Another Theory Cometh
This article contains a gross of simplifications and generalizations. Let's hope they're not too gross. While I intend to buttress my new approach to the analysis of fanhistory with examples, it would take a book the size of A Wealth of Fable to document my notions as fully as fanhistorians like Speer, Silverberg, Ted White, rich brown and me have explicated the Numbered Fandoms theory.
Fortunately for everyone, a mountain of evidence would be overkill. The Philosophical Theory of Fanhistory is not meant to replace Numbered Fandoms or any other concept of the hobby's 65 years of personalities, institutions, literature and events.
This is not a definitive or "correct" version of fanhistory. This is one way of looking at the facts. It is only one fan's attempt to better understand them, not an orthodoxy.
The Philosophical Theory of Fanhistory doesn't explain everything. It doesn't try. I believe it illuminates some aspects of fanhistory and is fodder for bull sessions and letters of comment. If it inspires some enjoyable discussions, I'll be pleased.
Much as I hate digressions in fanzine articles, a little background will be helpful before I prove beyond a doubt that I need other things to think about.
Fanzine fandom was tranquil and serene when I returned in 1989. It resembled a society tea party. Since I have no taste for contention, this suited me very well.
Folly embodied an upbeat approach to fandom from the very first issue. It mirrored my mood. When other fans responded positively, I resumed a high level of activity.
It took awhile to realize that the delightful mellowness and camaraderie were after-effects of a major trauma, not simple joy. The fanwar of the mid-1980s altered fans' attitudes, if only temporarily, about how to conduct themselves in fandom.
A couple of years ago, I wrote about the two schools of Fannishness, Trufannishness and Insurgentism. Ted White's extensive and persuasive analysis convinced me that I had correctly identified two important threads, but missed the tapestry of the Grand Design of Fanzine Fandom.
Ted's critique of the first draft proved that I needed to rework my new take on the twists and turns of fanhistory. Rich brown, too, contributed a valuable critique. What follows would not exist but for their constructive prodding. (Translation: Blame them.)
Those of you who have been living your lives in strict adherence to the tenets of "The Two Schools of Fannishness" may prepare for a New Testament. (The intelligent majority may find the next section a handy refresher, with suitable upgrading to my state-of-the-art theory, of a long-forgotten article.)
An Overview: From Here You Can See the Sanitarium
I identify seven basic approaches to fandom: Sercon, Scientism, Communicationism, |
Professionalism, Commercialism, Trufannishness, and Insurgentism. Trufannishness and Insurgentism both derive from the idea of fannishness and were comparative latecomers. Scientism, probably the least familiar to modern fans, waned as an important philosophy before World War II.
Here come the definitions:
- Scientism. Hugo Gernsback, founder of Amazing Stories, espoused the belief that science fiction readers should also be science hobbyists. According to Sam Moskowitz in The Immortal Storm, Papa Hugo, a pretty fair tinkerer himself, felt "... that the aim of every fan should not be a collection of fantastic fiction, but a home laboratory where fictional dreams might attain reality."
- Sercon. Whatever Gernsback's plans for fandom, it quickly became evident that scientism was not relevant to the interests of most of the pioneering fans. A serious constructive fan is primarily interested in science fiction and/or fantasy.
- Communicationism. Some fans stuck to news, previews, interviews with authors and reviews of stories and "scientifilms," as the first media fan Forry Ackerman called them. Others debated the ideas. This led to the view of fandom as a responsive forum for the exchange of thoughts, opinions and information.
- Trufannish. Fannishness is an outgrowth of Communicationism. Its earliest significant expression, the Staple War in Astounding, was an attempt to lighten the sometime-ponderous Communicationist exchanges. Fannishness spawned two distinct fan philosophies. Trufannishness is an idealistic mindset that emphasizes the brotherhood of fans and the subcultural connections that unite them. Trufans glory in the anecdotes and personalities that form the fannish context and abhor divisive feuding.
- Insurgentism. Insurgentism seeks to preserve the subculture from unfannish and degrading influences such as bureaucracy and commercialism. This iconoclastic fanview values truth over politeness in its pursuit of high standards of behavior and quality.
- Professionalism. This embodies the desire to become a creative participant in science fiction. The Professionalistic fan sees fandom as a conduit or stepping stone to joining the ranks of science fiction professionals.
- Commercialism. Not everyone who loves science fiction is cut out to be a creative artist. The commercialistic fan is one who seeks to make money, perhaps even a livelihood, from activities connected with science fiction.
When I discussed Professionalism and Commercialism with Joyce and others, I noted an inclination to see them as malevolent forces. This |
