Since childhood, I have always been fascinated by cars. Whether it was a road trip and I would be obsessed with the variety of cars we would pass by or going to a local car show that I dragged my dad along to or simply watching car videos and researching car sites for endless hours, my fasciation has yet to cease. However, in the last few years my fandom for cars has changed in terms of specificity. I use to be into Japanese, tuner cars, as I was influenced heavily by the fast and furious movies, but my fandom has now turned more toward British and German cars like Porsches, Aston Martins, BMWs, Audis, and Mercedes Benz. But, surprisingly my fandom for these cars is not because they are more lavish and expensive and I feel the need that as I grow up I should be more into mature things, but I have become more fascinated behind the craftsmanship and engineering that these so called cars undergo in comparison to their Japanese counter-parts. Some genuine research questions I have include what are the differences in how BMWs, Audis, and Mercedes Benz are crafted, what parts are used to make the car, which sell better, which brand is meant to sold to what kind of customers, which of the three companies is most successful, what general people think of when I mention each of these three car names, and also what do each of these car brands think they have to prove to each other. Also, I am wondering which brand leads each car class and segment as there are so many, such as the compact cars like the M2 and audi rs3 and cla45amg, while there is the S-class and 7 series on the other end of the spectrum.
0 Comments
What I really liked about Duffet’s article was the idea that he premised upon: does fandom or academia come first? For what he describes as fan-scholars, they are fans first and not viewed as true academics, while for academic-scholars, academics come first but are not seen as true fans. I think this is really interesting and brings about the concept marginalization that Duffet talks about. Academic-scholars will marginalize fans from academia and fans will marginalize academics from fandom, which basically becomes a debate of insider versus outsider. I also really liked the idea of unsolicited data because that is what true fandom is about. It’s about before personal research is conducted, what is already out there on your subject and what part of that interests you the most. I think unsolicited data is what captures fans first, and personal research then takes them the extra step. Moreover, I really liked Duffet’s two concepts “affective fallacy” and “decontextualized.” Although they may not seem to go together at first, I find them quite interesting when compared directly. Affective fallacy is more about being emotionally swayed a certain way about a topic that may cause the fan to lose objectivity. But then again, without this emotional component, how can a fan really understand the true value of this within the context of the specific fandom topic. This brings into the idea of “decontextualized,” which talks about an outsider not understanding the importance of a situation or idea because they don’t have appropriate background context. Thus, is it better to be more subjective or objective? And at what point, can you call yourself a true fan. Besides sharing a common interest, are you allowed to disagree on certain topics, and to what extent, and who draws the line besides insiders versus outsiders? These are the kinds of questions that Duffet’s article raises for me, which was quite engaging.
Henry Jenkins talks about why remixing is so important in the political process. He talked about how remixing political advertisements and news episodes can really help people understand and evaluate the media appropriately. Nowadays, the political process is so highly campaign based and it is hard to tell whether we are actually choosing the better and more capable candidate or the one with more mass-media campaigning and funding. I really liked this specific blog because at first glance I didn’t really see how remixing is the most effective way to help someone understand the political debate and media coverage, but Jenkins quickly cleared that up. In remixing and specifically in the platform that was created called MediaBreakers/Studios allows students who are not ready to yet vote become fully engaged. And Jenkins explains that remixing involves the student to “access, analyze, evaluate, and create.” Personally, I think this four step process is the beauty behind remixing and why it can be such a learning and effective process. Material has to be sourced appropriately, which requires researching on your own, and also analyzed and evaluated to see what the ad is trying to see, what its message is, what it may be trying to hide, the wording, sentence structure, and so much more. Once that is all done, you have to create the remix and question the ads or messages you have found by using other ads or clips in the media. This process is very holistic and because it requires attention from multiple news sources and much critical thinking, I think it is a great way for someone to really learn how the media works and the whole campaigning process for the presidential race.
My relationship to fandom is actually quite undeveloped. I believe I understand somewhat what true fandom is, but when I personally think about my own relationship to fandom, I see myself being a fanatic only about cars and maybe a couple of TV shows. I think this is because traditionally when I think of fandom, I think of very extreme cases, but in my own life, this is not the case. |
Sahil ParikhCar Fanatic ArchivesCategories |