Protecting One's Self

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

For instance, I'd still never call myself a "fan" of anything, and the idea of declaring to belong to a "fandom" sounds entirely too public and partisan to me. In a way, I've made my peace with being quite an introverted and private person; even in this culture where you're supposed to share everything, it really is okay not to.

I think there are people who would laugh at the idea that I am a Tolkien fan introvert who doesn't want to share things, since I invariably get known by about three facts anywhere I go: I'm the Catholic guy, I'm the Lord of the Rings guy, and I'm the LEGO guy--but this, yes!

Mind you, I can't really say that Middle-earth have ever been an ENTIRELY private preserve of enjoyment: I indoctrinated my next-oldest brother into the books and as we are the oldest siblings in a large family, there's a whole batch of demi-Formendacils who have always had an up-close sharing in this.

And I think you hit the nail on the head saying you don't like calling yourself a "fan." I recognise that impulse immediately, but I don't think I've ever had an articulation for why, but the connection here between "being a fan" and "being public" feels exactly right.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

That said, I do love Boro's example too. At the risk of sounding cheesy, the Downs has been a great lesson for me in that other people sharing the same interests is not a threat, but a chance to develop incredible friendships.

This is very true, and Boro's example is an excellent counterpoint: the Tolkien extrovert to our Tolkien introverts (and a reminder, maybe, that these things never come unalloyed): when I encounter mentions of Middle-earth in "the wild," I am invariably excited. That said, my first instinct on having The Lord of the Rings brought up is to dissemble and only casually reveal how much I know/love those books, but that might be a case of some budding maturity, since people generally aren't interested in me establishing my Tolkien knowledge bona fides as though everyone I met needed to discover I am the The Most Knowledgable One™.

But it's also because you don't bare your soul to complete strangers. And the Downs is both an example and a counter-example here, because, well, you AREN'T all complete strangers (and there is still a pseudo-anonymity against those of you (and the Inktomi bots) who are).

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

I do very little in that respect.

No matter how infuriating they could be, I also feel very blessed having seen the PJ Movies. I mean there are so much good stuff (and as I have said elsewhere) such good casting choices. The awesomeness of Galadriel's opening monologue has come at a price though...

I have a very hard time remembering how I used to visual Middle-earth and it's inhabitants. Every now and then I can recall a much more aged, almost wizard like, Théoden, but most other things seem lost to me.

I guess this is the reason I am very hesitant to watch adaptation of bellowed books. Obviously I almost always give in and watch the damn thing...

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

For instance, I'd still never call myself a "fan" of anything, and the idea of declaring to belong to a "fandom" sounds entirely too public and partisan to me.

-and-

Originally Posted by Formendacil

And I think you hit the nail on the head saying you don't like calling yourself a "fan." I recognise that impulse immediately, but I don't think I've ever had an articulation for why, but the connection here between "being a fan" and "being public" feels exactly right.

The word "fan" given the wide variety of things and contexts that is can be used for to me has a connotation of trivializing my interest in Tolkien (or indeed anything else).

There is also something else there that I am struggling to articulate. The word "fan" kind of hits with a note of frivolous immaturity or thoughtlessness in a way.

Of course, a sure sign of immaturity is worrying too much about it...so you can't win for losing.

I've never really thought to articulate it in this manner, but if somebody asked me to describe my attitude toward Tolkien's work, I would probably answer with a nebulous "I'm very interested in Tolkien's work." A bit vague in a way, but I think that would be the best description.

[Morsul the Dark]

With regard to being a fan of something I’d like to paraphrase a tiny bit of an article I just read. It’s behind a Patreon Paywall so I won’t post the whole thing out of respect to their work. If you want the rest look up Jeff May on patreon.

Jeff’s post is directed towards Comics fans specifically and is all about how to be a better fan.*

Do you read comics?” question.

*It usually goes one of the following ways:
“Yes, I read comics and I wish to discuss those comics with you right now and possibly in the future.” Hell yeah, new best friend!

* “No, I do not read comics, but I would like to start” with a sense of piqued curiosity.

*”No, I do not read comics” with a sense of slight shame at being called out for being some kind of nerdy imposter.

* “No, I do not read comics, ew, I am being incredibly judgy toward a stranger” with a surprising sense of derision at the idea that they would ever waste their money on something like a comic book.

So I think To put this in Tolkien Context:

Those who’ve read the books, possibly seen the movies but enjoy discussing it.

Those who’ve seen the movies and want to learn more from the books.

Those who’ve seen the movies and feel put down for not reading the books yet.

And folks that have watched the movies but think reading is too nerdy.


So while yes those in the fourth group exist and are the types of fans I feel are being talked about when talking about being protective I do think the other two types of film fans need to be considered.

I honestly don’t remember if I read the books first or joined the Downs first. I do know I saw the Fellowship first at the very least. I even remember me first introduction to LoTR it was the trailer. When Gandalf says “It wants to be Found” I was hooked, heck I just got a slight chill thinking about that line.

The point is yes there was an influx of new members from the films myself included. And while I know I’ve seen talk of “Legolas Fangirls” and strong opinions on the films I Do think this community was welcoming to those that were willing to learn about this new world opened to them.

I don’t think fans should be Protectors of their passions rather they should be Ambassadors for it.

*Jeff May’s Original Post

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Morsul the Dark

I don’t think fans should be Protectors of their passions rather they should be Ambassadors for it.

Talking of Protectors touches on the whole concept of fandom gatekeeping and that is... yeah, that kind of Protectionism is not good or healthy for any fandom. I think it's to the credit of the Downs as a community that although it predated the Movies and has always skewed Book-centric, it didn't retreat into a complete "ew, Movie fans" disdain, but held to its core values. One need only look at some of the acrimony brought on in the Comic Book or Star Wars fandoms by excessive gatekeeping.

Ironically, since gatekeeping often takes the form of trying to weed out the unworthy by appealing to the amount of knowledge one has ("oh yeah? Well, if you're a real fan, tell me who..."), I think the amount of sheer lore around Tolkien as well as its many shades of authoritative status (published, posthumous, early drafts, late work, footnotes, wastepaper bing, only published in Parma Eldalambion...) makes it a lot harder to use knowledge as a pure source of gatekeeping. Certainly, I don't associate this community with that kind of gatekeeping--we can be testy about the Movies, but I think the harshest feelings have been reserved for things like Priya Seth's disciples: all the lore and none of the comprehension.

All that being said, while I quite agree that Protectionism as Gatekeeping is bad, that doesn't necessarily mean that Privacy is bad. Just as it's possible for the near-pacifism of the Shire to be allied morally with the stalwart and military "Tower of the Guard," so too can outgoing "oh man, you love this stuff too!"-ism be allied with what I mean when I say "a sense of protectiveness."

Both are manifestations of love. It would easy enough to say one is the extroverted mode and one is the introverted mode--so I will say it. But it's also true that there are different levels of engagement. I think if one encountered someone, ala Boro's Dernhelm, in the wild, the excitement would be genuine, but it might still be surface-level compared to the depths of one's feeling for the subject. We expose our tender underbellies when we show off what we love, and even if, like Smaug, we love our bejewelled underbellies, we're still unlikely to expose them completely and openly to admiration unless we truly trust and/or know the other party.

Which is, I think, where those of us tending towards the introverted mode have found the Downs a home: it is easier to go beyond the surface-level fandom toward the "protected" feelings because this is a community that is known and trusted, but because it's technically public and because other members shade from "my wife" to "my inner Internet circle" to "friends of friends" to "usernames," it's still not QUITE all the way toward full exposure.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Morsul the Dark

So I think To put this in Tolkien Context:

Those who’ve read the books, possibly seen the movies but enjoy discussing it.

Those who’ve seen the movies and want to learn more from the books.

Those who’ve seen the movies and feel put down for not reading the books yet.

And folks that have watched the movies but think reading is too nerdy.

...

I don’t think fans should be Protectors of their passions rather they should be Ambassadors for it.

Morsul, I wish I could rep you for this post, it is so well said. Apparently I've repped you too recently though, however impossible that seems.

Simultaneously though, I also relate very much to what Form and Greenie have said about Privacy, and exposing something that's very dear to you. I can easily call myself a fan of other "fandom-generating productions": Doctor Who, Game of Thrones (until it's disaster of an ending at least), Star Wars. I would call myself a fan of other authors, like Jane Austen or Orson Scott Card. But though my love for Tolkien has been much longer and much stronger than the rest, I somehow hesitate to call myself a fan in that regard. Reflecting on it, I think the answer is two-fold. Firstly, for better or worse, LOTR fans did become intertwined with the PJ movies, and that might not be an association I wanted to support, albeit subconsciously. The second part though is that if I am a "fan" of things like Star Wars, surely that word is simply inadequate to describe my relationship with Tolkien's works, with the Downs, with all Tolkien-associated ties I've made. I appreciate that there are much more "hard-core" fans than myself in those other fandoms, I am a relatively superficial skimmer, but I really do get squeaky-happy whenever I see a reference to them - doubly so if it's a crossover reference. But Tolkien means so much more. I'm not just a fan of his work, it's been a part of my life. The fact is, though I've been on otherwise themed forums before, and I might have some non-LOTR figurines cluttering my bedside table, none of that comes close to the relationship I have with Tolkien and other Tolkien lovers (thank you, Downs!). Calling myself a mere "fan" seems to cheapen that, bring it down to the level of creative memes and figurines.

And I also have that element of privacy in that I won't display my Tolkien devotion in the way I do to the rest. Those I would proudly wear on a T-shirt, whereas LOTR I would think very hard about before displaying. And I think the reasons for that are the same - wanting to not create a false association of what I love, and deeming it too precious to expose. But I'm starting to come around on that slightly, I think. I recently found a box of LOTR figurines I used to play with as a kid, and I thought I'd put them up right next to my mini-Tardis. If I have to justify or explain my position to others, so be it. Why shouldn't I have them up, even if I am not such a fan of the movies? In my games they had adventures and hunted Shelob, they are as much a part of my LOTR life experience as the books were at that age. And I'm warming up towards the movies too in that way: sure, I dislike a lot of what goes on there, but they played their own role in my relationship with Tolkien and it wasn't necessarily a bad one.

It's funny, I never really thought of this, at least not consciously put it into words. What it means to be a "fan". The protectiveness against both too much and too little flexibility. It's interesting to see how much shared feeling there is, even though no one quite agrees on the details of when and why the feeling is applied. Thank you Formy for an excellent thread!

[Morsul the Dark]

I certainly don’t advocate for shouting from the rooftops, as much fun as that may be. I simply mean inviting those that find the group on their own. Tolkien has always felt more reserved than Star Wars and such. There are collectibles of course but the Merch side of Tolkien never really manifested. Fantasy seems to have not made that same leap like SciFi.

There does seem to be a certain stigma to fantasy in general and Tolkien is THE go to touchstone for most, so that definitely is part of it. So why? Why is Fantasy stigmatized? Damned if I know. Perhaps because we tell kids fairy tales and therefore any story that has a wizard is “for kids”. A comparison would be animation. People think Cartoon=Kids.
Obviously Animation is simply a medium, and Fantasy is just a genre with plenty of room to breathe.

I realize some of you have said you’ve become more private about it as you’ve gotten older, but I’ll pose this question, not as an argument, but out of curiosity. Do you feel Game of Thrones had any effect positive or negative on your stance?

My thought, barely formed as it is, GoT could go two ways if it did have an effect at all.

1. To show people Fantasy can be for adults, we know Amazon plans its adaptation to air more on this side. This making the stigma less because now it’s not just “kids’ stuff”

Or

2. To make fantasy more stigmatized because now instead of kids’ stuff fantasy is overcorrected to just be Bewbs with dragons tossed in.

I guess my overarching question do you protect yourselves from people knowing you like LoTR or from liking Fantasy in general.

Edit: PS G55 you reped my Boots post

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Morsul the Dark

I realize some of you have said you’ve become more private about it as you’ve gotten older, but I’ll pose this question, not as an argument, but out of curiosity. Do you feel Game of Thrones had any effect positive or negative on your stance?

....

I guess my overarching question do you protect yourselves from people knowing you like LoTR or from liking Fantasy in general.

Game of Thrones is enough outside my sphere of interest, as either book or show, that I really shouldn't say it has had any effect on how I feel about Tolkien. But you also asked about fantasy in general...

And Game of Thrones was the very least the nail in the coffin of me calling myself a "fantasy" fan. As a teenager, I would have said I was a fantasy reader--obviously, Tolkien was the driver of that, but he wasn't alone: I chased all sorts of authors off the library bookshelves in the hopes of recapturing that thrill. Of course, nothing ever really measured up, but I enjoyed enough things in different ways that I still thought of myself as a fantasy reader generally.

I don't really think that way anymore, and my attempt to make it through A Song of Ice and Fire in 2012 basically ended it. I burned through two and a half books in about a week, and the strongest emotional response was somehow exactly halfway between the enchantment high l was chasing and being completely rubbed the wrong way. In other words, Martin soared high enough on the exact register I was looking for, but did all the wrong things and two things sort of clicked:

1. (Which, really, I already knew but could never quite admit) There is no other Tolkien and if you look for "fantasy" when what you really mean is "Tolkien," then you'll ALWAYS be disappointed.

2. I understood better than I ever had what Tolkien and Lewis meant when they made their not-entirely-successful deal: "no one's writing what we want to read so we'll have to write it ourselves."

All of which is not to say that I haven't read any other fantasy since, but when I have it's like watching Star Wars: I enjoy it, but I enjoy it (or don't) on its own terms, rather than chasing Tolkien.

And I probably would say that the cultural impact of the HBO Game of Thrones has made me a bit more reticient to reveal I'm a Tolkienist, if it's had any effect at all, since it has sucked up enough cultural oxygen that people, when they think of fantasy tend to foreground that in the zeitgeist, and it just... isn't... part of my experience. I don't bear GoT any ill will, but when the other person's reference point is excitement over that show and they're trying to get to book-Tolkien me, it's a giant case of conflated terms and it's just easier to avoid it.