Blog Going Dormant

Some plants turn brown for a season, and even disappear for months, then burst forth anew in wild glory, more beautiful and stately than ever. They don't die, they are just taking a pretty heavy semester and are still writing like fiends, just not on their blog. They expect to pop up in December during winter break, but until then they are hiding.
Perhaps they will post papers from creative writing classes, but not much else. This plant is sorry that it could not finish its Fantasy musings. Did anyone care about that, anyway? Probably not. This plant feels so immersed in academia and that it's not sure what is important to its audience. Is academia a kind of fertilizer, though? Opposed to plain soil, but good for the development of the plant?

Does the plant need to go to sleep?

Yes.

Fantasy I

The more I think about fiction genres, the more I get confused about why they are divided the way they are. There’s the Romance section, with their bulging pectorals, antebellum lace and unrequited lust. Thrillers have their busty femmes fatal, unknown viruses and protagonists with names every bit as improbable as their authors’. Then there are Mysteries, solvable only by those with the curious cross section of knowledge concerning entomology, braille, and the method for discovering where magnetic north was on November 26^th, 1978 (which our detective fortunately has). Science Fiction has its warp drives, blasters and androids and for some reason it's always hyphenated with the oddly named Fantasy genre.

Most of these genres have to do with expectations of plot and sometimes character. Romance, for example, is centered on love. This love is typically heterosexual involving at least one idealized male. All other elements are up for grabs; it can be in virtually any setting with any number of supporting characters, and can have any number of plot twists and outcomes including happily or tragically ever after, but there must be love, otherwise it is not Romance. Mysteries also have plot requirements, though very different ones. A mystery must have a problem to which the reader is curious to learn the resolution, usually centered on a murder. The protagonist is typically unusually apt at solving such cases, and if the author is any good, there are enough clues sprinkled throughout the narrative that the reader may figure out the answer just one or two paragraphs before the big reveal, so they can feel smart (it was either the butler, or the “victim” faked their death and is living it up in Monte Carlo having cashed in on their own life insurance). Science Fiction is essentially speculation based on a theoretical technological, societal, or environmental change or changes. This can often lead to outlandish settings, but does not specifically call for it. In fact, pure or “hard” sci-fi settings are typically nearly identical to our own, using our own physics, and most of our existing technology. Fantasy, however, is purely based on setting. You could have a heterosexual relationship involving an idealized male, but if it takes place in Discworld the narrative is Fantasy, not Romance*. You may have a plot that follows all of the classic hallmarks of a Mystery, but if the murdered party was an elf, the narrative is Fantasy.

This is curious to me for two reasons. The first is in the name. Isn’t all fiction a fantasy to some extent? Escapism is inherent in fiction, which is obvious when we use Patterson to help dull the boredom of Boston to Denver with a layover in Atlanta, but even the boring stuff is an escape. Fiction is what we read and write when reality won’t do the job, whatever that job may be. Charles Dickens, Ian Fleming, Upton Sinclair, Ernest Hemingway, Arthur Conan Doyle, each of these authors experienced enough of real life to write nothing but pure truth, but they thought they could do a better job with a few well-placed embellishments than with a straight journalistic essay or a biographical case study. From Seuss to Steinbeck it’s all fantasy, so why is there a genre that specifically names itself as such?

The answer is, of course, that Fantasy offers an escapist experience above and beyond the normal fare. While Harper Lee is telling us about killing metaphorical mockingbirds, Larry Coreia tells us about killing actual monsters. The difference is that no one is perusing Monster Hunter Vendetta to pick out the symbolism and contemporary themes. That doesn’t mean those things aren’t there, it’s just that we assume that this particular novel was written to entertain, not to call attention to social inequality or the moral crisis of a godless age or relativism or any of the other pretentiously contrived objectives that literary novels have. When you think about it, though, this is a strange assumption to have. There are ample opportunities for symbolism in Fantasy, in fact, one could argue that the flexibility afforded by this genre allows for even more double and triple meanings and sneaky significance than “normal” settings do. C.S. Lewis certainly seemed to believe so, and storytellers have been using fantastic elements to make their point for centuries. Consider Aesop’s talking animals, or Grimm’s witches and fairy godmothers, or Scheherazade’s djinns. Fantasy appears to be the perfect genre for literary writers and readers, but is typically only used for children. I’ve already alluded to TheChronicles of Narnia but there are many other children’s Fantasy books that are considered good literature; Peter Pan, A Wrinkle in Time, and Harry Potter are just a few, but something happens when we get older. Around the period the writing industry calls “Young Adult,” Fantasy starts to lose its literary legitimacy and I have only vague, accusatory guesses as to why.

Regardless of the reasons that Fantasy becomes pariah to literary fiction aficionados, non-literary readers seem to enjoy it immensely. I have said before that all fiction is an escape to some degree, but if escape is the reader’s primary objective than there is no greater distance a person can put themselves from the aggravating, tedious, demoralizing and disappointing harshness of reality than a Fantasy world. How else do we explain the success of Lewis Caroll’s Wonderland, and Frank L. Baum’s Oz series? There are those that believe these were intended to have profound metaphorical significance but the message flew right over our heads because Wonderland and Oz are whimsically whacky places to be. Instead of rubbing our chins and quietly commenting on the deft comparison of the Cowardly Lion to Britain’s royal house, we giggled uncontrollably and said, “more of this in my entertainment please,” and the market delivered. Now we have a full section in each and every bookstore and library labeled “Sci-Fi/Fantasy,” for no other apparent reason than blasters and necromancy are fun to read about. 

This leads me to the second reason that Fantasy’s existence as a separate genre from the rest puzzles me; why is this extreme variation of escapism in such high demand? 

To Be Continued...

 *knowing Terry Pratchett, the romance would be hilariously subverted anyway

Sweet Dreams are Made of These: A Cursory Examination of the Uses and Abuses of America's Favorite Social Network, Part II

We previously explored what Facebook is and some of the informal rules of use that go along with it. Today we look at how Facebook has changed the socio-cultural makeup of the United States, and our behavior in general.

Some of the most apparent changes Facebook has wrought on us are a direct result of violating the rules mentioned in the last post. Failure to control who is inside a users’ network and a lack of prudence in what information is broadcast, sometimes one in conjunction with the other, has resulted in less than favorable results for many users. Facebook has been utilized by both sides of the law. Thieves, for example, sometimes use the network to select targets and time their robberies, while law enforcement officers often learn when and where parties will occur so that they may troll for under aged drinkers. Information on the network is also admissible in court, which has assisted the prosecution in both criminal and civil cases. Employers are also known to use Facebook as a means for learning more about their prospective employees. This could be considered a positive development for business though the practice is sometimes considered ethically questionable, especially since other social media sites such as Linkedin cater to the professional demographic whereas Facebook is typically considered a more personal venue. Another socio-cultural change is in bullying. Not all social interactions are positive ones, and Facebook allows harassment to continue when the parties are not physically present, just as it enables friendly interactions to continue under the same circumstances. Subjects of such harassment, or “cyber bullying,” find that even their homes are no longer a safe place from antagonism. All of these negative changes may be controlled and even eliminated through careful management of personal behavior on Facebook. Essentially, these are changes that do not have to exist if the user is shrewd enough to protect his or herself.

There are other changes, however, that have not resulted from user error. Friends are not the only people monitoring Facebook user’s online behavior. Corporations are also paying attention to which links are clicked and by whom, how much time is spent on applications, and which users “like” what. The data is recorded, sold and “mined,” then used to tailor advertisements to specific users. The full implications of this kind of technology have not yet been felt, but it is cause for concern. When used for its original intent data mining is fairly benign, helping to connect businesses with consumers that want their products and creating more wealth for both parties. However, there are potential uses for all of this accumulated data outside of its original intent. It doesn’t take a novelist’s vivid imagination to explore the potential for abuse, by the hands of the corporations that gather the data, by criminals that could potentially steal the data, or by the government who may find pretense to seize the data. The only real way for a Facebook user to protect her data is simply to not be a Facebook user at all. However, she would also have to avoid all of the most popular social media outlets as well as search engines. The risks of exposing data must be weighed against the rewards of the connectivity that Facebook offers.

The most important consequence of Facebook is not in the way it is misused, however. Facebook is at its most powerful when it is employed as it was intended; as a way to bring people closer together. Basic human behavior has not changed as a result of social media, but that is not to say that it hasn’t brought out something new in us. We still flirt, still fight, we still tell one another really bad jokes and compete for attention, we just do it all faster and more effectively. Facebook is like a social enzyme, facilitating and accelerating human interaction on an unprecedented scale. Thanks to Facebook, we can literally spend time with a hundred friends all at once. Because humans are social creatures, this accelerated interaction operates on our endocrine system like a drug. All of the frustrations and pleasures that we normally receive from communication, the tiny ego boost from a friend who laughs at a joke, for example, or a sarcastic contradiction, may be multiplied a dozen times over. Paradoxically, research has found that this constant interaction can play a role in preventing people from growing relationships. Doctoral student Russell Clayton found that the more time individuals spent on Facebook, the more likely they were to “experience Facebook-related conflict with their romantic partners, which then may cause negative relationship outcomes including emotional and physical cheating, breakup and divorce.” As individuals pursue multiple relationships with friends, they fail to invest in a deeper, more meaningful relationship with their spouse or romantic interest. This is even more likely when the relationship has been recently established, possibly because one or both parties do not perceive as much reward in the new relationship as with their established cohorts on social media. Though Facebook is addicting, however, we still tire from it. The emotional rollercoaster is exhausting, prompting many users to periodically take a break. According to the Pew Research Center, 61% of Facebook users have ceased activity for several weeks, and sometimes even longer. The reasons vary from time constraints to boredom with a very few citing security concerns, but the vast majority of those taking a breather from the social network plan on coming back. It would seem that the old, limited form of individualized communication continues to be necessary and even preferred, but alone it is not enough to sate our need for socialization. Facebook, or at least the idea behind Facebook, is here to stay.

In conclusion, Facebook is a useful tool to help us do the thing we perhaps love the most; to share ourselves with one another, for better or worse. Grandparents use it to keep tabs on grandprogeny while sharing Youtube videos of adorable kittens, frat brahs organize and ferret out their next big kegger, romance is both cultivated and destroyed through giddy flirtation, and narcissism is courted in every degree as users vie for attention and validation from their peers. It’s a gloriously hot, sweaty mess of sarcasm, affection, capriciousness, hilarity, pettiness, activism, and every kind of racism, sexism, marginalization and mortification alongside a smattering of thoughtfulness, compassion, encouragement and forgiveness. In short, Facebook is used to engage in the full spectrum of emotional and intellectual interaction between human beings. It may not alter humanity on a fundamental level, but it does subtly shape how we behave and, consequently, who we are.