmarillion with several essays that develop his thinking on topics related to his world. At this point, he knew his work was not only publishable but of deep interest to some; I always get the sense in these volumes that he is more aware of his audience and his legacy than in the pre-LotR volumes.

The Nature of Middle-earth, though not technically part of the HoMe, includes various previously unpublished writings on ... well, what the title says! As with the HoMe, it is not necessarily a book you can just sit down with to read a good story; it will be of more interest for those looking to dive deeper into the canon or understand the particulars of how Tolkien constructed his world.

HoMe pro tip: It's okay to cherrypick! In fact, I recommend cherrypicking. Begin with the volumes that contain material that interest you; for example, I started with 10 for Laws and Customs among the Eldar and 12 for The Shibboleth of Feanor. The HoMe generally isn't something you read cover to cover; it can be dense and complex, and you're going to get more out of it if you begin where your interest lies and expand out (or not!) from there.

Now if you finish The Silmarillion and are interested in what Tolkien called "the three Great Tales":

The Children of Hurin is a lengthier version of Turin's story, told in an edited volume by Christopher Tolkien with the story compiled similarly to how he compiled The Silmarillion.

Beren and Luthien and The Fall of Gondolin take a different approach, compiling older texts but without the extensive commentary found in the HoMe, making them more readable to a general audience.

The Fall of Numenor similarly compiles all material about the Second Age in one place.

Tolkien is best known for his Middle-earth writings, but he was also a leading philologist in his day and wrote not only short stories not set in Middle-earth but worked with and wrote based on medieval texts that he worked with professionally.

A Tolkien Reader compiles Tolkien's short works, both fiction and nonfiction.

Sigurd and Gudrun are Tolkien's poems based on Norse mythology.

The Fall of Arthur is an unfinished poem about King Arthur.

Beowulf is his translation of the poem plus his short story based on the poem, "Sellic Spell."

Bottom line: Where you go really depends on where your interest lies! Do you want another book to sit down and devour, cover to cover? Or are you interested in the minutia of Tolkien's world and how he built it? Do you like Elves? Mortals? What are you curious about? Here, it can be good to lean on the fandom: Let fellow fans know what you want to know more about, and you'll generally find many people willing to help you find it.

Hi there!

I'm a newbie in the tolkien works, I've finished off the hobbit and the lotr books but have no idea where to go next. I've looked at different websites about it but I haven't gotten any clear answers. There's like a million of these books and I feel so lost!

I figured that as a long time fan that you'd know the answers to this question if it's not too much of a bother.

Thanks in advance no pressure!

Augh, anon! This is one of the best things to ask of someone with a lifelong interest in this universe.

I WILL get back to you on this, but.

Was thinking (midnight brain) could we make it a group effort? It feels as though seeing different perspectives from other people in the fandom would be of help here, and since I do want this covered I'm calling on mutuals and followers in the Tolkien fandom.

Please if you deem, I do encourage people to add to this.

Let me try tagging (there are legit so many of us): @arofili @actual-bill-potts @eveningalchemist @goschatewabn @cuarthol @melestasflight @thelordofgifs @outofangband @thegreatstrongbow @potatoobsessed999 @hennethgalad @jamcake-muses @i-did-not-mean-to @glorf1ndel @z-h-i-e @verecunda @naryaflame @mirkwood-hr-department @saurons-pr-department @welcomingdisaster @hirazuki @nuredhel @effervescentdragon @searchingforserendipity25 @cilil @hhimring @chrissystriped @yuzukimist @edensrose @awesome-bluehair-universe @swanmaids @herinke @celebbun @auntieaugury @auroramama @puelhathnofury @kiatheinsomniac @eilinelsghost @asianbutnotjapanese @i-gwarth @batsyforyou @aprilertuileviresse @fishing4stars @elamarth-calmagol @zeladanial @silmarillionwritersguild @silmarillionno @solmarillion @samarqqand @sallysavestheday+ anyone else and ALL the Tolkien visual artists who see this and I forgot to mention (love you all, so many) if you have the inclination to add your journey/experience/recommendations? Anything, we have a good topic here.

[dawnfelagund]

I wrote this and am really excited to see it finished. I started researching it back in early August, knowing Celegorm would be a complicated character. Although fairly simple in the published text—he is only mentioned fifty-two times—Celegorm underwent more than fifty years of revisions. He was an interesting character to research in a large part because many of the texts that include him exist in multiple drafts, so we can see how his character unfolds across those fifty-plus years. (But this also explains why this biography took more than three months to research and write!)

Here are some of the big takeaways from my research:

When Celegorm originated in the legendarium, Tolkien had no idea who he was. It really does seem he wanted someone named Celegorm foremost and would figure out the rest from there! He was himself, then briefly Thingol, then less briefly Finrod, and then back to himself: the Celegorm who would become the one we know from the published Silmarillion.

The Nargothrond Element—Celegorm and Curufin's betrayal of Finrod and abduction of Lúthien—emerged early in Tolkien's work in the legendarium but seems to be what anchored Celegorm's character, establishing his basic personality, which Tolkien then shaped in rather interesting ways across the next forty years.

After establishing the Nargothrond Element, Tolkien seemed concerned with shaping Celegorm's character to avoid pure villainy. We have a couple of texts where Tolkien "thinks aloud" about Celegorm and Curufin in ways that show he wanted them to be complex characters defined by more than their misdeeds. My theory here is that they foremost illustrate not evil but the potential of anyone to fall.

One way Tolkien complicates Celegorm is through his acts of heroism, which many fans recognize. More important than that, though, is friendship. Celegorm is a person who was loved. He was allowed various close friendships as his character developed: Curufin, Barahir, Beren, Finrod, Orodreth, Angrod, Aegnor, and finally Aredhel. This last friendship—which emerged when Tolkien resumed work on the "Silmarillion" after completing The Lord of the Rings—conveniently allowed Celegorm a friend and to behave heroically in a way that didn't advance the cause against Morgoth (and in fact helped to do the opposite).

The narrator of The Silmarillion uses the Silmarils and the Fëanorian oath to explain the history of the First Age: everything went to ruin because of the Silmarils and the oath more specifically. Celegorm's role in the story very much plays into this explanation of history, and we see how everything he does turns to ruin (even helping his cousin escape an abusive marriage!) In late revisions, Tolkien seems to have held up Maedhros and Maglor as foils to Celegorm and Curufin in this regard. The two pairs of brothers take very different paths in how they respond to their oath but all end up equally ruined.

Celegorm's biography more fully discusses and documents these big ideas with evidence from across Tolkien's work on the "Silmarillion."

The first part of Celegorm's biography introduced a character without a clear identity until Tolkien solidified his role in the betrayal of Finrod Felagund, which Christopher Tolkien termed the Nargothrond Element. This centerpiece of Celegorm's story was years in the making and established Celegorm's identity as we know it.

But Tolkien's work was done. The second part of Celegorm's biography considers how his character evolved once the Nargothrond Element was in place. Although Tolkien is not often lauded for creating complex characters, in Celegorm's character, we see numerous instances where he balanced Celegorm's role as a villain with the need to make him not-wholly-evil, his role ultimately serving the central theme of The Silmarillion. In addition to shaping new details about Celegorm's life, Tolkien also developed his relationships with other characters, showing that Celegorm—for all his flaws—was still someone who loved and was loved by others.

You can read Celegorm's biography here (and jump to Part 2 here).

[dawnfelagund]

One lesson I have learned after a decade and a half of writing these biographies is that Tolkien's characters are always more interesting and complicated than I think they'll be. I have found Celegorm especially interesting to work on because the early years of his character are so well documented (including with dates on most of the texts!) that we can see how Tolkien constructed and evolved characters from his earliest WWI-era work to his later-in-life revisions after publishing The Lord of the Rings.

Anyway, I wrote this! and hope that some of you will be able to check it out. ^_^

Tolkien is generally not recognized for his skill at creating complex characterizations. On the surface, Celegorm seems a prime example of this: a basic villain who betrays a beloved king, kidnaps a princess, and keeps company with the types of people who murder children. Even his dog rejects him.

But, as a deeper investigation of his character reveals, Tolkien did consider him with some nuance, often drawing back from pure villainy to add details to his character that allow for the kind of speculation and inference that makes reading (and creating fanworks about) The Silmarillion so enjoyable. Even after deciding that Celegorm should play the role of a villain—and this decision evolved over the course of years—Tolkien seems not to have lost sight of Celegorm's earlier, more benevolent form and appears to have acted with intention to shape Celegorm's character accordingly.

You can read the first part of Celegorm's biography here.

[dawnfelagund]

Signal boosting! I'm going to collect responses in about a week, I think.

For the past several months on our Cultus Dispatches column about Tolkien fan studies, we have been looking at canon and authority. This has begun to shade into fanon and fan authority. Historically, these have been complicated topics in the Tolkien fandom, generating disdain from some even as others gleefully embrace fan-created elements in the fanworks they read, write, and view.

We are looking to hear from you about your perspectives on fanon and other fan-generated elements in fanworks! Fandom Voices is a periodic project that is a part of Cultus Dispatches and seeks fan perspectives on topics related to the fandom. If you read, view, or create fanworks, you are eligible to participate. Note that the question is very open-ended and intentionally so! We welcome anything you wish to share about fanon in Tolkien-based fanworks.

You can learn more and share your thoughts on fanon here.

[dawnfelagund]

Where are these intelligent bots when I have to fix white screens of death and write the SWG newsletter each week.

[dawnfelagund]

This summer, I shared the results of an informal survey I'd run about independent fanworks archives: "a website where creators can share their fanworks ... run by fans but unaffiliated with any for-profit or nonprofit corporations or organizations."

The tl;dr of all of that data was that many people want independent archives and would maybe even volunteer for one, but they are intimidated by the technical side. (Which, having spent the afternoon troubleshooting an email issue on the SWG on my phone from the backseat of a moving car, I get.) And then a friend sent me this! It seems like they are aiming for exactly that: to build software that can be easily deployed by fans who don't have extensive technical experience.

They just wrapped up Week One of their beta. If you read all my natterings about independent archives and hear that little voice going, "... this is you ..." then this may be an option you want to look into.

[dawnfelagund]

Independent Archive Survey

What concerns about OTW/AO3 do you have?

Check all that apply.

the organization is slow to respond to fandom concerns: 59% consolidation of most fandoms and fanworks onto AO3 increases the risk of a mass loss of fanworks: 57% volunteer safety is not taken seriously enough: 45% concerns about racism within the organization and AO3 are not being adequately addressed: 38% the organization is slow to respond to individual fans who need their help: 28% moderation of potentially harmful content is inadequate: 27% the organization is not transparent enough about decisions: 22% AO3 users' safety is not taken seriously enough: 18% the AO3 code is not properly documented and maintained: 18% organization leadership (e.g., Board members, Legal, committee chairs) wield too much power: 17% I don't have any concerns about OTW/AO3 archives: 12% (note: 2 of the 10 respondents who chose this did select concerns from the list; eliminating these responses, 10% of respondents had no concerns) I don't know: 2% Responses in the "other" field:

Other projects besides AO3 seem to fall by the wayside (e.g. fanlore); AO3 is hostile to outside fixes for code problems; volunteers are burned through quickly; volunteers must go through an intensive onboarding process that weeds out people who actually want to help; functions of AO3 don't work as intended/advertised (the exchange interface, the prompt meme, tagsets)

I have concerns as noted but I also hope and want Ao3 to improve and succeed (while also supporting the existence of more archives!)

Moderation of illegal content is inadequate

My main concern with OTW is that it has grown too large as an organization/project to continue operating solely on volunteer labor. To be honest, most of their issues stem out from that main problem or are exacerbated by it, in my opinion. But it isn't some simple thing to start bringing on paid staff either. Anyway, in short, the org has outgrown its model, but switching to a new model will also take time and there will be more growing pains as a result before things improve.

Not enough moderation in general. Hard to remove/report harassing comments, spam fics, etc.

for how long it's been around, the feature set is surprisingly immature (e.g., blocking/muting is just now being added, the time-based posting bug)

No sense of community

The size makes for a lack of community; the weight placed on quantitative measures (work stats)

I use it too little to personally experience the negative effects, however I'll support people I know and trust who do.

administration of the site feels to far from the individual user

Responses: 82

Analysis

I hesitated to include this item at all. I really do not want this to become a small archive vs. AO3 issue or to be presented as an either-or. We can and should have both, and for the 999th time, I want the OTW and AO3 to succeed for a variety of reasons. However, getting a sense of concerns seemed important as we move forward into crafting next-generation small archives that meet the needs of their creators, visitors, and fandoms. So the question went in.

Not surprisingly, fewer people overall are concerned about OTW/AO3 than small archives. About one in ten respondents did not have concerns at all, and no single concern was selected as often as the top ones in the corresponding dataset for small archives. Again, this is not a surprise. Despite the past few months, many of the concerns on the OTW/AO3 list remain hypotheticals, whereas concerns about small archives have happened at one time or another (if only because there have been thousands of small archives and just one AO3!) Furthermore, many of the concerns on this list were in response to some of the whistleblowing of recent months, and it's possible not all respondents were even aware of what was going on.

What were the concerns? Two dominated. The organization's slow response to fandom concerns, was top—also not a surprise. It's nearly cliche to point out that the wheels of large bureaucracies grind slowly, and one needn't be versed in the latest discussions around the OTW to have likely seen this at some point in its almost fifteen-year history. I will note that this is an area where smaller archives can succeed ... but aren't guaranteed, of course. On the SWG, it has always been a policy to take no longer than twenty-four hours to respond to a task, question, or issue, and most of the time we are significantly quicker than that. (Sometimes actually fixing the issue takes longer, but even that is rare.) However, you have to commit to doing this. The potential is there (where I'd argue it's really never going to be for an organization the size of the OTW), but it needs to be realized.

Secondmost was the worry about consolidation and the possibility of the mass loss of fanworks. I have been yelling about this for years, so I'll admit that it felt pretty good to see that those words haven't gone entirely unheeded. Is this unlikely? Yep. Is it possible? It is. Sorry, sweet summer children, it really is, and if it does happen, it is devastating in a way that the closure of a small archive never will be. And for the last dataset about small archive concerns, I made the case that the data around archive closures possibly reflected the Tolkien fandom's "collective trauma" about the unannounced transfer of ownership or closure of small archives. (And I imagine most respondents participate in the Tolkien fandom; my signal boost wasn't passed that widely around.) Of course, this happens against a backdrop of Fandom's collective trauma around unannounced content purges. Point being, these possibilities are on our mind.

There are a couple responses that pair naturally between the small archive and OTW/AO3 datasets. There is much more worry about the technical stability of small archives than AO3. Again, we've seen small archives fail and degrade due to tech issues, so this isn't hypothetical in the way it is for AO3, for all that's been said about spaghetti code. On leadership and the power given to a site's leaders, the two sets are remarkably even. This does surprise me! For all that's been revealed about the OTW's governance in recent months, they do have a process of governance that is more transparent than most archives, and they do offer points of democratic input, whereas many small sites do not.

The "Other" option was also more used for the OTW/AO3 dataset than the small archive dataset and includes some interesting responses that elaborate on the concerns from the list and identify some new ones. A couple mentions of "community" jump out at me here—and again, this is what small archives have to offer (potentially! again, "potential" and "actual" can be quite starkly divided) and what AO3 really cannot in most circumstances (and I'd further add was not intended to. I've argued before that a universal archive cannot offer the community features many people want and need by definition.)

What is the independent archive survey?

The independent archive survey ran from 23 June through 7 July 2023. Eighty-two respondents took the survey during that time. The survey asked about interest in independent archives and included a section for participants interested in building or volunteering for an independent archive. The survey was open to all creators and readers/viewers of fanworks.

What is an independent archive?

The survey defined an independent archive as "a website where creators can share their fanworks. What makes it 'independent' is that it is run by fans but unaffiliated with any for-profit or nonprofit corporations or organizations. Historically, independent archives have grown out of fan communities that create fanworks."

Follow the tag #independent archives for more survey results and ongoing work to restore independent archives to fandoms that want them.

Independent Archives Survey Masterpost

[dawnfelagund]

Independent Archive Survey

What concerns about independent archives do you have?

small archives can close without warning: 72% multiple small archives make it harder to find fanworks to read/view: 71% crossposting to multiple archives is time-consuming: 54% activity on small archives may be too low or drop off over time: 49% small sites can become cliquish or otherwise exclude some fans: 48% I'm unsure if software is being maintained and regular backups made: 44% small sites may not have the features I want or have come to depend on: 43% smaller sites may be difficult or unfamiliar to use: 39% I may have a smaller audience for my fanworks, fewer comments, etc.: 35% I may not be able to archive all of my fanworks in one place: 32% small archives put too much power/control in the hands of one or a few people: 22% my fandom friends may not be interested in the same archives I am: 21% I don't have any concerns about small archives: 1% I don't know: 2% Responses in the "other" field:

many of the concerns about the otw apply to smaller archives as well

site design - i haven't seen a single-fandom archive whose design i like as much or find as easy to use (as a reader and author) as ao3. given the choice between reading the same fic on swg and ao3, i'll chose ao3 because it's easier on my eyes

subcat of "too much power" -- smaller archives may go down if the maintainer can no longer fulfill their duties

Fics being used in AI without author consent, changing/unclear guidelines, fanworks being removed without warning (ie. FFN, LJ, at the will of moderators bc they don’t like xyz)

Responses: 82

Analysis

What leaped out at me in these results was the most-chosen concern: that small archives may close without warning. I have come to think of the unannounced archive transfers/closures of archives in the Tolkien fanworks fandom as its "collective trauma" and felt myself rather dramatic for using those particular terms, but this suggests I'm not that far off-base. The whole concept of independent community archives, in my mind, is predicated upon an assumption of caring that exceeds what a large organization (like the OTW) or for-profit site (like FFN or Wattpad) can reasonably be expected to muster. The closure of a small site, without warning and the chance for people to save fanworks, undermines that basic assumption. Future archive owners, take note: What can you do to alleviate this worry that your archive will rip the rug out from under its users? This is definitely an issue I believe we need to address collectively moving forward. What do best practices in this area look like?

Difficulty finding fanworks to read/view is hot on the heels of archive closures, however, as far as concerns. With these data in hand, I'd love to know more about the specifics of this concern. Is this around search features (which were mentioned in another free-response field elsewhere in the survey) not working as well as they should? Is it about having to visit multiple sites, especially when those sites may not have new content every day? What can a small site offer that makes it easier for users to access new fanworks without having to visit daily? (Social media? Newsletters? What else?)

The middle of the pack in the data are mostly concerns around convenience and traffic, the latter of which translates into not just comments but feeling like a site is part of a living community. It's hard to argue with convenience; smaller sites are less convenient than a large site that includes everything or almost everything. Furthermore, the ubiquity of large sites—specifically AO3—makes "different" feel like "inconvenient" when it's actually not. The fact that a small archive doesn't behave exactly like AO3 is not an inconvenience anymore than it is an inconvenience when the produce section is the right in Grocery A and the left in Grocery B, but people will treat it as such because they have become so ingrained to doing and seeing and experiencing things only one way. (This is probably true of the internet and websites more broadly.) As site owners, we have to remain cognizant of how we can offer what AO3 et al cannot—which I would argue is community and consideration for individual users and fandom cultures—and how we can support new creators and visitors as they use something not-AO3.

Finally, the two lowest concerns surprised me. I thought that, in light of what has happened with the OTW this year, "too much power/control in the hands of one or a few people" would rank much higher. Perhaps it is knowing that those in leadership roles are people you know, versus people who feel at best unreachable and at worst are entirely anonymous, that makes the difference, the fandom version of the small-town ideal of being able to trust someone on the basis of a handshake (and the fact that you will have to look each other in the eye during routine community encounters). Perhaps it is an assumption of transparency that comes with that knowing. I'm sure I was not the only person surprised by the breadth and depth of dysfunction at the OTW, but I always had a sense back in the day about which small-site archivists were struggling to keep up with their sites, or which communities were dramamongers, or which moderators played favorites or otherwise acted in ways that were unfair.

The last concern, about using archives that one's friends do not, is an interesting shift because I recall this as a primary reason for some fandoms, including Tolkien, not adopting new platforms in the past (e.g., Dreamwidth and Tumblr), because one's friends weren't there. I wonder the extent to which this lack of concern reflects the lack of community on large sites. Convenience and universality have superseded community and connection as considerations—but that's part of the point, isn't it?

What is the independent archive survey?

The independent archive survey ran from 23 June through 7 July 2023. Eighty-two respondents took the survey during that time. The survey asked about interest in independent archives and included a section for participants interested in building or volunteering for an independent archive. The survey was open to all creators and readers/viewers of fanworks.

What is an independent archive?

The survey defined an independent archive as "a website where creators can share their fanworks. What makes it 'independent' is that it is run by fans but unaffiliated with any for-profit or nonprofit corporations or organizations. Historically, independent archives have grown out of fan communities that create fanworks."

Follow the tag #independent archives for more survey results and ongoing work to restore independent archives to fandoms that want them.

Independent Archives Survey Masterpost

[dawnfelagund]

Independent Archive Survey

In what other ways might you be interested in volunteering for an independent archive?

Check all that apply.

community activities (events, challenges, etc.): 69% member support (helping creators use the archive): 56% moderation (monitoring fanworks/user interactions, addressing/removing content/interactions that violate archive policies): 50% policy development: 33% promotional (social media, recruitment, etc.): 30% tech support (software upgrades, bug fixes, etc.): 22% I don't know: 5.6% Other: Financial I am currently running a Dreamwidth archive and looking to expand it Responses: 36

Analysis

As I noted above, there are multiple items that show relatively low interest in the technical aspects of running an archive compared to the creative and "soft skills" areas, and nowhere is this more obvious than in this dataset. This isn't surprising. Creative/soft skills more closely align with what we already do in fandom. More of us could, for example, plan a challenge or help a newcomer than fix a software bug, given the skills we have right now. A lot of skills we use all the time in fandom concern creativity, communication, and interaction, so "leveling up" in those areas, so to speak, in an official capacity, is less of a stretch for most people.

Of course, as we (re)build independent archives, the technical aspects are essential in a way that none of the others are (with the possible exception of policies … but even there, small archives have gotten by with minimal policies or trusting the culture among a small group of users to serve in this regard). This loops back to the question of how to educate possible archivists to handle the technical demands of running an archive, but also making this either comfortable and interesting to enough fans that technical needs can be met. A familiar refrain to anyone who works on technical fandom projects is the loneliness and lack of help/support, and many fandom projects have failed for lack of interest in maintaining the technical aspects. I know, personally speaking, that having Russandol as a second tech admin on the SWG feels like a gift. When there is a problem to be solved, there is someone to bounce ideas off of and work alongside. In short, if we're to see independent archives work again, we need to figure out how to make that 22% a bigger number.

What is the independent archive survey?

The independent archive survey ran from 23 June through 7 July 2023. Eighty-two respondents took the survey during that time. The survey asked about interest in independent archives and included a section for participants interested in building or volunteering for an independent archive. The survey was open to all creators and readers/viewers of fanworks.

What is an independent archive?

The survey defined an independent archive as "a website where creators can share their fanworks. What makes it 'independent' is that it is run by fans but unaffiliated with any for-profit or nonprofit corporations or organizations. Historically, independent archives have grown out of fan communities that create fanworks."

Follow the tag #independent archives for more survey results and ongoing work to restore independent archives to fandoms that want them.

Independent Archives Survey Masterpost

[dawnfelagund]

Independent Archive Survey

How would you prefer to learn new skills to build an independent archive?

Check all that apply.

Complete a tutorial or course that results in an archive that is ready to use: 69% Complete a tutorial or course that provides skills you can use to build your own archive: 58% Have access to an instructor or mentor as you learn new skills: 44% Figure out what I need to know for myself: 19% I don't know: 8% I am not interested in building an independent archive: 14% Other: Advice by other people about why they made the decisions they did running an archive and the lessons they learned that I can apply

Analysis

These data have obvious interest to me in terms of decisions about how best to present information (and the tutorial I have in the works falls under the most popular choice, so yay!), but the biggest takeaway is that potential archivists don't want to go it alone. They prefer learning tools that will lead them to a usable end product, and they prefer learning tools that are self-paced. (Though more than half of respondents who were interested in archive-building would like access to an instructor or mentor too, so that should not be discounted.)

I also want to highlight the only response to the "Other" option: "Advice by other people about why they made the decisions they did running an archive and the lessons they learned that I can apply." Putting all of this together, it seems that the ideal system for learning to build an archive would be a combination of self-paced tutorials but also the option to ask questions and receive additional mentorship/support.

What is the independent archive survey?

The independent archive survey ran from 23 June through 7 July 2023. Eighty-two respondents took the survey during that time. The survey asked about interest in independent archives and included a section for participants interested in building or volunteering for an independent archive. The survey was open to all creators and readers/viewers of fanworks.

What is an independent archive?

The survey defined an independent archive as "a website where creators can share their fanworks. What makes it 'independent' is that it is run by fans but unaffiliated with any for-profit or nonprofit corporations or organizations. Historically, independent archives have grown out of fan communities that create fanworks."

Follow the tag #independent archives for more survey results and ongoing work to restore independent archives to fandoms that want them.

Independent Archives Survey Masterpost

[dawnfelagund]

Independent Archive Survey

What skills do you already have in web design, web development, or site-building?

Competence Exists (>50% of respondents have this skill)

HTML

CSS

Wordpress

Competence Developing (25-49% of respondents have this skill)

Python

Other coding language

MySQL

Graphics design

Area of Need (<25% of respondents have this skill)

Drupal

Other content management system

PHP

Analysis

I debated about how best to visualize these data, which are perhaps the most complex in the survey. Being an educator and therefore used to thinking in terms of proficiency, I decided to represent the data in that way: which technical skills are most needed among potential archivists.

And, to be clear, everything on this survey is not required to run an archive. I am emphatically not a coder but have run a successful archive for many years now using first eFiction and now Drupal. I had two purposes in asking this question. First: if I make tutorial materials, where is my effort best spent? You don't have to know HTML and CSS to use Drupal, but it sure makes things (especially theming!) easier if you have at least some understanding of them. Second: where are efforts to expand options for building independent archives best directed?

On the second question, Wordpress surfaces and not for the first time. There have been various efforts and making a fanfic archive plugin for Wordpress over the years. My SWG co-admin Russandol and I even tinkered with Wordpress last year, trying to build an archive using existing plugins. From what we can find of supported plugins, it doesn't seem possible at this time.

But the data here suggest that it would be ideal if it were possible. Many fans have at least some experience with Wordpress, and some have quite a bit. The ability to provide an archive option that builds on existing competence is ideal.

I do think it's likely that respondents were underestimating their skills. I do not think that only one respondent had an expert knowledge of HTML. Unfortunately, it is difficult to define what is meant by beginner, intermediate, and expert without getting bogged down, and we fandom people are very good at imposter syndrome. ("I can't possibly be an expert in this useful thing!") I'd define "expert" as "able to do what is needed using this tool or knowing how to find information to do what is needed," and I'm guessing more than a few of the "intermediates" can in fact do this for HTML, which makes me think that all of the graphs may see an upward shift in terms of expertise levels.

What is the independent archive survey?

The independent archive survey ran from 23 June through 7 July 2023. Eighty-two respondents took the survey during that time. The survey asked about interest in independent archives and included a section for participants interested in building or volunteering for an independent archive. The survey was open to all creators and readers/viewers of fanworks.

What is an independent archive?

The survey defined an independent archive as "a website where creators can share their fanworks. What makes it 'independent' is that it is run by fans but unaffiliated with any for-profit or nonprofit corporations or organizations. Historically, independent archives have grown out of fan communities that create fanworks."

Follow the tag #independent archives for more survey results and ongoing work to restore independent archives to fandoms that want them.

Independent Archives Survey Masterpost