Saturday, May 14, 2016

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.

Posted by
Labels:

2 comments:

  1. UnknownMay 16, 2016 at 3:07 PM

    Hi Bolly!

    I would perhaps argue that he does, in a way, create 'fan-art' because film-making could be classed as an art form in itself.
    The stylistic choices and shots in Tarantino's films, in particular, make his body of work somewhat artistic. The brilliance of his poaching (if you'll excuse my own fanatical opinions) is that not only does he reconstruct certain sequences but he poaches some of the shots, the actions and dialogue whilst putting it into a new context.
    His appreciation for the way his favourite films are structured, performed and recorded comes through in his poaching the same way that the affection for Robert Downey Jr's portrayal of 'Iron Man' comes through in a fifteen year old's sketch of the same character.
    The dilemma lies in the superfluous question, what is art and does Tarantino's film-making and poaching cross into art?

    One thing I would also say is that Tarantino definitely shows appreciation for his favourite 70's films, however, is he actively contributing and connecting with other fans the same way that participants in Fandom culture might? Or is he simply showing his own love for a text! I think your answer to this debate lies in whether he is actively participating in a community surrounding the texts beyond that of the fans of his movies.

    Furthermore, when he poaches, does he leave a trail for said communities to discuss his 'fan-art' the same way that a sketch of 'Iron Man' on DeviantArt might?

    Also - I apologise for the length of this comment. I simply adore Tarantino (you know that).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownMay 17, 2016 at 6:01 AM

      Hi Sarah!

      You could argue that he is a fan and that creating is a form of art but fans do not get paid a huge amount to share their work to other fans, right?

      It is clear in his films itself that is it poached because people who are really into his work, like you can tell that it has been poached from somewhere.

      It can also be argued that he is a fan as he took time to learn all the things that he poached and put it into one film in Pulp Fiction and make it into a content of his own. A non fan would not educate themselves on the text if they were not interested. I can see where you are coming from.

      Although he is actively writing and directing films based on texts he likes, he have to keep in mind that fans do not get paid to keep their title.

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)