CONCLUSION

The message of the films that he has written and directed is clear within itself. Based on the concepts of textual poaching and fandom; if we were to look at it as if he was a fan, there are two sides to this argument because to what extent would one person class Tarantino as a fan and what would he have to do to be qualified as a textual poacher. Every person looks at the meaning of fandom to a different extent. As de Certeau said, "readers are travellers" (Jenkins 2013, p.24) everyone will look at things differently depending on what suits their life most. Looking at Pulp Fiction as the main text along with Kill Bill by Tarantino, it is clear that Tarantino is a textual poacher based on the texts that have been analysed throughout this essay. If he poached the text with the intention of liking something, just like others do, he would not get paid and would have recreated it into his own version whereas he makes them look the same. Not only did he poach the texts, he has also poached the community because he has featured anything that he has poached in his film and made it his own, the certain text that he poached then belongs the the community that Tarantino has made by poaching. 

REFLECTIVE

I first became interested in Tarantino after watching Pulp Fiction. I may not have known all the characters but when it came to the diner scene, there were very few that I didn't recognise. After that I decided to do more research, the first thing I thought about Tarantino as a writer and a director is that he poaches characters and dialogue from other films and icons in the 20s. I then did a research on IMDB on Pulp Fiction connections where I came to realise that there are many references throughout the film. 

The second film from Tarantino that I watched was The Hateful Eight (2015), I went to the cinema to watch this. I noticed that I was in a special studio instead of a normal size cinema screening room. I did not pay special price which means that the seats should not be this big and comfortable. I then noticed that the screen size in Hateful Eight was not a usual screening size. The screen is wider which is why it was in a special screening room. After watching more films by Tarantino, I noticed he only uses a certain screen size for all of his films. 

Because this was the second film that I watched by Tarantino, the first thing I noticed was that the blood scenes are the same, it explodes. It also has extreme fight scenes and killing scenes. It reminded me of many Japanese films that I have watched. Although I am not a person who would be interested in extreme fighting and killing scenes with blood exploding everywhere, it made me curios about the style of films that he makes. It made me think that he is unique in his own way and that is what he is known for, he created a community of people who loves what he creates. His filming style and contents. 

I then watched Kill Bill: Volume 1 (2003) and Kill Bill: Volume 2 (2004) also by Tarantino, it is very clear that he is a lover of old films but it has made me question whether he poached it for the reason of loving it or poached it to make it unique in the Western world where his works originates. The style may not be new to Japanese or Chinese films that I have watched however it will be new to Western. 

The reason I chose to do this research on textual poaching and fandom is because I question, to what extent would a person have to be involved in a certain community to be classed as a fan and to what extent could a person who uses the existing content to be classed as a poacher. 

TARANTINO as a Fan

                                 "Persons inspired by orgiastic rites and enthusiastic frenzy,"                                  (Jenkins 2013, p.12) 

A fan is a person who is actively doing something to show the interest in what they love. They are in an active community that shares the content that they continuously produce within the community. Is Tarantino a fan? Some may argue and say yes, some may argue and say no, however, fans are groups of people who actively do something to show their interest. They do not directly poach the text, they poach the characters but put it into their own meaning to fit their lifestyle. As seen in Pulp Fiction, Tarantino directly poaches the characters and contents so that the audience would directly get the reference of where he poached it from. He does not actively write fan fiction or create fan art but as a career, he produce films. Fans do not get paid for doing what they do but Tarantino does. Tarantino is then not a fan because if he was a fan, he would not get paid for doing it, just like other fans do not. Tarantino created the community for fans that love what he does from the content that he poached from other texts.

      "Fans of media productions interact with each other and with institutional producers in what Jenkins described as participatory culture" (Laughey 2007, p.178)

For those who argue that Tarantino is a fan, they may be right because he created a film such as Pulp Fiction (1994). The characters and dialogues throughout the whole film are all based on his interests. As a fan though, fans must be active, fans must either be creating fan fictions to continue the story of something that has ended but wanted the character to stay alive therefore wrote their own fan fiction and for those who are into art then do fan art. Tarantino may be argued to be a fan because he produced Pulp Fiction based on characters of the past and wanted the characters to still be recognised and so he continues the characters in his films. 
Some people may still argue that fans do not have to be active but for as long as they have interest in the content, they can still participate in the community by looking at other fans creations without creating. As de Certeau mentioned, "readers are travellers" (Jenkins 2013, p.24), the word fan itself can be interpreted in many different ways by anyone.

TARANTINO as a Textual Poacher

With the concepts that have been previously described on textual poaching by Jenkins where he suggests that fans are active producers and own the right to interpret; when looking at Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction, Tarantino clearly fits into the role of Jenkins definition of a textual poacher with his work as a writer and director of the films that he has created.

“others think that fans creations count as fair use,” (Gray, Sandvoss, Harrington, Jenkins 2007, p.60) however it also does depend on what his intentions were when he was poaching it. If his intention was to keep the characters going after his favourite film has ended and as a fan, that would be the same as other fans creating fan fiction to they share their own content in the way that suits their lifestyle by poaching the existing character however, because Tarantino is a filmmaker who writes and directs, it means that he does it as a job and this is his primary source of income, it clearly means that not only has he poached the characters, he also poached the community because the fans of the existing texts that he poached from would love to see their favourite characters featured in another story. It is Tarantino’s career to be an active producer of the content and he has interpreted the characters that poached in a way that he sees it. 

Looking at how de Certeau described textual poachers, they are not unique and developed poaching as a form of art. When looking at Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction(1994), the content is clearly not unique as nearly every characters in the film is a reference to something else as seen in the video to the introduction of this assessment. Even the posters on the wall in the film, however because the characters are from the 20s onwards and watching this now in 2016, it is really a form of art within the film that he has created. His style of writing and directing is mostly references to other films, Kill Bill (2003) for example is poached from Lady Snowblood and he used the blood exploding as a form of art in every single movies that he was written and directed.

“At least as long as no one is making any money from selling them. (Gray, Sandvoss, Harrington, Jenkins 2007, p.60), this should be the intention of the fan, not poaching from the content that they love so that the original creators feel that they own the whole right to the characters. Because by making money from poaching means that no matter how much Tarantino claims to be a lover of films, it is still poaching. Although the characters will still be known for what they originally were, they have also moved on to another community that Tarantino has created for his film that he poached the characters into.

“Fewer fan creators are worried that they are somehow doing something wrong, and they are more likely to expect that their readers will understand their basic,” (Gray, Sandvoss, Harrington, Jenkins 2007, p.64). Referring this quote to Pulp Fiction, because Tarantino has already created a community based on the community that has already existed (that he poached the content from) the audience should then understand why because they could see their favourite characters again. Both theorists may have looked at textual poaching from a different point of view however when one fits into both, it states that one is clearly a textual poacher. 

TARANTINO has been poached

                                 "The fans assert their own right to form interpretations,"                                  (Jenkins 2013, p.18) 

The video above has been created to show how similar these scenes are in comparison to each other. Jenkins mentioned in his book, textual poaching is what fans do, "justifying one's own pleasures," (Jenkins 2013, p.19) Just like Tarantino was poaching from other films as an inspiration, other films will also poach from him. With a large culture sharing the same interest, content will be inspired by one and other such as Breaking Bad (2008 - 2013) and Pulp Fiction (1994), it is very obvious that Breaking Bad was poaching Pulp Fiction because the scenes are very alike, the contents are very similar, props also look alike but not the exact same if we notice during the baseball bat scene in the above video although, the dialogue is not the exact same. 

"Participatory cultures of fandom transform the experience of media consumption into the                    production of new texts, indeed of a new culture and a new community"                              (Laughey 2007, p.178)

Using the quote above as an argument, once the fan has an idea of how they can recreate the text to belong to their own, the text that they create will lead to another culture and another community because just like Pulp Fiction have its own fans and community. The same can be said for Breaking Bad although in this case, content is nearly the same, it should be aimed at the same target audience, once this target audience watches the trailer and likes it, they may also become part of this community. This will then be classed as not only poaching content but also poaching culture. 

TARANTINO is Poaching across time and space

The above video that I have created shows that Tarantino's filming style has been poached from Lady Snowblood (1973). The reason I have chosen to use Kill Bill (2003) as an example for poaching across time and space is because the scenes are nearly alike, especially the ending and the music in both films towards the end of the video is also similar. Jenkins described fans as "highly educated" (Jenkins 2013, p.18) and also quoted de Certeau (1984): 

                "readers are travellers, they move across lands belonging to someone else"                        (Jenkins 2013, p.24)

Tarantino as a fan is also an "active producer" (Jenkins 2013, p.23) because he as a fan is "heavily researched" (Booth 2010, p.17) as the content was originally in Japanese language hence the style of the film and made in 1973 it takes a person who is heavily interested in that style of content to find such a specific film and get inspiration from it, such as the fight scenes that are shown in the video and how the blood is heavily exploding, he uses the same style in every single films that he writes and direct. Tarantino has been using the same blood exploding scenes in his films as that is his filming style, to be a fan of something, a person has to be actively doing something; saying this, in every film that he has made, he has used the blood exploding scene which means that he is a fan of that. "The fans assert their own right to form interpretations," (Jenkins 2013, p.18) and Tarantino fits into the community of fans that Jenkins described. 

        "A certain kind of production (real enough, but not the only kind) that set out to produce history by "informing" the whole of a country" (Certeau 1988, p.167) 

Tarantino created the film to make it look realistic in the fight scenes, and in this day and age, people are more likely to discover this scene style from Tarantino first because without Tarantino "informing"  (Certeau 1988, p.167) that this style of scenes does exist, people who watch it would not have been curious about where the style is from but because it is so different, Tarantino must have taken something as an inspiration to make it his own by using a Western Actress (Kill Bill) instead of a Japanese actress (Lady Snowblood) as the main character in the fights. 

Fandom & Textual Poaching

The first concept that we will be discussing is fandom from Henry Jenkins and Matt Hills. Hills suggests that fans are "obsessed with a particular star, celebrity, films, tv programmes, band; somebody who can produce reams of information on their object of fandom" (Hills 2002, p. Preface) whereas Jenkins suggests that fans are "like the poachers of old, fans operate from a position of cultural marginality and social weakness. Like other popular readers, fans lack direct access to the means of commercial cultural production and have only the most limited resources with which to influence the entertainment industry's decision," (Jenkins 1992, p.26-27)
When seeing both sides of the argument, both arguments are valid. Looking at Hills argument, if a person does not like a certain type of text, they are not a fan, they are less likely to be interested in the content, because fans are a community of people who are interested in the same content. Like Tarantino's infamous briefcase in Pulp Fiction (1994) that the entire film is based around, nobody knows what is in there and has not been explained by Tarantino so fans have many different theories online to share within the community, this is Tarantino allowing fans to do what they want with the content. People who are not fans will not do further research and will not put the effort into creating anything related to the text that they are not into and are not "obsessed" (Hills 2002, p. Preface) with the text so fans are obsessed as described by Hills. Moving on to Jenkins argument, fans only have limited resources depending on what the industry has to offer them. With web 2.0, it has been easier for fans to create fan fictions, fan blogs, and fan art platform and can share it with a community of people with the same interest, "create grounds for (their) struggle," (Gray, Sandvoss, Harrington, Jenkins 2007, p.288).
With the concept of Textual poaching, I will be looking at the meaning of textual poaching from Jenkin's and de Certeau's point of view. For Jenkins, fans are "active producers" (Jenkins 2013, p.23) and "own the right to form interpretations," (Jenkins 2013, p.18) whereas de Certeau argued that "fans are not unique in their status as textual poachers, yet, they have developed poaching to an art form," (Jenkins 2013, p.27) 
When Jenkins suggests that fans are "active producers," (Jenkins 2013, p.23) producers can be defined as content creators. The producer and the content creator both create a form of art. The art may be a recreation of something that has already exist or entirely new, however in this context, it is based on the recreation of something based on the text that the fans are interested in. Anyone can be any form of content creators depending on an individual's personal interest. Fans recreate a form of art to fit their own lifestyle and interest, they fill in what is missing to suit their desire. Fans are fanatics meaning "of or belonging to a temple" (Jenkins 2013, p.12) which leads us to think that fans are part of a cult, a cult that shares the same interest. However when Jenkins suggested that fans "own the right to form interpretations," fans have the right to do it, however there should be an extent to how much they are allowed to interpret. The original creators have created the characters with a certain personality and look which they all fit into a story. If the fans were to change the personality of the characters or the looks of the characters, they could also easily change the name which means that they are creating a whole new content, which also means that they are not poaching it anymore because the character have a whole new look and personality. When looking at de Certeau's argument, "fans are not unique in their status as textual poachers," (Jenkins 2013, p.27) when creating content, fans will always create it to fit their lifestyle, when creating to fit one's lifestyle, it is always inspired by surrounding which means that any form of creation would be poaching therefore, de Certeau's argument stands out more because it is human nature to get inspired by other texts.

Pulp Fiction - Textual Poaching & Fandom

With a long list of references reported by IMBD on movies connection page for Tarantino's Pulp Fiction. I have decided to use it as my main text for my case study analysis and reflection. The concepts I will be using are textual poaching and fandom. I have created the above video to show some references in the film. Pulp fiction is a good example of textual poaching and fandom because it has a lot of different texts within the film. The question is, how would we define this? Would we think that Tarantino poached the content because he has the intention of poaching it or is he paying tribute to the films that he is a fan of by referencing them in the films that he writes and directs?

Tarantino's Pulp Fiction is a good example of a media text that has been made cross-platform by both the producers and the fans. The producers create the movie poster to advertise the film and fans create content "to suit the fans own," (Hartley, 2011). Below is an example of a poster made by  the producers and the fans, on the left is made by the producers (Miramax) and on the right is made by a fan (MasterDEV777, 2011). Fans however do not stop their creation at just art, fans are "inspirational consumers" (Gray, Sandvoss, Harrington 2007, p.258) that create a piece of content to show their interest in the content. Fans are a group of people that are "drawn together by shared passions" (Gray, Sandvoss, Harrington 2007, p.357). Let's ask ourselves this question, when fans create content based on their favourite film, in this case, Pulp Fiction, does this mean that they are poaching the characters for their own pleasure or to show that they have the "means to connect with others and extend your (their) horizons?" in this series of blog posts, I will be discussing to what extent would it be classed as poaching.