The main problem with fandom research/transformative fandom academia is that it's almost entirely self-selecting. Like any hobby space, fandom is decentralized (though maybe not enough) and difficult to properly survey. So you get articles about Thoughts on Yaoi but it's really 'Thoughts on Yaoi of people who clicked the link on one reddit post' or whatever.
At best, a lot of articles sound under-researched; at worst they're astoundingly racist and harmful.
I've read some good stuff over the years. And I've read a whole lot of bad, too.
@kalloway@fedibird.com I'm fine with Thoughts on Yaoi based on people who clicked on the link in Reddit as long as the article states that explicitly (in how they sampled). Location determines so much of some fandom attitudes!
Oh for sure! And I'd honestly love a whole series of, like, the same questions being answered by various fannish demographics just to show the variety.
I've just run into so much bad, and so much didn't-do-the-research...
I remember reading a real corker about a decade ago, where the author explained that the main characters of Cardcaptor Sakura were high school girls.
I think this was the same author that later admitted to not having seen a(nother) particular series and was basing their argument on info they'd gotten from a fansite.
@kalloway@fedibird.com I've read my share of terrible papers too... but that sounds uniquely bad. How do you even write something on a series you haven't watched before?! The mind boggles.
And the reviewers just let that through? And the editors? So many layers bypassed!
Okay I dug back through my DW and it's two different essays and different authors in "The Japanification of Children's Popular Culture: From Godzilla to Miyazaki".
The didn't watch the series author was Antonia Levi who I already thought was a bit of a hack.
The CCS fail was a different author but I can't find a table of contents at the moment.
Anyway, the Goodreads reviews of that book are brutal and decade-ago!me agrees completely.
@kalloway@fedibird.com I love to read a good critique! Link me to your DW post, if you are okay with that?
also I went to GR too, since you mentioned it, and the first review in GoodReads is like, "With the exception of three half-decent entries, this entire collection is an embarrassment to the analytical essay."
That bodes well XD
Here you go! (Please forgive the age.)
https://www.dreamwidth.org/captcha?returnto=https://kalloway.dreamwidth.org/1354536.html
The quotes are all in the comments, I think.
Also here is a post
https://kalloway.dreamwidth.org/1517575.html
about "Boys' Love Manga: Essays on the Sexual Ambiguity and Cross-Cultural Fandom of the Genre (Levi, McHarry, Pagliassotti)" which was at least better (also good comments)
And then there's the Saint Seiya atrocity, and also didn't you one that claimed transphobia/queerphobia/whichever -ist it was in Robotech because of some nonsense understanding of Yellow in Genesis Climber that doesn't exist in the source? (I might be forgetting details there, I mostly remember pulling sources for you and yelling a lot; it was a whiiile ago)
That's in the first link! (Didn't actually watch the show!author.)
Every now and then I find my copy of the Saint Seiya atrocity and them misplace it again, possibly for my own sanity.
@kalloway So I saw, after I commented *lol* there's a weird captcha on the link and my phone didn't like it at first --
I can always send you a digital one, because there is no escape
Yeah, apparently a lot of Fedi links to DW will return the captcha from DW because I guess DW gets a lot of spam/bad whatnot from Fedi somehow?
...
...
...
maybe.
