The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television: Understanding Speculative TV Fandoms 3658437383, 9783658437381

Table of contents :
Acknowledgments
Contents
1 Introducing the Mediaverse
1.1 Mediaverse, Web 2.0 and the Speculative Genre
1.2 Star Trek: Pioneering Speculative Television
1.3 Black Mirror & Techno-Dystopian Science Fiction
1.4 Genre-bending in The OA
1.5 Good Omens and Fantasy Fiction
2 The Star Trek Mediaverse
2.1 Star Trek: History and Fandom
2.2 Transmediality and Intermediality in Star Trek
2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom
2.4 Audience Criticism and Cultural Diffusion in Star Trek
3 Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse
3.1 Techno-Dystopia and Black Mirror
3.2 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Viewer as Player
3.3 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Mediaverse
3.4 Striking Vipers and the Virtual Queer
3.5 Digital Consciousness in Black Museum
3.6 Techno-Dystopia and the Black Mirror Mediaverse
4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse
4.1 Science Fiction and Fantasy Audiences
4.2 The OA and Storytelling
4.3 The OA and the Spiritual
4.4 The Intradiegetic Utopia
4.5 The Extradiegetic Vision and #SaveTheOA
4.6 Shared Interpretations and Performances in The OA Fandom
5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’
5.1 Good Omens: The Myth and the Prophecy
5.2 Good Omens: A Metafictional Reading
5.3 Good Omens: A Modern Fantasy
5.4 Good Omens: Fantasy Fiction Meets Fanfiction
5.5 Neil Gaiman and Celebrity Culture
5.6 The Second Screen and the Paratextual Function of the Celebrity
6 Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit
Works Cited

Citation preview

Ashumi Shah

The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television Understanding Speculative TV Fandoms

The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television

Ashumi Shah

The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television Understanding Speculative TV Fandoms

Ashumi Shah Stadtbergen, Germany This doctoral thesis was submitted as a requirement for a doctoral degree at the chair of New English Literatures and Cultural Studies at the University of Augsburg, Germany. The thesis was successfully defended on 9 June 2022. Submitted by: Ashumi Shah from: Mumbai, India Submitted on: 10.12.2021 Supervisors: Prof. Dr. Annika McPherson Prof. Dr. Katja Sarkowsky Prof. Dr. Jeffrey Wimmer

ISBN 978-3-658-43738-1 ISBN 978-3-658-43739-8 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43739-8 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2024 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer VS imprint is published by the registered company Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature. The registered company address is: Abraham-Lincoln-Str. 46, 65189 Wiesbaden, Germany Paper in this product is recyclable.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Annika McPherson, and my colleagues, Anke Bock, Danica Stojanovic, Michelle Genck and Alice Weiß for their support and advice throughout my thesis. I offer them the sincerest thanks for all that they have taught me through the years of my PhD studies at the University of Augsburg. A special thanks goes to my partner, Julian Klingholz for his continuous support and encouragement throughout my PhD. My utmost gratitude goes towards my family—the Shahs, the Klingholz’ and the Schrenks, and to my friends in India and Germany for all their motivation, encouragement, and support. All my accomplishments would not have been possible without them. Thank you all.

v

Contents

1 Introducing the Mediaverse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Mediaverse, Web 2.0 and the Speculative Genre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Star Trek: Pioneering Speculative Television . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Black Mirror & Techno-Dystopian Science Fiction . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 Genre-bending in The OA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 Good Omens and Fantasy Fiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 10 23 26 33 34

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Star Trek: History and Fandom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Transmediality and Intermediality in Star Trek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Audience Criticism and Cultural Diffusion in Star Trek . . . . . . . .

39 39 46 53 87

3 Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Techno-Dystopia and Black Mirror . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Viewer as Player . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Mediaverse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 Striking Vipers and the Virtual Queer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 Digital Consciousness in Black Museum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.6 Techno-Dystopia and the Black Mirror Mediaverse . . . . . . . . . . . .

91 92 93 103 112 118 126

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Science Fiction and Fantasy Audiences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 The OA and Storytelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 The OA and the Spiritual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 The Intradiegetic Utopia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 The Extradiegetic Vision and #SaveTheOA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6 Shared Interpretations and Performances in The OA Fandom . . .

135 136 141 154 162 169 177 vii

viii

Contents

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 Good Omens: The Myth and the Prophecy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 Good Omens: A Metafictional Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3 Good Omens: A Modern Fantasy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 Good Omens: Fantasy Fiction Meets Fanfiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5 Neil Gaiman and Celebrity Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6 The Second Screen and the Paratextual Function of the Celebrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

183 185 192 196 200 213 223

6 Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

227

Works Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

241

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

This study is a development of my ‘musings’ considering my personal television fandoms, which then grew into its own to develop theoretical concepts with contextual underpinnings that I could not have foreseen. When delving deeper into those fandoms that I was an active or passive member of, one of the first noticeable commonalities was their success in mainstream media. This could mean several things—commercial success, critical success, auteurial popularity etc. What followed was a contextualisation of these texts as fan spaces for interaction, negotiation and revision that eventually developed into an inductive study through which the discourse surrounding fan-text-producer interaction could be problematised and its complex nature better understood to map the changing landscape of television culture. Considering my fan identity, I was particularly concerned with those fandoms whose dynamics in the sense of textual references, interpersonal fan interactions and negotiations with textual producers were clear to me. It is in the process of these examinations that a model was developed to parse, complexify and present as a template the interconnectedness of television texts and their stakeholders. The role of the internet and social media analysis, as well as Henry Jenkins’ notion of the aca/fan, a concept that is further elaborated upon in this chapter, is significant to the development of this study. Although fan communities began as an offline phenomenon before the popularity of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Reddit etc., their presence on the internet is prominent as is their tech-savvy bricolage of texts. The accumulation, annotation, interpretation, and recirculation of textual elements, whether diegetic or extradiegetic are illustrated individually in the case studies, which collectively paint a picture of social processes and their influence on how television texts are perceived and how these perceptions are altered. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2024 A. Shah, The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43739-8_1

1

2

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

In addition to the examination of internet fandoms of television texts, historical perspectives are also important to consider. Here, ‘historical perspectives’ have a twofold meaning. Firstly, the varied media and their auxiliary affordances have a history rooted in textual proliferation and social interrelationship in the everyday life of an individual. Secondly, some of the television texts examined in this study have a history that is comprised of extensive long-standing fan traditions and fan-producer interactions. This is due to the indubitable success of the text, wherein fans find themselves investing increasingly in their fannish expressions. The interplay between the two historical perspectives is at the heart of the intermediality and transmediality of the texts examined in this study. Intermediality identifies the interaction between various media and their resources that play a crucial role in meaning-making (Bruhn and Schirrmacher 3). A certain media text is often perceived through other media texts, both in form and content. The similarities and differences between the media form are identified as intermediality. A common example of this is when a movie or television show is compared to the book it is adapted from. In this case, intermedia is encompassed by how the old media is experienced in the new media format, i.e., how the book may be experienced in the film or television show. While the concept of intermediality is further explored below, it is worthwhile diving into how television texts and their popularity have evolved to identify how television fandoms navigate fan spaces using textual cues as well as aspects of the media format embedded in textual delivery. An increasing number of studies on television highlight the ever-growing proliferation of visual media in our everyday lives. Over 90 years after the conceptualisation of the first television in the early 1920 s (Montfort 197–200), that particular piece of technology and the services offered surrounding it has morphed into a wide spectrum of media delivery channels, with television screens shrinking and growing larger at the same time. As high-speed Internet and data services, along with Smartphone technology, grew increasingly sophisticated, the individual could access television texts from their phones and other devices, and consequently fit the ‘television’ in their pockets. Furthermore, with the shift to the ‘post-network’ or ‘post-broadcast’ era of television and a rising number of related services for television content,1 along with the transformation of technology in terms of picture and sound, televisions, too, became increasingly sophisticated, 1

The terms ‘post-network era’ and ‘post-broadcast era’ will be used interchangeably in this text. Both focus on the shift of power to the audiences when it comes to choosing programmes and content to view as well as its appropriation and annotation. While Derek Johnson uses the term ‘post-network era,’ John Hartley identifies the 21st century as the

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

3

offering a high-quality picture, surround-sound systems and, with the Smart TV, apps that would link streaming services and delivery channels to one’s flatscreen: Today’s “smart,” online-ready television sets … carry on-board app suites that receive services carried by Wi-Fi from our Internet routers. Other Wi-Fi enabled devices like Roku and Apple TV connected to our televisions by HDMI cable bring an even greater variety of apps to the menu of channels from which we can select. (Johnson 7)

The post-network era of television, Johnson argues, centres around “the more open and participatory affordances of the Internet [which] enable audiences to make programming choices while independent modes of production and distribution thrive outside the control of traditional gate-keepers” (4). With streaming producers such as Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Hulu and others becoming industry giants, offering vast quantities of content by vying to retain monopoly through exclusive access to both broadcast era and post-broadcast era content, they eventually become content factories as they play the dual role of both content producer and distributor. These streaming services that now engage in production “[carve] out distinct territories and brand identities in collaboration and opposition to one another” (Johnson 7), eventually producing what has been termed ‘web television’ content. Given the duality of their role, I refer to these companies as ‘streaming producers.’ Streaming producers offer original content that sits alongside traditional television content on their respective apps and websites, which are accessed through personal devices such as tablets, laptops and Smartphones as well as Smart TVs, frequently with wireless connectivity. Additionally, through various subsidiaries and channels, streaming producers are often involved in the production of media texts whose rights are not exclusively held by them.2 The availability of televisual content through various digital modes of delivery and broadcast as specified “post-broadcast era,” which is “characterized by interactivity, customization, multiple platforms and non-broadcast entertainment carried via video, cable, streaming, or archive systems such as TiVo” (Fiske and Hartley xiv-v). However, it would be erroneous to assume in the case of the ‘post-network era’ that the networks have died out. On the contrary, networks, too, have begun to adopt the changing modes of delivery, especially digital modes, to compete with those deliveries that may be identified as ‘post-network.’ Given this shift, it is more accurate to state that the networks are strong contenders for post-broadcast television rather than victims of the changing modes of delivery. 2 For example, the television show Lucifer (2016—present), originally distributed by Warner Brothers Television via the Fox Network, was later ‘rescued’ from cancellation and distributed by Netflix, who acquired the rights to the show in 2019 after fans began to protest cancellation (Andreeva). The modes and channels of delivery for the show, however, are intricately entwined in digital modes and traditional broadcasting modes, as prior to Netflix’

4

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

by the corporate and licensing ecosystems of media texts is symptomatic of the effects of the neoliberal economy on new media. A neoliberal economy, driven by cheerleaders of the free market through privatization and globalization, “subtends a cultural mythology and political hermeneutic that conditions how we perceive new media spectatorial practices such as time-shifting and binge-watching” (Sim 186). Dennis Broe argues that post the great recession of 2008, economic inequality continues to peak and that it is “the digital ‘virtual’ world [which] becomes capital’s (sole?) hope and beacon for its promise of abundance and the site of its last pretensions to equality: Television seriality is an integral part of that strained abundance” (1–2). As is evident, new media and the neoliberal economy are intertwined, specifically when it comes to the examination of television sub-cultures. The traditions, social customs and behaviours of the television viewer are therefore inextricably linked with not only the content consumed but the manner of its consumption as well, i.e. the mode of delivery, the viewing practices and the tendency to engage in different types of communities surrounding this particular medium. As the term ‘television,’ in the contemporary scenario, is representative of multiple meanings in relation to both content and delivery, the link between television, new media and the neoliberal economy becomes apparent. With guerrilla advertising and aggressive publicity practices that characterise new media and are indicative of the balance tipping in favour of the attention economy, it becomes increasingly difficult to find the ‘off switch’ when encountering media in one’s day-to-day life, whether it may be in the form of billboards, flyers in the mailbox, full front-page ads in the newspaper or a video advertisement, or even in the pathological sense that speaks to media addiction, such as in ‘binge-watching’ practices and the desire to engage in self-publicity and self-presentation on social media.3 With this perceivable association between different branches of media

acquisition of the show, Fox Network broadcasted it in the United States and then, after the broadcast, made the entire season available for streaming on Hulu. Additionally, the distribution, whether via digital or broadcast modes, is also geographically influenced, since Hulu, a competitor of Netflix, retained rights to distribute the show only in the United States while Fox still broadcasted it. In the United Kingdom and in Germany, the show, even after the Netflix acquisition, continues to be available for streaming on Amazon Prime Video, yet another competitor of Netflix. 3 Jay Conrad Levinson and Seth Godin argue, “With guerrilla marketing, the focus changes from the volume of advertising to the impact of the message. … The guerrilla is obsessed with benefits. Whenever offering a product or service, she focuses on how it will benefit the consumer and builds everything—the product, the delivery, the marketing—around that benefit” (4). The ‘attention economy,’ according to Broe, refers to “luring the spectator central to

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

5

industries, such as the celebrity and influencer industry, advertisement and marketing, as well as the production and distribution of content, among others, there is a growing demand for a more comprehensive examination of television media texts that is able to consider all of these in their complex interwovenness. The theorisation of what I term the mediaverse is a response to this exigency of the interconnectedness among the networked nodes of new media that wield a significant influence on the production and consumption of media and its presence in our everyday lives. One of the key aspects this study addresses is the need for a revised approach in the study of media texts that supplements and combines previous mediacentric, text-centric, audience-centric and production-centric approaches to media. A number of these approaches investigate feedback loops that characterise media texts today. The relationship and the perpetual struggle for influence on the content of a media text between the audiences (or fans) and the producers has been explored in various studies through the lenses of transmedia, prosumption, and practices of bricolage,4 among others. These concepts and approaches will be discussed in light of the role they play in the theorisation of the mediaverse when examining the texts in this study. In the examination of the synergies, paratexts, merchandising and marketing strategies that characterised the production and consumption of the texts in this study, the mediaverse addresses the exigency of the interconnectedness of the various structures, institutions, and collectives that are centred around media texts and the nature of their communication with each other. As a result the mediaverse aims for an integrated examination of the text and the socio-political and cultural climate it is produced and consumed in. In this vein, the mediaverse offers a lens by means of which to analyse the media text.

capital’s new virtual accumulation” and “manufacturing an audience” through digital modes of production and continued storytelling (2). 4 The term ‘bricolage’ was coined by Claude Lévi-Strauss, a French anthropologist. Leonie Schmidt and Jeroen De Kloet identify ‘bricolage’ in Media and Cultural Studies as “[occurring] together with terms like ‘parody’, ‘pastiche’, ‘remix’, ‘textual poaching’, ‘mash-up’, and ‘hybridity’. Bricolage indicates the joining of separate media elements to form a different whole, a newly put together piece of media that orchestrates different meanings from those of the alleged original” (1). Prosumption, here, can be described as the practices undertaken by active audiences that seemingly eradicate “the distinction between making and using media” (Gajjala et.al 1). These practices involve appropriation and reappropriation of media content by engaged amateurs and can potentially threaten “the usual power relations between makers and consumers, often conflating and democratizing them so that lines are blurred and domination is usurped” (Gajjala et. al 1).

6

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

This study outlines the mediaverse as a toolkit or a lens to analyse a media text in relation to an individual or community of media consumers, producers, and prosumers, as well as the platforms (both physical and virtual) that serve as sites of individual or collective media engagement and facilitate the formation of communities or performance as a media prosumer. As a portmanteau of ‘media’ and ‘universe,’ it suggests an approach to the study of media texts that considers all levels of engagement that are associated with the particular text as a ‘universe’. While this universe can be considered as a self-contained unit, it can also, in the sense of the popular speculative fiction trope, be appraised as a ‘pocket universe,’ an ‘alternate universe’ or a ‘parallel universe,’ as it stands alongside other media texts’ universes. In this vein, the mediaverse serves its function of a critical lens by employing concepts such as transmediality and intermediality to contextualise the texts in the current social, political and cultural climate. This not only allows for an extensive comparison between various texts but also their place in the development of media sub-cultures. Hence, one can regard the mediaverse of a text to investigate its appeal, acceptance, appropriation, annotation and overall role in shaping the characteristics of contemporary media. Thus, the mediaverse of a text functions as an object signifying the media text and its contents, its contexts, as well as the particular entity delivering the text and the communities producing, consuming or prosuming the text. The mediaverse, therefore, is both a critical toolkit as well as an object of examination. These functions of the mediaverse interact with each other in relation to the various modes and media that shape contemporary media culture. Additionally, the text-centric approach of the mediaverse, wherein a text is seen as the mediaverse object to identify popular media practices, distinguishes the concept from that of the ‘mediatized worlds’ as conceived by Andreas Hepp and Friedrich Krotz (1–9). While both the mediaverse and mediatized worlds are networked concepts that can be potentially large scaled as well as small scaled, there is a clear distinction between the scope of the two. Mediatized worlds are apparently characterised by ‘social phenomenology’ and ‘symbolic interactionism’ (Hepp and Krotz 6). The aspect of social phenomenology in mediatized worlds refers to “the fragmentation of everyday lifeworlds” and combined with the notion of symbolic interactionism, mediatized worlds “are structured fragments of social lifeworlds with a certain binding intersubjective knowledge inventory, with specific social practices and cultural thickenings” (Hepp and Krotz 6–8). In comparison, the mediaverse does share many of the features of mediatized worlds, including the investigation of specific social practices and cultural thickenings, but only within the scope of the specific mediaverse object, i.e., concerning itself with the text(s) upon which

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

7

the mediaverse is founded. The consideration of the stakeholders of the mediaverse, i.e. those involved in the production, consumption and distribution of the media text and the social and cultural systems embedded in their interactions with each other and with the text are mediatized and in that they make up a ‘fragmented lifeworld’ that engages with media texts. The mediaverse, therefore, is concerned with mediatization of specific texts and textualities. This means the mediaverse encompasses the ever-growing archive of media-text centred interactions in various modes between the stakeholders of the media text, thus tracing the archaeology of the context within which the text is produced, consumed and distributed. Moulding the mediaverse approach in the assessment of media texts is a dynamic process propogating the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, which can be adapted to suit specific media collectives. This approach allows for addressing the intermedial and transmedial nature of the mediaverse. With the overlaps between various media formats and the migratory behaviour of media audiences from one text or one medium to another, intermediality and transmediality demonstrate the dialogue between various media formats. Discussing the history of intermediality, Nicole Lamerichs illustrates the various ways in which the term might be understood: “First, intermediality can mean combining various media in one product or artwork. … Second, intermediality can be understood as a process of transfer or ‘transmediality’ when content flows across unique media and media platforms” (23–4). These different conceptualisations are further problematized as the phenomenon continues to develop. For example, while Henry Jenkins develops a ‘transmedia storytelling’ model that illustrates narrative expansion over multiple media, Lamerichs conceives of transmedia storytelling as “a subset of transmedia design, which captures not only processes of storytelling, but also transmedia performance and play” (24). Additionally, intermediality is also contextualised within the framework of intertextuality, which encompasses the relationship between various texts within the same medium as well as across different media (Lamerichs 25). Since the mediaverse approach is centred on the remediation and reconfiguration of media culture and dominant practices in media, it is crucial to differentiate my understanding and use of the terms ‘intermediality’ and ‘transmediality.’ In this study, both terms encapsulate multimediality in relation to form and content, i.e. both terms include media texts, paratexts, and intertexts delivered in the same format as well as in different formats to that of the mediaverse text in question. Innovation and development of new trends concerning media formats are mapped through the lens of the mediaverse in the case studies under discussion. The difference in my use of the

8

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

terms, therefore, rests in the engagement with the narrative. The term ‘transmedia’ here is employed in the sense of ‘transmedia storytelling,’ which is linked to the expansion of the storyworld through media formats such as the ‘source text’ or the mediaverse. The discussion of transmediality therefore is triggered by the analyses of the content of the texts, whereas intermediality is understood through the examination of the form of the text. The intermediality of a particular text, when discussed, refers to how a text may be framed when it engages with different media formats. Instead of conceiving of the text as self-contained, intertmediality considers the text, including its form and content, as constitutive of shaping media culture, wherein a networked model such as the mediaverse is effective in identifying how media is experienced today and how it is constantly being reconfigured by elements of representation, interpretation, reception and appropriation. Methodologically, the mediaverse retains pliancy to facilitate immersion on the side of the examiner when considering the media culture associated with a particular mediaverse. Considering this scrutiny of complex mediaverses, this project outlines four primary structures as a starting point (Fig. 1.1): 1. 2. 3. 4.

The media text The text’s paratexts and intertexts Spectators (active audiences, fans, and anti-fans) Networks and platforms (physical and virtual sites that serve as networks for delivering media texts)

The mediaverse, therefore, employs an analysis that involves aspects of representation, interpretation, reception and appropriation of the source text, which demonstrate how the respective mediaverse has led to the mediatization of culture. In the conception of these structures of the mediaverse, the Bourdieusian notion of a ‘field’ plays a significant role. Pierre Bourdieu’s aim of building “a theoretical construct of concepts through which the working of a field (or world, network, configuration or system)” is replicated here to study the complex mechanisms, structures and laws which cover the field of media today as a structure of relations between positions which, with the help of several forms of capital, on the one hand, and based on a joint illusio and their own doxa, on the other, struggle for specific symbolic capital (prestige). The positions are occupied by agents

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

9

The Media Text

The Paratexts and Intertexts

Spectators

Networks and Plaorms

Fig. 1.1 The four primary structures of the mediaverse

who take these positions on the basis of their habitus.5 (van Maanen 55, emphasis in original)

The mediaverse, by virtue of the structures examined, investigates not only the ‘field’ in the Bourdieusian sense but also the agents and the forms of capital associated with it. Numerous concepts, especially in audience and celebrity studies, are focused on the power struggle to control symbolic capital, whether it manifests in the form of control over the text in the sense of textual and cultural meanings, or its production or reproduction, e.g. in relation to a celebrity and the attention economy. It is the dynamics of the relation between these structures, agents and capitals that demonstrates the customs and ideas that fragmentise media culture. The present study exemplifies the notion and approach of the mediaverse through case studies from speculative genres.

5

Habitus, in Bourdieusian terms, is described by van Maanen as “a set of dispositions [that are] … permanent structures of perception and evaluation which govern how people act. Bourdieu stresses that the habitus is something ‘having transformed into a being’; so that agents are not or hardly aware of it; on the level of identity the individual and his or her habitus coincide” (58).

10

1

1.1

Introducing the Mediaverse

Mediaverse, Web 2.0 and the Speculative Genre

All instruments of communication carry the potential of social engagement. Media such as the telephone, telegram, radio, television and the Internet are, to a certain degree, social media, as their usage implies the presence of a user or audience member and an interaction between them and the media text and, by extension, the producer of the media text. Yet, sociability is related to what are commonly termed ‘online social media platforms’6 that have, over the last two decades, served as catalysts for the formation or strengthening of personal and institutional networks through social engagement. This study, which is dedicated to identifying the elements and the impact of new media ecosystems, is a mixed-methods research including the accumulation, annotation and interpretation of qualitative data, especially considering the sociality of web television media, and how their consumption influences collective practices. Apart from viewing the mediaverse in the sense of the Bourdieusian field, this project is also influenced by practices of netnography. As an important element of media anthropology analysis, netnography is closely related to fan studies and research centred on fandoms: Every day, people are intimately involved not only in the social processes of media consumption, but also in its production and circulation. Ordinary citizens become elevated, some rapidly gain celebrity status. The dynamics of media’s social processes have dramatically shifted, and continue to alter. … It is worth noting that, from its inception, netnography was influenced by and used for fan studies in the Cultural Studies vein …. These early fan studies … were marked by a close, personal, intellectual, and emotional engagement with the online phenomena they investigated, as well as in the novel processes of the investigation itself. Netnography shared and still shares this fan-oriented and fan-group derived emphasis on media, community and passionate engagement. (Robert V. Kozinets 22–3)

For most part, being a fan involves the social performance that informs media as a social structure. Because media is social and can encompass both mass media and interpersonal communication, one can argue that media 6

I use the terms ‘social media platforms’ and ‘social networking platforms’ interchangeably because of their roles as catalysts to forge and maintain social networks. Robert V. Kozinets uses Boyd and Ellison’s definition of social network sites, which is broadly how the two terms are understood here as well: “Web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system” (Boyd and Ellison quoted in Kozinets 78).

1.1 Mediaverse, Web 2.0 and the Speculative Genre

11

facilitates the flow of communications and relationships … across different nodal connections and sub-systems of capital, flowing in the form of both social and informational exchange that, together, form ecosystems of great complexity that have major impacts upon the systems in which they are embedded, including the Earth’s own living environs. (Kozinets 67)

Based on this perception of media and related social processes as ecosystems, this project conceives of the mediaverse as an ecosystem to be explored through various investigational tools including elements of netnography, prosumption analysis, and transmedia storytelling. This study draws from the netnographic characteristic of human and material agency as well as sociality and the principles of networked individualism in community building, including autoethnographic aspects that result from my status as a researcher as well as a fan—or, as Jenkins calls it, an aca/fan.7 The aca/fan nature of my investigation in this project enables a close reading of the text that also takes into consideration its production, consumption and prosumption, which is characterised by “insights into the media by releasing [the researcher] from the narrowly circumscribed categories and assumptions of academic criticism and allowing [them] to play with textual materials” (Jenkins Textual Poachers, 5), specifically as it adopts an interdisciplinary cultural studies approach. The subsequent section outlines the influence of social media analysis on the methodology of this research, including the selection of specific social media platforms, delivery channels, and the mediaverses selected for this study. Sociality occurring online is, according to Kozinets, moving at a “breakneck pace” (68). Fascination with the Internet is closely related to online media being social and serving as fuel for the attention economy, especially given that the World Wide Web may be considered as “strange and powerful, equal parts technological, cultural and economic” (Kozinets 68). Computer mediation has changed the perception of time in relation to social engagements. No longer must one wait for days or even hours to hear from friends, family or co-workers. It is not mandatory to step outside of one’s computerized study to meet people and become a member of communities. Online social media platforms have made these forms of sociality a matter of a few clicks. Moreover, they also serve as a source for information. Yet, numerous studies address the contrasting nature of

7

In the introduction to Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers: Exploring Participatory Culture, Henry Jenkins refers to the ‘Aca/Fan’ as a ‘hybrid identity’ to describe academics who are also fans of media texts and undertake an investigation of those texts, allowing them an insight into the fandom-as-a-community experience (4–12).

12

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

mediated socialities, for example via the Internet, as opposed to those developed in the offline world.8 The pervasive nature of new media plays a significant role in the theorisation of the mediaverse. As new media is increasingly dynamic and embedded into the everyday life of an individual, mediatized interactions among consumers and producers of media texts are normalised. Mediated socialities, especially via the internet, are often contrasting in nature. Social media users are exposed to a wealth of information on platforms through advertisement, newsfeeds, embedded links, blogging and vlogging activities and visuals. The easy access to this information caused an explosion in what can be termed ‘online participatory culture.’ The characteristics of participatory culture, and how information factors into the same, are closely related to the development of Web 2.0 as a moment in technology innovation sandwiched between the dot-com bust and the App store. It wasn’t just a set of technologies … or a group of websites …, but a collection of ideals (transparency, participation, and openness) as well. … “Web 2.0” is also a kind of social, economic, technological, and intellectual “imaginary” in Benedict Anderson’s sense of an “imagined community.” It describes and opens up for consideration a world in which technology creates greater cultural participation, where creativity and control are disseminated throughout the population rather than concentrated in the hands of a few large corporations. Web 2.0 suggests that technology can be used to bring about positive political changes and new relationships between citizens and governments, individuals and movements, and customers and businesses. (Alice E. Marwick 6–7)

According to Marwick, people employed the affordances and ideals that composed Web 2.0 to engage in self-branding and self-disclosure. Its technological affordances allowed ordinary people “without Ivy League educations or family connections … to become very rich” (7). The onset of Web 2.0 permitted the average Internet user to build a ‘profile’ that represented them and to navigate through the social media landscape via active participation. Among these new affordances were the wide availability, (re)circulation and consumption of information. A user could now engage in an information exchange on social networking platforms to connect with others, create and collaborate on projects, and build on their social identity—in sum, information enabled the average Internet user to participate.

8

For debates addressing mediated socialities, see e.g., Mark Poster; J A. Polla and Steve Cisler; Nicholas Graham; Alan McKee; Christian Fuchs; Jean Burgess; Marwick; Pavica Sheldon; Caroline Tagg et. al.

1.1 Mediaverse, Web 2.0 and the Speculative Genre

13

One of the main characteristics of Web 2.0 is user-generated content. This novelty indicated the potential democratization of digital technology and introduced new forms of activism. Technology came to be viewed as a tool to shape a “better, freer society, and framed the collection and sharing of information as the bedrock of revolution” (Marwick 22). Accessing information and cultural products, rearranging and appropriating them to form a ‘bricolaged’ product became a crucial feature in the everyday life of the user: The advent of Web 2.0 in the first years of the new millennium has created a “participatory culture” in which consumers are encouraged to participate, seek out new information, and make connections among dispersed pieces of media content. … The lines between producers and consumers of popular culture increasingly blur. By making use of a variety of technologies, applications, and platforms—such as Photoshop, meme creators, YouTube, Vimeo, Vine, Twitter, Weibo—today’s bricoleurs dissect media, put it back together again in new—often humorous—ways, and share their reassembled creations with a global audience. (Schmidt and De Kloet 1)

In relation to the mediaverse, bricolage may be perceived as a conversation-starter or propellor in the sense of an on-going dialogue between the media consumer and producer, as opposed to viewing it as a power struggle between the two parties. In the identification of the four structural pillars in the examination of the mediaverse identified above (media text, spectators, paratexts and intertexts, and platform/network), it firstly acknowledges the presence of more than just the consumer and producer as agents in the media field. Streaming producers,9 along with creative heads and writers of the media texts, as well as social media platforms with community spaces, are agents in the mediaverse. This acknowledgment implies that an approach to a media text which aims to distinguish whether it is the producer or the consumer who wields a greater influence is growing increasingly irrelevant. As an integrated network of the four structures, 9

According to Susan Hayward, in films, a producer refers to the “individual responsible for the financial and administrative aspects of film production [who] “Manages the entire production and works in close collaboration with the director/film-maker. The producer sorts out locations, studios, schedule of production, controls the management of budgets, the hiring of stars, director of photography, screenwriter, and special effects studio” (286). Although this meaning of the ‘producer’ also applies in this project, there are multiple layers and connotations to this term in the context of streaming and web television distribution. These distinctions are key in the examination of the mediaverse, for the producer’s influence over a text is a crucial topic when examining the dialogue and cultural exchange among audiences and producers. For example, a streaming distributor may act as a producer of a text and therefore identifying it as the company’s ‘Original’ product marks the text in ways that affect the meaning-making processes.

14

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

the mediaverse allows for a delineation of what the nature of the influence of each agent and position within the field is, thereby creating a need to modify academic approaches for evaluating audience members, prosumers and fans as commentators on and critics of a media text, as well as the media practices of these agents in a specific mediaverse. With Web 2.0, the average media user began to spend a significant amount of time online, not only consuming media but possibly also annotating, appropriating and circulating it. The pervasion of new media grew to an extent that scholarly disciplines began to be developed to examine media consumption and audiences, which contributed to a change in making sense of participatory culture, as Jenkins highlights through the notion of convergence. Jenkins argues for the convergence model of transmedia storytelling and comments on the migratory behaviour of media audiences, stating that they “will go almost anywhere in search of the kinds of entertainment experiences they want” (Convergence Culture 2). Forming social communities around cultural objects such as a film, TV series, celebrity, sports personality etc., and engaging in discourse around the objects enhances the experience of audiences. Pleasure that is reaped from this form of participation is also characterised by the Bourdieusian notion of habitus, which elucidates the social position of an individual based on one’s expression of appreciation or pleasure towards those artistic texts and ideologies that the individual’s social environment equips one with.10 Taking to social media to express one’s pleasure or displeasure with a media text is a common practice today. Benjamin Brojakowski identifies these social media spaces as “virtual loungerooms” wherein “an audience can commune and centrally share the television experience” (32). Viewing media content as “materials for conversation,” John Storey seconds the notion of social communities formed around media texts: Watching television (and that is also true with other media), actually generates a common currency to be exchanged in the cultural economy of everyday life. Television discourse is not just a currency which operates in the family, it is also important in most of the everyday interactions between people. … [R]ather than an alternative to social life, the consumption of television may play an integral part in its success. In certain instances, not being able to deal in the currency of television talk (i.e. not having seen particular programmes) may put a person at a distinct social disadvantage in the workplace or with a specific peer group. (19–20)

10

For the notion of habitus as a tool to analyse social transformations, see e.g. Bourdieu in Emma Rooksby and Jean Hillier.

1.1 Mediaverse, Web 2.0 and the Speculative Genre

15

In the following case studies, I demonstrate how members of social communities, especially online ones, employ media texts to exchange this social currency based on television talk as suggested by Storey, which eventually leads to the formation of hierarchies within the respective communities on social networking platforms. Most social networking platforms, or “virtual loungerooms” in Brojakowski’s terminology outlined above, are laden with technical components that assist a user in seeking out, joining and participating in an imagined community in derivation of Benedict Anderson’s use of the term. Anderson identifies nations and nation states as “imagined political communities,” as the members or citizens of the nations and nation states may not interact with every other member or citizen, nor do they seem aware of every member’s or citizen’s existence, “yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion” (6). This can be done through components embedded in social networking platforms such as hashtags, search tools, communities and groups, or following other users. When participation in these imagined communities is cemented through interactivity, the community tends to turn virtual, or in some cases even physical. The virtual space, therefore, serves as a site for virtual and physical community formation. New media audiences, in this case, serve as agents that enable this transition. By engaging in community-based interactions, new media audiences cannot be limited to merely the consumption of media, but also become ‘prosumers’ who engage with the text and reproduce it, thereby making the four structural pillars of the mediaverse permeable in a sense that they are not limited in the functions of production and consumption. For this project, the social media platforms that are of particular import are Twitter, Reddit and Instagram. Twitter, founded in 2006, “was originally devoted to a single purpose [of having] … a global community of friends and strangers answering one simple question: what are you doing?” (Kozinets 69). Furthermore, as Twitter became more popular and widely used over the years, it offered a range of social media functions in which connectivity between network members related to short exchanges of information, opinion, and news …. Twitter was also viewed as a social network, because it allowed members to subscribe to newsfeed only from particular sources. (Kozinets 69–70)

Twitter’s sociality has progressed a great deal over the years, which has allowed for the embedding of certain affordances into the platform, including ‘trends,’ ‘follows,’ ‘comments,’ and ‘tagging.’ Tagging, especially, is one of the key aspects that qualified the platform for this study.

16

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

The platform enables something not possible before: people can build their own categorization schemes by ‘tagging’ something and naming it. People use that platform ability to build differences and similarities, to distinguish and explain, to try to have meaning both literally and culturally, denotation as well as appropriately understood, experience-based connotation. (Kozinets 73)

Through the affordances of tagging, trending and hashtagging, Twitter is an ideal choice to examine a mediaverse such as Star Trek or Good Omens, since it enables the investigation of the ongoing dialogue concerning the source text and its collective viewing as a ‘media event’ encompassing meaning-making practices that are demonstrated in the case studies.11 The sheer volume of Twitter users (330 million as of 2019)12 and its popularity across the globe provides a large pool of users and conversations on which to base the inquiry concerning the dialogue between producer, consumer or prosumer, paratexts and intertexts, and delivery channels. Another key for considering both Twitter and Instagram is the ‘verified user’ affordance of these platforms. The ‘verified user’ is signified by a blue badge with a white tick-mark in it that accompanies the username. It certifies the authenticity of the user, generally for a public figure. However, a significant number of these public figures employ staff to communicate on their social media handles on their behalf. Nonetheless, this affordance tends to create both an intimacy (perhaps even a parasocial relationship) between the public figure and their followers,13 as well as the acquisition or conversion of Bourdieusian capitals. This is particularly explored in the case study of the Good Omens mediaverse in relation to the literary celebrity of its co-creator Neil Gaiman, who is a verified user of Twitter and Tumblr and is widely known for his fan engagement on social media. Moreover, because of the public nature of Twitter, the microblogs or Tweets by users are visible to everyone unless a user explicitly adjusts their privacy settings to display their Tweets only to a selected audience. This form of public sociality invites conversation from those experiencing an affective response especially in relation to the television shows under discussion in this project. In 11

Nick Couldry et. al argue that for a comprehensive understanding of “power processes” in the age of globalization, it is crucial to examine the eventization of media. Media events are broadly outlined as “high holidays of mass communication” or “interruptions of routine” which engage large audiences and which can be examined on syntactic, semantic and pragmatic levels (1–3). For further elaboration of media events and the eventization of media, see Daniel Dayan and Elihu Katz. 12 Source: https://www.omnicoreagency.com/twitter-statistics/. 13 “Parasocial theory has been developed to describe and attempt to explain the imagined social relationships and interactions we have with people who are distant from us and who do not reciprocate our individual communication or interest” (Gayle S. Stever 1).

1.1 Mediaverse, Web 2.0 and the Speculative Genre

17

terms of ethical discussions regarding the investigation of social media users, too, the public sociality of Twitter ensures that the examination does not become invasive in terms of privacy or data collection, as the risk of misquoting and misrepresenting any user is minimised, since the context of the Tweet and the dialogue surrounding it are publicly visible. Public sociality is also evident in the platform Reddit, another key site of investigation for this project. According to Kozinets, Reddit, “with its many topics, convenient public access and muted commercial presence, might be a key site for locating a variety of contemporary netnographies” (77). As a media aggregator that is “relatively anonymous, … Reddit allows people to ‘compartmentalize’ their participation from their social lives and activities beyond the site, creating a ‘culture of disinhibition and open disclosure’” (Kozinets 77). The format of Reddit appears as a forum or discussion board, wherein each forum topic is called a ‘Subreddit’ with public and user-friendly discussion boards, embedded links and other aspects that are associated with the Subreddit’s topic: Known for its open culture and lack of heavy-handed moderation, Reddit maintains an old-style resistance to overt commercialization and advertising-serving. The official policies of the platform frown upon blatant self-promotion and try to encourage organic user participation. Finally, the site is open to the public—anyone can view it without registering, but registration is required if a user wishes to post. (Kozinets 76)

The commitment necessary for posting on Reddit, especially in case of Subreddits dedicated to media texts, highlights the participation of the consumer in the interpretation and appropriation of the media text in question. The mediaverse case studies in this project on specific (web) television shows, each of which has a dedicated Subreddit and consequently a fan base, draw from netnographic investigation pertaining to these texts. Furthermore, as with Twitter, a form of celebrity and/or public-figure engagement is also part of Reddit’s social affordance of ‘AMAs’ (‘Ask Me Anything’), which include “hosting individuals, who might be famous, infamous, or simply interesting for something they do or represent in public” (Kozinets 76). This affordance, along with the infrastructure that enables a user to ‘Upvote’ or ‘Downvote’ a post, speaks to the participatory culture of social media audiences that play a crucial role in perceiving the mediaverse of a text. Some of the affordances built into both Twitter and Reddit are also evident in Instagram, such as the use of public or semi-public user profiles to engage in selfpresentation, the verified user add-on for public figures and celebrities, the ability to determine what turns up in one’s feed, the use of hashtags and likes, as well

18

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

as comments. Furthermore, Instagram is, along with numerous other platforms, a site that enables one to gain a ‘following’ through popularity to acquire social and economic capital in the Bourdieusian sense.14 In addition, a key feature of Instagram is that it is largely a visual platform “that allows users to upload photos and videos to the platform, and then offers a variety of different and easyto-use visual filters to improve or stylize them” (Kozinets 90). Instagram is of particular relevance here because of the celebrity presence it boasts, allowing for an examination of parasocial relationships and the impression of intimacy this seems to lend to fans. Delineating Twitter, Reddit and Instagram as key sites for investigation for this project affects its scope and cultural focus.15 These sites are ideal for the qualitative and interpretive approach in the sense of highlighting my place in the analysis as not only a participant-observer but also as an aca/fan with affective relations towards the texts on whose mediaverses this project is based. The mediaverse, to examine the effects of the pervasiveness of media texts and mediatized engagements with the texts, employs the concept of convergence to determine the flow of cultural capital and the dynamic shifts within media culture. Jenkins defines ‘convergence’ as follows: By convergence, I mean the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behavior of media audiences who will go almost anywhere in search of the kinds of entertainment experiences they want. Convergence is a word that manages to describe technological, industrial, cultural, and social changes depending on who’s speaking and what they think they are talking about. (Convergence Culture 3) 14

Crystal Abidin highlights that the exclusivity of the internet celebrity, usually accompanied by “the glamorization and celebration of practices and possessions so elite in access or rare in occurrence” that without a high economic capital, achieving the status of exclusivity would be unusual (20). Furthermore, internet celebrities earn ‘likes’ and ‘follows’ through the attention garnered from their exclusivity, bestowing them with “publicity, acclamation, or in some cases infamy” (20). This is an appropriate example of the conversion of economic into cultural or even social capital through the attention economy. However, the transformation from cultural or social capital to economic capital is also possible, as in the case of those microcelebrities who, through amassing social and cultural capital on social media, have been able to pursue being an ‘influencer’ as a full-time vocation with economic rewards (76–7). 15 Due to the significant number of references from the social media platforms that shape this project, the bibliography contains separate sections that illustrate the social media accounts that are cited in this project. Their in-text use is marked by footnotes that include links to the respective profile, Tweet, post etc. to ease the process of, in digital native terms, ‘looking them up.’

1.1 Mediaverse, Web 2.0 and the Speculative Genre

19

Through convergence culture, the synergies between old and new media are considered, especially in how they outline the trajectory of media texts in the future. This feature of convergence is essential to the mediaverse as it enables comparison between specific media texts, intertexts and paratexts as well as sub-groups of media audiences, distribution channels and platforms. For example, with the mediaverse approach, Researcher A, who evaluates the micro-politics among a media audience group X, can examine the juxtaposition of the media audience group Y investigated by Researcher B. Such a collation between the mediaverses of X and Y audiences allows for the conceptualisation of media trends while accounting for positions, agency and habitus concerning the mediaverses of the text’s producers, distributors and audiences, thereby also enabling the development of theories and vocabulary for application to media as a field in continuous transformation. With this approach, the mediaverse as an object may then be examined from the perspective of the audiences, and the same is possible from the perspective of the producers, distributors and social media platforms, thereby emphasising the interconnectedness of the four pillars of the mediaverse, and highlighting the exigency to utilise the mediaverse as both a theoretical lens and the object that this lens evaluates. In this vein, one can look at the mediaverse as divergence as described by Jean Burgess as the complement of convergence, i.e. “the tendency for … [separate] paths and streams to branch, fork and drift apart” and to follow up on these in determining media trends (47). While Burgess argues that ‘convergence’ as theorised by Jenkins was criticised due to “conceptual limitations of the term … [indicating] a perceived lack of attention to both history and power, and to the socially and environmentally destructive impacts of technological and economic convergence,” the mediaverse investigation diverges to inquire after specific turns gravitating in various directions within the media field. Doing so allows the mediaverse lens to evaluate the functions of intermediality and transmediality that characterises the media text and modifies cultural trends within media. Audience and Fan Studies are anchored in the assertion of identity. Fans tend to identify as such when aspiring particularly to social and cultural capitals when they interact within the fan community. For example, fan fiction writers tend to publish their fan fiction texts on specific platforms to have their work read, appreciated and commented upon. In doing so, they become part of the ongoing dialogue within the fan fiction community of a mediaverse, which may include one or several texts indicative of the fan fiction author’s and readers’ fan identities, cultural trends and networks. The cultural trends and mediaverses considered in this particular project are subject to the influence of my position as a fan and,

20

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

therefore, a member of the fan community of the texts examined here. This positioning is strategic for numerous reasons. It is through participation in the fandom that a significant amount of my research is shaped. Through consumption of fan fiction, interacting with other fans on social media networks, attending fan conventions and the pleasures of collection that characterise a fan, I understand these lived experiences and also engage in participant observation of relevant fan sites, both online and offline. For participant observation, Patricia A. Adler and Peter Adler identify two perspectives—the ‘opportunistic,’ which includes a degree of immersion from the researcher in the community that is being analysed; and the ‘convert’ perspective wherein the researcher, through their research, becomes an insider of the ethnographic (or, in this case, netnographic) field (67– 84). Insider ethnography has, as Lamerichs suggests, invited criticism because “of the emotional or psychological bias that such a social performance implies” (50). However, based on an assertion of my dual identity as both an opportunistic and convert investigator, I strive for a balance between my closeness to, or inclusion in, the mediaverses of this study and my simultaneous distance in terms of an academic researcher’s bias. The conceptualisation of the mediaverse objects I discuss reflects my involvement in the fandoms of the texts and also shape my research identity in relation to my fan identity. Insider ethno-/netnography is also significant because in this project, the mediaverses examined also deem audiences as critics. While it would be inappropriate to assume a congruity between the type and consumption practices of audiences and the type of critics that they may be, it is the express purpose of the mediaverse to determine sub-groups of audiences and fans of the texts that criticise and appraise it in a particular manner. Fans have, in previous studies,16 mainly been examined as producers who go to great lengths to appropriate a text, and some of these appropriations gain traction to the point where the appropriative practices become mainstream, diverging into a prosumption practice of a particular mediaverse.17 While examining this is certainly key to understanding the dialogue among fans, this project also pays attention to appropriative practices as criticism in that they represent the aspiration that certain fans have for the text, thereby identifying dominant strands of fan interpretations and modes of fan criticism. The observation of these particular aspects requires a significant proximity not 16

See Gjelsvik and Schubart (2016), Lamerichs (2018), Karen Hellekson and Kristina Busse (2006), Jenkins (2006b), and Pugh (2005). 17 An example is the case of ‘The Ineffable Husbands’ ship in the Good Omens fandom, which will be discussed in detail in Chapter 5. This trope can be identified as an ‘ascended fanon,’ which is when a fanon (“fans’ creation of details, plotlines, and characters unsupported by the original text”) becomes canon (Reijnders et. al 6–7).

1.1 Mediaverse, Web 2.0 and the Speculative Genre

21

only to the text but also to the modes of delivery, the fan community, and the sites of fan participation and dialogue, i.e. to the primary structures of the mediaverse as outlined above. This proximity is what allows for the examination of audiences as critics and, by extension, the mediaverse concept as a field wherein positions, agents and capital intersect. The membership of the researcher in the fandom enables an exploration of nuances in fan appropriation and criticism which, at first glance, might seem one-dimensional. However, this proximity, as one will note in the case studies, is crucial in the close reading and textual analysis of the television shows under discussion. As an avid consumer and fan of speculative fiction (sf) television, texts belonging to this umbrella genre form the body of the case studies in this project. While the mediaverse allows for argumentation directed towards other genres, positions and agents that are not considered in this particular study—such as e.g. political fandoms, alternative television texts, celebrity scandals and scams, or romanticised fan readings, to name a few— it is the proximity to the structures of sf television mediaverses that mark the examination of the texts and their fandoms in this project. A strict definition of the genre of speculative fiction is impossible to outline. According to R. B. Gill, “Optimally, a definition of speculative fiction will promote interpretation by suggesting affinities with similar explorations of human imagination and values. The looseness of the category provides opportunity for examination of varieties of classification and uses of genre” (71). In relation to literature, speculative fiction is commonly identified an as umbrella term that encompasses numerous genre categories such as science fiction, fantasy, historical fiction, paranormal, supernatural or horror narratives, magic realism, as well as utopian and dystopian literature. Works listed on the Internet Speculative Fiction Database belong to all of the above-mentioned genres (Gill 71–2). While at first glance it might seem that there is a great deal of emphasis placed on the fictionality of speculative fiction, a closer examination reveals that this fictionality is largely present to draw out an understanding of the ‘real’ world of the author or the reader. In this sense, it may be identified as ‘speculative’ for the invitation it extends to the reader to speculate about their environment through fiction. Gill thus identifies speculative fiction as works presenting modes of being that contrast with their audiences’ understanding of ordinary reality. The key emphasis in this definition is on speculative representation of what would happen had the actual chain of causes or the matrix of reality-conditions been replaced with other conditions. In this sense, speculative fiction is similar, but not identical, to the concept of possible worlds, because possible worlds are logically possible even though they may be non-actual …. Speculative

22

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

fiction envisions a systematically different world in which not only events are different, but causes operate by logics other than normal ones. For this reason also, speculative fiction is not identical with counterfactual fiction …. Counterfactual and uchronian narratives may be regarded as liminal members of the genre, but speculative fiction characteristically embraces a wider, more radical vision of alternative conditions. (72–3)

In its relationship to the audience’s understanding of ‘ordinary reality,’ the texts of speculative fiction television that are considered in this project, and the mediaverses associated with them, investigate the various layers of production, consumption and prosumption, and also take into account the narrative elements of the text that aid in this deconstruction to highlight what the mediaverses represent in the ‘real’ world within which the texts are produced and consumed, and how they are positioned vis-à-vis social issues and debates in society’s complex relationship with media. This interrelatedness between the speculative and the notion of the audience’s ‘ordinary reality’ played a significant role in the selection of the texts examined, especially concerning increasingly experimental styles and the ubiquitous presence of the television as well as its relationship to social media. To demonstrate the experimental nature of these texts, this study focuses on how their mediaverses enter into a dialogue which, in turn, enables the examination of audiences as critics. As the representation and relation to the environ of the audience is analysed, the source texts themselves, may be identified as metanarratives, particularly when considering transmedia texts, fantext and fan fiction, parasocial relationships and celebrity. Among the key elements of metafiction is “its attention to its own constructedness” (R. M. Berry 129). Through its self-conscious nature, metafictionality retains the ability to examine the ‘real’ as opposed to subverting it. As this exposes, so to speak, the seams of the text produced, this exposure not only informs, but empowers audience criticism. The demonstration of such a metafictionality is made possible through the mediaverse lens in its examination of the various positions and agents surrounding the texts. The mediaverse lens, therefore, serves to explore the experimental elements of the texts and disentangles the production, consumption and prosumption practices they inspire. In this examination, genre and genre-markers of the speculative play a crucial role, especially in relation to science fiction and fantasy. Both of these genres indicate overlapping genre markers and characteristics that also tend to outline fan practices associated with these particular genres. In the following case studies, the genre features of each media text are particularly highlighted to further explicate distinctive fan practices of each of the analysed mediaverses.

1.2 Star Trek: Pioneering Speculative Television

1.2

23

Star Trek: Pioneering Speculative Television

The first case study and chapter on the Star Trek mediaverse, with a focus on Star Trek: Discovery (DSC) and Star Trek: Picard, explores the tropes of science fiction. This investigation assesses Star Trek as featuring its own distinct markers that separate it from other science fiction texts by basing it on audience reception and criticism, such as the popularity of the social media initiative #NotMyTrek, as well as on the franchise developing a distinct identity through its narrative elements, particularly how it represents the United Federation of Planets and the problems that such a long-standing series faces in terms of its canon.18 The particular use of Star Trek as a case study here is justified by the numerous already-existing fan studies, the findings of which inform the Star Trek mediaverse and its history, e.g. regarding letter-writing campaigns to the producers of the show to lobby for its survival and continuation, which marks the Star Trek fandom as the first of its kind in successfully influencing the production of the show, thus setting a benchmark for many other fandoms to come. With the foundation laid by the expansive research on the Star Trek fandom, the mediaverse is thus theorised through an analysis of the distribution and reception of DSC and Picard. The resulting Star Trek mediaverse then outlines the notion of audiences as critics and demarcates Star Trek as a distinctive text in contemporary media culture in relation to its representations of—especially American—society. Any conversation about science fiction television narratives is incomplete without Gene Roddeberry’s Star Trek (1966—present). Jan Johnson-Smith writes, “No story of American sf would be complete without due reference to Star Trek …. The interconnected universe of the various Star Trek series serves as a sort of benchmark … against which other series are judged” (8). Peter Wright notes Gene Roddenberry as one of the individuals to whom the “seminal nature of 1960 s US television sf is attributable to” (94). Inspiring a sense of wonder among its audiences while adopting ‘cutting edge’ special effects for its time, Star Trek is often cited as an example for the development of science fiction television and its significance as transmedia text (see Peter Wright, Mark Bould et. al, Lincoln Geraghty, Jan Johnson-Smith and Bruce E. Drushel). In an argument considering the term science fiction, Edward James and Farah Mendlesohn suggest that science fiction is not a genre but “an ongoing discussion” (1). As science fiction is a dynamic discussion, the definition of the term retains malleability but is nonetheless employed to identify a text through certain narrative tropes and 18

This also rings true for other long-standing franchises with a rich production and consumption history such as Star Wars or Doctor Who.

24

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

markers. James and Mendlesohn describe the aforementioned ‘sense of wonder’ as “the emotional heart” which “continues to power sf” (3). Other common features of science fiction include cognitive estrangement,19 which is defined as “the sense that something in the fictive world is dissonant with the reader’s experienced world” (James and Mendlesohn 5) and the notion of the setting, planet or landscape as character (James and Mendlesohn 8–9). Furthermore, alienation, complementing the sense of wonder, is viewed “as the central element of character,” which contributes to “a cold romanticism” of science fiction as “we are forever excluded from our object of love, and alienation is as much a part of sf as is the joy of discovery” (James and Mendlesohn 10). Additionally, science fiction as a polysemic discourse highlights “a multiplicity of interpretations,” (James and Mendlesohn 10), which employ the above-mentioned science fiction tropes and contribute to the role of science fiction as reflecting and commenting upon contemporary society. The Star Trek mediaverse, then, is theorised through the speculative aspect that characterises works of science fiction in that the speculative musings of the social, cultural, political, and economic environs of the author play a significant role in crafting the diegetic world.20 While the extant social, cultural, political, and economic situation shapes the body of science fiction texts, they, in turn, enable a reflection upon the audience or reader’s environs, fuelled through the ‘what if’ questions that speculative fiction tends to inspire. While the abovementioned features of science fiction texts are examined in more detail in relation to the Black Mirror mediaverse, it is primarily this aspect of enabling reflection upon the current circumstances that is of particular interest here. Star Trek’s cultural reflections tend to highlight American ideals or social, cultural, or political scenarios, thereby instigating speculation concerning America. In their description of the ‘magisterial gaze,’ Johnson-Smith ascribes aspirations associated with the west and an “elevated point of view” concerning the American landscape. This particularly pertained to a ‘sense of divine destiny and potential glory’ that was symbolised by features of the American landscape. The notion of the ‘God-given garden of the American West’ was identified as an ‘acceptable image of the West’—an aspect that is particularly prominent in 19

The term ‘cognitive estrangement’ was coined by Darko Suvin in the late 1970 s to elaborate upon the context and plausibility of a science fiction text, particularly to make the text appear scientifically consistent among the elements of fictional dissonance, especially when juxtaposed with ‘real’ science or the science of ‘our’ world. 20 As indicated in the introduction to this study, I consider science fiction as falling under the umbrella category of speculative fiction, wherein the authors and readers speculate about their environment through fiction.

1.2 Star Trek: Pioneering Speculative Television

25

Star Trek as the American nation or the American culture manifest (45–7). The ‘magisterial gaze’ is particularly reflected in the initial scenes of Star Trek: Discovery, with a pan-shot of a majestic dessert-landscape of an alien planet that is surveyed by high-ranking officials of the Federation. Mirroring the American promise of ideals such as progress, technological prowess, sublimity of the landscape and a window into a utopian future, Star Trek embodies the speculative America. Turning the mediaverse lens to examine the object Star Trek: Discovery (2017—present, henceforth referred to as ‘DSC’), this chapter aims to delineate this aspect of reflecting upon and speculating the American condition. The first step in doing so is identifying Star Trek and DSC as speculative fiction television. As David G. LoConto asserts, Star Trek was part of the culmination of the postwar fanaticism of the unknown that was evident through the various movies, novels and short stories that were published after World War II. As technology began to expand, so did the imaginations of people across the planet. The use of atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki facilitated all kinds of potential outcomes that could occur both to people and the environment. The developing Cold War allowed further exploration of how the “bad guys” could be portrayed without talking about communists, the Soviet Union or “Red” China. The inevitable space race between the United States and the Soviet Union allowed for further development of storylines. (21)

LoConto’s statements illustrate the proclivity of Star Trek to highlight the American current affairs and engender speculation concerning the same. LoConto also discusses how the plot lines and narrative content of Star Trek paralleled top secret government projects in America at the time and warranted a visit from “the FBI to identify where they were getting their ideas from” (14), signifying not only the strong influence of ongoing circumstances on Star Trek narratives but also how these narratives speculated upon the same. Gill identifies speculative fiction as “often [being] considered a commercial rather than a literary category,” largely as the label ‘speculative’ is often used as a category by publishers and booksellers. The label includes diverse works of genre fiction, “ranging from apocalyptic to steampunk” wherein there is “no limit to possible micro-subjects” (71–2). However, Gill addresses the need to view speculative fiction as a literary category because of numerous reasons, one of which being that the category “[suggests] affinities with … explorations of human imagination and values” (71). According to Gill, speculative fiction allows readers’ to use their “present understanding of the real world” to explore their relationship with the world. With alterations made to the ‘real world’ in works

26

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

of speculative fiction, the genre “embraces a wider, more radical vision of alternative conditions,” to allow sufficient distance from the reader’s reality to allow speculations about it (71–2). While Gill’s exploration of the speculative genre is restricted to the literary, the parameters by which the speculative is delineated are also applicable to television, and especially productive in the context of Star Trek to outline the series as being speculative of the American condition. In the examination of the Americanness of Star Trek’s speculative narrative, the mediaverse lens aids in illustrating the show’s cultural significance. In this analysis, the Star Trek mediaverse is the object in consideration, juxtaposing DSC’s narrative elements and transmedia synergies to that of the franchise as a whole, thereby highlighting the intermediality of the Star Trek mediaverse. This includes an examination of the structures of the Star Trek mediaverse in relation to its sites of production and consumption, the fans of Star Trek and the corresponding fan practices that underline how the franchise is understood in light of the mutual influence of transmediality and intermediality.

1.3

Black Mirror & Techno-Dystopian Science Fiction

While the first case study of the Star Trek mediaverse explores the cultural significance of the body of texts in the Star Trek canon and related mediatized engagements to speculate on the Americanness of the text, the second case study follows the text Black Mirror and explores its techno-dystopian underpinnings that serve as the foundation for interactions that make up the Black Mirror mediaverse. In television media, one of the texts situated at the centre of current debates surrounding technology is the Netflix anthology series Black Mirror (2011— present) produced by Charlie Brooker and Annabel Jones. Black Mirror, like Star Trek too, speculates concerning technology’s influences on social, political and economic conditions. In doing so, the show invites audiences to discuss the role of technology and its affordances in everyday life. This speculation, particularly in the case of Black Mirror, talks back to common genre markers of science fiction. The following section, therefore, positions Black Mirror within the purview of speculative science fiction, enabling the subsequent examination of Black Mirror as a techno-dystopian text that engages in experimental modes of narration and delivery. As will be shown, the Black Mirror mediaverse furthermore validates audience participation and fan appropriation of the text in a way that sanctions speculation about technology’s place in contemporary society.

1.3 Black Mirror & Techno-Dystopian Science Fiction

27

Science fiction, as a genre, has been notoriously hard to define. Brian Baker even dubs ‘What is science fiction?’ as an “impossible question, impossible because unanswerable, though many have tried, critics, writers and readers alike” (7). Baker identifies the genre’s hybrid nature regarding science and fictionality and its constant evolution as the reason behind its failure to be defined (8). However, certain recurring elements have been identified within canonical works of the genre. Adam Roberts, for example, separates science fiction from fantasy by stating that it “exists in some sort of defining relationship with science. This is true, even insofar as sf is in the business of exploring, and often transgressing, the boundary between what counts as science and what goes beyond” (4). In the various readings of texts that have commonly been identified as science fiction, such as the works of Jules Verne and H. G. Wells, science manifested in many forms, including but not limited to profession, technology, machines and contraptions. Science fiction, according to Roberts, thus largely began with the understanding of science (4). The science fiction genre boasts a very large and dedicated following in most media formats and enjoys a dominant position in television and web television (Telotte 1). Today, there is an explosion of science fiction content on television, in books, comics and other media, which has generated academic interest not only in the genre and its products but also in the audiences and consumers of science fiction. Early on, the genre was perceived with much derision and often identified with juvenile escapism (J. P. Telotte 1). In an attempt to trace the history of science fiction and its legitimation, inventor and writer Hugo Gernsback focused on ‘scientification’ that sought to “spread enthusiasm for the various technological devices that Gernsback imported and sold” (Brian Stableford 30). The word ‘science’ acquired its modern meaning when it took aboard the realization that reliable knowledge is rooted in the evidence of the senses, carefully sifted by deductive reasoning and the experimental testing of generalizations. In the seventeenth century writers began producing speculative fictions about new discoveries and technologies that the application of scientific method might bring about … within existing genres and narrative frameworks. (Stableford 15)

As technology evolved, science fiction became a means by which authors commented upon contemporary developments. Concerning the long history of science fiction, Roberts discusses how the Copernican Revolution led to a shift not only in the perception of science but its role in the transformation of European thought and its economy (4–5). Consequently, Copernicus featured in John Donne’s Ignatius his Conclave (1611), demonstrating the pervasiveness of science and scientific advancement in literary texts. Furthermore, Copernicus’ theory served as

28

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

“the locus of opposition to the Church’s domination of knowledge” (Roberts 5). As a result, one can assert science fiction as a genre that is political, and reflects upon the social, political, economic and technological climate of the time of its composition. Roberts identifies Donne’s work as “one of the earliest examples of what became a vigorous strand of seventeenth-century interplanetary romances” (4). The number of literary works that engaged with scientific speculation began to grow exponentially as the genre became increasingly popular. Tropes surrounding aliens, colonization of other planets and satellites, the utopian state, saviour figures and time travel, or engaging with future time began to emerge. Science fiction gradually became a cultural force by the means of which authors engaged with current affairs. For example, according to Roberts, utopia represented “an idealizing commentary upon present-day concerns, to project its alternative into a notional future world,” which he further argues was reflected in the works of John Milton and Gerard Winstanley (10). The works of Jules Verne and H. G. Wells in the nineteenth century, in turn, speak to the “industrial revolution and the transformative (and often alienating) social changes that accompanied it” (Arthur B. Evans 13). Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein addressed science as a source of terror while also cementing the mad scientist trope that is characteristic of numerous works of science fiction, especially in the nineteenth century, and also the “sudden paradigm shift between tradition and modernity” (Arthur B. Evans 13). This particular quality of engagement with contemporary issues prevailed in works of science fiction over the centuries and also migrated with the genre to other media formats such as film, television and web television. Hence, science fiction “is intimately bound up with ideas about historical change, especially the linked notions of progress, evolution, and modernity” (John Rieder 24). From Star Trek’s communications officer Lt. Uhura being played by a woman of colour, Nichelle Nichols, to Jodie Whittaker’s 13th Doctor in Doctor Who addressing humanity’s use of plastic and its devastating effect on the planet’s ecosystem, science fiction has frequently attempted to address social issues and spread awareness among the viewers of the genre. Telotte thus argues that “the science fiction series might represent an important voice for an increasingly technologized and science-haunted world” (1). Technology and science, however, are not only pervasive but also dynamic. Science fiction often chronicles and problematizes technological progress, and how it may be related to societal progress, highlighting the dynamic nature of the genre. As technology evolved, so did the texts featuring it—not only to map such technological progress but to reflect on it. This evolution rippled across media formats. As social media became increasingly pervasive, science fiction, as suggested before, came to reflect, comment on and appropriate these changes. Due to the pervasive nature of media, it has

1.3 Black Mirror & Techno-Dystopian Science Fiction

29

become commonplace for media consumers who interact with other media consumers to identify themselves not only as audiences but also as fans. This ease of identification and assertion can be seen as a direct result of Web 2.0, which enables the creation and sharing of user-generated content. The products of Web 2.0, such as YouTube, have levelled the playing field between the amateur and the professional, allowing for grassroots and corporate media producers to showcase their practices. This demonstrates the democratizing, yet capitalist nature of Web 2.0, which has dismantled the notion of ‘power in the hands of the few’ at least as far as technology and technological affordances are concerned, but also led to a new monopolization by corporations and institutions, as well as to a digital divide in terms of lack of access still for a large population all over the world. Yet, Web 2.0 certainly engages with the notion of autonomy granted to the user. Furthermore, it delivered to media consumers mass entertainment in the form of video games and streaming platforms that enable an easy access to books, music, movies and television shows. Additionally, digitization has sparked a revolution in the production structures and strategies as well as consumption behavior, which has led to the practice of prosumption among those who engage with media texts, as digitization allows “enunciatively and textually active fans to post, repost, remix, and embed content in their commentary or other paratexts, thus constructing, amending, or reinforcing the boundaries of their fan object” (Gray et. al 12). Therefore, technology has played a crucial role in shaping media and media consumption culture. Technology along with progress and its critique are key themes of most (if not all) science fiction television texts. Science fiction television, once deemed “escapist” (Telotte 1), is now a dominant genre on various networks and channels. The genre and format combination of science fiction television has sparked a great deal of interest among audiences to the point where a network specifically dedicated to the genre, the ‘Sci-Fi Channel’ (now ‘syfy’) started airing in 1992. The many science fiction television texts led to an increasing migration of television series titles to the big screen (in addition to vice versa), the creation of various spin-off series, and the development of a complex industry devoted to producing novel, comic book, and online continuations of the more successful series. (Telotte 2)

Science fiction television thus is viewed as “one of the key mirrors of the contemporary cultural climate” (Telotte 2). The mirror analogy is particularly interesting in relation to the science fiction web television show Black Mirror produced by

30

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

Netflix. The title of the show invokes a ‘mirror’ which shows the ‘dark’ aspects of contemporary society: Netflix’s critically acclaimed series Black Mirror (2011–2019) brings compelling representations of the emerging fourth industrial revolution in which robotics, data profiling, VR, algorithms and biohacking are enmeshed in systems of governance, work, pleasure, intimate relationships, memory, death and grief. The inventive title Black Mirror is itself evocative of countless technological forms—mobile phones, flat-screen TVs as well as small-screen wearable and hand-held devices that mediate our relationship to self, others and world. Notably the mirror is not just a reflecting surface, it is a dark cracked rebound suggesting that the plethora of our technologies are not neutral in their very design. (Margaret Gibson and Clarissa Carden 1)

This reflection of the darker and shadier aspects of society and technology as a theme is evident in most episodes of Black Mirror. However, science and technology “pose increasing challenges for science fiction narrative, particularly in terms of its ability to move beyond this new everyday world and to visualize an even more speculative—and perhaps far more spectacular—vision of what the future might hold and what we might yet achieve” (Telotte 3). With science fiction continuing its speculation in relation to technological progress, the genre attempts to illustrate mankind’s inherent sense of wonder. Mendlesohn argues that the sense of wonder which the narrative of science fiction texts is centred upon serves as “the emotional heart” of the genre: “The earliest sf relied on the creation of a new invention, or an arrival in a new place” (3). It can be argued that this sense of wonder translates into romance, yet “romance means something very different in sf” (Mendlesohn 3). Furthermore, science fiction is fuelled by cognitive estrangement, which “is tied inextricably to the encoded nature of sf” and relates to “the sense that something in the fictive world is dissonant with the reader’s experienced world” (Mendlesohn 5). Such cognitive estrangement enables critical commentary in texts of science fiction, as it arises when the text encourages reflection upon contemporary culture and society. Identifying estrangement as ‘moral uncanniness’ in the text, Gibson and Carden argue: Black Mirror provokes and disturbs, asking us to question the morality and ethics of devices that now provide unprecedented access to information, real time unfolding events, intimate lives and bodies. There is a deep sense of moral uncanniness as we grapple with how to deal with the ethical implications of being able to access people’s information that poses a threat to privacy. (2)

1.3 Black Mirror & Techno-Dystopian Science Fiction

31

Therefore, the elements of cognitive estrangement or moral uncanniness, a sense of wonder, and the proclivity to criticize the contemporary climate as well as the genre’s association with technology are all closely related to each other and have a significant impact on each other. However, in Black Mirror, despite illustrating how technology is created and exploited with an agenda to evoke the uncanny, “the fundamental, existential question “how should we live?” pervades the anthology” (Gibson and Carden 2). The proliferation of technology that characterized Web 2.0 and the following ‘fourth industrial revolution’ that Gibson and Carden address contribute to how the techno-dystopia theme plays out in the series through tropes of the uncanny and confronting the morals and ethics tied to affordances of technology and digitization. The technological affordances on one hand, connect people to one another, who forge varied and complex intimacies, and on the other, distance people from moral obligations due to anonymity, thus blurring the line between the personal and the public. The sense of wonder and the moral uncanniness experienced by the reader of a work of science fiction can also be linked to the elements of the journey and alienness, both of which are further key aspects of the genre. Alienness is arguably closely related to cognitive estrangement as the reader is compelled to consider what may be perceived as ‘Other’ or as outside the norm. When one considers works such as Thomas More’s Utopia (1516), Jules Verne’s Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea (1870), Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (1932) and Douglas Adams’ The Hitch-Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (1979), their narratives feature one or more characters’ literal or metaphorical journey, as well as a sense of alienness that is revealed to the reader as a result of cognitive estrangement and othering that caters to varied interpretations of the text. According to Mendlesohn, “Science fiction is part of a polysemic discourse. Texts are vulnerable to a multiplicity of interpretations, each of which produces a different landscape of sf, as reflected in numerous academic and ‘fan’ canons which have emerged over the past” (10). With science fiction falling within the realm of the speculative, which allows for deliberation and invention in terms of plot, narration, lexicon and characterization among other aspects, it can also be considered as experimental in the sense of an experimental idea or notion being made literary or visual. Joe Bray et. al assert that experimental literature is “irreducibly diverse” and that “the one feature that all literary experiments share is their commitment to raising fundamental questions about the very nature and being of verbal art itself … it is literature’s way of reinventing itself” (1). Given science fiction’s lexical and narrative experimentation and the tendency towards cognitive estrangement, many works of science fiction are experimental. Black Mirror, as a work of science

32

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

and speculative fiction, is an experimental text both due to its content, which rests within the framework of science fiction, as well as its modes of delivery. Black Mirror also tends to experiment with media technologies and affordances, and consequently ventures into the realm of experimental narration and innovative storytelling: “Black Mirror imaginatively heightens anxieties about the depth and reach of technological expansionism where social control of populations and individuals as well as economic exploitation are key drivers” (Gibson and Carden 4). Technological dystopia, according to Peter Pericles Trifonas, is foregrounded by the combination of human ingenuity and rapid technological advancements, which seemingly ‘threaten the state of the world’ (431). Machines, which are naturalized as a ‘stock’ feature in texts of science fiction, often serve as catalysts that trigger the end game and threaten the state of existence in science fiction texts. Dystopian themes, according to Trifonas, played a crucial role in texts of science fiction (429). Over the years, dystopian texts have “depicted different types of societies from ideal and satirical perspective … representing a failed quest to discover utopia and even understand it” (Trifonas 430). Dystopian elements as a response to failed utopian pursuits are seen as “morally unresolved in the rise of a technological dystopia and its effect on human society in a world to come, playing on the incommensurability of philosophical, religious, economic, and literary narratives of scientific progress” (Trifonas 430). The failed search for personal and collective utopia is at the heart of Black Mirror wherein speculative or existing technologies underline the dystopic elements of the diegetic world. With Black Mirror, the science fiction genre-markers veer into the niche of techno-dystopia and particularly highlight the differences in this show regarding the role of technology in comparison to Star Trek. My discussion of Black Mirror includes an intermedial analysis of the first experimental Black Mirror web-film, Black Mirror: Bandersnatch, which features interactive and ludic elements such as ‘choose your own adventure’ that transgresses the boundaries of traditional television. The fan dialogue surrounding Black Mirror that focuses on contemporary social issues in relation to matters of representation and social justice are highlighted in this study of the Black Mirror mediaverse, thereby emphasising the role of audiences in the interpretation and appropriation of the text. Turning the mediaverse lens on Black Mirror positions the text’s mediaverse in the realm of innovative experimental media in relation to the techno-dystopian themes the show engages with.

1.4 Genre-bending in The OA

1.4

33

Genre-bending in The OA

While the Black Mirror mediaverse highlights themes and tropes of technodystopia as the nexus of interaction among the audiences and producers of the text, the mediaverse of The OA demonstrates the elements of a metamodern utopia that is brought about by the engagement of the audiences with the show and its producers. In the case of Star Trek: Discovery, the engagement of both producers and audiences with the text, its contents and delivery illustrate the speculative nature of the text, particularly concerning the social, political, and cultural developments of the United States of America. However, given the significant role played by technology and the presence of popular tropes such as aliens and alien-worlds, futuristic gadgets, space travel, artificial intelligence, the text can certainly be identified as a work of science fiction in the broad understanding of the genre. The relationship between technology and society is also evident in the Black Mirror mediaverse. Distinct from DSC, Black Mirror posits technology in a way that enables audiences to criticise not only the proliferation of the technology or the technology itself but also the manner in which it is used or abused. In my consideration of Black Mirror, I explore the notion of cognitive estrangement and sense of wonder that certain episodes of Black Mirror tend to evoke in their audiences. With The OA, the question of genre and genre markers is further problematized because, firstly, the narrative is embedded with tropes from speculative fiction that are often veering in the direction of both science fiction and fantasy and, secondly, because of its formatting and mode of delivery. The complexity evoked by this genre-mixing in The OA is also transmitted to its fandom, which has adopted unique fan practices concerning the text. In the discussion of The OA’s genre(s), the mediaverse model is in particular effective in that it enables a shift in focus from identifying genre markers to audiences. As will be indicated in the examination of the DSC mediaverse, fan texts, including fan interpretations, interactions, appropriations and annotations, are conceived in accordance with paratexts and intertexts that fans consume. These fan-appropriated realms significantly influence the network of textual mediaverses, teasing out elements of the text that may be further examined to illustrate how it is mediated and remediated. Placing The OA as a work of spiritual fiction at the nexus of science fiction and fantasy under the umbrella of the speculative, allows for a revision of pre-existing media and genre concepts. The mediaverse approach, however, circumvents the necessity to employ pre-established jargon and conceptualisations to a text that pushes beyond recognized conformities of

34

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

genre. Rather, it allows for the examination of science fiction and fantasy audiences as well as overlapping fan practices among various audiences within the realm of speculative genres. While The OA bears the markers of spiritualism and mysticism in the narrative, creating yet another genre node on The OA mediaverse, when the perspective shifts to the examination of the modes of delivery, one may observe its influence on the genre markers that the text may be tagged with. The analysis concludes with a look at how fan and celebrity activism, which is already broached in the consideration of the DSC mediaverse, and which influences the current media consumption climate. As audiences influence the perception of a media text within fan communities, they form sub-groups with specific aspirations for the text and its characters. These aspirations are mapped out in their appropriation and community-driven fan practices, which are consequently laid out in chapter three in relation to Netflix’ The OA.21 The text is examined in light of its metafictional and experimental characteristics, which upon cancellation by the producer and distributor Netflix sparked an outrage among fans and led to the #SaveTheOA initiative, calling to attention how fan activism attempts to influence the changing media landscape and is a harbinger of new practices for engaging with media. In this analysis, audiences not only assess the media text but also its production channels and agents, which delineates their crucial role within the mediaverse concept.

1.5

Good Omens and Fantasy Fiction

Given that genre is significant when audiences consider which texts to consume and annotate, as well as employ genre markers to interact with the stakeholders of the text, it is appropriate to discuss the genre of fantasy fiction when examining the Good Omens mediaverse, especially in light of the fanfiction practices that fantasy fans gravitate towards. Concerning the conception of genres in general, Jason Mittell argues that the “genres are produced by the very process of categorization itself, making the topic more interesting and sophisticated than it might seem” (81). He looks at genres as categories and considers them to be “a product of cultural practices, rather than a stable, self-evident term” (81). Examining a specific genre as a cultural practice enables the exploration of genre categories via “a specific case study” in 21

Although the text is called The OA and in referring to its mediaverse, it should be addressed as ‘The The OA mediaverse,’ for the sake of readability, I refer to the text with a single use of the definite article.

1.5 Good Omens and Fantasy Fiction

35

terms of a close examination of its “formal features and interpretative meanings” (Mittell 81). Much like science fiction, fantasy as a genre has also proven to be notoriously difficult to define. Dieter Petzold discusses both the difficulty in outlining the genre and the terms associated with it (11). Not only does there seem to be disagreement about the definition of the genre, but also regarding the history of the genre and what might be considered canonical fantasy texts. Instead of attempting to define the genre, Petzold thus argues for plurality in its examination (12). According to the Oxford English Dictionary, ‘fantasy’ has “no less than seven separate meanings, plus a large number of subdivisions” (Petzold 12). Addressing the difference between ‘fantasy’ and ‘fantasy fiction,’ Petzold argues that the former refers to “sub-creative art, an impulse native to literature or a natural human activity,” while the latter alludes to a “concrete body of texts” that are characteristic of a genre (12). Petzold furthermore claims that fantasy fiction “cannot be defined exclusively in terms of subject matter, form, or function”— aspects which he nevertheless claims are “important for an understanding of the genre” (13). To expand upon fantasy fiction as a genre, and specifically as one that may be examined as a key cultural practice, I employ the limited web television series Good Omens (2019) as a case study. The series is an adaptation of the book Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch (1990) written by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman. Neil Gaiman also served as creator, writer and showrunner of the series. Given his status as a literary celebrity, one may argue for Neil Gaiman’s role as auteur. This section of the project, while examining fantasy fiction and its audiences, also expands upon the transformation of Neil Gaiman’s celebrity due to the release of the web television show to further illustrate the networked functions of the mediaverse. Scholars such as Farah Mendlesohn, Edward James, Jason Mittell and Dieter Petzold carefully avoid attributing ‘typical traits’ to fantasy as a genre. Petzold claims that doing so would make any list of these traits capricious. What he does note, however, is that fantasy fiction as a genre can arguably be seen as an invitation to the reader to “join in a game,” where he suggests the reader may experience ‘wonder’ for the very foundation of the narrative is shaken (Petzold 13). On the other hand, James and Mendlesohn claim: we view fantasy as a group of texts that share, to a greater degree or other, a cluster of common tropes which may be objects but which may also be narrative techniques. At the centre are those stories which share tropes of the completely impossible and towards the edge, in subsets, are those stories which include only a small number of tropes, or which construct those tropes in such a way as to leave doubt in the reader’s mind as to whether what they have read is fantastical or not. (1)

36

1

Introducing the Mediaverse

The ‘experience of wonder’ is similar to the sense of wonder one experiences when consuming science fiction. Indeed, James and Mendlesohn argue that science fiction and fantasy fiction may be closely related, and scholars mostly agree that “fantasy is about the construction of the impossible whereas science fiction may be about the unlikely but is grounded in the scientifically possible” (1). Science fiction and fantasy fiction can be identified as falling under the umbrella of the speculative for their ability to function as a ‘thought experiment.’ In the section that analyses the text Black Mirror, I address this notion of the thought experiment as it functions in science fiction. With fantasy fiction, the thought experiment, too, is seen in its relationship with the reader’s reality. Petzold claims that works of fantasy fiction “may have a strong resemblance to what we think of as reality, mainly by conforming to certain rules that are assumed to govern the natural world,” and that, although it does not try to imitate nature, it does relate to the natural order of things and the reader’s reality in an “oblique” manner, cementing fantasy fiction’s complex relationship with reality (Petzold 14). As fantasy fiction aims to subvert the reader’s reality through tropes of the genre, it also enables the reader to experience cognitive estrangement, as is the case with science fiction. While science fiction utilizes science to achieve this sense of defamiliarization, fantasy fiction does the same through the subversion of what may be commonly accepted as the natural order of things, and that by proposing the impossible, defamiliarizes the obvious. The shared notions of cognitive estrangement and sense of wonder between science fiction and fantasy also characterize the unique relationship between the text and the audience. For fantasy fiction, Petzold employs Clayton’s term ‘noematic’ to illustrate the notion of ‘reality’ that composes the reader’s world and ‘fantasmic,’ which symbolizes the means by which the noematic is subverted. Against this backdrop, for any text to qualify as a work of fantasy fiction, it “needs to express a conscious departure from, even a rebellion against, the principle of mimesis” (15), an act that is informed by the subversion of the noematic. For this subversion, however, it is crucial to consider that the noematic state does not exist solely for the reader and their response, but also for the producer of the text. To James and Mendlesohn, “an awareness of conversation between authors and texts is one of the defining characteristics of the form” (2). This feature may arguably be the most appropriate in the context of contemporary media culture, given not only the affordances of Web 2.0 but also the ‘second screen,’ which enables a communion among audiences and producers through the networked mediaverse, as this case study outlines. The examination of The OA mediaverse and the Good Omens mediaverse is indicative of the fact that in the production field, celebrities and public figures

1.5 Good Omens and Fantasy Fiction

37

that are associated with a particular text can wield a major influence on both the text and its fandom. While this is apparent in The OA mediaverse, it is a key aspect in the discussion of Prime Video’s Good Omens mediaverse. Neil Gaiman, co-author of the novel of Good Omens and executive producer of its web television adaptation, holds a significant position in the Good Omens mediaverse and, through his active social media presence, is visibly involved in the exchange of social capital. The mediaverse concept here lays emphasis on how the textual meaning-making processes by audiences and fans of Good Omens are influenced by Gaiman, diverging into themes concerning not only the text but also parasocial relationships and literary celebrity to exemplify yet another layer in the dynamics of media discourses that undergo constant transformation because of the exchanges between the structures of the mediaverse. In conclusion, these four case studies selected as examples to explore the mediaverse are assessed to delineate the strengths and limitations of the concept as a new lens by means of which media texts, producers, distributors, social media platforms and consumers can be examined individually and as collectives based on their complex, dynamic relationship with each other. While I limit my investigation to specific television shows, platforms and fan practices, the potential scope of the mediaverse can be extended to other texts, genres, audience types, and platforms to facilitate comparative cross-examinations. As such, the framework of the mediaverse presents a foundational component in the theorization of today’s diverse and constantly shifting media culture.

The Star Trek Mediaverse

2.1

2

Star Trek: History and Fandom

Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek made its debut in September 1966 and became a phenomenon that lasted more than 50 years and continues to entertain its audiences. Surviving two cancellation attempts by the NBC network, the Star Trek franchise grew to produce numerous television shows with many seasons, animated shows, movies, comics, and graphic novels amongst others. With the release of DSC in 2017, producer and showrunner Alex Kurtzman hailed what can be identified as a revival of the franchise with four seasons of DSC and one season of Picard already launched; and with two more shows in production (as of early 2021).1 The multitudes of transmedia texts have greatly enriched the Star Trek universe, providing it with depth and complexity that is characteristic of those narratives that are delivered to audiences over a prolonged period of time and through various media formats. The very complex intermediality of the Star Trek mediaverse and its equally complex transmedial world-building is also what allows for its continuity, both in terms of narration and of consumption by its audiences. According to Dawn Stobbart, the longevity of the text is a result of the fan base continually being “fed ancillary content for years and years,” thus leading them to keep the “torch burning” (161). The original series of Star Trek featuring Captain James T. Kirk and First Officer and Science Officer Spock along with Helmsman Sulu, Communications Officer Uhura and Chief Engineer Scott enjoyed a three-year run from 1966 to 1969, and upon its cancellation, the 1 https://www.space.com/star-trek-section-31-discovery-filming-schedules.html and https:// www.denofgeek.com/tv/star-trek-strange-new-worlds-optimistic-science-fiction/

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2024 A. Shah, The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43739-8_2

39

40

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

actors of the series lent their voices to an animated series featuring their respective characters. However, the series soon developed a cult following, which led to grassroots attempts to revive the same. Upon lobbying for the series’ revival and sending numerous letters to the network as well as to those associated with the production of the series, it returned to American television screens as Star Trek: The Next Generation (henceforth referred to as: TNG) featuring a new cast with a similar premise (Camille Bacon-Smith 2–4; Drushel 6–8). This similarity—and later the movie Star Trek: Generations (1994)—lent continuity to the show. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993–1999), in turn, in its pilot episode is tied in with the concluding story arc of TNG and later also features characters from TNG, such as engineer O’ Brien, Lt. Worf and Captain Picard himself. The federation ship Voyager, the main setting for Star Trek: Voyager (1995–2001), is seen departing from the space station ‘Deep Space Nine,’ once again highlighting the continuity of the Star Trek narrative universe. Furthermore, during the run of each of these shows, numerous novelizations, tie-in video games, movies and comics were released that would aid in the prolonged enjoyment of consuming all things Star Trek. Given the multiplicity of the transmedia text that is Star Trek, it is no surprise that the franchise developed a dedicated fan following, leading to scholarly inquiry into both the text itself and its audiences. With fan studies still in its nascent stages at the time, the work of Henry Jenkins and Camille Bacon-Smith played an important role in legitimizing fan communities. Bacon-Smith’s Enterprising Women: Television Fandom and the Creation of the Popular Myth (1992) and Jenkins’ Textual Poachers (1992) employed the Star Trek fandom as case studies to explore the development and politics of fan communities in relation to the texts and those involved in their production. Bacon-Smith likens being a fan to being a rebel (Bacon-Smith 2–4), in which context Trekkers (Star Trek fans) set the standards for later fan communities: Star Trek, the granddaddy of the media sources … survived two cancellation attempts by its network, NBC, because loyal fans organized write-in salvage campaigns that generated hundreds of thousands of letters. … Star Trek itself continued in innumerable commercial ventures—Saturday cartoons, toys, books, movies, and now a new set of television episodes. Catchphrases from the show have entered the popular vernacular. Writers and actors in the commercial products attend conventions sponsored in part by the very ladies who are testing the sexual limits of their favorite Vulcan, Mr. Spock, in their own fiction. The write-in campaign has become so important in the industry that some producers exhort their fans to rally letter-writers around their own flagging series. (Bacon-Smith 4–5)

2.1 Star Trek: History and Fandom

41

Bacon-Smith elaborates how the network NBC had to bow “to write-in pressure to move fan favorite Quantum Leap to a more convenient viewing time,” further highlighting how various fan communities followed the Trekker way of breathing new life into their fandom (5). Both Jenkins’ and Bacon-Smith’s texts illustrate the cultural production (or reproduction) and the social standing of a fan, zooming in on numerous fan practices such as writing fan fiction, fan-vidding,2 attending fan conventions and fan activism that juxtaposes textual consumption with textual production and highlight the fan phenomenon. Aided by Jenkins’ and BaconSmith’s studies, fan studies gradually developed as an area of research (see e.g. Busse and Hellekson, Coppa, Jonathan Gray et. al, Rukmini Pande, Lamerichs, and Matt Hills). According to Jenkins, fans of texts become “important cultural critics” as they explore fan communities from an “autobiographical perspective” (Jenkins, Fans, Bloggers and Gamers 4–5). Additionally, while the transmediality of the Star Trek mediaverse is expounded upon by the different series, comics, graphic novels, films, novelisations, animated series etc., so is its intermediality. The interactions between the various media formats in the Star Trek mediaverse has contributed significantly to the development of Trekker culture. Contemporary media synergy practices, for example, have led to fans of the series to consume the text in various ways and streamline their experience of the text, such as ‘binge-watching’ a season of the show while also viewing a spin-off or an adaptation of the ‘source’ text. Furthermore, the rich and longstanding history of Star Trek and Trekkers has led to the development of nostalgic but also anti-fannish sentiments among the Trekker community. The Star Trek mediaverse, therefore, engages in contemporary media culture not as a single text, but as a transmedial and intermedial corpus of texts. Concerning DSC, Sherryl Vint argues that the show presents the Star Trek universe in a different light while maintaining aspects that Trekkers are familiar with: “the outlines of the familiar Federation are there but written in an unstable medium and subject to change. … And changing our perspective on the Star Trek universe is precisely what this series is about” (1–2). As Vint suggests, 2

Francesca Coppa describes fannish vidding as: [A] form of grassroots filmmaking in which clips from television shows and movies are set to music. The result is called a vid or a songvid. Unlike professional MTV-style music videos, in which footage is created to promote and popularize a piece of music, fannish vidders use music in order to comment on or analyze a set of preexisting visuals, to stage a reading, or occasionally to use the footage to tell new stories. In vidding, the fans are fans of the visual source, and music is used as an interpretive lens to help the viewer to see the source text differently. A vid is a visual essay that stages an argument, and thus it is more akin to arts criticism than to traditional music video (Coppa Transformative Works).

42

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse DSC sets out ambitiously to perpetuate all that is most beloved and culturally valuable about the franchise—its interest in social justice and equality, its utopian vision of a future of prosperity and inclusion, its commitment to pushing the boundaries of media diversity—while at the same time acknowledging the ways that the franchise’s embrace of mainstream liberalism has allowed it to be complicit in white supremacist and imperialist ideologies. (2)

An example of DSC’s advocation for equality, diversity and representation is evident in the story arc of Adira Tal in season three. Adira is the first human to have joined permanently with a trill symbiont. Canonically, trill symbionts carry the memories, knowledge and experiences of all the previous individuals the symbiont has united with, therefore encompassing multiple personalities. While this feature does speak subtly to the notion of gender fluidity, as the trill host now holds identities of people of various genders, it is more explicit in the case of Adira Tal. Adira is the first character to verbally state that they identify as non-binary and prefer the pronoun ‘they/them.’ The actor playing Adira, Blu del Barrio, has explicitly stated, “Adira is non-binary, has always been non-binary before they were a host. It wasn’t that having the symbiont brought out something else in them” (Riley Silverman).3 In the same interview, the actor claims that their own personal pronouns are the same as Adira’s and that they, too, identify as non-binary. It was while shooting for DSC that they came out to their social circle as non-binary and playing Adira certainly played a significant role in the process. Furthermore, Blu also stated that the trill species connected with queer fans of Star Trek in the past because of potential to interpret the species as nonbinary. In addition, the cast for the third season also features Ian Alexander, a non-binary, transgender actor who plays Adira’s ‘boyfriend’ and a trill host, whose death Adira witnesses, and the latter is therefore compelled to accept the trill symbiont to save it and perhaps the memories of their boyfriend. The cast, therefore, is more diverse in terms of gender and LGBTQ + representation, further highlighting how the producers are conscious of LGBTQ + activism. This is also evident the casting of Sonequa Martin-Green as the lead character of Michael in DSC (discussed further below) and in the employment of canonical plot elements, such as the trill, that call back to the earlier iterations of Star Trek yet are distinctive in their portrayal in DSC to consider questions of representation and social justice that the franchise hopes to broach among its viewers. In yet another example of the series’ engagement with contemporary issues, the series also contains elements that often reflect the political climate of the 3

https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/star-treks-new-non-binary-star-blu-del-barrio-talks-theirdebut.

2.1 Star Trek: History and Fandom

43

United States. In light of the growing unrest under the Trump government concerning matters of equality and justice, DSC outlines the cultural politics located within a system that may be deemed as unjust, further illustrating the confluence of Star Trek and the influence of American culture, politics and economy. An examination of the Star Trek mediaverse, especially the fan dialogue, reveals the engagement of the Trekkers and the show(s) with the political climate in the United States. For example, numerous online magazines and blogs report on how fans, through a social media initiative dubbed ‘Trek Against Trump,’ took a political stand, specifically against Donald Trump, when he was still the Republican Presidential nominee in 2016.’4 Its posts on Facebook and Twitter engage with Trekkers and those involved in the production of the show to further the campaign against what the ‘Trek Against Trump’ community believes Donald Trump stands for, which is often identified as the opposite of what Trek represents to them, i.e.: [A] positive vision of the future, a vision of hope and optimism, and most importantly, a vision of inclusion, where people of all races are accorded equal respect and dignity, where individual beliefs and lifestyles are respected so long as they pose no threat to others. We cannot turn our backs on what is happening in the upcoming election. Never has there been a presidential candidate who stands in such complete opposition to the ideals of the Star Trek universe as Donald Trump. His election would take this country backward, perhaps disastrously. We need to elect a president who will move this country forward to the kind of future we all dream of: where personal differences are understood and accepted, where science overrules superstition, where people work together instead of against each other. (Mission Statement of ‘Trek Against Trump’ community on Facebook)

The ‘Trek Against Trump’ community was mobilised during the 2016 election, wherein those involved in the making of the show publicly announced their endorsement of Hillary Clinton and their discontent with the nomination of Donald Trump. Specifically, the ‘Trek Against Trump’ campaign urged its fans, audiences and endorsers to vote for Clinton: We have heard people say they will vote Green or Libertarian or not at all because the two major candidates are equally flawed. That is both illogical and inaccurate. … One is an amateur with a contemptuous ignorance of national laws and international 4

See: 1) https://larrynemecek.com/trek-against-trump/ 2) https://www.themarysue.com/trek-against-trump/ 3) https://www.facebook.com/TrekAgainstTrumpOfficial/ 4) https://qz.com/re/trek-against-trump/ 5) https://mashable.com/2016/09/29/trek-against-trump-facebook-group/?europe=true.

44

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse realities, while the other has devoted her life to public service …. If, as some say, the government is broken, a protest vote will not fix it. (Mission Statement of ‘Trek Against Trump’ community on Facebook)

The campaign, which aims to “Vote for a future of enlightenment and inclusion, a future that will someday lead us to the stars” was endorsed by numerous celebrities and producers associated with Star Trek, including J. J. Abrams, Ira Steven Behr, LeVar Burton, Denise Crosby, Jonathan Frakes, Bryan Fuller, George Takei and Brent Spiner among many others. This form of political activism on the part of celebrities and public figures is not unheard of, especially in the case of Star Trek. The presence of Star Trek actors and producers on Twitter revealed their advocacy for racial equality and social justice, and their criticism of racial discrimination and particularly of President Donald Trump. For example, Marina Sirtis, who plays the role of Deanna Troi in ST: TNG, often engages in dialogue on Twitter with her followers and Twitter users to vocalise her criticism of Donald Trump, especially during the 2020 Presidential election and his handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.5 In interactions such as the above, social media institutions, such as Facebook or Twitter, through intermedial interactions with web television media such as Star Trek, are mediated by audience members and actors engaged in the production of the text to manifest speculation and articulation concerning the momentary political and social environment of America. Such an instance of intermedial exchange that resonates with fan-celebrity intervention and interaction is also evident in the case of Jason Isaacs. Sabrina Mittermeier discusses celebrity activism and resistance, particularly on the part of Jason Issacs, who played the role of Gabriel Lorca in DSC season 1 and Lucius Malfoy in the Harry Potter films (52–3). Noting the importance of self-promotion and self-presentation, certain celebrities engage in social and political commentary and criticism, particularly when concerned with fan activism, wherein “forms of civic engagement and political participation … emerge from within fan culture itself, often in response to shared interests of fans, often conducted through the infrastructure of existing fan practices and relationships, and often framed through metaphors that are drawn from popular and participatory culture” (Mittermeier 53). Jason Isaacs, according to Mittermeier, is an example of celebrity

5

See:1)https://twitter.com/Marina_Sirtis/status/1329933537877757952. 2) https://twitter.com/Marina_Sirtis/status/1331694307107958784. 3) https://twitter.com/Marina_Sirtis/status/1330628003064213504. 4) https://twitter.com/Marina_Sirtis/status/1330241936142323712. 5) https://twitter.com/Marina_Sirtis/status/1329583543853355008.

2.1 Star Trek: History and Fandom

45

activism in Western culture, particularly after the political impact of the election of Donald Trump and of Brexit (53). Isaacs’ condition to signing up to play Gabirel Lorca in DSC was to be able to provide input to the character he plays. This is crucial in the context of Isaacs’ criticism of Donald Trump’s America and how this is reflected in Lorca’s character and his desire to “Make the Empire Glorious Again” as he attempts to dethrone Emperor Georgiou (54–5). Mittermeier claims that the parallels between Isaacs’s Lorca and Donald Trump were not only deliberate but a “collaborative project” between the writers and Isaacs “to make a clear statement on contemporary politics” (55). This engagement with the script is also supported by LoConto, who states that Isaacs “purposely added the line to reflect … the propaganda used by the Trump administration. Isaacs wanted to highlight what the Mirror Universe was, and that was Trump’s America” (136). This interaction between the producers and show collaborators to participate in the ongoing cultural and political dialogue through the media texts, and of the audiences engaging in meaning-making based on their environs is what the mediaverse approach outlines. These processes yielded campaigns such as ‘Trek Against Trump’ and other fan activism or producer-driven projects that carry cultural value and enable the media text to be a tool by means of which one may perceive societal circumstances in which the text is produced and consumed. Here, ‘Trek Against Trump’ serves as a momentary manifestation of culture that is a product of intermedial interplay between the web television text that gives form to certain ideas and the discourse they spark among audiences and producers that are mediated by social media websites. Also, through fan appropriation and audience criticism, one may identify the aspirations of the fans and audiences. For example, through ‘Trek Against Trump’ and Isaacs’ celebrity activism, fans and producers articulate their aspiration towards a more equal, and a more inclusive America, by reference to Star Trek as speculative of the American condition. Furthermore, in Isaacs’ case, his criticism of Britain’s Brexit vote, too, outlines speculation about the Britain that Isaacs and his fans strive for, indicating that mediaverses tend to actively engage with extant circumstances and play a role in identifying trends regarding public affairs. An analysis of the continuities and changes in the narration, delivery and reception of the Star Trek mediaverse grants an overview of the themes at the heart of the franchise that spark dialogue and criticism among the audiences and producers in light of how they may relate to the contemporary social, cultural and political scenario. This examination involves consideration of the transmedial and intermedial universe embedded within the Star Trek mediaverse.

46

2.2

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

Transmediality and Intermediality in Star Trek

With the advent of digital technology, television programming underwent a monumental change. According to Elizabeth Evans, digital television “has opened up a greater number of channels to a wider number of homes and the potential for delivering new forms of content to television sets” (1). As television programming made room for technological affordances brought on by the internet and digitization, producers of television shows noticed the merits in branching out to different media formats to retain loyal fans. Additionally, internet and digitization also led to grassroots production and appropriation of media content: “The internet has become a key site for engagement with audio-visual media of all kinds, from broadcast material to professionally produced ‘webisodes’ to user generated content” (Evans 1). Advances in television technology led to an expansion of television content and narratives through what Jenkins labels transmedia storytelling (Convergence Culture). Evans’ application of transmedia is particularly useful, as it retains its focus on how television narratives become “bigger than the TV” (1–2) as a result of transmedia storytelling—an aspect that is highlighted in relation to DSC and Picard. Additionally, Evans’ understanding allows for a distinction between transmedia storytelling and the mediaverse. According to Evans, transmediality “describes the increasingly popular industrial practice of using multiple media technologies to present information concerning a single fictional world through a range of textual forms. … It may relate to practices such as franchising, merchandising, adaptations, spin-offs, sequels and marketing” (1–2). Audiences are thus key to the development of transmedia storytelling and distribution of content, as producers of television shows seek to retain loyal audiences and accomplish this by delivering media content on multiple platforms to prolong the enjoyment of a particular text, thus providing audiences with a unique experience of consuming the text. Furthermore, although certain incarnations of the text stand out from the rest of the franchise, they do contain textual elements that “serve as a reminder of the wider Star Trek world for the reviewer,” thus highlighting the transmedial nature of the text, wherein the transmedial Star Trek universe contains a multitude of texts across various media formats to which audiences continue to return (Stobbart 162). Evans claims, “Whereas it is possible to observe how the television industry offers increasingly varied forms of engagement, it is also necessary to ascertain the extent to which viewers are embracing these changes” (2), as audiences “are predominantly positioned as viewers of content or users of technology” (4–5). While transmediality focuses on the expansion of the storyworld via multiple formats, it is the textual intermediality that is centred on how the

2.2 Transmediality and Intermediality in Star Trek

47

texts of the transmedia storyworld interact with one another as well as with the producers and audiences. This distinction in the functions of transmediality and intermediality provides an insight into the Star Trek mediaverse, including the Trekker community. This relationship is a result of technological convergence and the spreadability of media content since audiences engage with it across the various media platforms via which this content is delivered. Transmedia storytelling, as opposed to transmedia distribution and engagement (see Jenkins Convergence Culture, and Peter von Stackelberg),6 focuses on the development of the narrative, which can no longer be restricted to a single medium. Media institutions vied for control over the text through production and distribution rights, reflecting intermedial trajectories of media text that are problematised as a result of new media engagements. For example, Stobbart discusses the split in 2005 between Viacom and CBS concerning the rights to the intellectual property of Star Trek, and how these played a significant role in the development of the newer iterations: This complicated ownership resulted in delays and cancelations of new Star Trek content, with the 2009 and 2016 films both being affected by CBS being resistant to these releases, and which affected tie-in merchandise production. This made the 2019 remerger of CBS and Viacom’s Paramount Pictures all the more exciting, as it will allow the parts of the franchise that were owned by different companies to become part of one corporate entity again, potentially enabling the whole franchise to once again enjoy a symbiotic relationship. (162–3).

This intermedial and transmedial interplay that influences production and distribution of the text is directly linked to the text’s continuity, longevity and profitability. By producing and providing the fandom more Star Trek, not only is more complexity and depth lent to the Star Trek universe but also the target demographic is widened as a result of the multimedia structure of the text. It is crucial to examine transmedia storytelling alongside distribution to note how each media format is affected by specific sets of regulations, and to illustrate the feedback producers receive concerning consumption practices and the popularity 6

Transmedia distribution and engagement are linked to the changing media landscape and focus on the production and distribution, and commercial practices of transmedia texts including licensing, branding, merchandising, and franchising. Transmedia storytelling is centred on the storyworld, wherein the narrative universe is expanded upon via different texts across multiple delivery channels (von Stackelberg 233–4). For the sake of clarity, as already stated in the introduction to this project, the use of the term ‘transmedia’ is restricted to transmedia storytelling unless stated otherwise, and the synergies and systems surrounding the transmedia text that involves various media formats is referred to as ‘intermediality.’

48

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

of, as well as profit garnered from the texts they produce. Von Stackelberg identifies four factors that played a significant role in the emergence of transmedia franchises, namely: “technological change; proliferation of media channels but declining audiences; commercial considerations; and fan experiences” (235). In consideration of the Star Trek mediaverse, these four factors played a crucial role in the development of the storyworld and its intermedial exchange. Factors such as proliferation of media channels and commercial aspects have created challenges for media producers and underlined the importance of transmedia storytelling: [C]onsumers’ familiarity with a creator, her cast of characters, and a known storyworld can be a significant benefit of a media and transmedia franchise when competing in a crowded marketplace. The proliferation of content and the number of channels available for content distribution has made discoverability a significant challenge for all media products, whether they are films, television programs, books, or some other form of media. The development of a loyal base of fans for a transmedia franchise can help mitigate the challenges of discoverability by creating both a recurring source of revenue and opportunities to use fans’ personal and social media connections to promote the franchise (von Stackelberg 237)

As far as Trekkers are concerned, fan studies has long acknowledged the dedication of the fan community, often depicting its ‘hardcore’ audience to highlight the social identity of active audiences and fans. The Star Trek fans, according to John Tulloch and Henry Jenkins, are conceptualized by producers, journalists, critics, and other audience members because of how the fan practices are perceived by “popular journalism and preconceived by the reading public” (4– 5). Scholarship on the Star Trek fandom and its practices indicates that the text enjoys both mass popularity as well as a dedicated following. It is the dedicated followers, the Trekkers, who embrace technology to appropriate the text, which often manifests in bricolaged products such as fanzines, fan art and fan fiction, fan-made videos, cosplay etc. The diversification of varied fan practices that result in an exponentially increasing volume of user-generated content also revealed a steady heterogeneity among Trekkers, including gendered and racialised meaningmaking and interpretation processes (see Rukmini Pande, Paul Booth and Mel Stanfill). Given the assiduity of Trekkers, it is hardly surprising that Star Trek transitioned into the realm of transmedia storytelling and distribution, since the fans demanded more of the text as well as more from the text, and the producers aimed to deliver—albeit for commercial benefits, which Mary Celeste Kearney identifies “as ‘transmedia exploitation,’ consisting of ‘the repeated adaptation of

2.2 Transmediality and Intermediality in Star Trek

49

an established entertainment text into different media forms’ and ‘the promotion of a text’s reputation as a successful entertainment property when marketing later versions produced in different formats” (Kearney quoted in Evans 21, emphasis in original). Evans employs Marsha Kinder and Mary Celeste Kearney’s understanding of transmedia as “processes of cross-platform adaptation and marketing,” with an agenda for commercial gain for the producers (21). Evans elaborates specifically on Kinder’s use of the term “supersystems” to describe the intertextuality that firmly link transmedia texts “constructed around a figure or group of figures from pop culture” (21). In the case of Star Trek, the individual iterations of the franchise become part of the Star Trek supersystem by establishing a link to the narrative universe, these expanding the text in the transmedial sense. Evans argues for supersystems as an effective means to raise children to become consumers to “ensure the commercial success of the product,” which is achieved by the commodification of content and entails the transformation of the text into a media event (21), wherein audiences strive to attend or view premiere shows and screenings, or stream episodes as soon as they become available, and also engage in ‘pleasures of collection’ that involve purchasing limited edition and other merchandise, collecting autographs and as part of ‘pleasures of connection’ also striving for celebrity-fan encounters, both online and offline (Duffet 277). The commercial perspective that characterises supersystems and transmedia franchises is linked closely to audience practices and fan experiences since creating a “high-quality audience experience” is significantly beneficial for a franchise in the competitive media market as it creates “a strong sense of ownership and identification” with the franchise (Lemke quoted in von Stackelberg 237). In the case of Trekkers, nostalgia is also characterised by a business perspective, as it is often used as a tool to retain loyal audiences. Ryan Lizardi asserts the mediation of nostalgia through fan campaigns dedicated to the resurrection or revival of their favourite shows, as was the case with Star Trek: The Original Series, and as the communication between fans and producers of media texts became more pronounced, “[f]ans now felt even more connection to and control over the series. … A fan’s job never being done is a sentiment that media producers are happy to encourage and is one that carries a direct connection to the melancholic mindset encouraged in the contemporary nostalgic” (67–71). The newer iterations of the Star Trek mediaverse, such as DSC and Picard, employ nostalgia as a tool to expand the transmedial story of Star Trek, for example by featuring beloved characters from the narrative universe, such as Jean-Luc Picard or Spock, to facilitate the migration of audiences from one text of the transmedia world to another. The notion of supersystems and transmedia storytelling can be expanded to explore migratory practices of the Star Trek fandom. Transmedia franchises are,

50

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

according to von Stackelberg, driven by popular characters as well as storyworlds. Captain Jean-Luc Picard, played by Sir Patrick Stewart, remains one of the most beloved characters of the franchise to this day. Among the Star Trek fan community, Picard has, since his first appearance in Star Trek: The Next Generation, become a cultural icon. As a result of his character’s popularity, Stewart as Picard graced the covers of numerous magazines, novelizations, film posters, official and unofficial Star Trek merchandise and video games.7 It could certainly be argued that within the Star Trek supersystem, Picard, like other characters, settings, and objects from the franchise, is employed as a central cultural object that evokes nostalgia and is designed to entice fans to other media formats, thus demonstrating overlap between transmediality and intermediality of contemporary texts that transform consumption trends. To facilitate this migration, media producers (writers, artists, game designers etc.) aim to expand the fictional world featuring the specific icon, thereby adding the layer of transmedia storytelling and engagement to the text. This form of storytelling also occurs through spin-offs,8 which is also evident in the case of Jean-Luc Picard, who is a Starfleet Captain on the Federation ship ‘USS Enterprise’ in the late 24th century. The numerous transmedia texts shed light on Picard’s character arc, for example the film Star Trek: First Contact (1996) illustrates the aftereffects of Picard’s Borg assimilation on his psyche. In the film Star Trek: Generations (1994), Picard enlists the help of Captain Kirk, who is also a cultural icon in the Star Trek supersystem, to defeat Dr. Sora, while the Star Trek: The Next Generation tie-in novel Kahless (1996) features Picard and his crew member Lieutenant Worf aiding a clone of Kahless, the first Klingon emperor, who is often revered by the Klingons as a prophet. The legend of Kahless is then continued in both DSC, especially its pilot episode ‘The Vulcan Hello’ and the story arc of Voq, as well as in its tie-in graphic novel, The Light of Kahless, thus illustrating the expansion of the narrative using existents and cultural icons from the source text. This kind of expansion offers continuity as well as grounds for migration among audiences, and in the spirit of transmedia storytelling also breathes new life into and continually reinvents the myth of Star Trek.

7

https://www.bonanza.com/listings/Star-Trek-Captain-Picard-Captain-Kirk-Vintage-1994Time-Magazine/129152571. https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Vendetta. https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Trek_Nemesis. https://www.ign.com/games/star-trek-hidden-evil. 8 The term spin-off is used here to identify the practice by which new media texts are derived from an already existing one, thereby adding continuity to a narrative universe.

2.2 Transmediality and Intermediality in Star Trek

51

Michael G. Robinson uses the mythologization of Star Trek as a starting point to explore the Star Trek culture. He argues that the text is “a creator of its own mythology” and that DSC links to the Star Trek culture using various elements to reinvigorate the franchise (81–3). Furthermore, the creators and those involved in the making of the text are also deemed key figures in the myth. In case of the Star Trek culture, “Gene Roddenberry is undeniably central to the myth of Trek” (Robinson 83). Robinson illustrates the importance of the myth in the creation of DSC, supporting his claim with viewing figures, production decisions and the mode by which the show is delivered: “While there were some controversial qualities to the way Discovery arrived on screen, this was just the tip of the iceberg for differences in this show. From its very conception, Discovery was designed to break expectations” (85–7). The stated controversy relates to the discontentment among long-time Trekkers, who were reluctant to subscribe to CBS All Access, the streaming platform on which the new Star Trek series would be made available: [T]here was fan resistance to the entire idea. All Access requires just that, access. Stereotypically tech savvy Trekkers presumably have reliable internet. However, these fans were being asked to shell out more gold-pressed latinum to see the newest instalment in their beloved franchise. (Robinson 86)

Not only were the fans discontent with the way the show was to be distributed, but also with its production team, which underwent dramatic changes after Bryan Fuller, the original showrunner planned for DSC, quit the production, thus highlighting how technological changes and proliferation of media channels, such as the ubiquity of streaming services and SVOD, played a significant part in shaping the development of Star Trek as a transmedial and intermedial text. Furthermore, the show received some backlash regarding the casting of Sonequa Martin-Green as Michael, the central character of the show, an African American woman and not the highest-ranking officer on the ship. Although this choice felt like a natural continuation of Trek’s commitment to diversity … Discovery did get caught up in an anti-diversity backlash that had heightened over the past few years in popular culture. … [The] new Trek series had joined a group of other genre texts that had come under fire from alt-right groups … [which] suggested that these racist opinions were antithetical to Trek’s long-standing commitment to diversity. (Robinson 88)

This debate concerning representation and cultural diversification in DSC is representative of the socio-political unease at the heart of American society under

52

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

the Trump government, where polarized opinions regarding the aforementioned issues were in the spotlight. In this, the series is part of a larger conversation concerning Star Trek as speculative of the West, and particularly of the United States of America, wherein Star Trek is often condemned “for its (at best) naïve or (at worst) racist approach to anything other than a ‘white’ and American-led future” (Johnson-Smith 82):9 Contemporary social and cultural issues have always been at the heart of Star Trek …. However, the dominant cultural question of recent decades has been that of representation and, since the original Star Trek series began in the 1960s, a revolutionary period for concepts of ethnicity, gender and sexuality. (Johnson-Smith 79–80)

While the question of representation, especially of gender and race in Star Trek, has always been in spotlight (Johnson-Smith 80), social justice and cultural identity in the newer iterations of Star Trek, such as DSC and Picard, add to these debates in the current climate. Close observation of the modes of production, reports from press media, communication from the producers of the show and the reception of fans illustrates how DSC is an extension of the cultural body of Star Trek, yet simultaneously separate from it. For example, while Roddenberry is certainly the originator of the Star Trek universe, he is further removed from its production than he was with The Original Series and The Next Generation. While Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise were also produced after Roddenberry’s death, they were “created by a finely tuned Trek-producing culture industry at Paramount” (Robinson 84), setting it apart from more current and upcoming Star Trek productions. The relationship—on a narrative, distributive, and production level—between the various Trek texts is certainly characterized by elements of transmedia television. However, the production and consumption of the text in the age of new media is greatly influenced by elements that are outside of transmedia television as commonly understood (see Evans’ definition above), such as the interaction with the creators or those associated with the production of the show through social media networks, conventions, and face-to-face interactions as well as press reports. For example, Robinson informs his reading and analysis of Star Trek with press reports from Hollywood Reporter, which quoted show runner Alex Kurtzman as follows: “Star Trek is about optimism, hope, and a brighter future. Even if the future turns out to be not as bright as we hope, we are always striving to protect and preserve the best version of it” (Kurtzman quoted in Robinson 98); 9

For further discussions concerning the question of race in early iterations of Star Trek, see Daniel Bernardi and Mia Consalio.

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

53

or with an interaction with Jonathan Frakes at a convention, who states: “The optimism that Gene infused in all of his shows and in all of us may not be as obvious as it once was, but it’s certainly the driving force of his vision and the franchise” (Frakes quoted in Robinson 98). With the strong influence of interactions among the creators and producers of media texts as well as media consumers and prosumers, scholarship calls for a framework that investigates this relationship, elements of which lie outside of transmedia storytelling and distribution. The mediaverse lens allows such an examination of a media text on a narrative and metanarrative level. The analysis on the narrative level investigates the meaning-making processes as far as the text is concerned, and how the text negotiates its cultural identity in relation to other texts and genre frameworks. On the metanarrative level, the text serves as an anchor point to scrutinize the relationship between the structures and agents of production and those of consumption, leading to a holistic inquiry into the ‘universe’ of the text across the diegetic and extradiegetic level. Such an inquiry enables the mapping of the trajectory of the text in terms of its cultural significance.

2.3

Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

The experience of engaging with a media text does not meet a finite end. Similar to a domino effect, the production and consumption of a media text leans into orientating oneself to yet other texts. Klaus Bruhn Jensen identifies this as one of the defining characteristics of intertextuality, “What theories of intertextuality began to emphasize was the contingency and transience of texts. … Texts make sense not in themselves, but in relation to other texts” (2). For example, the abovementioned practices in the scope of transmedia storytelling and distribution, such as franchising, merchandising, spin-offs etc. prolong the production cycle of the text concerned, with producers of the transmedial materials inclined towards commercial gains. On the other end of the spectrum, prosumption practices enable the continuous engagement and enjoyment of a media text for audiences. Star Trek has been an extremely successful franchise on a global scale. In 1995, Jenkins identified a “recent bibliography [which] listed more than 1,300 English-language articles examining every conceivable aspect of the programme, its producer and stars, its exploitation and its reception” (Science Fiction Audiences 3). The Original Series featuring Captain Kirk and Lieutenant Spock graced North American television screens for three years, from 1966–69, and it was upon

54

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

its cancellation that the popularity of the show reached new heights.10 With the revival as The Next Generation and the following spin-offs, Star Trek’s popularity grew steadily. However, with what can arguably be termed as a second revival commencing with DSC,11 the series heralded the association of the franchise with changing television practices. Investigating the Star Trek mediverse entails an examination of the proliferating distribution practices characteristic of new media as far as the iterations of the franchise are concerned. CBS, the network that acquired the franchise,12 announced that DSC would be broadcast on the network and its streaming platforms on a weekly basis instead of making an entire season accessible at once (TrekCore). The rights for international broadcasting, however, were granted to Netflix for streaming outside of the USA and Canada for a wider reach (StarTrek.com International Broadcasters), following a bidding war between Netflix, Amazon and Hulu (Kayla Iacovino). The networks were aware of the franchise’s popularity and dedicated following, thus counting on the guaranteed success of DSC. This faith is based on the show’s history and its engagement with its audiences, as the first season’s showrunners Alex Kurtzman and Bryan Fuller emphasize: Bringing Star Trek back to television means returning it to its roots, and for years those roots flourished under Bryan’s devoted care. His encyclopaedic knowledge of Trek canon is surpassed only by his love for Gene Roddeberry’s optimistic future, a vision that continues to guide us as we explore strange new worlds. (StarTrek.com Bryan Fuller)

However, DSC’s production, distribution and marketing were received with varying degrees of both euphoria and disappointment from a heterogenous fandom, not least due to the approaching show anniversary: “[A]s the fiftieth anniversary of Star Trek was approaching, Star Trek fans were beginning to worry whether the end was near. … fans spoke openly about the need for a new series to begin. Views from the fans typically revolved around the idea that if something did not occur by 2016, then it was all over” (LoConto 131–2). Linking this sentiment 10

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series. The scale of output, at least in television terms, was reduced after the end of Star Trek: Enterprise in 2005. No new television show was produced until DSC in 2017, with the three shows Picard, Short Treks and Star Trek: Lower Decks released in the Star Trek franchise and two more shows in production. 12 Interestingly, CBS was among numerous other networks that had rejected Roddenberry’s initial pitch for Star Trek in 1963 (Tulloch and Jenkins 6). 11

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

55

to the 2016 presidential election in the United States, LoConto claims that the political climate made the fans feel “that Star Trek was needed, not just desired,” as fans began to pin their personal and collective happiness to the show returning to the television screens (132). Fans were growing increasingly restless and unhappy with a potentially grim, ‘Star Trek-less’ future: “Star Trek fans were losing meaning in their lives. Optimism was fading” (LoConto 132): Given the fact that the 2016 election would result in a new president of the United States, the return of a Star Trek television series could prove necessary, in the minds of the fans, as a positive step for humanity. Potentially it would be met with the first woman president. That seemed very much like a Star Trek theme. (LoConto 132)

The speculative nature of Star Trek in framing the popular discourse surrounding the politics of America also contributed to the speculative consumption of Star Trek paratexts, including interviews, convention panels, celebrity activism. Speculative consumption, according to Gray, involves “creating an idea of what pleasures any one text will provide, what information it will offer, what ‘effect’ it will have on us and so forth” (Shows Sold Separately 24). Speculative consumption regarding Star Trek involves a myriad of engagements with the intermedial franchise at large, with its long-standing fandom and with the industry associated with its production. As fans began to further voice their distress and “openly stated they would stop attending conventions after the fiftieth anniversary,” CBS announced DSC, which was slated for release in 2017 (LoConto 129–32). Furthermore, they announced Short Treks and Section 31 as well as the return of Captain Pike and Spock. In addition to this news that Trekkers rejoiced in, the fandom expressed further delight and emotion when CBS announced in 2018 that Sir Patrick Steward would reprise his role as Jean-Luc Picard in a series slated for release in early 2020 (LoConto 129). Although CBS breathed new life into the Star Trek fandom, this venture came with pitfalls. While the fandom was ecstatic to have more of Star Trek and pleased to have Bryan Fuller as the showrunner because of his involvement in writing some episodes for DS9 and Voyager, they were not keen on paying extra money to watch the show on CBS All Access, as the idea seemed “the antithesis of everything Star Trek stood for” (LoConto 132). This sentiment further intensified when, in 2022, the series was pulled from Netflix for global audiences, and was made available to the subscribers of the streaming service, Paramount + .13 With this change in distribution, fans were disgruntled as they were required 13

See: onally.

https://intl.startrek.com/news/star-trek-discovery-moves-to-paramount-internati

56

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

to subscribe to another streaming service for viewing a particular iteration of the Star Trek universe, with Picard being made available to audiences on Amazon Prime and the classic iterations continuing to stream on Netflix. The change in consumption practices brought about by the explosion of web streaming services, while enabling proliferation of media content, also became a reason for declining audience numbers. Additionally, with DSC being cancelled after 5 seasons, and Picard being cancelled after 2, the Star Trek universe appears to suffer yet another decline in production. However, while the announcement of DSC in 2016 generated immense excitement among Trekkers, it was quickly followed by production problems. For example, due to production disagreements and time commitments, Fuller stepped down as the show runner in October 2016 and the show’s release was pushed back to May 2017. Another delay and pushback of the release date frustrated the fans further, and with the mounting problems, some “disgruntled fans had already started calling Discovery, ‘ST:D,’ representing, sexually transmitted disease” (LoConto 133–4). As DSC’s airdate approached, the discontentment among fans took on different tones: At the 2017 conventions, more and more information was released. Some of the actors from Discovery showed up at the Star Trek convention in Las Vegas. Those involved in makeup and set design spoke of some of the changes that would occur, while still trying to remain faithful to the franchise. Fans were uneasy. The Klingons looked different. Filming was in progress. Everyone had been hired. Sonequa Martin Green was hired to be the star of the show. Fans complained that Star Trek should not be getting leftovers from The Walking Dead. Though originally behind in schedule and overbudget, Star Trek was still returning. Everyone knew at this point that Discovery was going to take place approximately ten years before Kirk and Spock. Fans wondered if either major character would show up on the series. Shatner was rumoured to potentially have a role in the new series. It was announced in 2017 that there would be a more diverse cast, representing the purity of Roddenberry’s vision. There would be far more women on the bridge, and there would be a gay couple. Fans also learned that the captain would not be the star of the series, which created a lot of question marks. There had never been a Star Trek series where the captain was purposely not the star. Stress, stress, stress. (LoConto 134)

The preoccupation of fans with the principles and values that they believe Star Trek embodies not only caused friction within the fandom, but also between those involved in the production of the show and sub-communities within the fandom. Based on LoConto’s account of fan sentiments, one can assert the importance of nostalgia to the fandom. This notion of nostalgia speaks to the entry point of the fan into the Star Trek fandom and the varied perspectives of what the identity

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

57

of the franchise, and consequently a Trekker, should ideally be. For example, Catherine Coker recounts her and many fans’ apprehension concerning the Star Trek reboot directed by J.J. Abrams in 2009, which appealed to a “general audience” and “was promoted as ‘Not Your Daddy’s Star Trek’—emphasizing its distance from its source material as well as making a blunt appeal for a newer, younger audience” (21). Coker states being among those fans who did not know what to make of the film because, on one hand, the names and the behaviour of the various characters were familiar but, on the other hand, gone were the women and people of colour that Star Trek featured to point towards “an idealized future” (21). The film’s polarized reception led to a variety of reactions, criticism and appropriation from the fandom, such as the emergence of blogs and forum posts responding to aspects of the film, for example “Where no Woman, a LiveJournal community dedicated to ‘Un-erasing the Women of Star Trek’” (Coker 21). As Abrams’ film created the Kelvin universe, the revision of the Star Trek text and its diversion from what the audience knew from The Original Series (1966–69) invited an abundance of AU (Alternate Universe) fanfiction (Coker 22). Moreover, the reboot energized the ‘Ship Wars’ in the fandom: ST: TOS fanfiction was focused overwhelmingly on Kirk and Spock, and through K/S gave rise to the term of ‘slashfiction’, but Star Trek XI fandom has many more ‘shipper’ factions—those groups of fans that actively champion certain relationship pairings between characters. Because the film itself made a romantic connection between Spock and Uhura and emphasized the intense friendship of Kirk and McCoy, these pairings make up the major groups. Smaller online communities also are dedicated to stories focused on Chekov/Sulu, Kirk/Sulu, Kirk/Pike and McCoy/Pike. Het (or heteronormative romance) is represented by pairings of any of the men—but predominantly Kirk or McCoy—with the new minor character of Gaila and McCoy/Chapel. There is also a significant femmeslash—slash pairings of women characters—a contingent that often is Gaila/Uhura, but also Chapel/Rand (about whom there were some stories written during the ST: TOS fandom days). (Coker 23)

The diverse opinions of the fans on Abrams’ reboot and their reactions to the text had opened up fan dialogue about whether it was ‘their’ Star Trek or not. In the documentary that focuses on the making of Deep Space Nine, titled What We Left Behind—Looking Back at Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (2019), Ira Behr and the writers as well as the actors of the show discuss how the show was met with resistance and criticism for being, at the time, the first iteration of the franchise set in a space station and not on an exploration vessel of Starfleet. This resistance indicates that fans of the previous iterations, which likely had served as their entry into the Star Trek phenomena, had already determined what Star Trek meant for them. Consequently, nostalgia evoked through plotlines, aesthetics, familiar

58

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

characters, settings and expository elements may have a positive or a negative effect on one’s viewing. LoConto identifies this phenomenon as the ‘cultural diffusion’: The fandom fragmented into independent units with different [texts], and with that came different characters, different times, different places, different collectibles, different games, and different uniforms. This all led to different collective identities under the umbrella of Star Trek. Fans still identified themselves as devoted to Star Trek, but arguments broke out regarding what constituted either the best Star Trek or which series were authentic. (99)

These diverse perspectives indicate sub-communities within the Star Trek fandom that are dedicated to a particular iteration, and also aid in identifying the distinct features and practices of the respective sub-community and its negotiation with the franchise at large. DSC faces similar evaluation by the fandom to determine whether it aligns with what they believe Star Trek to be or not. The textual revision of Star Trek that occurs in DSC is what leads to fan-led movements such as #NotMyTrek analysed below. Yet, DSC may also serve as an entry point into the franchise in its own right for those who are consuming Star Trek for the very first time. The relationship that DSC shares with other iterations of the franchise and within the framework of the Star Trek universe as a whole is crucial to not only examine the show as a profit-oriented commercial entity in the way the show is produced, publicized and distributed, but also how it takes on a cultural identity of its own, in turn influencing the entire franchise. An analysis of tropes that have been considered largely synonymous with Star Trek serves to illustrate DSC’s negotiation of the franchise and audiences’ engagement with it. Star Trek: Discovery and the Federation Every iteration of Star Trek has looked to the future. In his original pitch to the network executives, Roddenberry had described Star Trek “as a ‘Wagon Train to the Stars.’ His proposed programme would be a weekly science fiction series with recurring characters ‘who travel to other worlds and meet jeopardy and adventure’” (Roddenberry quoted in Tulloch and Jenkins 6). This illustrates how Roddenberry imagined Star Trek to be a Western in space aligned with the notion of the ‘final frontier,’ as suggested by the prologue in the early iterations of the show, thus highlighting its Americanness: The Western remains uniquely American, recreating a romantic, idealized version of the frontier, an area markedly responsible for creating the national character. [It]

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

59

seldom spoke of its present but of the future—of what would happen when the wilderness became a garden. … Popular tales of the American West chiefly project the image of an independent frontiersman, situating such individuals within an intensely masculine narrative dependent upon an incredible human confrontation with implacable elements. (Johnson-Smith 39).

Further elaborating upon the ‘final frontier’ theme, Johnson-Smith argues that “the Western suggests a unified culture where people pull together, and it does so to a greater extent than any other genre” (40). With Star Trek perceived as a Western in outer space, the Federation becomes the site for the unification of culture, but also a coloniser that seeks to regulate its members.14 Space, in its role as the final frontier, serves as the wilderness that the Federation seeks to explore and colonize in order to, in Johnson-Smith’s terms, transform it into a garden, alluding to American pastoralism that seeks to describe an idyll through features such as nostalgia, sentimentality, and transformation of the landscape with a view to the future.15 The notion of the frontier allows the exploration of the fictional landscape of outer space and previously unexplored planets to discuss socio-political issues and central concerns of American society. With the exception of DS9, which is set on a stationary space station, all iterations of Star Trek focus on the theme of exploration of the wilderness that is outer space. This narrative feature, among others, serves as a link between the iteration of the transmedial text and the transmedia storyworld that is the Star Trek universe. By establishing this link to the transmedia storyworld, audiences anchor and negotiate their interpretations of the specific iteration within the overall franchise. Here, I employ the mediaverse lens, i.e. an investigation of the interaction among audiences, producers, distributors, paratexts and intertexts to anchor DSC as an iteration of Star Trek and its relationship with the franchise. DSC underlines the theme of space as the final frontier with even greater intensity than the other iterations in that, in its pilot episode, it has the Federation plunge into a war with the Klingons. In this sense, space functions as a frontier twice over, for not only does the Federation continue to face the unknown in its deep space exploration vessels, but space also serves as the battleground for the war with the Klingons. The Federation-versus-Klingons scenario also underlines 14

The colonial nature of the Federation as well as the Terran Empire is evident in numerous instances, one of which is Saru and Kaminar’s story arc that is discussed in detail later in this chapter. 15 For American Pastoralism, see Leo Marx’ The Machine in the Garden: Technology and the Pastoral Ideal in America (1979) and Chris Pak’s “The American Pastoral and the Conquest of Space” (2016).

60

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

the human utopia-theme that is central to Star Trek as a whole. Johnson-Smith argues that each episode in the series could be perceived as a ‘morality tale’ and that Star Trek: The Original Series featured episodes that “generally closed with a didactic message from Kirk to the aliens/planetary residents about the mistakes they had made and the error of their ways, or an old-fashioned military victory over either of the long-standing galactic enemies, the Klingons and the Romulans” (58–9). In that sense it is telling that the ensemble cast of each of the Star Trek shows features more humans than ‘alien species.’ Traditionally, the ‘bridge,’ which is where most of the ensemble cast ‘resides’ comprises of more humans and humanoid species as opposed to alien species. While Klingons, Vulcans, Borgs, Andorians, Cardassians, Ferengi and others play a prominent role in various Star Trek shows particularly as antagonists, in proportion, the number of key characters that are human is significantly higher. This disproportion underlines the human conception of the Starfleet Federation. Displayed as hierarchical and militaristic, the Federation lays down the foundation for the moral code that Starfleet officers are expected to abide by. Given the significant influence of humans on a narrative level, the Federation’s perception of the universe at large tends to also be human-oriented. This theme plays out in DSC to “establish it as a story about identity and power, on both fictional and metafictional levels” (Andrea Whitacre 21). In outlining DSC’s identity as a Star Trek franchise, Whitacre discusses the opening of the pilot episode: The very first scene of the new show invites viewers to examine Starfleet’s identity from the outside, through the perspective of the Klingon Empire. Conducted entirely in Klingon with English subtitles, this opening is a comment on the nature of Starfleet as potential conqueror or colonizer despite (or rather because of) their ubiquitous friendly greeting: ‘We come in peace.’ (21)

The Federation’s militarism is evident in the narrative discourse, for example when Michael Burnham is charged with mutiny for attacking her captain Philippa Georgiou. This act of mutiny comes shortly after Georgiou and Burnham’s away mission to assist a planet. Upon being lost and in mortal danger due to an oncoming storm, Georgiou manages to alert the USS Shenzhou by tracing a giant insignia of the Federation on a desert plain (“The Vulcan Hello” S1 E1 00:01:42).16 As the opening credits begin after this particular scene and the one showing the interaction among the Klingons, DSCs Federation “is both an object 16

Interestingly, the first human spaceflight developed by China was also called ‘Shenzhou.’ This inclusion of the Shenzhou in popular culture via DSC contrasts with that of the USS Enterprise. As a result of a letter writing campaign by Trekkers, the first Space Shuttle Orbiter

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

61

of critique and the means of salvation” (Whitacre 21). Additionally, a division between critical assumption based on lack of evidence and scientific objectivity is key in the exchange between Burnham and Saru when encountering an unfamiliar object. While Saru assumes the object has negative intent because it is “lurking,” Michael refrains from speculating about its agenda without facts to base her assumptions on, asking, “We see something we don’t understand and instantly cast judgment?”17 (“The Vulcan Hello” S1 E1 00:11:03). Further into the scene, while evaluating how best to get data from the unidentified object, Michael comments, “You do understand, being afraid of everything means you learn nothing. There’s no opportunity to discover, to explore,” to which Saru replies, “And here I thought we were doing a deep-space relay audit” (“The Vulcan Hello” S1 E1 00:11:30). This exchange once again illustrates the ambiguity concerning the Federation. Michael, excited by the unknown and willing to take risks to unmask it (as has been the mission of most deep space exploration ships commissioned by Starfleet such as the titular USS Discovery), symbolizes the frontier woman keen on exploring the unknown, while Saru is firmly guided by the orders given to him by the Federation and the singular objective of following those orders. This dynamic between whose perspective and attitude more accurately embodies the Federation ideals is also raised in the sixth episode of the third season of DSC titled, “Scavengers,” wherein Michael and Saru disagree on how they must serve the Federation when it is at its most vulnerable, where once again, Michael acts against Federation orders (00:07:08). In the pilot episode, Michael, based on her knowledge of the Klingons and her military strategist thinking, suggests targeting the Klingon artifact to force the Klingons to reveal themselves, which works. While Gerogiou enters counsel with a Starfleet Admiral, she claims that the USS Shenzhou has attempted to reach out and communicate with the Klingons with every greeting available to the Federation, indicating that there is a protocol to be followed during contact, but it is also reminiscent of the opening scene in which the Klingons perceived vicious intentions in the greeting of the Federation. Michael asserts that Klingon attack is imminent, while Georgiou emulates the Federation response, hoping that the two civilizations will be cordial towards each other. To this sentiment, Michael retorts, “That’s the diplomat in you talking. What does the soldier say?” (“The Vulcan Hello” S1 E1 00:33:04)—underlining that the Federation, when pushed, by NASA, originally named ‘Constitution,’ was renamed ‘Enterprise,’ see https://science.ksc. nasa.gov/shuttle/resources/orbiters/enterprise.html. 17 Ironically, Michael’s personal biases impair or influence her judgment in a later scene when she finds out that the artifact belongs to Klingons, leading her to mutiny.

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

62

can drop the mask of diplomacy to protect all that it stands for. The Klingons use the previously mentioned Light of Kahless as a beacon to send out a call to the Klingon houses scattered across the galaxy, hoping that the Federation as a common enemy would reunite the houses. Given all that transpires in the pilot episode, one may identify the Federation as an antagonist, which firmly opposes its portrayal in the previous iterations of Star Trek that tend to highlight it as a utopian institution. This notion of the ‘Federation’ as utopic and as a claimant to the a moral high-ground in intergalactic interactions is evident in other iterations of Star Trek, wherein Federation representatives and officers have, for example, prevented acts of terrorism, genocide and malpractices that have threatened numerous planets and their residents.18 With DSC challenging this utopian projection of the Federation, it certainly establishes an identity as a Star Trek text that, while canonically expanding the Star Trek universe, also stands separate from it. While the link to the Star Trek storyworld is cemented with narrative elements, such as the significant role the Federation plays in day to day operations of the events that transpire in DSC, certain sequences allow for a critical view of the Federation. This enables the audiences to navigate the newer iteration as an entity separate from the other iterations within the transmedial world, where in some cases, audiences are increasingly critical of the changes that set the text apart. While challenging the utopian vision of the Federation, DSC also illustrates the Federation as the lesser evil by presenting the Mirror Universe: More and more, Star Trek finds itself turning to its evil twin universe in order to articulate its own contradictions and to attempt to earn its utopia. … The Mirror Universe’s 18

See, for example:

1. “The High Ground.” Beaumont, Gabriel, director. Star Trek: The Next Generation, season 3 episode 12, Paramount Domestic Television, 29 Jan. 1990. 2. “Force of Nature.” Lederman, Robert, director. Star Trek: The Next Generation, season 7 episode 9, Paramount Domestic Television, 15 Nov. 1993. 3. “Juggernaut.” Kroeker, Allan, director. Star Trek:Voyager, season 5 episode 21, Paramount Network Television, 26 April 1999. 4. “Paradise Lost.” Badiyi, Reza, director. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, season 4 episode 12, Paramount Domestic Television, 8 Jan. 1996.

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

63

Terran Empire is consistently portrayed as a fascist empire that sustains itself through military conquest. Junior officers gain promotion through assassination: their commanders maintain power through surveillance and torture. … [DSC] also emphasizes more than any other series the xenophobia of the Empire, articulated in racial terms as human supremacy over all alien species. … DSC takes the Mirror Universe far more seriously than its sibling series, both in terms of the tone and in terms of the threat it poses. … In DSC … the purpose of the Mirror Universe is to reveal the Federation’s instabilities. … As a proxy for the Federation’s larger ethical battle against its darker impulses, Burnham fights to hold onto her sense of self and her identity as a Starfleet officer while immersed in the necessary violence of the Mirror Universe. (Whitacre 21–5)

In the negotiation of its identity within the franchise, DSC diegetically reflects on social, cultural and political concerns of the society in which it is produced, thereby becoming a tool for reflection of the American condition. LoConto even argues that the writers of the show believed the Terran Empire of the Mirror Universe to be reflecting the contemporary American social and political climate, as they claimed that the “mirror universe showed the United States to be unwise, destroying the environment, and unwilling to accept diverse points of view to create beauty. It was condescending as it denigrated the very thought of diversity and hearing every voice” (136). Also, the story arc of season three of DSC is set in the 32nd century, where a mysterious event named ‘The Burn’ caused nearly every Starfleet vessel containing Dilithium to explode. With Starfleet vessels reduced in number, the Federation was weakened, and it was up to the crew of the USS Discovery to investigate ‘The Burn’ and help restore the Federation to its former glory. The particular responsibility of reinstating the Federation to its previous prestigious status may be interpreted in two ways in relation to the political climate of the United States. For the 2016 election, Donald Trump’s campaign slogan ‘Make America Great Again,’ implied that his government would restore America to its ‘former glory,’ particularly indicating his displeasure over his predecessor President Barack Obama. In this sense, the Federation may stand for America, which needed the kind of leadership at its helm to address the ostensibly deteriorating standards to which the people held the nation. On the other hand, the sub-plot may also reflect the 2020 Presidential election, where numerous people, including those involved in the production of various iterations of Star Trek, endorsed Joe Biden and urged people to vote for him to put an end to the presidency of Donald Trump and his racist, homophobic, transphobic and sexist remarks and his ridicule of people with disability.

64

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

As previously stated, it is commonly understood that the mission of Star Trek is to fight for social justice, representation and equality, which explains the attitude of prominent figures associated with Star Trek towards Donald Trump. In addition, the third season of DSC invokes Great Britain’s decision to leave the European Union in the decision of some of the founding planets of the United Federation of Planets to no longer being members in the 32nd century, such as Earth as well as Vulcan, now known by its new name Ni’Var (“Unification III” S3 E7). Interestingly, the episode includes the word ‘Unification’ in its title, signifying the unification between the related species of the Vulcans and the Romulans, erstwhile enemies who were reunited by the efforts of Ambassador Spock, Michael’s brother. When it is revealed that the Vulcans are concealing crucial scientific data that might provide key insight into ‘The Burn,’ both Michael and Saru express their shock at the relationship between the Federation and Vulcans. Admiral Charles Vance reveals that it was the Vulcans who wanted to leave the Federation while Romulans wanted to remain, invoking the split vote between the Scottish and English populations in relation to Brexit. Here, although the events of the narrative take place in the 32nd century, connections to the empirical reality of the audience are drawn through narrative elements, enabling a criticism of the social, political and cultural environment of the audience. In an effort to get the representatives of Ni’Var to help the Federation and open diplomatic dialogue between the two parties, Michael invokes the ritual of ‘T’kalin-ket,’ which involves a Quorum convening to determine whether Michael’s cause is worthy of pursuit and whether the information she seeks may be granted. The Quorum, in which key public and political figures of Ni’Var participate, is reflective of a government assembly session to determine the future governance of a nation. The season arcs of DSC thus raise the question of the Federation’s identity. In the third season, Michael struggles to follow orders from those with a higher rank, often disobeying them directly, which is anathema to the strictly hierarchical Federation, even though it is for the sake of the Federation that she rebels against the authority of her superiors, for she argues that she cannot rest until she identifies what caused ‘The Burn’ and led to the decline of the Federation. In the first season arc, the Federation is seemingly pitted against the Empire in the ‘Mirror Universe,’ highlighting the Federation as more democratic and humane. Questions concerning the identity of the Federation are thus played out both on the political level as well as on the level of the identity crisis faced by Federation personnel. While an identity crisis remains a key theme for many characters in DSC— such as Michael Burnham, Stamets, Dr. Culber and Ash-Voq—in Michael’s case it is linked with her status as a Starfleet officer and an orphaned human raised in

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

65

a Vulcan environment. This duality mirrors that of the Federation, which in DSC is addressed on the subjective level as opposed to the Federation as a symbol of utopian objectivity and, indeed, as the ‘lesser evil’. As the show progresses, parallels are drawn between the neomatic reality of the audience and narrative elements that span across the transmedia storyworld, thus enabling a comparison between the two. The balance between coinciding and contradicting elements between DSC and the rest of the franchise as far as the Federation is concerned invokes not only a critical view of the governing body of the Star Trek universe but also underlines the trope of identity crisis of certain characters as well as that of the Federation. For example, Michael attacks her superior Georgiou in the pilot episode. She does this to save everyone from an imminent Klingon attack, as she reasons that her knowledge of them is what leads to her decision to fire first. Breaking the hierarchy and the chain of command is a serious crime according to Federation principles, which not only becomes further evident when Michael is sentenced to imprisonment for life after being stripped off her rank, but also dictates her actions in the third season. In the scene when she is sentenced, representatives of the Federation are seated at a long table while Michael is standing before them. The voice of the representative who reads the charges and sentences her is clear, while Michael speaks too softly. The representatives appear as rigidly seated silhouettes with no distinctive features aside from their Federation uniform, whereas Michael is bathed in light, lending her an angelic appearance. This is a scene of contrasts, as Michael is, by her own admission, the enemy in that her efforts to save her crew from harm and prevent the war with the Klingons failed—something that a Federation officer ought to have attempted, but instead of being commended for it, she is reprimanded (“Battle at the Binary Stars” S1 E2 00:36:00). In this instance, the Federation appears as the enemy because its principles may have been a catalyst to spark the war and negatively influence the lives of many, including Michael. Instances such as these, when the individual is confronted with pitting their subjectivity against the Federation, highlight its shortcomings, which DSC addresses and challenges more than previous Star Trek iterations did. Furthermore, on the extradiegetic level, the audience is also invited to view the Federation critically, particularly regarding the second season arc of DSC, where the artificial intelligence program of the Federation, ‘Control,’ is on a quest for power, and its plan involves wiping out all sentient life from the universe. The involvement of the CIA-esque ‘Section 31’ that undertakes clandestine and ethically questionable operations in the name of the Federation becomes a key target for sabotage by ‘Control.’ While the Federation and its principles are certainly under fire due to the actions of Section 31, ‘Control’ is

66

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

deemed as the greater evil, for its ultimate goal is nothingness, which paints the Federation in a positive light. In addition, the second season arc is also key in evoking nostalgia, especially concerning the characters of Spock and Pike. Trekker Nostalgia Both DSC and Picard talk back to the franchise in different ways, occasionally challenging the previous iterations’ versions of events while also dipping into references to these, thus evoking nostalgia among Trekkers. Catering to consumer nostalgia is commonplace in franchises and transmedia texts to serve as a hook for the audiences or to encourage migration to other texts within the transmedia universe. Apart from commercial considerations, consumer nostalgia is an effective tool to identify the cultural significance of long-standing transmedia texts, such as Star Trek. Producers of Star Trek iterations of DSC and Picard also engage in these practices, not only for their audiences but also to interact with the narrative of the previous iterations. DSC’s employment of the Mirror Universe as the key symbol in the first season’s story arc is certainly a tool through which that series engages with the collective franchise identity. The Mirror Universe features in those episodes of Star Trek series where, according to Whitacre, “[the] relationship to the core franchise is most central or fraught” (24). Whitacre further argues that long running series such as Star Trek and Doctor Who rely on the play of intertextuality and self-referencing, “allowing the internal ‘mirror’ to reflect not only the social and political situation of contemporary audiences but the nature of the ‘normal’ world of the television series” (24). Such self-referencing and intertextuality serve as “a kind of connective tissue for continuity and meta-commentary” (Whitacre 24). The dedication of DSC to the Mirror Universe for an entire season is indicative of the challenges the series lays down concerning its identity and position within the Star Trek franchise at large, asserting its place as a Star Trek franchise for the contemporary audience. The show has received much criticism as a result of this assertion, as will be discussed below. Apart from using the Mirror Universe as a narrative tool for, as Whitacre puts it, continuity and meta-commentary, DSC and Picard also employ narrative elements to evoke Trekker nostalgia. The title of Picard is suggestive of a reference to one of the most beloved and popular captains in the Star Trek universe, Jean-Luc Picard from The Next Generation (TNG). The series focuses on the titular character who quit Starfleet to watch over his estate and vineyard after a disastrous interview followed by a political scandal. An aged Picard is drawn back into travelling among the stars after an encounter with an android who is potentially related to Data, whom he considered a dear friend and for whose death he believes himself responsible.

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

67

While Picard makes new friends and foes on his journey to help the android, he also enlists the aid of some old friends who featured prominently in TNG. Cameos and sequences with characters from the classic iterations of the show include Seven of Nine, Hugh (Third of Nine), Will Riker, Deanna Troi and Data. The appearances of these characters and their interactions with Picard allow for them as well as veteran viewers to reminisce about TNG. Through employment of such narrative tools, audiences tend to view Picard as a node within the framework of the Star Trek supersystem, who respond not only to the individual series, but also to the overall transmedia text. In doing so, the position of the character of Jean-Luc Picard as a cultural icon is further strengthened. This characteristic of audiences negotiating with elements of a transmedia storyworld identifies the position of audiences as mediators of cultural icons through their viewership and consequently, fan practices. Like Picard, paratextual aspects in DSC are also redolent of other iterations of Star Trek, further underlining the inclination for nostalgia as a commercial consideration to maintain audience (and Trekker) interest that is characteristic of transmedia texts and highlight its intertextuality. An example of DSC’s engagement as a transmedial text is the relationship between the show as a Star Trek franchise and its theme music. In DSC, the theme music of the opening credits is reminiscent of the franchise at large while simultaneously promising distinction from the other shows. Jeff Russo, the composer of the DSC soundtrack, in an interview with Variety discusses his conversation with the producers of the show and their desire to highlight “exploration and harmony and discord between people and species” as well as the fact that to tip his hat to Alexander Courage’s original “Star Trek” theme, he bookended his new music with elements from that famous fanfare. The 100-second theme—long for network—combines an air of mystery, a propulsive rhythm and a hopeful feeling while reminding viewers that it’s all still “Star Trek.” (Burlingame)19

While the composition is a blend of the old and the new, the imagery shown in the opening credits, too, hints at the classic shows. The sequence appears almost abstract, with blueprint-like images of classic Star Trek icons such as the communicator, phaser, the Vulcan salute, or the Klingon Bat’leth among others (Fig. 2.1), which once again play upon the notion of new-but-still-Star Trek that is characteristic of DSC’s franchise identity. Apart from the opening credits’ imagery, DSC also employs references to the classic show on a diegetic level, further evoking franchise nostalgia. The events 19

https://variety.com/2017/artisans/production/composer-jeff-russo-star-trek-discovery-120 2564832/

68

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

Fig. 2.1 Screenshots from the opening credits of Star Trek: Discovery

of DSC occur just prior to those of The Original Series.20 Additionally, DSC, like Picard, evokes nostalgia by employing familiar characters. Contrary to Picard, however, which showcased the same actors from TNG well after the ship’s retirement, DSC employs different actors than The Original Series since the diegetic timelines of both shows are so close that their faces need to appear young. The appearance of the USS Enterprise in the finale of DSC’s first season serves as a cliff-hanger, as both Michael and the audience await Spock’s entry. The second season continues to tease this expectation as Spock’s history with Michael is shown through first person narration and flashbacks until, finally, Spock appears in the seventh episode. While the show builds this anticipation, it also makes references to The Original Series on a diegetic level. When Captain Kirk is introduced to Captain Pike in The Original Series, the audience is informed of Pike’s history with the Talosians and Vina, both of whom are crucial to DSC’s second season story arc. The episode “If Memory Serves” (Season 2 Episode 8) begins with a scene reminiscent of the classic iteration of the show. Opening with the text “Previously on Star Trek,” this scene shows Leonard Nimoy as Spock and Jeffrey Hunter as Pike arriving at Talos and encountering the Talosians and Vina as seen in The Original Series. The flashbacks end with a personal log from DSC’s Captain Pike, also reminiscent of the classic iterations of the show in that the Captain’s Logs was a common narrative tool that both DSC and Picard did away

20

Prequels of long-running television series seem to be steadily growing, as is also the case with the Star Wars canon, wherein the Disney + produced The Mandalorian (2019—present) chronicles the rise of Yoda and his journey to becoming a Jedi Master. Another example is the movie Black Widow (2021), which details how Natasha Romanoff of the Avengers became the infamous assassin known as the Black Widow and is chronologically set before the events that transpired in the Avengers films to date.

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

69

with.21 Tying DSC’s narrative to be canonically compatible with The Original Series is crucial to meet fan expectations. Fans tend to oppose texts that do not reconcile with older or more popular texts within a franchise, especially one with such a dedicated fan following as Star Trek. Fans disgruntled with DSC and its canonical revision took to social media to express their discontentment with the hashtag #NotMyTrek. DSC’s plot indicating that Spock’s parents adopted and raised Michael and she is therefore his adoptive sister received mixed reviews from fans, with some arguing that DSC goes against the canon since in the many seasons featuring Spock, they never heard of him having a sister, hence refusing to consider DSC as part of the Star Trek universe. While the appearance of Spock and Pike indicates that “nostalgia is more overtly catered to in DSC’s second season,” (Sabrina Mittermeier and Mareike Spychala 9), for some fans the attempt to evoke franchise nostalgia thus backfires. Using the #NotMyTrek hashtag, numerous fans voice their disappointment with DSC. In doing so, they often put themselves in the position of safeguarding what they believe was Gene Roddenberry’s vision. As LoConto asserts, fans “are great at raising Gene Roddenberry to support their conclusions, even if their articulation of Roddenberry’s vision is paradoxical to what Roddenberry said” (136). For example, Twitter user ‘@EddieSteak’ emphatically voices his disappointment with Michael Chabon’s vision: Star Trek: Picard was so astoundingly atrocious that I think there must be malicious intent behind it. Michael Chabon is either a totally witless and incompetent writer, or he purposely torpedoed Star Trek out of his own personal disdain for it and its fans. Either way, fuck him.22

To this, another Twitter user, ‘@the_geminator’ replies: I would love to think that both him and Kurtzman are just talent-less hacks, but the answer is both. They are talent-less hacks and they meant to tear down everything that Roddenberry had envisioned. #NotMyTrek.23

21

Interestingly, the episode that featured Talos IV in The Original Series and was supposed to be the pilot of the franchise was never broadcasted for various production reasons, and the footage from the unaired episode was later used in the show in “The Menagerie, Part 1” and “The Menagerie, Part 2,” further complicating the Talos IV story arc to be canonically tied in with the franchise, which the second season story arc of DSC aimed to resolve. 22 https://twitter.com/EddieSteak/status/1243338525262712835. 23 https://twitter.com/the_geminator/status/1243619998456840192.

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

70

Furthermore, the #NotMyTrek fans of the franchise often engage in so-called hate-watching practices, which involve following the series as new episodes or seasons are released and taking to social media to voice their dissatisfaction or engage in anti-fandom practices and expressions.24 In doing so, these fans, however, also play a crucial role in the negotiation of the series’ identity within the franchise, as they assert their respective identities not only as Trekkers, but as a group within the Trekker community that considers itself to be in a position to determine what can qualify as ‘real’ Star Trek. Although numerous fans employ the hashtag #NotMyTrek to express their views about both DSC and Picard and become gate-keepers of ‘Roddenberry’s Star Trek,’ a large number of fans also jump to the newer franchises’ defense, invoking the inclusive nature of both the franchise and its fan community. For example, Twitter user ‘@HerPikaHighness’ tweets: The saddest thing for me to see is people claiming to love Star Trek for all its “boldly go” motto yet consistently want [sic] to push Trek back into some confined box and never allow it to experiment and grow. They don’t want Trek to boldly go, they want Trek to boldly stay in place.25

To this Tweet, user ‘@Mr_Picard’ replied: If it isn’t exactly like 90s Trek it’s “not Star Trek.” I get the “shock” of Trek adapting to modern television standards but I don’t get why these people are hate-watching when there’s literally hundreds of hours of 90s Trek for them to watch and bathe in their nostalgia.26

The ‘hate-watching’ practices that some Trekkers engage in puts them in the unique position of being simultaneously fans and anti-fans who are emotionally united in their dislike of DSC and Picard. Anne Gilbert asserts: “Unsurprisingly, … emotional attachment does correlate to viewing patterns—but the emotion with the greatest predictive potential is not ‘love’ or ‘beautiful’ or even ‘enjoyment’; instead, it’s ‘hate’” (62–3). Gilbert argues that hate-watching is a social practice that involves community-based interactions as opposed to fandom, which she argues is not necessarily communal. Gilbert defines hate-watching as 24

For more on the notion of the anti-fan and anti-fandom practices such as using platforms like Twitter to engage in hate-watching practices, see Melissa A. Click’s Anti-Fandom: Dislike and Hate in the Digital Age (2019). 25 https://twitter.com/HerPikaHighness/status/1246313765538353152. 26 https://twitter.com/Mr_Picard/status/1246338753037303808.

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

71

viewing a television program or film despite disliking it—or, perhaps, watching as a result of disliking it—usually in order to point out its flaws. It therefore involves specific criteria: Judging a text to be of poor quality, continuing to watch, delighting in doing so, and having no reservations about perpetuating these behaviours. (63)

Hate-watching can thus be identified as one of the markers of being an anti-fan. While Trekkers usually engage in watching reruns of the show for experiencing the enjoyment that is central to their fandom, the hate-watching of certain iterations of the Star Trek universe, especially in times of heightened social media proliferation in everyday life, constitutes a social and community-oriented performance. Ideally, when a viewer expresses dislike for a particular text, this is supposed to constitute a deterrent for other potential active viewers and migratory audiences. Hate-watching, however, does not produce this effect. In fact, when hate is expressed on platforms such as Twitter, the practice has the potential to snowball, with more fans or anti-fans participating in both hate-watching and the conversation about hate-watching, leading to those very community interactions that cause hashtags such as #NotMyTrek to trend. Furthermore, hate-watching and the social media performance associated with it in this particular case allows for a discourse on what each fan or anti-fan believes makes Star Trek what it is, what it should be and what it is not. The notion of authenticity in a media fandom is twofold, as it is concerned with the text as well as fan identity.27 Due to the heterogeneous nature of Star Trek’s many texts and its fandom, the fan community often debates on what texts within the Star Trek franchise may be considered as ‘authentically Star Trek.’ Furthermore, like many fan communities, the hierarchy within a fandom too, becomes apparent, wherein some fans claim to be ‘true,’ or ‘authentic,’ or ‘casual’ fans of a text based on certain markers, such as collectibles, viewings, trivia etc. Additionally, fans debate the authenticity of the text by considering what the show represented and its fidelity to their perception of what Star Trek should be. In this regard, fans criticised DSC for being “too dark” or “politically correct” (LoConto 136). Eventually, how the audiences evaluate a particular show plays a crucial role in its further production stages, its marketing, as well as its scholarly examination. Star Trek and Storytelling All previous iterations of Star Trek “typically conformed to the prevalent narrative formats of their historical periods, i.e., most episodes comprised single, self-contained narrative units” (Ina Batzke 105). In analysing the move of the 27

For authenticity in fandoms, see Victor Costello and Barbara Moore; Mickey Hess; and Richard Peterson.

72

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

Star Trek narrative from the traditional ‘extended seriality’ to a ‘post-network’ serial, Batzke examines the change in narrative discourse and complexity and highlights DSC’s negotiation of the Star Trek canon as it navigates through intricate world-building strategies (105–6). Through an analysis of the motif of the Mirror Universe across the franchise, Batzke highlights how DSC’s diegesis and mode of storytelling as a post-network serial allowed for the expansion and complexity of the Mirror Universe which, arguably, is a source of discomfort for those fans whose primary concern is the reconciliation of the series with the canon (107–13). While previous iterations of Star Trek have marked the Mirror Universe through various narrative and visual tools, such as the use of prosthesis makeup, skewed camera angles, behaviour of the characters and their Mirror counterparts, in DSC’s case, its portrayal and what it yields is different (Batzke 112). Instead of self-contained episodic narratives, the Mirror Universe spans an entire season in DSC, thus constituting the primary motif for the season arc. Considering the Mirror Universe allows for viewing the Federation in a favourable light as the ‘lesser evil,’ as previously discussed, the narrative subsequently opens up the Mirror Universe and it’s heavy-handed governing for comparison with the neomatic political and social environment of the audiences. DSC, therefore, establishes a connection beyond the diegesis of the transmedial world of Star Trek, and enables the producers and audiences to navigate the text as a tool for criticism of their empirical reality, thus taking on a greater cultural significance. The Mirror Universe allows for an examination of its contradictory elements to the Prime Universe that enable the viewer to reflect upon their ‘real’ environ. For example, the fascist Terran Empire of the Mirror Universe and their leader, Emperor Georgiou, could be compared to a cruel dictator, or examine the engagement of the text with imperialist and racist ideologies (see Judith Rauscher). However, there are various other themes, characters, motifs and symbols that illustrate the complexity of the show and how its post-network serialisation influences viewership, among them the tardigrade’s and Saru’s story arc. The Tardigrade The role of the Federation as an egalitarian and secure governing body is highlighted throughout the numerous iterations of the transmedia storyworld. This is done particularly through demonstrating the contradictory principles and ideals of the Federation as opposed to other ‘alien’ institutions. For example, Klingons are portrayed as a warrior race peppered with extreme views concerning honour and code of war. The Borg are seen as a ‘hive-mind’ entity dictated by assimilation of any species that is different from their own. Vulcans are strongly guided by logic while the Ferengi are capitalists in the extreme. This indicates that in most cases,

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

73

the failings of alien institutions underline the utopic nature of the Federation. While DSC does feature these alien species with their respective shortcomings, it also introduces an alien race that is removed from the conflicts of warring bodies and institutions in the Star Trek universe—the tardigrade. The USS Discovery is not only a science vessel but also an experimental vessel. This aspect distinguishes the ship from previous Star Trek ships or stations. The work of Lt. Paul Stamets with the spore drive and the mycelian network is what sets the ship apart from the rest of the Federation fleet with the exception of the USS Glen. Stamets and his research partner Straal were stationed in Discovery and Glenn respectively to work on the spore drive as a propulsion system. In the process, the mycelial network was discovered, which enabled the USS Discovery to travel long distances almost instantaneously. After the battle at Binary Stars, when a full-fledged war against the Klingon Empire was waged, the USS Discovery and the USS Glen were seen as the Federation’s secret weapon to win the war, because of which the technology of the two ships began to be explored for military applications. The spore drive is used as a military and diplomatic tool by the weakened Federation to maintain its stronghold. The covert military operations and experiments appear to be in sync with the previously outlined scrutiny and criticism of the Federation in DSC. While the warp drive had been the key technology for traveling in space in all of Star Trek, the mycelial network distinguishes the USS Discovery from all the other ships, even when they travel approximately 900 years into the future in the third season. Here, in fact, the ship is even more valuable because it has significant reserves of dilithium, an element that powers the warp drive and which has become rare because of ‘The Burn.’ Drawing a comparison between the traditional-serial-Mirror Universe and the post-network-Mirror Universe, Batzke writes: “In contrast to sudden plot twists, which are common to Star Trek series, DSC’s writers here instead have focused on a slow burn,” especially concerning the discrepancies in Lorca’s character and how these are seemingly resolved with the Mirror Universe storyline when it is finally revealed that USS Discovery’s Lorca was, in fact, the Mirror Universe Lorca with his own agenda (113–7). The “slow burn” is also evident in the tardigrade storyline and marks DSC’s narrative evolution as a result of the changing modes of storytelling in the age of new media. Traveling using the mycelial network with the spore drive engine is only successful when the crew of the USS Discovery manage to capture a creature of the tardigrade species. The particular tardigrade ‘Ripper’ was captured on board the

74

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

USS Glen after the USS Discovery answered a distress call from the ship (“Context is for Kings” S1 E3 00:32:07).28 Seemingly, the USS Glen was destroyed as a result of an accident with the spore drive and the crew mutilated because of Ripper attacking them, after they had imprisoned it to be studied. Ripper is the first of its kind to encounter the Federation in this episode. An alien from deep space, it is christened a ‘tardigrade’ due to character traits similar to that of the microscopic species found in the waters of earth that are “capable of surviving both extreme heat and sub-freezing temperatures” (Memory Alpha Fanwiki ‘Tardigrade’).29 When studying Ripper and its biology, Stamets realises that because of the species’ unique ability to communicate with the mycelial network, Ripper’s brain can be used as an organic computer to navigate through the network and make jumps across millions of miles in deep space, eventually enabling them to prevent a Klingon attack on the mining station Corvan II (“The Butcher’s Knife Cares Not for the Lamb’s Cry30 S1 E4 00:38:11). With this plot development, it becomes evident that the tardigrade is key to this new form of deep space travel and that it may turn the outcome of the war with the Klingons in favour of the Federation. However, it may also be confusing for long-time Trekkers to accept the tardigrade storyline because DSC’s premise is set prior to the events aboard Kirk’s USS Enterprise. Given that DSC’s diegesis functions as a prequel, veteran viewers may not accept DSC as canon. This situation is explained, however, as the show progresses to the finale of the second season, with a few plot satellites veering off to either be linked to the use of the mycelial network or even take place in it (e.g., “Vaulting Ambition,” and “Saints of Imperfection”). The events of the second season of DSC, especially encounters with the Red Angel, cause the USS Discovery to jump into the distant future without any chance of returning to their timeline, with the crew of the USS Enterprise that was left behind to provide testimonies to the Federation, agreeing that they will never speak of these events and the spore drive under the penalty of treason. Furthermore, Spock’s personal log during the finale of the second season reveals that he and the crew of the USS Enterprise agreed to never utter Micheal’s name to ensure that her sacrifice is not in vain, effectively solving the issue of textual revision and why Spock’s foster 28

Interestingly, this episode is titled ‘Context is for Kings,’ and introduces the titular ship as well as the main cast of characters to the audience. Additionally, the references to Caroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland also contextualise Michael’s character and her relationship with her foster mother, Amanda Grayson. Caroll’s text is also influential in Spock’s story arc, highlighting the connection between the two that is later explored in season 2 of DSC. Moreover, the title also invites contextualising the show as part of the Star Trek franchise. 29 https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Tardigrade_(microscopic). 30 Henceforth referred to as “The Butcher’s Knife.”

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

75

sister is never mentioned in the later years of the diegetic world, thus canonically tying DSC to the Star Trek universe (“Such Sweet Sorrow” S2 E14 00:59:03). The use of tardigrades as a plot element on DSC received mixed reviews from fans, with some voicing their disappointment in the species and claiming that it is hard to accept the tardigrade as a propulsion system because it does not ‘feel’ like science fiction or because the earlier shows do not mention the tardigrade. The lack of credibility in this storyline also serves as a tool for anti-DSC fans to identify DSC as not-Star Trek, as is evident in the following Twitter exchange: ‘@kari_izumi’: Enterprise did a whole episode about Archer being horny for the XO he hated while his dog was dying and Voy gave of Janeway/Paris lizard babies. I doubt this show can dig under those low bars31 ‘@ShadownMann9’: It already has, and it has dug tunnels even deeper. Magic tardigrade as a propulsion system? F-bombs in the armory, fidget spinner starship, cannibals in a mirror universe, “Galactic Treaty”, not a single Star Trek past 2009 is Star Trek 32 .

In this example, it is evident that user ‘@ShadownMann9’ considers the “magical tardigrade” as more of a fantasy trope than belonging to science fiction, especially of the(ir) Star Trek kind. This sentiment is also reflected in a Tweet by user ‘@boazhsan’: Star Trek Discovery definitely has some good stuff regarding special effects, imaginative creation of space environments, and character development. But the sci fi part can be hard to swallow... the spore drive with tardigrade DNA, the parallel universes and the time travel...33 Sometimes it feels a bit lazy—as if the multiple species and the space exploration and the characters aren’t enough, and that constant attempts to push the envelope on the sci-fi side are required to maintain people’s interest.34

Further criticism may be drawn when analysing the role of the tardigrade species in DSC as merely a tool in the Federation’s war with the Klingon Empire. Thus, the species is given neither agency nor the individuality that is granted to other alien species in their conflicts with the Federation to paint the latter as a symbol of egalitarian utopia. Moreover, in what is seemingly an attempt to canonically 31

https://twitter.com/kari_izumi/status/1295088185114898432. https://twitter.com/ShadowMann9/status/1295136600976891904. 33 https://twitter.com/boazhsan/status/1293749405066002432. 34 https://twitter.com/boazhsan/status/1293750174947241986. 32

76

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

tie the tardigrade species to the Star Trek universe, the creators of the show also wrote the Star Trek: Short Treks episode “Ephraim and Dot,” discussed in detail in the following section. Short Treks Short Treks can be seen as both an extension of DSC and of Picard, but also as a stand-alone entity within the vast Star Trek franchise.35 On the CBS All Access streaming service, which features numerous shows, documentaries, movies and specials, Star Trek has its own ‘tab’ or ‘category’ that is highlighted in the menu bar (at the time of writing). Within this category one can stream both the classic and the new iterations of the show, including Short Treks (Fig. 2.2). The appearance of the various texts of Star Trek in this manner would lead one to conclude that, similar to the other iterations, the Short Treks stand as a spin-off within the Star Trek universe, and may certainly influence one’s experience of the Star Trek universe, but that the iteration may also be perceived as an entity separate from DSC, and consumed without having seen DSC. However, on Netflix, the Short Treks appeared in the ‘trailers and more’ tab of DSC (Fig. 2.3), contained within DSC and specifically influencing it not only in the narrative sense but also in its delivery. Furthermore, apart from the opening sequence, there is no indication on Netflix that these episodes were, indeed, Short Treks, except for their length, which is shorter than a regular episode, for they were listed by their episode titles. Visually too, the opening sequence of Short Treks with its title is presented in the same format, font and colour scheme as that of DSC, adding to the impression of an addendum to DSC. Additionally, most of the episodes of the Short Treks, particularly all episodes of the first season, have strong narrative links to DSC, which are elaborated below. Only the final episode of the second season of the Short Treks, titled “Children of Mars,” is narratively linked to Picard. As Picard was available via Amazon Prime and not via Netflix, at the time, one would need subscription to either CBS All Access or to two different streaming platforms to watch all iterations of Star Trek, clearly marking CBS not only as the new main production studio, but also the prioritized delivery platform for Star Trek. An anthology series set in the Star Trek universe, marking its role as yet another iteration within the franchise, the Short Treks comprise two seasons so far (i.e. in 2021), the first of which was released between the premier of DSC’s 35

At the time of writing, with Picard, DSC, Star Trek: Lower Decks and Short Treks being ‘CBS All Access Originals,’ the shows premiere on the CBS Streaming service and make their international debut via other streaming platforms such as Netflix or Amazon Prime Video within 24 hours of their release on CBS All Access. As far as distribution dynamics are concerned, it would seem that CBS retains rights concerning when the episode is presented.

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

77

Fig 2.2. Star Trek shows available on CBS All Access

first and second seasons and the second following DSC’s second season. Given its unique anthology format,36 Short Treks can certainly be watched without having seen the rest of Star Trek, as is characteristic of media texts within a transmedia storytelling synergy. Keeping with that characteristic, however, Short Treks also serve to prolong the enjoyment of viewing Star Trek and expand the franchise’s narrative. In addition to being a transmedia element, Short Treks can thus also be seen as a strategic production and marketing tool, ensuring that the memory of DSC and Picard is not short-lived in-between seasons and to reach a wider audience, especially given the fact that some of the episodes—including “Ephraim and Dot”—are animated and perhaps appealing to younger audiences.

36

The anthology format as used here refers to a compilation of texts in a series wherein each text may feature a distinct set of characters, plot and/or setting. In consideration of the Short Treks, each episode features characters that are not present in other episodes of the particular iteration but do make an appearance in other texts within the franchise. For example, while Sulu and Khan appear only in the Short Trek titled “The Tardigrade,” they are prominently present in other iterations of Star Trek. This is different from the episodic structure of other television texts of the Star Trek franchise, which feature an ensemble cast that is present in most of the episodes of the respective show. This format further problematizes the role of the Short Treks, and whether it is an addendum to another iteration of Star Trek or a Star Trek text in its own right.

78

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

Fig. 2.3 Short Treks as part of ‘Trailers and More’ of the title Star Trek: Discovery on Netflix

The intermedial delineation of Short Treks from the other iterations of the franchise is underlined not only by distinct practices concerning its delivery and its narrative and distributive relationship to DSC and Picard but also through the medium of animation. The animated aspect of some Short Trek episodes separates the series based on its medium from the other iterations of Star Trek, and the animated materiality mediates the interaction between the transmedial storyworld of Star Trek and a younger audience than the other iterations. Furthermore, certain episodes, as previously mentioned, assist in streamlining the Star Trek canon. The engagement with canon and the narrative aspects of textual revision

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

79

are often dependent on who is directing a particular episode of the series. For example, Olatunde Osunsanmi directed seven episodes of DSC and two of Short Treks and has also previously worked with the executive producer of DSC on another show, Sleepy Hollow (2013–2017). In an interview for the Scifi Bulletin, Osunsanmi explains his role as director, executive producer, and as a “creative satellite” for the showrunner Alex Kurtzman.37 Furthermore, he elaborates upon his vision for Star Trek, his work on the finale of the second season of DSC and how each episode seemingly has a distinct identity. From the interview, it is evident that those involved in the production of DSC are experimenting with Star Trek via, for example, different camera movements and angles, special effects and character story-arcs (Scifi Bulletin). In the following analysis of selected Short Treks episodes, I highlight aspects concerning how their diegesis is linked to the Star Trek canon or aids in bridging DSC to the canon, effectively making it a transmedia text contributing to the Star Trek universe as a text. Short Treks qualify as a transmedia text while also being a standalone text because they stand out in their narrative content and can be consumed without having watched any other iteration of Star Trek and also due to their formatting by virtue of length and production as an anthology text. Their role in expanding the Star Trek transmedia universe is attributed to their distribution as both an anthology series and an addendum to DSC. I thus identify the Short Treks as a filter which alters the view of the Star Trek canon and specifically DSC’s place in it. In this framework, one can consider not only the diegesis of both the specific text and the narrative universe that encompasses this text, but also other functions and agents associated with the text, such as the previously discussed aspects of Trekker nostalgia, including #NotMyTrek, or how DSC is delivered to its audiences via streaming producers and how this mode of storytelling is a result of the metamorphosis of television in the post-network era. Such an analysis, which I claim is characteristic of the mediaverse, circumvents the cause-and-effect cycle concerning the production and reception processes of the text and instead allows one to view the text’s role as a talking point, leading to a dialogue that illustrates its meaning within Star Trek culture, allowing for the demonstration of how individuals and communities inform the meaning making and appropriation practices associated with the narrative universe. This aids in the overview of the varied practices of media production and consumption and how the audiences and producers negotiate their relationship with the text.

37

https://scifibulletin.com/us-tv/star-trek/star-trek-interview-discovery-executive-producerolatunde-osunsanmi/

80

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

The Short Treks episode “Ephraim and Dot” is the fourth episode of the second season. It is animated and begins as a black and white film that is presented, as the logo at the very start of the episode indicates, by Starfleet Science, one of the many agencies of Starfleet. The images soon transform into full colour. Made to appear educational, the film explains that space is peppered with flora and fauna, some of which is deadly and some docile. A tardigrade then appears on the screen floating through space, suggesting that the Federation is aware of the species and an encounter with one is deemed rare. The tardigrade in the film is named Ephraim and is in search of the ideal place to lay its eggs. Finding a meteorite, Ephraim begins to dig to lay its eggs there, but the meteorite is smashed suddenly by the USS Enterprise dropping out of warp. Ephraim flies around the spaceship and identifies the ship’s warp core as an ideal place to lay its eggs. After doing so, a battle ensues between Ephraim and the ship’s DOT-7 robot, named Dot, who identifies Ephraim as an intruder and attempts to get the creature off the ship. Ephraim follows closely behind to get back to its eggs as the Enterprise experiences numerous adventures on its travels. Eventually, seconds before the ship self-destructs, Dot manages to rescue Ephraim’s eggs and unite them with Ephraim. Numerous narrative and visual aspects of the episode reference other episodes in the Star Trek universe, effectively establishing the play at intertextuality that is characteristic of intermedial texts, wherein the viewer’s perspective of a text is coloured by paratexts and intertexts as well as the medium by which the text is delivered. Ephraim, in its encounter with and pursuit of the USS Enterprise, also witnesses some of the key characters and incidents of the ship’s various journeys, such as a Tholian web reminiscent of Season 3, Episode 9 of The Original Series or the USS Reliant which USS Enterprise encountered in the movie Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Furthermore, the Short Trek episode also briefly shows animated versions of Khan in conversation with Captain Kirk and Doctor McCoy as well as Sulu threatening his fellow crewmembers with a sword, as seen in Season 1 Episode 6 of The Original Series. Eventually, at the end of the Short Treks episode, Ephraim and its newly hatched younglings are seen flying into the mycelial network, linking the narrative back to DSC and also illustrating that both the tardigrade species and the mycelial network did not remain a Federation secret. While the attempt to tie the mycelial network and the tardigrade species to the Star Trek canon is clear, the episode also opens itself up to criticism as to some inconsistencies. For example, as noted by the Star Trek fanwiki ‘Memory Alpha,’ the markings on the USS Enterprise, due to retcon configuration, are incorrectly depicted. According to the wiki, the episode’s director Michael

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

81

Giacchino acknowledged this inconsistency “in a tweet, citing a difficult schedule.”38 Mistakes such as these, as well as the overarching production, stylistic and narrative elements of the newer iteration contributed to anti-fan sentiments that snowballed into movements such as #NotMyTrek. This illustrates how fans operate as critics and how this criticism plays into the overall perception of the text, including future production cycles. This highlights the text as material for the dialogue between production, audiences, and various delivery and social media platforms. Without the restriction of categorizing showrunners, audiences, producers and consumers with a strict distinction, the mediaverse approach allows for a networked examination that includes manifestations of the production and consumption customs associated with the text—positioning showrunners and audiences as agents that establish these varied customs—in combination with narrative elements within and across various iterations of Star Trek. Saru and Kaminar Like the tardigrade storyline, other narrative elements of DSC broker its identity as a franchise of the Star Trek universe. Among these elements, Saru as a character stands out as for various reasons: Firstly, Saru is the first of the alien Kelpien species to enter Starfleet. The previous iterations of Star Trek, although set diegetically after the events of DSC, do not feature a Kelpien, and Saru’s story arc arguably explains why. Secondly, the Short Treks episode “The Brightest Star” (Season 1 Episode 3) provides a detailed insight not only into Saru’s character but also into Kelpien biology and their synergy with the other species that inhabits their home planet Kaminar. This is especially crucial for certain episodes in the second season of DSC, when the crew of USS Discovery arrives at Kaminar as a result of the mysterious seven signals that have appeared across the quadrant, which USS Discovery is tasked with investigating. The following analysis of Saru’s position as a character in DSC identifies him as a node within the Star Trek mediaverse that is examined to identify how the portrayal of Saru’s character in DSC and Short Treks expands the transmedial storyworld of Star Trek and enables an arbitration between the audience of DSC and the way they navigate DSC as a part of the Star Trek universe. This analysis also serves to underline how Saru’s role, while significant in the narrative, is different from that of Jean-Luc Picard, who is seen as a cultural icon in the Star Trek universe. Saru’s very first statement in the pilot episode of DSC is indicative of his skepticism and fear. Being the Chief Science Officer of the ship, Saru plays an integral role in threat assessment, despite the fact that his assessments are usually 38

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Ephraim_and_Dot_(episode).

82

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

overestimated, as summed up by Captain Georgiou: “Saru’s Kelpien. He thinks everything’s malicious” (“The Vulcan Hello” S1 E1 00:09:01). This statement is among the first markers of the Kelpiens as a species. Furthermore, it is the audience’s very first introduction to both Saru and Kelpiens, whom they have never before encountered in Star Trek. Saru’s uniform and badge are lined with silver, indicative of his role within the ship’s hierarchy, as opposed to the gold badges and uniform seams that most of the rest of the bridge crew sport, highlighting specifically Michael’s superior rank. This notion is reinforced in the subsequent conversation on the bridge when attempting to identify an unknown object among the debris at Binary Stars. Michael is often dismissive about Saru and expresses a certain displeasure at the idea of Saru accompanying her via a thruster pack to examine the object. Saru, too, balks at the idea because, as is revealed later, he assesses Michael as a threat to his well-being, which goes against the Kelpien principle of not being put at risk. Michael’s attitude towards Saru seemingly changes in the course of Season 1, after the trial for her mutiny against Captain Georgiou. When she joins the crew of the USS Discovery, she finds out that Saru is the First Officer on the ship alongside Captain Gabriel Lorca (who, unbeknownst to the audience at this stage, is the Lorca from the Mirror Universe with his own agenda). Forced to work together once more, Saru and Michael eventually develop a close friendship. They are often at odds with each other, but still continue to have deep respect for one another. Michael and Saru’s professional relationship and friendship is reflected upon in all the three seasons of the show. In the third season, Saru, relieved to see Michael after their jump into the 32nd century, makes her his first officer. Michael, pleased to accept, nonetheless often disobeys direct orders and jeopardises Saru’s leadership. Citing trust or the lack thereof as a problem, Saru demotes Michael when she once again disobeys him. His evaluation of Michael’s skills along with his heightened ability to perceive threats makes Saru a good leader, a fact that is recognized when Saru is Acting Captain in the second season of DSC and is promoted to Captain in the third season, along with being assigned special ops relating to the unique spore drive that the ship is equipped with. Interestingly, it is a first for Star Trek to feature an alien captain as one of the main characters in an ensemble cast. Star Trek is known for its ‘firstness,’ evident for example in employing a female person of colour as the communications officer on board the USS Enterprise with Lt. Uhura in The Original Series, and its depiction of meritocracy, as well as being one of the first shows that generated dedicated conventions and fanzines that were widely circulated. Although the previous iterations have mostly been Captain-centric, with a Captain usually played by a white actor, DSC and Picard stand out with

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

83

yet more instances of ‘firstness,’ specifically with DSC being less Captain-centric and featuring a black female character as the protagonist. There is, however, a slight discrepancy: Despite Saru being promoted to Acting Captain in the second season, he is from its very first episode forced to share his title and relinquish a significant portion of his authority to yet another white Captain, Captain Pike. Furthermore, Captain Pike’s back story and relationship with Spock and the Talosians plays an equally, if not more important, part in the season arc as does Saru’s story. It is also Captain Pike and his Number One who finally get a spin-off show, titled Strange New Worlds, rather than Captain Saru, indicating that although the new Star Trek seemingly strives for more diverse representation, it does so only gradually. LoConto comments on this gradual growth and the notion of ‘firstness’ in Star Trek as the “glory” attributed to Star Trek as a franchise for “asking moral questions; exploring social issues; demonstrating how diverse groups can succeed together; as well as the first television interracial kiss” (27) between Kirk and Uhura in 1968. LoConto further argues that Star Trek, too, “suffers from the social forces of its time,” which was reflected in the heels and mini-skirts that female officers were shown wearing in The Original Series, or sexist perspectives on the division of labour, wherein the woman was the communications officer, while the men served as captains, chief science officers and first officers.39 Although this seemingly altered in TNG, where Tasha Yar, a female Starfleet officer, served as head of security. However, on the other hand, Deanna Troi was employed as Counselor due to her extra-sensory empath abilities. Furthermore, LoConto suggests that the “bad guys often were equivalent to negatively perceived groups within 1960s America. The Klingons were darker skinned, and the Andorians spoke with an accent that reflected more of the Eastern-Block countries of the Soviet Union of the time. … Star Trek has been criticized for framing issues consistent with their present-day ideologies” (27). In the case of DSC, however, the diversity concerning the casting choices and questions of representation are altered. With key characters being played by people of colour, including those of Michael, Ash, Commander Landry, Book (Season 3), the cast arguably reflects more diversity in line with calls for more equitable representation in U.S. popular culture. The accent of aliens and their depiction, too, changes to varying degrees so as to not otherize various ethnicities, 39

Interestingly, in “The Cage,” Captain Pike’s first officer was played by a woman, who later became his wife. LoConto states that “Roddenberry confessed that part of that outcome was the result of ‘pillow talk,’” and that gender equality had little to do with it. Furthermore, when the show “was finally picked up in 1966, executives at NBC did not want a female first officer” (LoConto 27).

84

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

e. g. the Andorians and Klingons no longer speaking with previous accents or in their appearance, which does not connote alienness to a specific ethnicity. Moreover, the coming together of the various alien species against the Terran Empire in the Mirror Universe portrays the beauty and power of diversity, which Michael immediately recognizes in her continuous attempt to win over the Klingons and stop them warring with the Federation in the Prime Universe. After learning of Lorca’s betrayal, the crew of the USS Discovery are reminded of their duty and of the values of the Federation by Saru, who argues that the ship is not Lorca’s, but that of the Starfleet crew and, by extension, of the Federation, serving the ideals that the Federation stands for. Saru thus reminds the crew of their mission as members of the Federation and to put duty and service above all else. The fact that it is Saru who reminds the crew of this is interesting because he is, at the time, the only Kelpien in Starfleet.40 Furthermore, the status of the Kelpien species as ‘slaves’ and ‘livestock’ in the Terran Empire of the Mirror Universe reflects their status as a ‘backward’ and technologically inept species in the eyes of the Federation in the Prime Universe as they have not yet discovered warp travel. Saru remains the sole exception among the Kelpiens because of his tinkering with technology that sent out signals picked up by Georgiou, who ended up recruiting him. Seeing his admission in Starfleet and his position as the Acting Captain as opportunities that he wants to make the most of, Saru’s unshakeable belief in the principles of the Federation particularly stands out despite the fact that his home planet and his species are not included in the Federation until the 32nd century. In DSC’s three seasons, Saru’s character undergoes numerous changes, both physically and mentally, which also influence his Captainship. Being Kelpian, Saru is gradually revealed to be intricately linked with his emotional state. Showing how Kelpiens as a species evolved and adjusted to their environment, and also highlighting Saru as an exception to this evolution over the first two seasons and the Short Treks illustrates the narrative complexity that characterises contemporary shows. As indicated previously, this narrative complexity is due to the post-network television landscape which enables the audience to unravel the various lines of narrative inquiry based on how the show is delivered to them—in this case, through DSC as the main text and the Short Treks episode “The Brightest Star” relating details regarding Saru’s life and information about his species prior to his becoming a Starfleet officer. The narrative of the Short Trek also informs Saru’s story arc and the fate of the ship in later seasons, when the crew 40

This trope of being ‘the only’ or ‘the first’ of a species to be an officer of the Federation is also reflected, for example, in the case of Lt. Worf in The Next Generation.

2.3 Star Trek: Formatting, Franchising and the Fandom

85

of the USS Discovery encounters the sentient sphere, assimilates its knowledge, and learns of the past of the Kelpen species, eventually aiding in the rescue of the Kelpien planet, Saru, and his sister Siraana. The sphere’s knowledge is also key in the second season’s story arc, for it is what the antagonist of the season, the AI ‘Control,’ is after and is willing to destroy all sentient life to acquire. The narrative complexity linked to Saru’s story arc can be further demonstrated by analysing Saru’s backstory. In the initial episode, Saru’s ‘ganglia’ are revealed for the first time when the Klingon Bird-of-Prey appears in close proximity to the USS Shenzhou. In an interaction with Michael, Saru explains: Your world has food chains. Mine does not. Our species map is binary. We’re either predator or prey. My people were hunted, bred, farmed. We are your livestock of old. We were biologically determined for one purpose, and one purpose alone: to sense the coming of death. I sense it coming now. (“The Vulcan Hello” S1 E1 00:31:04)

Later, in the episode “Context is for Kings” (S1 E3) Saru begins perceiving Michael as a threat, as his ganglia react to her presence. This is because of the Battle at Binary Stars, and how Michael’s actions seemed to have culminated into a full-scale war with the Klingons, as well as the loss of their Captain. With this build-up in the narrative, the function of Saru’s ganglia and the interaction with Michael above present the Kelpiens as docile beings.41 In the Mirror Universe, Kelpians indeed seem to serve as ‘livestock’ and slaves, which further highlights the extreme contrast between Saru’s position of authority on the USS Discovery and the Mirror Universe Kelpiens and also underlines the Federation as the ‘lesser evil.’ The state of perpetual fear that is characteristic of Kelpiens is further explored in the Short Treks between seasons 1 and 2 of DSC, particularly the episode “The Brightest Star” which focuses on the lives of the Kelpiens on their home planet Kaminar. Here, the planet is inhabited by the Kelpiens and the Ba’ul, the latter being apex predators to whom Kelpiens sacrifice themselves in a ritual called ‘The Great Balance.’ During one of these rituals, a piece of technology is left behind from a Ba’ul ship, which the ever-inquisitive Saru begins to tinker with, demonstrating his refusal to simply be taken by the Ba’ul. In his search for a greater purpose in life than submitting to being livestock for the Ba’ul, Saru sends out a message answered by Philippa Georgiou, who commends him on being “the 41

In yet another instance of contrasting characteristics, the Terran Emperor offers Kelpien ganglia from her dish, which is deemed to be a ‘treat’ in the Mirror Universe, to Michael, harking back to Saru’s ganglia having reacted to her as a threat (“Vaulting Ambition” S1 E12 00:12:00).

86

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

first and only Kelpien with the ingenuity to manipulate technology that advanced” (“The Brightest Star” Short Treks 00:11:00). Georgiou thus invites Saru to join her and Starfleet. However, if Saru agrees to do so, he can never return to his home planet and to his people, as interfering in their pre-warp society would violate the Federation’s Prime Directive (or General Order One). Saru answers that his place is no longer on Kaminar, emphasising that his hope was stronger than his fear.42 This Short Treks episode thus not only narrates Saru’s back story but also plays a significant role in the second season arc, underlining the synergy between these two formats that add complexity to the narrative. This complexity is characteristic of new media practices juxtaposed with the proliferation of television media through SVOD and web television technology. It is through the examination of the textual mediaverse that the transmedial and intermedial complexities of television text may be investigated to identify how the contributions of fans and audiences and their negotiations with the text, and its distributors and producers become significant in shaping how media texts are produced, distributed and consumed. Up until season two of DSC, Saru’s character is gradually familiarised to the audiences, not only in the sense of who he is as an individual, but also given the fact that he is a Kelpien, an entirely new species in the Star Trek universe. Details about Saru and his species are provided to the audience through the show DSC, the Short Treks, and also via the DSC graphic novel released by IDW Publishing titled Star Trek: Discovery—Captain Saru. Additionally, instead of episodes largely being self-contained narrative units, as is the case with the previous iterations of Star Trek, both DSC and Picard follow the season-arc narrative format, which dictates continuity in its episodic narrative throughout the season and the series. The particulars of Saru’s narrative and knowledge of the Kelpien species as delivered in DSC and the Short Treks thus canonically tie the series to the Star Trek universe and underline the place of the species at large in the Star Trek universe. Additionally, the season 3 arc, which is set in the 32nd century further demonstrates the progress of the Kelpien species, including their joining the Federation and members of the species becoming Starfleet officers. Moreover, it is a Kelpien child, Su’Kal, whose altering biology due to the radioactive exposure from a planet in the Verubin Nebula, who causes ‘The Burn,’ indicating the potential of the Kelpien race. Saru’s and the tardigrade’s story arcs also revise the broader Star Trek franchise. Nonetheless, the delivery of the narrative raises 42

Siranna’s story arc, too, is intertwined with Saru’s. His sister first appears in the Short Treks episode “The Brightest Star,” where she is portrayed as a dutiful daughter and loving sister as she watches Georgiou’s shuttle fly away from Kaminar, not knowing that her brother has left her and the planet.

2.4 Audience Criticism and Cultural Diffusion in Star Trek

87

questions concerning how informed audiences are of the textual revision, and the exchange that takes place between the producers and the consumers to ensure a holistic experience of the text.

2.4

Audience Criticism and Cultural Diffusion in Star Trek

Over the course of this chapter, aspects of the Star Trek mediaverse have been outlined, addressing the inception of the show, the history and development of the Trekker fandom, and the diegetic and formatting transformations evident in contemporary iterations of the text. Examining the structures of the Star Trek mediaverse and the relationship between these structures outlines the codification of production, consumption and prosumption practices associated with the text. Fig. 2.4 demonstrates how the structures of the mediaverse interact using the concepts and examples employed in the case study above.

•Incepon of Star Trek •History of Trekkers

The Media Text

Networks and Plaorms •Proliferaon of media channels - CBS All Access, Nelix and Prime •Twier, Celebrity Acvism and #NotMyTrek

The Paratexts and Intertexts

•Star Trek: Discovery •Star Trek: Picard •Short Treks and The Tardigrade

Spectators

•Trekker Nostalgia •#NotMyTrek and anfans •Cultural Diffusion

Fig. 2.4 The Star Trek Mediaverse

The coordination of changing modes of television technology and the increasing proliferation of media channels plays a crucial role in production strategies. The investigation of the Star Trek mediaverse, particularly the relationship

88

2 The Star Trek Mediaverse

between the production of DSC as expanding the transmedial storyworld of Star Trek and the large fan-base of Star Trek, led to the conclusion that commercial consideration of nostalgia of long-standing texts such as Star Trek, with its heterogenous and culturally diffused fandom,43 is often seen as an opportunity to manufacture television content and maintain a dedicated following, leading to, as was the case with DSC, a bidding war among SVOD providers. However, it is also due to cultural diffusion that this may backfire, as initiatives such as #NotMyTrek demonstrate. With the examination of fan reactions and interpretations of certain narrative elements of the show, the Star Trek mediaverse can serve as an example that underlines the notion that fan practices—which involve the performance of one’s fandom, particularly on social media platforms, where fan communities are constantly forming and evolving—gain momentum and allow the fandom to critically engage with both delivery and content of the text. In addition to exacting the text based on textual revision and canon, the audiences and producers are also invested in examining the links not only between the particular iteration and its fidelity to the canonical transmedial storyworld of the franchise at large but also between the text and the contemporary social and political climate, as is evident in Star Trek’s allusions to the United States of America or Brexit, thus highlighting yet another dimension to the dialogue that takes place between mediaverse structures and highlighting the cultural significance of audiences as critics in their interpretation of the text and its relationship to their empirical reality. In parallel, the Star Trek mediaverse demonstrates that, as is true for most texts of science fiction, a key trope of Star Trek is the relationship between society and technology or science. In the second season of DSC, the crew of the USS Discovery must prevent the AI ‘Control’ from gaining the sphere data and thus taking control of Starfleet and the Federation, eventually wiping out all sentient life in the universe. In Picard, Jean-Luc, too, must unite with various other characters to prevent androids from committing genocide in a futuristic world where they are already deeply mistrusted and misunderstood by all other organic lifeforms. Both texts point towards popular debates concerning technology and how deeply embedded it is in society and our everyday lives that also inform the next case study of the Netflix anthology series Black Mirror. My examination of the Star Trek mediaverse, therefore, highlights the freedoms and constraints involved in the production and consumption of the television texts analysed above, and how these limitations manifest in the collaboration between the Trekkers and the show’s cast members, creators, and delivery channels. Furthermore, these aspects of collaborative culture outline Trekkers and 43

See page 59 of this text.

2.4 Audience Criticism and Cultural Diffusion in Star Trek

89

audiences of the show as critics who engage with the text and determine its identity within the franchise at large. In this chapter, the Star Trek franchise, and particularly DSC, were located within the scope of speculative fiction, wherein diegetic and extradiegetic markers were identified to highlight the text as being speculative of the extant social and political circumstances. This relationship between the textual content and the extant neomatic environment of the audiences is further underlined in the following case study of Black Mirror by examining it as a work of techno-dystopia.

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

3

More often than not contemporary media seeks to innovate. It aims to challenge not only the status-quo within the media industry itself but also the media discourse and the means of consumption. Having emerged from the industrial era into what Dennis Broe identifies as the “hyperindustrial epoch,” media has become increasingly complex and has led to the construction of a new model of “perpetual productivity” (2). In the attention economy, audiences are manufactured and conditioned to consume media’s new complexity. As the media industry intensifies, fandoms and audiences begin to be identified as yet another form of capital: Fandom in this model, as in the example of Facebook, while perceived as leisure, is also of course integral to building product recognition and the brand of networks associated with a series. Fans are not only being worked on (and worked over), but they are also working; their labor is crucial in building this commercial structure. (Broe 2)

The conception of a fandom centered on a media text not only serves as capital but also enables polysemic interpretations and community-based interaction concerning the text. Multiple interpretations of the text are derived as a result of varied consumption principles as well as the nature of the media text in question. With growing means of production and delivery, media texts experiment with form, sparking new methods of interactivity and meta-narration. To identify the influence of production, experimentation and consumption of media and its dynamic principles, I again employ the mediaverse. The mediaverse’s four structural pillars which can be relegated to their functions concerning a media text—the contents of the text, the paratexts and intertexts, the spectators as well as

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2024 A. Shah, The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43739-8_3

91

92

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

the media platforms, networks and delivery channels—help establish new media as increasingly pervasive and permeable. This chapter examines Black Mirror: Bandersnatch, Black Museum (S4 E6) and Striking Vipers (S5 E1) through the mediaverse lens that brings into focus the content, the genre and the format to further highlight the hyper-pervasive and permeable nature of new media.

3.1

Techno-Dystopia and Black Mirror

The opening sequence of every episode of the anthology series Black Mirror displays a screen buffering signal before it shatters, arguably to underline the meaning behind the title. A device with a screen, whether it is a phone, laptop or television, is used primarily to communicate, with the communication taking place between two individuals, or between specific groups, or generally, the masses. When the screen is broken beyond repair, such as in the above-mentioned opening of the series, one is forced to gaze upon the ‘darkened mirror’ of the screen. This reflection of what a person, or a collective of persons, is in relation to the technology they use, or even exploit, forms the crux of the series Black Mirror. Richard J. Hand argues for the multiplicity of genres underlining the series, with technology remaining the focal point of the narrative: Since it first aired in 2011, Black Mirror has been a preeminent example of contemporary dark fantasy, blurring generic boundaries so that science fiction, horror, thriller or satire meld into one other. Despite this eclectic sense of genre, Black Mirror identifies core anxieties that haunt present-day society—especially the fundamental transformations initiated by digital technology—and extrapolates them to their disturbing conclusions. (20)

In Black Mirror, the theme of techno-dystopia is embedded in the sense of unnerving estrangement inspired by a technological component in the narrative that not only infiltrates the everyday lives of the people in the text but also irrevocably alters it, often by evoking a sense of alienation and reflection on the fragility of life. Hand argues, “Black Mirror explores the critical significance of reception and consumption in relation to the dualism of the domestic/social which is increasingly obfuscated by contemporary media platforms” (21). The proliferation of technology and new media in everyday life alters the social and domestic spheres of individuals, consequently influencing their relationships with other people, groups, and society at large. This aspect is particularly highlighted

3.2 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Viewer as Player

93

in episodes of Black Mirror, with the underlining notion that when you look at a darkened screen or ‘mirror,’ it is looking back at you. The sense of being ‘watched’ or being part of an increasingly exhibitionist society contributes to its dehumanization, and, as Hand suggests, “the individualised feeds of social media and an abdication to algorithmic decision-making perhaps do not give us freedom and happiness but have instigated a hellish echo chamber of illusions and oppression in which the fundamental meaning and future of humanity itself is under interrogation” (22). The cataclysmic spin on technology and media central to Black Mirror may be identified as the ‘dystopic’ element in that it demonstrates the darker side of human nature. The morally ambiguous behaviour exhibited by people in the series is further discussed in this case study. The Black Mirror mediaverse, therefore, highlights how this ‘moral uncanny’ allows audiences to reflect on the role of media and technology in their empirical realities, questioning the trajectory of technological, and in conjunction with it, human progress.

3.2

Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Viewer as Player

The word ‘Bandersnatch’ is coined by author Lewis Carroll and first appears in the poem Jabberwocky in the text Through the Looking-Glass (1872). The title of the text certainly adds to the layer of the title Black Mirror, with ‘lookingglass’ meaning ‘mirror,’ and that although in the literal understanding of the word, a ‘mirror’ does not have anything ‘through’ it since it does not have an ‘other’ side, but that through the mirror one may reflect upon oneself, or the world one lives in, indicating a precarious balance between reality and fantasy/ simulation. This interplay between reality and simulation is the central trope in Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (henceforth referred to as Bandersnatch), and is particularly underlined by the text’s mode of delivery, i.e. as an interactive film. Bandersnatch is an interactive film released by the SVOD (subscription video on demand) service of Netflix in 2018. According to Netflix, the movie falls under the following genre tags: British movies, British T.V. shows, mind-bending and offbeat.1 It is interesting to note that Bandersnatch is identified as a TV show, 1

Streaming and SVOD services like Netflix, HBO, Amazon Prime Video etc. employ genre tags for all the texts available for viewing on their platform. The use of genre tags coupled with data provided by the users (specifically in terms of what text they view and how frequently) is then used by these services to recommend other texts available on the platform. Furthermore, this data is also used by these streaming services when it comes to content manufacturing. Netflix Originals are renewed or cancelled often based on viewing figures within a certain time frame after the show or movie has premiered on Netflix. Additionally, these

94

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

despite the fact that the overview screen of the film on Netflix notes that “This movie is: Mind-Bending, Offbeat, Cerebral”.2 Black Mirror is a web television show created by Charlie Brooker and Annabel Jones and produced as well as distributed internationally by Netflix. Like Short Treks, Black Mirror can also be identified as anthological, with episodes being directed by various directors but stand-alone as far as their narrative contents are concerned. No two episodes are narratively linked to each other, with the exception of ‘easter eggs’ often cropping up in the episodes of the series in later seasons. Bandersnatch is distinct from the other episodes of Black Mirror because of its experimental ‘choose-yourown-adventure’ format and also because while it is not set in a dystopian world as is characteristic of techno-dystopian texts, it does strongly feature elements from the techno-dystopian genre. These elements are problematized in this case study, with links established between the role technology plays in creating the ambiguity between reality and fantasy. Additionally, Bandersnatch appears as a text separate from the Black Mirror show, which comprises 5 seasons. Therefore, one can argue that the employment of terms such as ‘tv show’ or ‘tv film,’ among others, is complicated due to the plurality of meaning of those terms, especially in the post-network era. The complexity of Bandersnatch as a text is related to its interactive and experimental format beyond genre-labelling. The very aspects that make it experimental also make it relevant for media analysis. In the overview section, a short summary of the movie is displayed: “In 1984, a young programmer begins to question reality as he adapts a dark fantasy novel into a video game. A mindbending tale with multiple endings” (Netflix). Bandersnatch is an interactive film that provides the viewer of the film the choice to influence the narrative, which in accordance with this autonomy granted to the viewer, subscribes the text with multiple endings: “In this film, viewers are transformed into active participants, making decisions in an effort to guide Stefan as he inevitably descends into madness” (Carden and Gibson 145). The narrative is thus fuelled by interactive elements, which I examine in relation to viewer engagement. The ‘choose-yourown-adventure’ theme of the movie is also reflected in the diegetic narrative of the film itself. The protagonist, Stefan Butler, is a programmer who designs a 64-bit game that is inspired by the works of fictional author Jerome F. Davies, who writes choose-your-own-adventure novels, while the movie itself experiments with interaction. Katherine N. Hayles and Nick Montfort define interactive genre tags can range from generic, such as ‘romance’ or ‘thriller’ to labels such as ‘offbeat’ or ‘based on books.’ 2 https://www.netflix.com/title/80988062.

3.2 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Viewer as Player

95

fiction in the digital world as “a text-based narrative in which the user is offered navigational possibilities (e.g. head north or west), assets to pick up or refuse (such as a sword or key), virtual objects to view and manipulate, and a framework in which the user can win or lose” (452). This definition, if considered in a visual format instead of a text-based one, seems remarkably like video games, especially ones comprising open worlds that a player may navigate and interact with objects in to overcome obstacles and win the game. This observation is crucial since games and gaming are also important motifs within Bandersnatch. Hence, the following analysis positions Bandersnatch as an experimental text that demonstrates interactivity between the text and the viewer. Interactivity and Diegetic Breaks Science and technology underline Bandersnatch. Games are key to the film on three planes: the intra-diegetic level in which Stefan interacts with the novels, the diegetic level in which the audiences within the film interact with the game that Stefan designs, and the extra-diegetic level in which the viewer of the film interacts with the film and shapes its narrative. The science behind video games, i.e., their conception, design, execution and playing them, is revealed in the text and its modes of narrativity and interaction. The text can be identified as experimental by its mode of delivery and how the viewer is able to engage and ‘play’ with the text. Quite unlike movies that are consumed without such interaction, Bandersnatch evokes cognitive estrangement and a sense of wonder in its unique mode of chose-your-own-adventure narration. It allows the producers of the film to ostensibly relinquish absolute control of the narrative, instead offering some of it to the viewer. Nonetheless, the producers have of course scripted the various tangents and options that an audience member may choose and consequently drive the narrative forward. In this vein, the producers relinquish control on which particular script the viewer chooses to follow, but not of the script itself: [In Bandersnatch,] a solid amount of agency is placed on [Stefan’s] shoulders as an individual. Yet, as the film evolves, we see how this “choice as free will” veers towards “choice as interpretation of information” in the displacement of agency from the main character onto the viewer, and then in various circuitous ways … onto a more complex assemblage consisting of Stefan, the viewer, the production crew and the technology of the Netflix interactive storytelling platform. The latter rests on a custom-made device memory technology that is constantly working to seamlessly load the episode, considering all the back-end possibilities that occur at each choice point. Control over Stefan’s choices, which Stefan himself experiences as deteriorating throughout the film, is thus mirrored in the viewer’s experience—and in the exploration of control over the storyline. It is a level of control that is negotiated with the creators behind

96

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

the film, as much as with the affordances of the interactive storytelling technology developed by Netflix. (Kristin Veel, 158)

However, upon closer inspection, one can conclude that the film does not have a seamless narrative. Seamlessness refers to a film style wherein “the editing does not draw attention to itself. The spectator is presented with a narrative that is edited in such a way that it appears to have no breaks, no disconcerting unexplained transitions in time and space” (Hayward 319). This form of editing is called into question in Bandersnatch. The film begins with the protagonist, Stefan Butler, rising from bed on the morning of 9th July 1984, proceeding with his morning chores and then sitting with his father for breakfast. Up to this point, the narrative appears seamless and progresses in a logical sequence. The viewer of the film is then introduced to Bandersnatch, a ‘choose-your-own-adventure’ novel in the film written by the fictional author Jerome F. Davies. No sooner is the interactive process of choosing one’s own adventure in the novel explained by Stefan to his father than the film viewer is, without any prior notification or warning, faced with their first choice—should Stefan eat ‘Sugar Puffs’ or ‘Frosties’ for breakfast (Fig. 3.1)?

Fig. 3.1 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch—Sugar Puffs or Frosties?

With this scene, the film draws attention to its production processes and editing in multiple ways. To begin with, the title of the film Bandersnatch coincides with the title of Davies’ novel in the film. This detail makes the novel a crucial device within the narrative. However, right after the protagonist explains how one ‘reads’ the novel, the film viewer is given the choice for how to proceed, which

3.2 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Viewer as Player

97

serves as a tool that reflects the protagonist’s explanation and elucidates how the film is supposed to be viewed. This diegetic break, in turn, raises various questions concerning the editing, ambiguity and narration of the film as well as the role of the viewer. A diegetic break refers to “the destruction of the audience’s illusion of witnessing a quasi-unmediated story unfold in front of their eyes, often achieved by having characters cross the threshold of the intradiegetic communications system” (Mark Bischoff and Ulrike Ordon 5). In the case of Bandersnatch and the first choice it offers, this illusion shatters when the viewer makes their choice and consequently mediates what by common expectation should indeed have been a quasi-unmediated story. The viewer, therefore, is made aware of their spectatorship and the role they play, creating a sense of cognitive estrangement from traditional film watching experience. Furthermore, attention is drawn to the editing and mediation of the film also via the interactive element itself. If the spectator wants to change their initial choice—e.g. from ‘Sugar Puffs’ to ‘Frosties’ or vice versa—they would have to restart the film, since there is no option to rewind it. With this, the technological affordances that have made possible to rewind or fast-forward a film are taken away from the viewer. This causes a break in the illusion of control over how the narrative plays out. If the spectator chooses to restart the film to make different choices, and consequently does so, the editing of the film draws attention to itself, as the spectator is now made aware of the different ‘takes’ on or ‘scenes’ in the film’s narrative. In this manner, the film addresses the hypermediacy of the medium in the sense of “the fact that the knowledge of the world comes to us through media. The viewer acknowledges that he or she is in the presence of a medium and learns through acts of mediation or indeed about mediation itself” (Bischoff and Ordon 5). The acknowledgment of this presence of a medium takes place as the film progresses and the spectator has to progressively make more choices that guide the narrative. Here, the spectator recognizes themselves as the perceived subject to whom not only the film is presented but who is also involved in the storytelling process without being present in the narrative as an object or a character. However, the text challenges the usual discourse of the intermediality of media texts and their delivery systems also in case the film viewer excludes themselves from the storytelling process and does not make a/any choices. To address these questions, I draw on a synchronic approach, as the interactive element of Black Mirror: Bandersnatch allows for multiple interpretations and its use of technology on a diegetic and extradiegetic level, ultimately leans into the signature style of the Black Mirror series reflecting upon the merits and demerits of technology, thus tying it to elements prevalent in techno-dystopian texts.

98

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

Adopting a synchronic approach for the analysis of a film that is imbued with interactive narrative elements is crucial to enable its juxtaposition with the interactivity of the community comprised of its audiences, such as e.g. the Subreddit r/blackmirror discussed below. In such an examination, the media text and the community formed around it serve as structures of the mediaverse object that are based on the prosumption practices of migratory audiences. These practices involve the appropriation and re-appropriation of media content by engaged amateurs and can also potentially threaten “the usual power relations between makers and consumers, often conflating and democratizing them so that lines are blurred, and domination is usurped” (Gajjala, et. al 1). Scholars have previously discussed the role of meaning-making that is carried by the spectator of a film. The spectator is certainly involved in the storytelling process in the sense that in the steps and structures involved in the film-making process and its modes of production, the producers identify the spectators as the subject to whom the illusory reality is presented. This is something that the production of the film Black Mirror: Bandersnatch portrays in a different manner in that the latter is made aware of their role as a perceived subject and made conscious of their spectatorship, contributing to the overarching question of ‘are we in a simulation’ that is broached in Bandersnatch, with Stefan growing increasingly paranoid concerning his free will. Should the spectator choose to not make choices in the interactive scenes of the film, the viewing of the film changes in a way that the interface of the platform, in this case Netflix, makes the choice for the viewer. As a result, the film continues to play relatively seamlessly. While the spectators must undergo a 10-second wait every time a choice is presented to them, thus causing a diegetic break, they may opt for a non-interactive viewing, which aids the seamlessness of the narrative. On Reddit, in r/blackmirror user DragonEyed posted a thread titled: “I was curious to see what would happen if I choose nothing at all, and…”3 arguing that they let the series ‘make its own choices’ and were surprised by the result. They mention the different ‘endings’ they encountered to the film, and claimed that the only scenario that did not play out to them in their many viewings of the text was the one where Stefan gets into a fight with his psychiatric. The user finally concludes, “All in all, interesting episode. Completely different from anything out there. Worth watching.” Numerous comments on the post questioned if there was

3

https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/comments/aafzdl/bamdersnatch_i_was_curious_to_ see_what_would/ At the time of writing, this subreddit was open to the public. However, the subreddit is now available only to its members.

3.2 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Viewer as Player

99

‘true ending’ to the text and that those devices which would not support the interactive feature in the Netflix App would not play the movie at all. In response to a comment, the original poster states, “Usually it would pick up the left [option] first, then when it returns [sic] again to that point, it would select the opposite. [sic] I am not sure if it always picked up the left one first, I think there were [sic] exceptions.” The user’s quest to find out how the text plays out without any intervention (interactivity) from on their part is indicative of the spectator’s awareness of the role they play in continuing the narrative of the film, once again exposing the ‘seams’ of back-end editing and production of the text. The suggestion of one commentator that there may be one ‘true ending’ to the text underlines the belief that one narrative tangent of the show may be ‘superior’ than the others despite being no more ‘truer’ than the others simply because the producers of the show may have determined it so, although none of the endings indicate this. The expectation of a ‘true ending’ highlights the intermedial perception of the interactive text by contextualising it with a ‘regular’ film or episode wherein there is only one ending. Furthermore, in the original poster’s comment, they mention ‘it would pick up…,’ with the ‘it’ indicating that there is a perceived mediator that stands in for the viewer as player, thus making the choices for them. Here, free will does not make the ‘choices’ that guide the narrative, but does manifest itself in the decision to not ‘interact’ directly with the text as was arguably intended by the producers. The narrative choices then play out in the absence of the viewer as player, where seemingly another ‘entity,’ i.e. the perceived mediator, makes the choice on how the narrative continues. Whether this perceived mediator is Netflix as the interface wherein the interactivity is processed is not clearly outlined. However, the fact that there is a perceived mediator plays into the question concerning “choice as interpretation of information” that is mentioned by Veel (158). Free Will and Being ‘Watched’ In an attempt to verify the claims made by DragonEyed regarding Netflix “randomly picking up the options,” I encountered four different endings to the film. However, in this case, the term ‘ending’ is slightly problematic because in a certain progression of the narrative, the film tends to reach a ‘dead-end’ wherein the film viewer is given a choice to either restart the film, and consequently make different choices, or to go back to the instance of the previous ‘critical choice’ and make different choices so that the narrative progresses in a different direction. Early on, in the diegetic chronology of the film, the first ‘dead end’ that one can potentially encounter is when Stefan opts to program the game of ‘Bandersnatch’ for the company Tuckersoft in the company’s office space. His inspiration

100

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

is the fictional ‘choose-your-own-adventure’ novel written by Davies, which his mother enjoyed when she was alive. This adds yet another layer to the term ‘Bandersnatch’ as the title of the game, the title of the book by which it is inspired and the title of the film itself. The choice offered here to the spectator is to program the game at the company’s office space or at his home. Of course, in the neomatic reality of the audience, there are numerous other options to program the game, such as outsourcing it to freelancers or developers, or a hybrid collaboration wherein it can be programmed at both, the office or the home. However, the two choices presented to the viewer are not only simplistic but also restrictive. This sense of being restricted is reflected in the consequent choices that the viewer must make and also mirrored in Stefan’s growing awareness that he is being ‘controlled’ by another entity, and the ensuing paranoia, ultimately culminating in catastrophe. After this choice, the film cuts to a scene where Stefan and his father are watching television together. The program on the television reviews the game Bandersnatch created by Stefan as “a very designed-by-committee feel,” and gives it “no stars out of five. Terrible.” At this point in the film, the narrative becomes self-reflective as Stefan says “I should try again” despite having previously displayed no awareness of the fact that the option to “try again” is available to him via different choices made extradiegetically by the viewer of the film. Additionally, the option to ‘try again’ refers to making a different choice on part of the viewer, thus changing the outcome of the film, lending the term ‘try again’ multiple connotations. Relevant to the prosumption practices and the experimental narrative here is the aspect of synchrony that leans into the current cultural context. The ostensible relinquishing of control over the narrative to the spectator is mirrored in the narrative itself. Stefan struggles with the concept of free will, particularly his will. In the course of the film, he finds it harder to exercise control over his actions, and quickly learns that someone else appears to be making decisions for him, which understandably upsets him a great deal. He attempts to resist the directions of this ‘someone else’ that is controlling him, including seeking help from his psychiatrist, but is unable to succeed. Interestingly, Veel argues, “The possibility of parallel realities offers Stefan a way out of the sense of responsibility and guilt with regard to his mother’s death. Yet, it also becomes an absolution for killing his father … The issue of agency versus control, which runs throughout the film, is thus conflated through the multiple storylines into a simultaneity that provides temporal absolution from responsibility” (159). The complexity of agency and control is illustrated not only thematically in the film but also in the viewing of it and interacting with it. The entity that seems to be controlling him arguably is the viewer of the film, but only to a certain degree, as the viewer can

3.2 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Viewer as Player

101

only make choices within a given framework and range of options, thus reflecting Stefan’s predicament concerning agency in the limitations of the viewer to determine the outcome of the film: “Bandersnatch balances the difficult question of authorial responsibility by bestowing some agency on the viewer, but ultimately it also leaves the viewer with a sense that the options presented are confined” (Veel 164). The film viewer appears omnipresent to Stefan in the sense of ‘being watched’ or ‘controlled,’ allegorically alluding to increasing surveillance and data breaches that are continuously reported by the press media. Given that technology is embedded in the daily life of most individuals, observation and big data collection through Web 2.0 tools on one’s devices have become a major concern. In this manner, Black Mirror: Bandersnatch alludes to technology as a key theme in every Black Mirror episode, and that Stefan, a character of the movie, seems to transgress his diegetic layer by interacting directly with, or at least being aware of, the viewer of the film, therefore invoking the uncanny elements that are characteristic of Black Mirror as a whole. Moreover, Carden and Gibson liken Stefan to digital cookies in the sense that fans of the series “seize on the idea that Stefan is a cookie, programmed to constantly relive the moment when the original Stefan committed a violent murder,” and that the viewers to make decisions for Stefan leading up to the murder are “implicated” in his torture, further questioning the balance between control and the lack thereof (Veel 145). Furthermore, these plot elements also broach the question of ‘are we in a simulation?’ that is reminiscent of numerous popular media texts such as the film Matrix (1999), The Truman Show (1998) and Inception (2010) among others. The ‘simulation theory’ as it is often referred to in audience discussions underlines the previously mentioned concerns of people regarding being under constant surveillance and their personal data being shared without consent while also depicting those aspects of technology that evoke a sense of uncanniness among users such as the feeling of déjà vu or being manipulated into making decisions through tools like advertising. In this sense, arguably, the theme of techno-dystopia is carried out in Bandersnatch, with Stefan’s perception that he has no free will leading to the crumbling of the microcosmos he inhabits, eventually culminating in a psychosis induced by his paranoia that leads him to committing murder and landing in prison. The text, as a result, asks if we are in a dystopic microcosmos of our own making due to the technologies we create. After Stefan declares that he is going to ‘try again’, the previous scenes that led up to the point where the critical choice of whether he should accept Tuckersoft’s offer to program the game in their office space plays in snippets, indicating that the narrative is now aware of itself, and tends to ‘fast forward’ to the critical choice. At that point, the viewer may choose differently and has the opportunity

102

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

to take Stefan’s self-reflective comment “I should try again” as a suggestion for making a different choice. In this way, the viewer now pursues a different path into the narrative and can be identified as transitioning into a ‘player’ rather than a ‘viewer’ of Bandersnatch. This is analogous to the ability to ‘use up a life’ or ‘get a new life’ in video games as a do-over of a particular level, mission or part of the game. Additionally, should the viewer choose to remain a viewer and not become a ‘player’ who makes different choices the second time around, the default choice made by the perceived mediator (Netflix’ algorithm) will be different than the one previously made by either the viewer or by the algorithm. This points to two features regarding the production of this film. Firstly, those involved in the production process go to significant lengths to push the interactivity of the film’s narrative through the speedy recaps upon encountering ‘dead-ends’ in the narrative. The embedded presets allow for alternate story progression should the viewer not play or interact, further promoting film-spectator interactivity by default. Secondly, the narrative that then leads up to that critical choice, shown in quick recaps and snippets, tends to alter significantly. For example, one of the characters, Colin Ritman, who is supposed to have been introduced to Stefan for the first time at Tuckersoft’s office, has a different reaction to meeting Stefan in the ‘do-over’ version. He asks Stefan, “We’ve met before?” and instead of Colin troubleshooting his own game ‘Nohzdyve,’ it is Stefan who identifies the problem, to which Colin reacts with the question “how did you know that?” Instances such as these, which refer back to the film and the way it ‘played out’ previously reinforces the trope of déjà-vu and augments Stefan’s eerie feeling that he is being observed. At first, these alterations might seem subtle, but they take on a growing significance as they tend to break the fourth wall, alerting the viewer to the role they play in the film—that of a player. The breaking of the fourth wall also leads the spectator to experience a sense of hypermediacy. The constant diegetic breaks in the film and its features of interactivity allude to the dynamic relationship between the media producers and consumers. This takes place as the consumer takes partial control of how the narrative proceeds. The play of interactivity with the diegetic frames that are coupled with non-diegetic text that enables the viewer to make certain choices underscores the experimental nature of the film. Based on technological affordances the constantly evolving relationship between technology, intermediality and interactivity becomes evident through the diegetic breaks of Black Mirror: Bandersnatch. This relationship can also be demonstrated in the problematic concept of ‘ending(s)’ in this film and in the multiple avenues of discussions and choices in the audienceled communities surrounding the mediated text. The options for do-overs like in a game when a playing character meets a dead end or their death as well

3.3 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Mediaverse

103

as NPC (non-player character) sequences are evident in Black Mirror: Bandersnatch,4 wherein the interactive sequences leading up to that path in the film’s narrative that enable the dodging of a ‘dead-end’ may be replayed. The point in the film’s narrative from where the plot changes direction, therefore, may be identified as a ‘checkpoint’ similar to video games. The completion of a video game’s story or campaign usually leads to the credits screen. This aspect of the game ending with credits is also demonstrated in Bandersnatch, when some of the many narrative courses conclude with the option to “Exit to Credits,” implying that the particular narrative was one way for how the conclusion of the film was envisioned. Black Mirror: Bandersnatch circumvents star power, instead opting to highlight concepts of free will and the power of technology both on a diegetic as well as the interactive level, which not only reflects upon major preoccupations of contemporary thought as to the pervasive nature of technology and the role it plays in day to day life, but also necessitates a mediaverse-esque film analysis that calls for its own set of assumptions and even vocabulary to be examined in detail. In this sense, the text invites a critical deconstruction of the narrative and its fragments, which sidesteps the need to ascribe a coherent identity to the text. This aligns with the theme of the film and Black Mirror in general, which focuses on the pervasive and perhaps even destructive nature of technology in a fragmented and isolating society. To discuss how Black Mirror: Bandersnatch may be examined as fragmented and how it bypasses illusory coherence because of its experimental nature, I situate the text on a spectrum that highlights its relationship with the structures of the mediaverse that ultimately enable the text to be open to meaning-making and, in doing so, reject conventions of genre adoption and discourse-oriented deconstruction.

3.3

Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Mediaverse

The relationship of Black Mirror: Bandersnatch with the structure of the mediaverse pertaining to networks, platforms and delivery channels calls for an examination in relation to the dynamic nature of new media and the intermedial aspects of the text. Subscription video on demand is becoming a dominant mode of media consumption for visual texts like films and serials. Aimed at extracting 4

An NPC in gaming terms refers to a non-player character i. e. a character that is not controlled by the player. In Bandersnatch, the audience seemingly follows Stefan, occasionally making decisions for him, which Stefan is forced to follow. This makes the other characters NPCs as they are beyond the spectator’s control as opposed to Stefan.

104

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

maximum overall profit in this age of digital entertainment, production companies and streaming services like Netflix engage in experimental media to continuously increase their viewership numbers. While interactive films, webisodes and television episodes have existed before—e.g., when BBC invited viewers and fans of Doctor Who to fly the TARDIS5 —Black Mirror: Bandersnatch is one of the first ‘choose your own adventure’ films in the media mainstream. The Netflixproduced Black Mirror television show in general is very popular and has a dedicated fan following, enabling audiences to migrate from the web television show to the film. This migration is made relatively seamless due to the popularity of Netflix itself and its availability on a number of media platforms and devices such as Smart TVs, Internet browsers, tablets and phones. As the platform becomes increasingly omnipresent, so do the texts produced and showcased by it. Another feature of Netflix is one where the viewer is recommended shows or movies based on their viewing history. Therefore, viewers of the show Black Mirror or other science fiction and dystopian texts are likely to be recommended Bandersnatch by the Netflix algorithm, which in the case of Bandersnatch underlines the intermedial quality of determining not only what the audiences watch but also how the text is delivered to them. Releasing an interactive film on a digital platform invokes the very interactivity that may only be supported in the digital media format, and particularly requires a certain level of technology for the film to run while supporting the interactive interface. For example, a theatrical release of Black Mirror: Bandersnatch would be a very different viewing experience than the one on digital platforms, as theatregoers would have to make compromises and agree on a particular direction in the film’s narrative, thereby greatly impacting the viewers’ interpretations and overall impression of the film. This distinction in how the text is viewed as a direct result of its mode of delivery further delineates the significance of examining the intermedial framework of the specific mediaverse in question. Furthermore, given that streaming platforms are becoming increasingly competitive, an experiment like Bandersnatch, if successful, grants the producing platform an advantage to generally maximize their viewership. The affordances that enabled Bandersnatch to be interactive were further employed by Netflix after the film’s release and success.6 This indicates an attempt to capitalize on the innovative interactivity first distributed via this show

5

https://www.thedrum.com/stuff/2014/08/22/bbc-invites-doctor-who-fans-pilot-tardis-you tube-takeover. 6 They were e.g., applied to other texts such as You vs. Wild (2019) and Carmen Sandiego: To Steal or Not to Steal (2020), both of which are produced and distributed by Netflix.

3.3 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Mediaverse

105

and to increase their value in the competitive digital entertainment market. Stefan’s character engaging in gameplay and its creation and enabling his audiences in the diegetic world to choose their own adventure is certainly media savvy, but his character within the narrative is consumed by an audience that is perhaps equally media savvy, and this representation is further underlined by the engagement of the viewer on Netflix while watching the film. The film also evokes a sense of nostalgia, both in the visuals (wherein the game ‘Bandersnatch’), and in the mise-en-scène, which reference the 1980 s in terms of technology, gaming, music, costumes, and the sense of ‘being watched’ that Stefan struggles with as a result of proliferating media. In terms of production, besides corporations such as Netflix, there are also individuals behind a text like Black Mirror: Bandersnatch. Hand claims that an “association with a core creative personality probably has a central role in facilitating the cult status of a show” (23). The film is written by Charlie Brooker, directed by David Slade and produced by Russell McLean. Charlie Brooker is also the creator of the Netflix series Black Mirror, and the show as well as the show runner’s popularity often forms the basis of migration of audiences from one text to another. Moreover, when analysing interactive fiction, Hayles and Montfort employ the storyworlds approach, which “focuses on the integrative nature of narrative comprehension, the mental activities whereby readers locate events, actions, and states within an imagined world from which they can holistically draw inferences to fill in narrative gaps, understand motives, etc” (452). Charlie Brooker and Annabel Jones’ role in the production of Bandersnatch relates to their role in the production of Black Mirror, as some of the key aspects of the latter are carried forward to the film through their signature style, further alluding to the interactivity, intertextuality and intermediality between the two texts. The theme of technology and a dystopian society remains steady in all Black Mirror texts. As indicated in their interview in Deadline,7 it is crucial to combine the storyworld approach with the notion that Brooker and Jones’ are auteurs of the Black Mirror universe: I think what was different here is that this was foremost a movie, but it was also on a platform that isn’t a gaming platform, and it’s more movie than game. I’ve played a lot of video games, but I’ve never written one, and so there were aspects of creating it that were game-like, but we approached it as though we were writing a film. It was this weird hybrid experience where we had to make up a lot of the rules about how it was working behind the scenes as we went along. (Joe Utichi) 7

https://deadline.com/2019/05/black-mirror-bandersnatch-charlie-brooker-annabel-jonesdisruptors-interview-1202610099/

106

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

Brooker also explains how he employed the programming language ‘Twine’ for the creation of the interactive fiction text of Bandersnatch, wherein he “kept adding bits to it, but that would mean adding whole sections, and you couldn’t easily just add a single scene. It started out as a fairly lonely process, and then the misery and confusion about it slowly started spreading to affect every single department.” Both Brooker and Jones admit that writing the film was akin to writing multiple episodes at once, suggesting that from the get-go, the production team imagined the branching off of narrative points as distinct storyworlds with a common point of inception but leading into different narrative directions, making storyworlds the discourse currency through which they designed the film’s interactive structure. While on the consumption side, the film, in its interactivity exposed the ‘seams’ of editing and production, Brooker argues that he sees the text as ‘seamless’ in the coming together of the various narrative tangents, arguing for multiplicity in meaning-making by audiences and producers: I think it’s partly why, in the story, Stefan becomes aware that forces are acting upon him and making him do things, because that makes him a separate character from the instruction you’re giving him. Most videogame characters the player controls are, by their very nature, as unpredictable as the players. … One of the most important things to me when we started, and the one thing that amazed me when I saw the final version, was that it was seamless. You could play it on your TV and you couldn’t see the join between the branches. That felt like some kind of magic trick. When we went into it, that wasn’t going to be the case. There would have been a gap as the next section buffered, and we spent a long time working out how to keep the story flowing along. (Utichi)

This further indicates how an experimental text like Bandersnatch dodges categorisation, given how the intermediality of the text leans into complex interactions with the structures of the mediaverse. Brooker notes in his interview that the text is hard to define due to the blurring boundaries of media texts: I would say that everything is becoming a story platform, really. We classify “Bandersnatch” as a film—an interactive film—first and foremost. But you could easily classify it a game, or a TV episode. I think the boundaries are blurring, and I don’t know where you draw the line between these different things. Ultimately, we have to start recognizing the fact that these are stories first and foremost, rather than bespoke media. There’s very little difference between movies, TV and games, and it’s all starting to merge into one. … The story is what remains, but the boundaries are becoming arbitrary. (Utichi)

3.3 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Mediaverse

107

The new media savvy society lives in a growing virtual world. The virtual world supported by the Internet and Web 2.0, which thrives upon the foundations of the attention-economy, is certainly increasingly representative and perhaps even fragmented. However, the same virtual world is transforming into an increasingly networked entity interwoven with the physical world, enabling swifter communication and exchange of both virtual and physical commodities, thereby de-emphasising the fragmentation, and developing into something more than simply representational. This aspect can also be illustrated by the second screen theory proposed by Hye Jin Lee and Mark Andrejevic. The second screen is defined as [T]he companion device that people use when watching television, whether it be a smartphone, tablet, laptop or home computer. The idea of second-screen apps is that if the TV itself is not going to be the primary interactive interface, perhaps it can be synchronized with such an interface in ways that enable the forms of real-time monitoring, customization, and targeting envisioned by the developers and promoters of the interactive commercial economy. (Lee and Andrejevic 41)

They highlight the affordances of Web 2.0 apps that are “embraced by the industry because of their potential to generate and provide real-time raw data to marketers and advertisers” (43). Furthermore, the second-screen theory underlines the notion of connected viewing wherein media consumption becomes a social activity, and that community-oriented media consumption is becoming increasingly popular because, “commenting on the on-screen action is not quite as fun when no one else is watching” (43). As second-screen apps enable media consumers to engage actively with the media they consume, they begin forming networked communities, highlighting, and bringing together fragmented media consumption practices. Additionally, Lee and Andrejevic address the difference between browsers and apps concerning the role they play in drawing in their audiences and how information is delivered: Whereas browsers are more pull-oriented platforms (although admittedly with customized filters), apps are more push-oriented: preselecting customized forms of information and service delivery. They are also less open-ended: one does not surf apps; one uses them for dedicated, specialized purposes. The “push” character of apps makes them attractive for various content publishers and marketers. (45)

As a result of push-oriented apps, there exists a sea of content that marketers and producers navigate, especially based on the feedback received concerning particular media texts. This once again highlights the need for a holistic approach

108

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

to examining processes of new media production and consumption as well as the platforms used. The mediaverse thus represents the relationship between all three. For audiences of Bandersnatch there exist a great number of platforms and networks that enable a second-screen experience and the formation of networked communities. This can be on large-scale broadcasting platforms such as Reddit or Twitter, or on personal networks such as Facebook or WhatsApp, among many others. As new media applications grow more pervasive and are embedded in the average media user’s everyday life, media consumers find themselves playing a number of roles that influence media production practices, especially considering how media is encoded by producers with certain meanings and symbols, and then decoded by the audiences in an ongoing loop, where both producers and consumers exercise influence over one another.8 The section below examines new media audiences in these roles. The “r/blackmirror” Reddit community of Black Mirror can be viewed through various components such as relevant Subreddits, from the profile of other members of the group, invitations, the search tool etc. Being able to view the community, however, is different from being privy to the interactions that take place in the community, and it does not mean being a member of it. Rather, the ability to become a member of the community requires activity that leaves a virtual marker on the platform by clicking the “join r/blackmirror” button and (optional for groups on Facebook), answering questions before being accepted by a moderator or admin of the group. r/blackmirror can be identified as a private community, suggesting an exclusivity in accepting members into the community. This key feature of r/blackmirror characterises the group as an “in-and-out group” in that it is characterised by membership which “relates to feeling part of the community, which is determined by ‘in’ and ‘out’ groups” (Renee Barnes 13). Membership, in this case of r/blackmirror, is directly linked to the ability to access the group. The act of accessing the group to become a member can be identified as fulfilling social needs, which Barnes considers the second dimension of a community next to membership. For becoming a member in a Reddit community, there is one significant aspect concerning its “in-and-out” trait: While all the affordances granted to the members of a Reddit community are also granted to non-members who can view the interactions within the community, there are

8

Stuart Hall’s model of encoding-decoding communication relies upon discursive structures of the medium by which the message is delivered and also how the structures of production, knowledge and technology framework allows for the meaning making process which producers encode and audiences decode in their engagement with the media text (Meenakshi Gigi Durham and Douglas M. Kellner 165).

3.3 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Mediaverse

109

two exceptions. Firstly, if one is a member of a Reddit community, new activity within the community will show up in one’s newsfeed, but not in that of a non-member’s newsfeed. Secondly, each community on Reddit has its own chat room and/or Discord server, both of which can only be accessed by members of the community. According to Barnes, “Fulfilment of needs creates a sense of togetherness, making interaction rewarding” (13). The dimension of inclusivity afforded by membership can thus be encapsulated by the notion of pleasure as a result of habitus. The balance between inclusion of new members and exclusivity enables the group members to act as gatekeepers. The interaction which Barnes claims to be rewarding in a social context is suggested in the many actions that can be performed upon joining the community. These include joining discussions, posting comments, sharing posts, giving awards and upvoting others’ comments. These affordances point to the encouragement of open discussion and sharing within the group. Fig. 3.2 traces participation and interactivity in this context.

Viewing the Media Text (Computer-to-Human Interacon)

Expression on Social Networking Plaorms (Human-to-Computer Interacon)

Community Dialogue (Human-to-Human-via Computer Interacon)

Fig. 3.2 Interactivity and the Second Screen

All forms of interactivity indicated in Fig. 3.2 converge at the media text, in this case the techno-dystopian anthology series Black Mirror which, as a cultural object, serves as the cause for interactivity and participation. This mediation of dialogue and interactivity based on a cultural object establishes r/blackmirror as a community and accounts for “engaged listeners” or “lurkers” as identified by Barnes (13). Lurkers, according to Barnes, do not tend to leave a physical marker of their presence, yet form a significant portion of the community because they motivate or provoke interaction within a community: “Without an awareness that

110

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

there is someone listening, even if those listeners may not be flagging their presence by leaving a comment or even Liking a status update, we have no motivation to leave comments” (13). In an online community, one can observe the “shared forms of interactions, social ties among members and a sense of belonging and group identification” (Barnes 13). Self- and group identification in communities such as r/blackmirror situate the community in the space occupied by applications of Web 2.0 that characterise participation, and enable the negotiation of one’s identity, thus providing the foundation for the celebrity and microcelebrity logic on social media platforms.9 r/blackmirror is run by some audience members of the show and not officially sanctioned by the producers of the show, which is crucial for two reasons. Firstly, it eliminates the possibility of commercial motivation to join, participate or interact within the community. Rather, at some point after the show was made available, some audience members identified the show as a conversation piece (as pointed out by Storey 19) through which they could negotiate their social standing. Secondly, the existence of such a voluntary community places the cultural object Black Mirror firmly within Henry Jenkins’ convergence model of transmedia storytelling. The model points to the efforts of the audience members directed towards the active seeking out of ways to enhance their viewing experience: “Convergence occurs within the brains of individual consumers and through their social interactions with others” (Jenkins, Convergence Culture 3–6). What is significant in relation to new media audiences is that they play the role of transmedia storytellers in more ways than one. For groups such as r/ blackmirror, the narrative of the show Black Mirror is as important as the social, political and cultural context within which they experience the show. The narrative and the context thus tend to bleed into each other and allow for paratexts to affect their viewing experience. “Paratexts are anything that surrounds a text and helps an individual evaluate it. Media talk, conversations, spoilers or even advertisements would constitute a paratext” in relation to new media (Barnes 39). In her examination of the anti-fan and anti-fan practices, Barnes claims that paratexts enable viewers to engage in meaning making which “attributes values and expectations to the text” (39). Similarly, on 20th July 2019, user remotedockofthebay posted on r/blackmirror community, in the Subreddit titled ‘Black Mirror Season 5 Discussion Hub’:

9

For more details on self-presentation strategies in connection to online celebrities, see Status Update (Alice E. Marwick) and Internet Celebrity (Crystal Abidin).

3.3 Black Mirror: Bandersnatch and the Mediaverse

111

I liked ‘Striking Vipers’. I’ve only recently discovered Black Mirror and my Netflix for some reason played the episodes in a random order. So I saw striking vipers early on. I think the chemistry between the game characters was electric. The sex scenes were hot and I liked the tension between the real life men. I can see that watching it out of schedule put the episode in better light for me. If I had seen it as the final episode after Smithereens and Ashley Too, I would have been disappointed because it wasn’t a season end episode. Smithereens was good, but Ashley Too was too long and bit too cheesy. The beautiful thing about black mirror is how it relates to every day real life. Ashley Too is all about connecting with a celebrity and trying to cheer them on. It all felt a bit too ‘Freaky Friday’ Disney-like. Not much really surprised me.10

This text indicates firstly that a particular episode of the show Black Mirror is comparable to other episodes of the text despite being self-contained narrative units. Secondly, the post also points to the migratory behaviour of the author, who implies that those who have found watching Freaky Friday pleasurable are likely to enjoy the Black Mirror episodes “Smithereens” and “Ashley Too.” The author of this post performed an evaluation of not only the content and viewing experience of the show Black Mirror, but also evoked instances of intertextuality, which enable a comparison to the film Freaky Friday and an affective investment in the Black Mirror episodes based on this comparison. Another feature of transmedia storytelling, according to Evans, is the utilisation of “temporal windows inherent in the television schedule” (37). Considering the seasonal format of the show Black Mirror, rather than simply waiting for the next season to be made available, new media audiences engage in practices that can act as a substitute to the experience of viewing the show, such as consuming media texts similar to Black Mirror, subscribing to news feeds about the producers of the show, socialising and interacting with other viewers etc. Members of the audience also engage in other practices such as writing fan fiction, sharing of stories, migration to related media texts or formats based on elements such as genre, theme, or actors, which indicates the range of activities undertaken to enhance their viewing experience as a result of convergence.

10

https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/comments/bwzmxr/black_mirror_season_5_disc ussion_hub/eu9xyuv/

112

3.4

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

Striking Vipers and the Virtual Queer

As is evident in most episodes of Black Mirror, technology also plays a key role in influencing society and human relationships in the episode “Striking Vipers” (S5 E1). The episode focuses on the three main characters Danny, Karl and Theo, who are close friends and were roommates in their college days. Danny and Theo are in a romantic relationship with each other, while Danny and Karl appear to be close friends who are often seen spending their time playing video games. The video game is of particular import in this story, as it is what brings Danny and Karl together to spend time with each other. Years later, when Danny and Theo are married, Karl reconnects with Danny after eleven years, and the two play the same video game they used to play, called ‘Striking Vipers’, but now modified as a virtual reality (VR) experience. When they play as their chosen avatars, their lives become complicated, as they develop a virtual sexual relationship, while in the physical world, Danny and Karl merely have a platonic friendship and attempt to keep Theo in the dark about their virtual relationship within the game. The episode thus raises questions concerning technology and the virtual queer, which I address in this section, while drawing on audience interpretations to locate the text in the mediaverse. Early on in the episode, technological progress in the diegetic world is made known to the audience. Danny and Karl, when the former was still unmarried but already dating Theo, would engage in the video game of ‘Striking Vipers’ using a gaming console unit. They would often spend hours playing with each other, occasionally skipping work to continue the game, suggesting their addiction to the game—a much talked about topic in contemporary society.11 This addiction, however, develops darker undertones later on in the episode. When Karl surprises Danny at his birthday party eleven years later, he gifts him the VR version of the game ‘Striking Vipers’. The VR add-on has the name “TCKR” on it, which is also the company Rolo Haynes from the Black Museum works for,12 and interestingly, can also be seen as an acronym for ‘Tuckersoft’, the video game designing company that Stefan from Bandersnatch worked for, again implying a 11

For further reading on video-game addiction, see: “Online Video Game Addiction: Identification of Addicted Adolescent Gamers” by Antonius J. Van Rooij et. al; “Videogame Addiction and its Treatment” by Mark D. Griffiths and Alex Meredith; “Identifying Video Game Addictions in Children and Adolescents” by Sue Fisher. https://link.springer.com/ article/10.1007/s10879-009-9118-4; https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.13600443.2010.03104.x; https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0306460394900108. 12 Rolo Haynes is a character from the episode “Black Museum” of Black Mirror, which is further analyzed in this case study below.

3.4 Striking Vipers and the Virtual Queer

113

sense of connection and coherence across the Black Mirror formats. This kind of a crossover of artifacts and objects occurs frequently across the different Black Mirror episodes and formats. Danny had an incident that caused him problems in the knee to the point that he cannot work out. Danny’s physical impairment in the storyworld is an important point since, in the VR world, Danny is physically unimpaired. Physical competence and vigor become a crucial topic in the distinction between the virtual world and the physical one. This motif is highlighted in the conversation between Karl and Danny as well as in their encounters with their respective partners. Danny mocks Karl for his vanity and trying to compete with “the younger dudes” in the “dating scene” (“Striking Vipers” S5 E1 00:11:01). A conversation between Danny and Theo reveals Danny’s social awkwardness and how the domesticity of his life with Theo has taken a toll on their relationship. In the meantime, Karl is on a date with his girlfriend Mariella, and here too, the conversation appears stilted between the two, as they do not share much in common. The following scene shows the contrast between the sexual relationship between the two couples, with Theo and Danny discussing fertility, further illustrating the domestic couple undertones. On the other hand, Karl and Mariella seem to be panting in the aftermath, smiling at each other. While Mariella turns to her phone, Karl turns on the VR device to play a game of Striking Vipers X, inviting Danny to play with him. Once they play the first time using the VR add-on, the difference and similarity between the ‘old’ game and the ‘new’ modified version become clear. Danny and Karl opt for the same in-game avatars that they used to favour on the console unit, Karl picking Roxette, a white female and Danny picking Lance, a male Asian figure. Once the game is configured, the audience learns that through the advanced VR technology, Danny is now in the body of and playing as Lance, while Karl does the same through Roxette’s body. Their voices, too, take on the note of the characters they play as. Danny is shocked by the experience but quickly gets accustomed to it as soon as he learns that his physical impairments have not translated into the VR experience. He mentions how he actually feels “solid” and begins to enjoy the new experience of ‘being’ Lance. Karl says, “Man, in here, you can do so much shit you can’t do out there” (“Striking Vipers” S5 E1 00:18:16) as the two begin to warm up to fight, and with that Danny learns that the VR game emulates all physical sensations, including pain, which he feels when Karl strikes him, once again highlighting the ‘physicality’ of the VR gaming experience. Danny learns that the game resets and all his wounds and fatigue disappear after each reset. With this exposition, the premise of how the VR technology begins to affect their lives starts to become apparent.

114

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

Danny and Karl, as users of the VR technology, represent audiences who interact with technology and media. Current debates in popular and mainstream media discourse are translated into the diegetic layers of the text, indicating that producers of these texts engage in the diegetic embodiment of these topics. Gibson and Cardon claim that episodes of Black Mirror, and particularly “Striking Vipers,” “in many ways highlights the capacity of Black Mirror to truly mirror our reality—to act as a conduit through which to explore moral questions which are immediate and pressing today (15). Specifically, “Striking Vipers” does so by firstly raising the question of the physical world versus the virtual world, and the glaring conflict between the two worlds as the characters struggle to grapple with their respective virtual and physical realities, and secondly by engaging with notions of gender and sexuality, themes which speak to contemporary waves of LGBTQ + activism. By choosing a female avatar, Karl raises the question of gender identification, with Danny and Karl’s sense of wonder and cognitive estrangement manifesting in having a virtual body that enables them to have a same-sex relationship in a virtual world through heterosexual representation via their selected avatars. The seamlessly experienced fluidity of Karl’s sexual identification via his avatar harks back to and raises questions about his identity in the physical world, as it remains unclear whether he is living out his sexuality in the virtual world or delights in the physical sensation of being a woman in a relationship with another man. On r/blackmirror, in the discussion thread for the episode of “Striking Vipers,” members of the Subreddit engage in a second screen interaction over and commentary on the episode. For example, the user ‘SteepedCalla’ commented:13 Wonderful. This episode is beautiful and I don’t think the conversation would end where the episode had, in their relationships. All three were valid to feel confined by the rigidity of our cultural focus on monogamy. You get married, have kids and life is dull... There’s no reason for it to be that way. Maybe in the beginning we needed structure (or realistically, there was drama with religion.) but today we know so much and can work things out. Self discovery shouldn’t end when you get married. If it turns out things are unworkable as it happened in this episode, that’s fine, but at least you two aren’t miserable living a lie. Just be honest, communicate and accept what’s realistically limiting your relationship. Bonus for the casting being black. It means much more than if it were random. I’ve seen, read and hear about how it is to be LGBT+ in the black community. I don’t know what the writers had in mind, but all three characters had their own valid feelings. They love and care for each other but have needs and don’t let shit fall apart for no reason than outside pressures. We just need to see 13

https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/comments/bwznoy/black_mirror_episode_discuss ion_striking_vipers/f7xz5fw/?context=3.

3.4 Striking Vipers and the Virtual Queer

115

this more, maybe other communities do as well! Stay strong, ya’ll. Share the episode around if you’re safe to start a discussion.

The user argues for polygamy, suggesting that once a familiar or social structure is in place, an individual can experiment with their relationships. The notion of ‘self-discovery’ mentioned here can be examined as the internal, introspective voyage that an individual undertakes in identifying their place within social units such as a couple or a family. The user also mentions the cast and gives it ‘bonus’ points for representation, hinting at the difficulties people of colour experience when asserting their queer identities. In the episode, self-discovery and acknowledgment of one’s role in a social context, such as that of a marriage, occurs in moments when Danny is forced to reflect upon his marriage to Theo. He often appears distracted and is also confronted by Theo during a dinner date concerning his interest in her and his commitment to the relationship (“Striking Vipers” S5 E1 00:36:06). The introspective journey is not only restricted to Danny’s character, but also extends to both Karl and Theo. Karl, who boasts about his young and beautiful girlfriend, is forced to reconsider his notions of both physical and emotional intimacy. He attempts to explain to Danny and, in a way to himself, that their in-game relationship is nothing to be ashamed of, and that it does not mean Danny is cheating on Theo. He aims to legitimize their in-game encounters as ‘porn,’ although he is struggling to understand the relationship (“Striking Vipers” S5 E1 00:43:02). When Danny exclaims that seeing Karl on his birthday a year later is “too fucking strange,” one can argue that Danny’s attempts to come to terms with their in-game encounters have failed, and that he chose to cut Karl from his life completely rather than to admit the truth to Theo, a truth that he finds hard to define. It is this struggle that user ‘SteepedCalla’ highlights when they suggest that individuals need not be miserable in a relationship by ‘living a lie,’ something which Danny grasps towards the end of the episode when he decides to confide in Theo and they come to an agreement. For Theo, it is the acceptance of the ‘strangeness’ of the relationship that Danny and Karl and their gaming proxies share with each other that encompasses ‘the journey’ that she must embark on. However, it is suggested that once they come to an understanding and when Theo too is allowed the annual ‘night off’ from their marriage, that they all seem to have made peace with what was once deemed as a taboo relationship. Furthermore, the user’s comments on the cast being black relates this to the intersectional challenges of being a member of the LGBTQ + community, thereby commenting on contemporary hegemonic social norms. This underlines the theme of the ‘virtual queer’ in the episode, wherein the virtual space serves

116

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

as a site for the character’s performance of queer identity. The question of Danny and Karl’s sexuality and sexual orientation is the key puzzle of the episode, not just for the audiences but for the characters themselves. This puzzle is characteristic of Black Mirror, wherein each episode contains underlying themes of the relationship between technology and the everyday lives of people, exploring the uncanny and the ambiguity associated with the characters’ use of technology. In “Striking Vipers,” the uncanny experience rests on the use of the VR technology to engage in a sexual performance that may have serious repercussions for them and their close ones. Karl, who takes on the avatar of Roxette, is overtly sexual even in his taunts to Danny when it comes to winning the game when he says “Roxette’s gonna fuck your head off” (“Striking Vipers” S5 E1 00:05:01). While one might argue for Karl’s addiction to sex or porn, it becomes evident that this stems from his lack of an emotional connection or intimacy. Because he has been familiar with both Danny and Lance for many years, he can experience intimacy with Danny’s in-game character, Lance. He entices Danny to continue ‘playing’ with him, despite Danny arguing that it is ‘not fair’ to his wife, expressing discomfort with his ‘relationship’ with Karl. Karl, however, explains that he is unable to let go of their relationship: Nothing matches it, does it? I tried replacing it, man. I tried fucking the computercontrolled characters. It’s bullshit. It’s like a rubber doll. Not programmed for any sex stuff. They just sort of lie there. I tried with other players controlling Lance. There was this one guy from Holland. He was kind of halfway OK as long as I didn’t think about this accent. But it didn’t get me. It didn’t get me, not like when we’re in there. You and me. (“Striking Vipers” S5 E1 00: 48:00)

Karl’s explanation suggests that he views his in-game relationship as something that is not only physical but also emotional, since it is particularly Danny as Lance whom he desires. His experience exemplifies the fluidity of sexuality, since he admits that he has tried to ‘play’ and have an in-game sexual relationship with male characters, female characters and, on one occasion, even a polar bear. Furthermore, from Karl’s experience the viewer also learns that the storyworld seems to be populated with other characters that have also ‘experienced’ and experimented with the game in the same way that Danny and Karl have, indicative of how the VR technology and this particular use of it has already proliferated. When Danny resists, Karl admits that playing as Roxette and having sex with Danny as Lance was a “transcendent” experience and suggests that living vicariously through Roxette seems to hold more appeal than having a ‘real’ physical relationship, once again pointing to the notion of technology and artificial intelligence as a substitute in line with the techno-dystopian theme that Black Mirror

3.4 Striking Vipers and the Virtual Queer

117

is known for. Karl’s use and indeed, addiction to the technology, along with his various experiences with others, has already altered his perception of what a physically intimate relationship can be. Furthermore, his engagement with the technology also raises the question of his sexual orientation, which he attempts to come to terms with. When Karl attempts to tempt Danny back into the game by mentioning ‘Roxi,’ he distances himself from his in-game avatar. He wants Danny to imagine being with Roxette and not Karl so as to lure him back and to compartmentalise their complicated relationship in and out of the game. During one of their early VR matches, Roxette and Lance are seen getting dressed, suggesting that they have engaged in sexual intercourse. Roxette says, “So, guess that’s us gay now,” and when Lance looks at ‘her’ in shock, Roxette says, “that’s a joke,” indicating Karl’s attempt at using humor to defuse the situation (“Striking Vipers” S5 E1 00:27:02). As the episode progresses, it starts to become evident that Karl does not seem to grapple with the ramifications of his complicated VR relationship with Danny as the latter does, seemingly because Danny has a wife and a child, who would be irrevocably affected should their relationship come out in the open. Danny (as Lance) answers with a “don’t feel like a gay thing,” thereby problematizing Danny and Karl’s sexual orientation. Striking Vipers in many ways speaks to the moral questions which are being faced right now. It explores questions about the fluidity of sexuality and gender identity, and the meaning of fidelity in an environment in which virtual relationships have the potential to be sexually, as well as emotionally, fulfilling. The relationship between the two men is complicated further at the climax of the episode where Danny insists that he and Karl meet, physically, and kiss, to see whether the connection between them exists offline. Both men agree that it does not, and the frustration Danny feels leads to a physical fight. Offline, as black heterosexual men, they are friends with no physical attraction between them. Online, in re-raced and, in Karl’s case, regendered bodies, they have a sexual relationship that both deeply value. Unlike many Black Mirror episodes, Striking Vipers comes to a resolution which is at least somewhat satisfying for all parties. Danny reveals his relationship to his wife, Theo, and they come to an agreement. On one night per year, Danny can meet Karl in Striking Vipers X while Theo goes out to meet a man in a bar. The show’s creator, Charlie Brooker, describes the ending as “pragmatically romantic,” leading to a healthier relationship between Danny and Theo than had existed throughout the episode, during which Danny had been keeping secrets. (Gibson and Carden 16)

Danny’s attempts to resolve the complicated relationship with Karl by later confronting him and asking him to kiss in the ‘physical world’ outside of the game suggests that Danny’s discomfort stems from the lack of clarity regarding how he can come to terms with his relationship with Karl and where that leaves him

118

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

with Theo. When the two men do kiss, however, Karl says that he does not feel “a damn thing,” a sentiment that Danny seconds, confirming that their appeal to each other lies only in and for their game avatars (“Striking Vipers” S5 E1 00:54:09). The two men exchange a hug but then break out in an argument as Karl refuses to let go of their in-game relationship. The scene is steeped in dramatic irony as the two men engage in what they are expected to do in the game world in the ‘real’ one. The episode takes on technological progress, especially in addressing the blurring boundaries between the virtual and the physical, even going so far as to indicate that the virtual experience is, in fact, purely physical, especially when it becomes clear that the appeal rests on the physical experience when their virtual avatars have sex, once again problematising the place of the VR technology in their lives and coming to terms with their relationship. Hence, it becomes increasingly difficult to identify one as real and the other as ‘not real.’ Furthermore, the notion of the digital self as tied to yet separate from the physical self, which is demonstrated in this episode, along with the shared theme of technological progress and dystopia are also evident in the episode “Black Museum,” which is discussed in further detail, and consequently juxtaposed to “Striking Vipers” and Bandersnatch to outline aspects of the Black Mirror mediaverse.

3.5

Digital Consciousness in Black Museum

The notion of an individual controlling another’s actions is something that the episode “Black Museum” (S4 E6), like Bandersnatch, also deals with. On Netflix, the description of this Black Mirror episode is: “On a dusty stretch of a highway, a traveler stumbles across a museum that boasts rare criminal artifacts—and a disturbing main attraction.” Nish, the young black protagonist of the episode, is seen driving along a road in a desert region surrounded by dry mountains and dunes. She arrives at what appears to be an abandoned gas station and, using a solar panel, charges her car’s batteries. While waiting for the car to charge, Nish walks to what appears to be a museum without any visitors—the ‘Black Museum’ which, according to its proprietor, is home to ‘authentic criminological artefacts.’ The proprietor seems to lure her into visiting the museum. The premise so far suggests that Nish’s visit to the Black Museum is purely coincidental, but towards the end of the episode, one realizes that she had planned the visit all along so as to avenge her father who faced a great deal of atrocities at the hands of the museum’s proprietor Rolo Haynes. Haynes guides Nish through the museum, often commenting on objects on display. Particularly, three objects from the museum form three intra-diegetic

3.5 Digital Consciousness in Black Museum

119

narratives with flashbacks. From the very first story that Haynes narrates regarding Dawson’s ‘Symphatic Diagnoser,’ technology plays a significant role in this episode. Dr. Peter Dawson, an emergency room doctor, worked at St. Juniper’s hospital where he failed to save a patient’s life. His mortality rate was high and so Haynes decided to recruit him to test the Symphatic Diagnoser that would enable Dr. Dawson to experience the same physical sensations that his patients experience via a device embedded in him and another, worn like a “hairnet” by the patient to help diagnose and cure them. The Diagnoser soon becomes an object of kink as Dr. Dawson uses it for sexual pleasure, and quickly becomes addicted to pain after a patient who was wearing the Diagnoser flatlines. His story takes on yet darker undertones when Dr. Dawson begins harming himself to feed his addiction and eventually kills another man for the pleasure of pain. In Hayne’s retelling of Dr. Dawson’s story, one can first observe a sinister side to Haynes, who says that he had a background in neurotech and worked out of a university hospital called St. Juniper’s. His work, however, is not of the scientific nature in terms of him being a scientist. On the contrary, he appears to be more of a salesman and recruiter who tries to sell the idea of untested technology for which there seem to be no ethical guidelines or code of usage, and he recruits people to test the technology on. In fact, he describes himself as someone who worked in “recruitment” and makes statements about his workplace as being “the perfect mix of business and health care” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:07:06). He appears to disregard the mental, physical and emotional condition of others, and evaluates people based on how useful they are to him and his cause. He describes St. Juniper and its work ethic as the “idea was folks with no coverage signed up for free health care in exchange for consenting to occasional experimental treatment” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:07:07). This and his conversation with Dr. Dawson, in which Haynes explains the Diagnoser’s purpose, are further indicators of his ruthlessness. Haynes casually dismisses Dawson’s concern about the rats on whom the technology was first tested. Haynes’ apathy is also conveyed when he describes patients who come into the hospital as “assholes,” “drunk” and “dumb” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:08:02). His work with technology and manipulating people into becoming test subjects to verify the results of the technology suggests that since Haynes is callous, apathetic, and untrustworthy, so is the technology. Haynes is also presented as a predator prying on vulnerable individuals with a desperate need for the technology. This manipulative, predatory salesman and recruiter impression is exhibited throughout the episode. Furthermore, the technology that Haynes provides, although futuristic,

120

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

is indicative of problems concerning contemporary society, e.g., in that Dr. Dawson’s story comments on addiction, on the ruthless functioning of corporations and on self-harm. Dr. Dawson’s addiction is shown as taking over his personal life and relationships, as is evident when he inflicts pain on his sexual partner to experience it himself while the latter is wearing the Symphatic Diagnoser, and later seeking the pleasure of experiencing pain by inflicting self-harm. Some members of the Subreddit r/blackmirror comment on Dr. Dawson’s story:14 [A]s someone who self-harms [sic], that story hit me harder than anything in the whole show. I [sic] had to pause and pace around my house because it made sense to me Empathy turned into a convoluted sense of relief that will never properly be achieved again like it was the first time (user ‘seekunrustlement’)

The user addresses the show’s commentary on self-harm, while others in the thread commend the cinematography and the horror of watching Dr. Dawson inflict pain upon himself. The sense of irony in how the technology was initially expected to be altruistic is a theme that carries forward into the other stories of the episode, as does the ruthless nature of Haynes and the corporation he seems to represent. In terms of defamiliarizing the notion of pain, Dr. Dawson’s engagement with futuristic technology takes away the tendency to ‘fight or flee’ when encountering pain and instead replaces this urge with the constant need for pain and the pleasure it appears to bring, thus creating a sense of cognitive estrangement. Nish in this sense stands in for the audience to whom Dr. Dawson’s story is narrated by Haynes in flashbacks. This, however, is a case of external focalization, as Nish researched Haynes for the purpose of exacting her revenge, which the audience is not aware of at this stage. Haynes draws Nish’s attention to a plush monkey in one of the exhibit cases, calling it “one of the saddest things in the whole place” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:26:03). In another flashback, he narrates the story of Jack and Carrie and their baby. Haynes lacks any kind of empathy and distances himself from human emotions to the point of exhibiting the traits of a sociopath, which is conveyed by how he talks about Jack and Carrie’s union: “Eventually, he dick-pukes a little baby paste up her wazoo, which takes hold. Before you know it, out pops 14

https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/comments/e1s305/the_doctors_story_in_black_m useum/f8t99xg/?context=3.

3.5 Digital Consciousness in Black Museum

121

a boy. Boom. They’re a family unit. A walking commercial for a sunnier future” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:27:12). The words, phrases, metaphors and similes that Haynes employs make him appear sadistic and nefarious, as if he takes pleasure in the suffering of others and sees people only in terms of commerce and profit, both for his employers and for his own amusement. After an accident, Carrie is in St. Juniper’s hospital in a deep coma. A futuristic communication device is hooked up to coma patients, which enables them to communicate in a rudimentary, ‘yes-no’ fashion. After having observed Jack and Carrie, Haynes circles down on Jack as if the latter is prey and ropes them in for another one of his technological experiments. In this case, he manipulates Jack into allowing the scientists at TCKR to fit Carrie’s consciousness into the “unused space” in Jack’s brains, thus reflecting the notion of the aforementioned ‘digital self’. She is now able to see, hear and feel everything that Jack sees, hears and feels. Here, too, one can identify the undertones of surveillance that become gradually clearer as the narrative progresses. Carrie now appears seated in an armchair in a dark space, which is indicated to be Jack’s brain, giving her a ‘Big Brother’ feel, especially as she dictates Jack’s actions. With this tech fitted into Jack, the narrative once again plays with the notion of ‘spectator vs. user’ of technology. While viewers are spectators of the technology that enables Carrie’s consciousness to be ‘fitted into’ Jack’s brain, Jack and Carrie again can be identified as users (or abusers) of the technology. In Carrie’s case, the spectrum of human expression is limited now only to Jack, to whom she can ‘speak’ in his mind. While she sees, hears and feels all that Jack experiences, her role is limited to being a spectator, making her a victim trapped by the technology. Carrie’s position can be linked to that of Roxette and Lance from “Striking Vipers,” who have no existence outside of their VR host functions. Without John to give her expression, Carrie, too, does not exist. This problematizes communication for the couple and in Jack’s interactions with the world, one can identify Jack’s attempts to both censor and manipulate Carrie. Carrie, too, as an everlasting presence in Jack’s mind, does not permit Jack his personal headspace, and ends up manipulating him and his relationships to others. This becomes the bone of contention for their relationship since Carrie no longer exists for her son as an individual, but only as a means of play with Jack, whose reactions and conversations with Carrie inside his mind seem to amuse their son. There are a few scenes where one can hear Jack talking to her but does not quite understand what she is saying inside his head, as if Jack is talking to himself, indicating a psychological problem. This ‘mommy is inside

122

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

daddy’s head’ situation shapes the social environment and behavior of their son Parker.15 The experience of physical sensation, too, is a point of similarity with “Striking Vipers,” where physicality is transformed into sensual pleasure in the VR game, complicating the characters’ ‘physical’ world. In “Black Museum,” Jack’s physicality and Carrie’s lack thereof is problematized. Because of Carrie’s lack of agency and physicality, she struggles to control Jack’s physical reaction to another attractive woman. Here, the narrative again poses the question of the relationship to futuristic technology. Since both Jack and Carrie find themselves to be victims of technology, they look to Haynes as a mediator between them and the technology. Rather than abiding by the responsibilities that come with mediation, however, Haynes shrugs off any moral obligation and again acts as a manipulative salesman. It thus becomes clear that not only does Haynes manipulate and lure victims but that what he sells seems to come with a ‘conditions apply’ or ‘no guarantee’. He suggests that the couple “ration their contact” and offers Jack the option to “upgrade [his] privileges” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:36:03). The business-type jargon here clearly characterizes Haynes as a conniving salesman. Jack now has the option to put Carrie “on a pause” using an app on his phone. Abusing the technology, Jack begins to use this option with increasing frequency to avoid quarrels and disagreements with Carrie, at one point putting Carrie on pause for months, which horrifies her. Jack and Carrie try to resolve their problem by coming to “an agreement,” in Haynes’ hard-hearted terms: “Jack put Carrie on pause except for the weekends, when they’d take Parker out with Carrie in attendance, kind of like a divorcee with visiting rights” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:40:04). Once again, the solution proposed by Haynes provides only temporary relief and things become complicated when Jack begins a relationship with his neighbor Emily, who is aware of the ‘Carrie inside Jack’s head’ situation. Haynes suggests ‘deleting’ Carrie’s consciousness, which Jack likens to murder. The moral nature of Jack’s argument when he refuses to delete Carrie’s consciousness is comparable to the arguments that Karl makes to persuade Danny to resume their virtual relationship, not on moral grounds but on grounds of physical and emotional desire. Emily thinks of removing Carrie’s consciousness from Jack’s head as “deleting an email,” as she, too, is defamiliarized by the novelty of the technology and is 15

For example, in an attempt to rile up his parents, he slides a mug off his desk, and it crashes on the ground. This leads to Jack reprimanding Parker, and Carrie in turn reprimanding Jack for scolding Parker. Jack then turns to what can be identified as a twisted need for of selfharm and sadism as he eats canned anchovies to punish Carrie for arguing with him, who presumably hates the taste of anchovies.

3.5 Digital Consciousness in Black Museum

123

struggling with how to come to terms with their situation (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:42:55). Ultimately, Haynes suggests putting Carrie’s consciousness inside the plush monkey. The monkey invokes Carrie as akin to a testing subject in a laboratory while also symbolizing Carrie’s consciousness as a toy for both Jack and Haynes. Haynes describes the body of the plush monkey as having a ‘haptic feedback,’ which enables Carrie to feel when Parker hugs or cuddles the plush monkey, retaining bare minimum physicality in the relationship between a mother and her son. However, she only has limited communication, which Haynes describes as “rudimentary” and “kid-friendly” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:44:02). Carrie’s consciousness, now seated on a sofa chair ‘inside’ the plush monkey, can press two buttons. One button, which shows a sad face, when pressed gets the monkey to say, ‘monkey needs a hug’ and the other, with a happy face, ‘monkey loves you,’ so that Carrie’s emotional expression is restricted to binary responses. After some time, however, the plush monkey becomes a forgotten toy Parker no longer engages with, thus further dehumanizing Carrie. After Haynes’ flashback narration, Nish asks him about the crime that was committed in this case, since the Black Museum is a museum of criminal artefacts. Haynes calls the monkey itself a crime: “The UN made it illegal to transfer human consciousnesses into limited formats like this. Gotta be able to express at least five emotions for it to be humane, apparently. Human rights for cookies” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:48:09). Haynes juxtaposes human emotions and technological jargon in favour of technology. Horrified, Nish realizes that Carrie is still trapped inside the plush monkey, which is now an exhibit in the Black Museum. It was only after the fiasco with the plush monkey that Haynes was fired from St. Juniper’s hospital and founded the Black Museum as, in his words, “it appealed to the carny in [him]” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:48:11). The air conditioning inside the Black Museum, which has not been operational from the beginning of the episode, continues to fail to work properly, as a result of which Haynes is sweating profusely, and his discomfort becomes apparent. At this point in the narrative, he decides to show Nish the “prime exhibit” and leads her behind a curtained area in the museum to show her the consciousness of a man named Clayton Leigh, who appears as a hologram that is caged in what looks like a prison cell. The visitors of the Black Museum can observe him from behind a thick glass wall. In yet another flashback, Haynes reveals that Clayton Leigh was arrested for allegedly murdering a weather reporter. Clayton had already been mentioned during Jack and Carrie’s flashback story, in which his arrest is presented in news reports on the television. While it is unclear whether Leigh committed the murder or not, he was convicted and executed. Haynes approached

124

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

Leigh while he was in prison and persuaded him to “[sign] over the rights to [his] digital self in case the worst happens” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:52:08). This is an interesting juxtaposition to what might count as one’s ‘digital self’ in “Striking Vipers.” Danny and Karl, in the virtual world of the game, are represented by avatars with seemingly distinct identities. These avatars’ appearance, skills and physical attributes distinguishes them from the players, yet they transmit physical sensations and enable communication. In this sense, the ‘digital self’ of the players can be separated from the players and manifests in the virtual world, with the virtual world existing next to the physical world. In the case of Clayton Leigh, however, there is no distinction between the virtual world and the physical world, as he is ‘trapped’ in the physical world in his ‘digital self’ while retaining his appearance and consciousness: “the social media pages and other digital footprints left behind by a person who has died—have been described as ‘digital remains’ which play an important role in the continuation of ties between the living and the dead” (Carden and Gibson 142). This problematizes of the notion of a digital self or digital consciousness and the limitations associated with it yet illustrates aspects of digital immortality and digital afterlife of an individual engaging with digital technology that persists long after one’s physical self is gone. Haynes convinced Leigh with the offer that his family would “receive the lion’s share of any profits” if he agreed to sell his digital self (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:51:23).16 Haynes is exposed as a liar, however, when Nish asks about Leigh’s family’s opinion, and he answers that “They didn’t give a shit. Abandoned him the moment he got locked up” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:52:16). This statement is contradictory to the flashback which shows the concern Leigh’s wife expresses regarding the rights over his consciousness and says, “Jesus Christ, Clay, it’s your soul” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:53:00). Here, the notion of one’s digital self is further complicated by referring to it as one’s soul, adding a spiritual aspect that is not invoked in “Striking Vipers.” Based on a documentary that hinted at his innocence, Nish questions whether Clayton was really guilty, and also mentions ostensible tampering with DNA evidence. Haynes dismisses this as “fake news. Hatchet job” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:53:04). On the day of Leigh’s execution, Haynes, in his own words, uses a device to “slurp up his entire consciousness” and, using a computer, exports the consciousness as a hologram to the prison cell as the star exhibit of his newly opened Black Museum (“Black 16 In the recent years, aside from Black Mirror, numerous other science fiction television texts have explored the themes of the ‘digital self,’ such as Upload (2020), The Expanse (2015—present), Love Death + Robots (2019).

3.5 Digital Consciousness in Black Museum

125

Museum” S4 E6 00:53:12). Furthermore, Haynes fits the exhibit with a digital electric chair which seems to function like the ‘real’ one and allows visitors of the museum to pull the lever and electrocute Leigh all over again, causing pain to the digital self. Calling it an ‘attraction,’ Haynes describes how everyone who pulled the lever receives a souvenir in the form of a digital copy of his consciousness while he was being electrocuted, thus “perpetually experiencing that beautiful pain” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:57:01). Here, the digital self augments the suffering. With this description of pain and his affinity to the ‘carny,’ Haynes appears similar to Dr. Dawson’s increasing mental imbalance. Haynes informs Nish that he only allowed the visitors to pull the level for a maximum of 10 seconds, since doing so for longer than 15 seconds would “wipe his digital synapses out for good, kill him” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:56:11). After explaining Leigh’s story, Haynes appears to be suffocating, gasps for air as his face turns red and Nish, whose accent undergoes a dramatic change from British to American, asks him to take a seat. She then taunts Haynes: You left some parts of the story out, Mr. Haynes. Why is that? You forgot to mention the protests. His wife started a campaign, got some momentum behind it. Guess you’d call it virtue-signaling bullshit, but I know it hurt your attendance. And even the protestors got bored after a while. As soon as it was clear the state wouldn’t do a damn thing about clearing him, they just moved onto the next viral miscarriage of justice they can hang a hashtag off of. (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:58:04)

At this point, it becomes clear that Nish appears to be more than just another visitor who happens upon the museum. She expresses disdain towards activists and social media who rally behind a cause only for the sake of self-presentation and online performance, referring to the situation after the protests when visitors no longer frequented the Black Museum and its “core clientele” was comprised of “loners” and “sadists” from “the supremacist sicko demographic” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:59:09). Haynes continues to suffocate and gasp for air as Nish explains that he would accept extra cash from “some classic race-hate rich guy with a hard-on for power” to pull the lever to electrocute Clayton for slightly longer than 10 seconds (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:59:24). Here, racism is exposed as yet another way for Haynes to exploit capitalistic benefits, as ‘tormenting a black man’ becomes a selling point. The name of the museum as well as of the episode thus constitutes a commentary on racial discrimination and on the black man as an ‘exhibit.’ Allowing people to pull the lever for longer than 10 seconds sent Leigh into a vegetative state of being neither alive nor dead. According to Nish, “Even the perverts didn’t wanna pull a… a lever on a vegetable” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 01:00:03). In a flashback Clayton Leigh’s wife

126

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

is shown to visit him in the Black Museum, which Nish comments on: “He was like a docile animal. God knows if he even recognized her. God knows if he even recognizes me. Dad. Happy Birthday” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 01:00:18). Here, the motivation behind Nish’s visit to the Black Museum becomes apparent. After witnessing what had become of Leigh, his wife committed suicide and Nish found her. She had hacked the digital air conditioning system to get Haynes to drink from the bottle of water she offered him, which makes him unconscious. When he wakes up, he finds himself inside Clayton Leigh’s head exactly as Carrie was inside Jack’s head, thus becoming a victim of the very idea that he tried to sell. He is trapped and begins to insult Nish as she tells him what she plans to do next, “to transfer a fresh consciousness inside a virtual one” to perform “the first double-decker mercy killing” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 01:03:00). Pulling the lever at maximum capacity kills Clayton Leigh, but Haynes is now trapped inside a souvenir in perpetual pain, which Nish takes with her. The image of Nish as an avenger is further intensified when she leaves with the plush monkey which still contains Carrie’s consciousness and says ‘monkey loves you’ to Nish. Nish sets the Black Museum on fire and walks back to her car, hanging the souvenir with the perpetually suffering Haynes on the rearview mirror. When she asks “How’d I do, Mom? All good?” it is revealed that Nish’s mother’s consciousness is inside Nish’s head (“Black Museum” S4 E6 01:06:02). Considering the pleasantness with which Nish and her mother converse, the episode conveys that technology cannot easily be identified as ‘good’ or ‘evil,’ but that it largely depends on how it is used and for what purpose.

3.6

Techno-Dystopia and the Black Mirror Mediaverse

Based on the examination of these three Black Mirror examples, one can argue that the shared narrative elements, which align the text with science fiction include technology and science in its relationship with society. These provide commentary on contemporary culture within a near-futuristic setting in a way that involves audiences in thought experiments while at the same time exploring the limits of human knowledge. With narrative elements of the Black Mirror universe featuring prominently in the episode of “Black Museum,” one can argue that the seemingly stand-alone episodes take place in a single transmedial storyworld,17 17

Canavan claims that Black Mirror features: an ordered and coherent grand narrative across the various episodes of the series, none of which have any direct overlap, of any sort. We see only the very slow development of a new socio-technological paradigm; a device we encounter in episode X we see further developed

3.6 Techno-Dystopia and the Black Mirror Mediaverse

127

which Garry Canavan describes as, “[S]omething nearly unique in the history of television: a postmodern, post-anthropocentrized, and indeed truly post-human narrative, centred not on protagonists and antagonists but rather massively distributed across the entire planet as society navigates the early and middle stages of a vertiginous technological revolution” (258). Canavan’s claim posits the text as speculative in the sense that audiences negotiate with the text through a comparison with their neomatic environs, and that the notion of ‘cookies’18 as ‘digital copies’ particularly in the context of human consciousness emerges as the dominant theme in the series (Canavan 259). The introspective, literal or metaphorical voyages that the characters of these texts embark on also allow for introspection among the audiences, evoking estrangement and a sense of wonder. For example, Carden and Gibson allude to the technology of ‘cookies,’ which is evident in all the three Black Mirror texts analysed in this case study: “Cookies are one of the core technologies in the Black Mirror universe. They are a thinking, feeling, digital replication of an individual. Cookies have the personality and memories of the living, breathing, original of whom they are a double” (143). In the case of “Black Museum,” the cookie versions of Carrie and Leigh are victims of being the digital embodiment of their physical selves who are forced to interact with the physical environment without being granted all the affordances to successfully do so: In existing virtual environments, the moral weight of digital lives, even as separable from the physical self of the user behind a character, is increased or made apparent through the construction of the embodied self. In case of cookies, their recognisable physical embodiment in a digital environment reinforces the conception that their lives are human lives, and blurs the division between the digitised self and the person replicated. Despite the digital physicality of cookies, they do not, nonetheless, have a presence in the physical world. A cookie cannot extend beyond the confines of the world created for it. (Carden and Gibson 143–4)

in episode Y, and further improved in episodes Z and A—with those episodes not necessarily appearing in any sort of chronological or thematic sequence, but instead haphazardly and often years apart. This is a shared universe in which, weirdly, nothing is shared, beyond the occasional word or phrase, or momentary image on a blurry screen in the background of an unrelated scene. (259) 18 Concerning computer software and the web, ‘cookies’ can be defined as small blocks of data stored on a device used to access the web, which enable certain functions such as autofilling data in online forms, or viewing items stored in one’s shopping cart on an e-commerce site. There are numerous types of cookies, of which one is the tracking cookie that can store one’s browsing history data.

128

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

Interestingly, Haynes alludes to cookies within the narrative when he explains to Nish that the cookie technology was adapted and fine-tuned by TCKR after Dr. Dawson’s breakdown: “It’s how they wound up with the digital consciousness transference, what they call cookies today” (“Black Museum” S4 E6 00:26:06). Nish likens the cookie technology to uploading aged people to the cloud, alluding to yet another episode of Black Mirror—“San Junipero”—and emphasising the series’ shared narrative universe and themes. Moreover, according to Carden and Gibson, fans of the show have “[seized] on the idea that Stefan [from Bandersnatch] is a cookie, programmed to constantly relive the moment when the original Stefan committed a violent murder” further suggesting that the viewers/ audience members who interact with the text are implicated in Stefan’s torture as they command him to relive those moments. (145) In addition to the notion of digital replication and cookies, there are numerous common features between the episodes that are centred on the use and abuse of technology. An example of this similarity prevails between Danny and Karl in “Striking Vipers” and between Nish and Dr. Dawson in “Black Museum.” Danny and Karl, as previously explained, are portrayed as users of technology and face consequences as a result of how they are using that technology. This is in sharp contrast with Bandersnatch, where the audience of the film utilizes the technology to further the narrative. With Danny and Karl, their reaction to and sense of wonder regarding the technology is laid out for viewers similar to “Black Museum.” As the one who was implanted with the futuristic technology, Dr. Dawson first is the user who expresses a sense of wonder after his first experience with it, but later is the abuser of the technology, and also develops an addiction to pain as a result of his abuse. The fictional UN regulations that Haynes alludes to also hint at the dangers of limiting the spectrum of expression of human emotions and censorship. In this sense, this technology can be posited as contradictory to the one in “Striking Vipers,” where the in-game experiences enabled Danny and Karl to examine their emotions and physical responses to each other, thereby widening this spectrum of expression. With Bandersnatch, however, the limitation of expression and action due to the player’s or viewer’s commands resembles Carrie’s situation in that Stefan, as a result of these commands and his feeling of losing free will, is compelled to murder his father, suggesting the fatal consequences of technology-imposed limitations. Yet another shared theme between the episode of “Striking Vipers” and the film Bandersnatch is the ‘game,’ which both texts deal with differently. In “Striking Vipers,” the game represents an alternate world—not only as a thought experiment in the sense of ‘what if,’ but also in the literal sense, as it enables players of the game to experience physical sensations based on perceptions in

3.6 Techno-Dystopia and the Black Mirror Mediaverse

129

the virtual world. The game of Striking Vipers, delivered through a VR add-on, allows for characters to interact with each other without anyone outside of the game knowing about it, such as when Theo is in the dark about the in-game interactions between Danny and Karl. This lends a certain degree of anonymity and allows for multiple virtual worlds between various ‘players’ to exist side by side, creating a stack of horizontal worlds. Additionally, the players are allowed to choose avatars supported by the game’s features, who may be significantly similar to or different from the players who control the avatars. With these aspects, “Striking Vipers” touches upon topics such as data privacy and surveillance without distracting from the main theme of the virtual queer. In its exploration of these themes, the episode also frames itself as a Black Mirror text. Furthermore, the option to personalize and customize one’s virtual avatar also raises the question of identification, especially in relation to debates and discussions over gender. In “Striking Vipers,” two characters of the episode become players and engage in play, wherein their in-game avatars can also be identified as a different set of characters in the sense that one can distinguish between Danny and Lance, and between Karl and Roxette. The degree of interactivity among the audiences of the text is limited to consumption of the text and then conglomerating on the second screen to engage in that which Jenkins identifies as convergence culture. However, with Bandersnatch, the viewer of the film is the player in the sense that they choose the actions that are to be performed or resisted by the character in the film, thereby highlighting the question of free will or the lack thereof. As the audience member continues to ‘play’ with Stefan and drive the narrative forward, Stefan’s sense of paranoia grows to the point where he ‘confronts’ the audience member through a computer, interacting with the audience and discovering that his actions are being controlled by a viewer who is using the computer to speak to him. This paranoia speaks to contemporary debates on surveillance and data privacy. However, the quasi hopeful ending of “Striking Vipers” and “Black Museum,” which “seem to buck [Black Mirror’s] general pattern of negativity … appear more complicated upon reflection” (Canavan 257). The audience is explicitly aware of the show’s reflection of the dystopic vision of technology, and thus may identify it as a cautionary tale concerning technological developments and their impact on society. Beyond paranoia and complications resulting from technological developments such as VR gaming and digital surveillance, and with the viewer being a ‘player,’ Bandersnatch can be situated in a different place than “Striking Vipers” on the spectrum of the mediaverse where the range of interactivity among its structures differs greatly. This difference in intermediality is further highlighted in terms of the production context and delivery platform of the two texts: For one, Netflix

130

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

serves as simply the delivery channel while for the other, it may be identified as the gaming platform for the text as well as its delivery channel, illustrating the intermedial nature of the text that is realised through the affordances of Netflix and software such as Twine, which enable intermedial codification of the text. Moreover, through an examination of the mediaverse as a network, elements of science fiction texts become apparent as embedded in the text and in their process of being collectively decoded by audiences. Producers of the text employ various media tools at their disposal to elucidate the encoding process, including celebrity culture, thus adding further complexity to the audience’s decoding and polysemic interpretive processes that the mediaverse, in its networked approach, aims to make visible. An example of this entangled process is the book Inside Black Mirror (2018) written by Jason Arnopp along with the creators of Black Mirror, Charlie Brooker and Annabel Jones. The book details how each episode of the first four seasons of Black Mirror was conceptualized, as well as the contributions of the actors to the roles they played, and the directors and script writers elucidating how they made the stories come alive on the screen. Insights from those who contribute to the production of the show add another interpretive layer to a media text, which can also enhance migratory patterns and consumption practices of media audiences. Taking the example of the character of Rolo Haynes from the episode “Black Museum,” the section above identified him as ‘a sleazy salesman,’ ‘deceptive,’ and ‘manipulative.’ A number of commentators in the discussion thread of the episode in r/blackmirror add their interpretation of Haynes’ character, which serves as one of the many points of audience interaction. For example, users ‘Passing_Thru_ Forest’ and ‘takeme-to’ have the following exchange:19 Passing Thru Forest: I found it ironic that she had her mother’s consciousness [sic] implanted in her. It could mean she already knew how to use his technology experimented herself or his technology went through enough troubleshooting to be used ethically and is available for everyone. Aside from the prisoner, there was good(ish) intentions with his inventions, even if they had sinister results. I guess the irony to me is that without him she wouldn’t have her mother still around (even if it’s in her head), both her parents would simply be gone.

19

https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/comments/7mrqld/black_mirror_episode_discuss ion_s04e06_black/e0ufit6/?context=3.

3.6 Techno-Dystopia and the Black Mirror Mediaverse

131

Takeme-to: I agree that what you mentioned is ironic, but Rolo knew about the bad consequences his inventions could have; didn’t he say something like “A state of happiness can’t last very long” while talking about Jack and Carrie? Couldn’t he warn Jack about it instead of just convincing him to transplant Carrie in his head? Passing Thru Forest: That’s true. I think for me when he said that it was a storytelling gimmick he used since the situation went sour in the end. Then again, even if he did or didn’t know what could happen, he sure didn’t show any remorse after. It would’ve been neat if they wrote him as if the failures in his technology made him lose his mind more and more. It would’ve made it a little more interesting than him just being a sociopath.

Through this exchange, the two users’ interpretation of certain aspects of the text are made explicit. The users certainly also see Haynes in a negative light, and one of them labels him a ‘sociopath’ who lacks remorse. This decoding is based on the overall show and specific episodes elucidating the thought experiment of the producers, who encode it with the information, technology and other assets they can glean from the dominant and emerging cultural order. In accordance with this process, Rolo Haynes’ character, what he represents, and the current themes that the episode explores become part of the audiences’ collective social, cultural and political preoccupations. The series’ engagement with techno-dystopian tropes, such as experimental use of technology, the negative influence of exhibitionism as a result of technological progress and the notion of the ‘digital self’ can be identified as cultural dynamics that dominate the narrative context and are key in the interaction that takes place among the stakeholders of the mediaverse. The Black Mirror mediaverse assists in linking the production and the audience sides of the meaning-making process and cultural contextualization. Expanding upon the example of Rolo Haynes’ character, the interpretations and the ‘making of’ by the producers add an interpretive layer to the text, in turn informing the opinion of those audiences familiar with these paratexts. The actor who plays Haynes, Douglas Hodge, describes his preparation methods to be in character, which led him to refusing to rehearse lines with his co-star Letitia Wright and growling at her, looking to rile up Wright to make her hate him and express that hatred in her scenes with him (Brooker, Jones and Arnopp 601–4). He mentions how he found the script “laugh-out-loud funny. Absolutely terrifying too, with a political thrust” (Brooker, Jones and Arnopp 600). The reader also learns of Hodge’s opinion of Haynes and of racialism when he says:

132

3

Digital Consciousness in the Black Mirror Mediaverse

Rolo is a wonderful creation, an extraordinary person—a storyteller with an empathic disconnect. He’s probably the most toxic person I’ve ever had to be. Just after Black Museum, I played Nixon and I’m currently playing a Guantanamo Bay torturer, but none of them come close to Rolo Haynes’ unempathetic glee. Playing him was like swallowing a small thimble of poison each morning. Every day, the whole thing felt more toxic—especially as it was essentially a black cast and Rolo was a white supremacist. (Brooker, Jones and Arnopp 600)

This insight into the media text from the producers’ and the actor’s perspectives provides further context for audience members. Their interpretations and interactivity as media users add to the perspective on the media text, producer or delivery channels and networks. Haynes’ tendency towards exhibitionism and profit-making through exploitation of technology allows for reflection on how technology leans towards capitalism in the audience’s neomatic reality. The derisive attitude of Nish towards ‘social justice warriors’ too, is rooted in contemporary woke-ism and its expression on social media platforms. Moreover, social media platforms play a crucial role in textual contextualisation and fan engagement. Reddit community members like the ones discussed here, who consume speculative and sci-fi television media and are likely to have a subscription to Netflix, constitute interactive audiences. Further qualitative analyses, e.g. of Reddit profiles, can indicate what Subreddits and communities such audiences interact in and how their social and cultural experiences with specific texts shape their media profile. Fandoms as communities are derived from the interactions between the various structures of the mediaverse and the media text. The case of Inside Black Mirror also suggests the desire for producers to interact with their audiences outside and in extension of the media text (Fig. 3.3). As this case study of Black Mirror has shown, contemporary media engagement is pervasive and permeable as far as formats are concerned. This was illustrated through the example of virtual communities dedicated to the text, and the text being delivered to audiences via television, mobile phones or gaming consoles in SVOD format. Furthermore, audiences engage with the media text through second screens. These second screens allow not only for live feedback as well as prolonged exposure to the media text, which can benefit the producers, but also enables interactive audiences and fandoms to form social media communities that engage in convergence practices on these platforms, as a result of which the popularity of a particular media text can also snowball.20 Additionally, the second screen allows for the assertion of media engagement as permeable 20

At the other end of the spectrum is also the possibility that a text or an individual may be ‘cancelled,’ i.e., ostracised due to controversy.

3.6 Techno-Dystopia and the Black Mirror Mediaverse

•Black Mirror anthology series + ein film •Bandersnatch •Striking Vipers •Black Museum

•Genre-Bending •Shared Narrave Universe •Techno-dystopian theme The Media Text

•Nelix - television and gaming plaorm •Experimental and Interacve

133

Networks and Plaorms

The Paratexts and Intertexts

Spectators

•Viewers as players/gamers/viewers •The Second Screen •Cultural Contextualisaon and Meaning-Making

Fig. 3.3 The Black Mirror Mediaverse

in the sense of moving from one media format or platform to another to further interaction among the structures of the mediaverse, as evidenced by Inside Black Mirror. Significantly, it is the very elements of techno-dystopia that become ‘talking points’ for the above-mentioned interactions. Such elements of genre as talking points are also apparent in the case study of The OA.

The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

4

The mediaverses analysed so far have discussed the ways in which fans influence and change not only the text but also the cultural meaning they are imbibed with. Symptoms of cultural and social shifts in the empirical reality of the audiences inform the narrative tropes of speculative fiction television, as was seen in the case of Black Mirror and its negotiation with notions of technological progress and its impact on society. The OA mediaverse continues to develop the concept of the mediaverse through a further exploration of the meaning-making process and its manifestations in fan-created and fan-altered texts. Fans, as a result of affective liaisons with media texts, mark the texts in various ways, such as through repeated viewings, which led to algorithmic alterations in case of web television and SVOD platforms, or, as is explored in The OA mediaverse, through virtual loungerooms and fan discussions online and offline, and through bricolaged products such as fan-made films. The analyses begins with an exploration of science fiction and fantasy audiences, who treat both texts that they are fans of and fan communities themselves as fluid and ever-evolving. Mainstream fan practices that are an integral part of the identity of fandom in general take on unique characteristics based on texts, thus informing the unique practices of the fandom of a particular text. Although The OA as a web television series does not have the wide reach of, for example, Star Trek, it does inspire interpretive fan engagement through its narrative context and interactions between fans and producers, which are explored in depth for the mediaverse to illustrate itself as a useful tool in identifying mediated fan-producer negotiations through, for example, fan-made films, social media handles and grassroot protests. The consideration of storytelling practices and the role of the storyteller informed by the analysis of The OA mediaverse allows for identifying fan reception as critical in representing the text and its interpretation. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2024 A. Shah, The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43739-8_4

135

136

4.1

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

Science Fiction and Fantasy Audiences

Science fiction audiences and fandoms are often analysed as “hobby groups and clubs promoting activities that are alternatives to work” (Robin Anne Reid 204). However, the increasing frequency and availability of science fiction texts in various media formats and their influence on practices of popular culture contribute to the notion that the consumers of these texts can be examined as more than ‘hobbyists,’ especially given the fact that their very practices continue to steadily blur the line between consumption and production. As Reid notes, “sf fan culture is unique because of its longevity, its focus on the idea of the future as shared capital, and its early adoption of the newest technologies to facilitate sharing of fan-produced texts, both creative and critical” (204). The notion of ‘future as shared capital’ can be tied to the shift in social thought as a result of scientific and technological advances not only in the ‘real’ world, but also in the fictional texts where authors and producers venture to imagine a future influenced by these advances. Jenkins, for example, discusses how a significant portion of an entire generation of American researchers and technicians identified themselves as fans of Star Trek, which served as a confirmation that the work “they are doing is worthwhile, that science is not an unnatural, sinister art that will lead to our destruction, but something that will allow us to become richer, fuller humans” (Bains quoted in Tulloch and Jenkins 4). Such a collective impression regarding the future of humanity also manifests itself in the dialogue of science fiction audiences. The themes, tropes and symbols of the texts under discussion in this project illustrate the shared imagining of a futuristic or alternative reality and the innately human desire to know more, to explore, to stretch the possibilities of what could be instead of what exists—topics that the audiences of these texts frequently engage in their dialogues and debates. Initially, the term ‘fan,’ especially when applied to consumers of science fiction texts, was seen as derisive: “The fan as extraterrestrial; the fan as excessive consumer; the fan as cultist; the fan as dangerous fanatic—these images of the science fiction audience have a long history” (Tulloch and Jenkins 4, emphasis in original). Fans were stereotyped and represented as irrational and it was often assumed that they struggled with distinguishing the fantastic from the real. Such a picture of the science fiction fan is also seen in the CBS show Big Bang Theory, wherein some of the characters who identify as fans of texts such as Star Trek or Spiderman engage in pleasures of collection (of action figures, special edition DVDs, memorabilia from the show etc.) and in what can be deemed meaningless debates over the texts. This impression of science fiction audiences has been

4.1 Science Fiction and Fantasy Audiences

137

constructed by “popular journalism” and the “reading public” (Tulloch and Jenkins 5), but the producers of the texts also perceived their audiences in specific ways. For example, the network producers of Star Trek initially underestimated the viewership and believed the pilot to be “‘too cerebral’ for television” (Tulloch and Jenkins 6), whereas Gene Roddenberry, the creator of Star Trek, perceived a more heterogeneous audience: This need not invite bad writing since science fiction (as all sf classics indicate) permits an enormous range of audiences—the child, the housewife, and the truck driver can enjoy the colorful peril of Amazons wielding swords (or even muscled romance) while, at the same time, the underlying comment on man and society can be equally interesting and entertaining to a college professor. (Roddenberry in Tulloch and Jenkins 7)

It was during the coverage of Star Trek’s 25th anniversary that a shift in the perception of science fiction audiences became noticeable. Journalists of popular culture began to describe these audiences more sympathetically, and a number of them ‘came out’ as long-standing viewers of the show, thus shifting the notion from the fan as the Other to the fan as the Self (Tulloch and Jenkins 4). However, this conceptualisation was limited, as “textual meaning still holds privilege over readers’ meanings; fan activities are still defined primarily through relations of consumption and spectatorship rather than production or participation” (Tulloch and Jenkins 4). It was only when academics such as Jenkins and Bacon-Smith ‘came out’ as fans and began to focus on “fans as emblematic examples of audience resistance, of the appropriation and recirculation of programme materials, of ‘poaching’” (Tulloch and Jenkins 4) that attention shifted from legitimizing the fan to examining the practices of the fan and the fandom. Scholars such as Matt Hills, Paul Booth, Henry Jenkins, Camille Bacon-Smith, Francesca Coppa and Sheenagh Pugh began to examine practices of fans and fandoms as communities. Fans engage in various tasks to express and exercise their fandom. Their practices range from participating in pub quizzes to creating, publishing, circulating and reading fanzines to organising and participating in conventions to interact with other fans. The nature of one’s fandom has a significant impact on fan practices. Sports fans, for example, perform and express their fandom by attending the games of the teams they support, donning the team jerseys, and painting their faces in the team’s colours, whereas celebrity fans tend to idolise the celebrities, and are more likely to develop parasocial relationships with the object of their fannish affection and seek to stage encounters with celebrities for autographs or photographs with them. Audiences and fans of science fiction

138

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

texts, in turn, engage in certain distinguished practices, such as ‘the Star Trek campaign’ (Tulloch and Jenkins 8). In this context, Roddenberry’s ideal Star Trek viewer (familiar with the traditions of science fiction, attentive to the nuances of the programme’s social commentary, committed to its optimistic vision of the future) rematerializes as a viewer activist, ready to challenge the networks and lobby on behalf of the ‘creative producer.’ (Tulloch and Jenkins 8-9)

When rumours about Star Trek’s cancellation circulated among fans, they began to protest against the network and the cancellation of the show by writing letters to the network with a letter count that is rumoured to have reached over a million, although NBC’s official count was under 500,000 letters (Tulloch and Jenkins 9). The show’s subsequent renewal was understood by some as a victory of audiences’ and fans’ voices against production networks and corporations (Tulloch and Jenkins 9). Such grass-roots campaigns against the cancellation of shows were also undertaken by fans of the TV shows Sense 8, Lucifer and The OA. Their campaigning and lobbying practices became increasingly coordinated and sophisticated as a result of Web 2.0 applications and social media platforms. Furthermore, the nature of the shows also characterised these practices. While science fiction texts are likely to feature imaginary worlds both similar and contrasting to that of the reader’s neomatic world, this also applies to fantasy texts in that “each type of fandom shares ways of engaging with imaginary worlds, treating them playfully and imaginatively ‘as if’ they are real” (Hills 141). The common tropes of fantasy texts, especially the modern fantasy text, are discussed in detail in the Good Omens case study. For The OA, the concept of imaginary worlds applies to the narrative, which paves the way for fan practices that are characteristic of fantasy fandoms. The Harry Potter fandom is frequently used to illustrate fantasy fan communities and their practices: Harry Potter, as well as being the bestselling children’s book series (Rowling, 1997– 2007) of all time, has defined the meaning of fandom. As it debuted around the same time as the Internet came to popularity, fanfiction, fanart and fanvids showed what this new tool could offer. Wizard rock crowded MySpace and Bandcamp, even as YouTube, DeviantArt and FanFiction.net welcomed all comers with their creativity. (Valerie Estelle Frankel 5)

While the fan community of Star Trek undertook a lobbying campaign to save their text and also engaged in the pleasures of collection that are characteristic of fan communities, the Harry Potter fandom arguably set the benchmark for fan

4.1 Science Fiction and Fantasy Audiences

139

production in the age of Web 2.0. As a result of new applications, mediated communication grew more and more pervasive to the point that it became a part of everyday life of individuals, corporations and institutions. Social media and social networking websites allowed for a seamless flow of information and connection. The neoliberal society that Marwick sees Web 2.0 as a product of grew increasingly complex and, to a certain degree, eliminated geographical, economic and technical constraints, fostering easy communication, circulation of information and data. Henry Jenkins employs the term ‘media convergence,’ which “represents a cultural shift as consumers are encouraged to seek out new information and make connections among dispersed media content” (Jenkins Convergence Culture 3). Web 2.0 applications such as Twitter fostered a dialogue between the producers and consumers of media and also served as platforms for the circulation of user-generated content, which caused a shift in power between media producers and media consumers. Audiences could no longer be clearly demarcated from media producers as they began to appropriate, annotate and circulate the media that they consumed, engaging in DIY practices and flocking to platforms such as YouTube that allowed them to showcase the products of these practices. During this evolution of media audiences and in many ways serving as a catalyst for the change in audience practices, media technology also transformed. For example, the VCR allowed for recording, taping over and with later technology, editing of existing media texts, which led to its appropriation.1 With the ability to own (copies of) media texts and to consume them at one’s leisure, the pleasures of collection evolved, too. With the introduction of the Internet, audiences began to communicate their pleasure or displeasure with media texts to one another and fans became fandoms and fan communities. The dynamic nature of technology thus can be seen as operating hand in hand with cultural transformation. As audiences began to alter practices, scholars began to study these ‘new media audiences’ (see Eugenia Siapera 2011, Jenkins 2006). The Harry Potter universe—which Frankel claims gained traction alongside the proliferation and popularity of the Internet—is yet another imaginary world that includes paratexts, intertexts and transmedial elements as a result of fan production and fan appropriation facilitated by Web 2.0, as is also the case with Star Trek.2 Hills 1

An example of this is the VCR technology. Andrew O’Day discusses the change in consumption practices of fans of BBC’s Doctor Who during the time of the VCR (13). The VCR enabled the transition from what is popularly known as ‘appointment television’ to leisure viewing (O’Day 8). 2 Both fandoms are also lauded with bringing the fan and fan communities to the foreground in media research. As previously explained, the Star Trek fandom was among the first to be formally analysed by researchers, while the scholarship and academic interest in the Harry

140

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

argues that it is through the “creative imaginations of fan followings” that the imaginary worlds of numerous texts such as Star Trek, Doctor Who, Harry Potter or works of Tolkien and Conan Doyle “attain such longevity and cultural potency” (275). The longevity of a text remains a key concern of its fan community. By virtue of being a fan, the audience member seeks to prolong their enjoyment of and engagement with the text, as is evident in various fan communities.3 Longevity was also the concern of the Star Trek fandom’s letter-writing campaign that resulted in the revival of the franchise. With the transformation of communication and media technology as a result of Web 2.0, and the possibility to interact with the producers of the text, it is hardly surprising to see the social media handles of producers flooded with requests from audiences to renew their beloved shows. Social media handles, in this case, grant accessibility to the audiences while allowing producers to get real-time feedback on their productions from audiences. Apart from social media handles, there are numerous means to prolong the fan experience of a text, including fan texts. Through fan texts, fans become co-creators or “sustainers” of the imaginary worlds of the text as opposed to viewing the texts “as entities created officially or canonically by media producers before then being ‘consumed’ by fans and fan communities” (Hills 274–5). For Harry Potter and the Cursed Child (2016), Hills claims, The previous, and supposedly “final,” Harry Potter novel was published in 2007, with the film version of this following in 2011. Although Harry Potter’s out-of-activeproduction phase has thus been relatively short (with the official website Pottermore filling in some of this time from 2011 onward), fans have nonetheless continued to keep the Potterverse active via their fan fiction and creativity. Fans often remain focused on imaginary worlds when they have been officially “completed,” and when there are no new books or films in the offing. (275)

In considering the Harry Potter fandom, Hills argues that instead of thinking of fan communities as “post-object fandoms,” which considers fandoms as tied to concurrent and on-going productions of ‘official texts,’ it is more productive instead to think of fandoms as “fan-conserved imaginary worlds,” wherein texts Potter fandom “emphasized new avenues for fandom as popular culture gained a new respect in academics” (Frankel 5). 3 For example, in the case of the Sherlock Holmes fandom, despite it being a ‘closed canon’ in the sense that there are no forthcoming texts from the author, the Sherlock Holmes archive continues to expand based on the archontic nature of fantexts and the seemingly democratic nature of new media. It can be argued, therefore, that the fans of Sherlock Holmes continue to enjoy the longevity and diversity of the text that extends beyond canon.

4.2 The OA and Storytelling

141

are kept “culturally active” through fantexts (275). In examining the fan community of The OA, the structures of the mediaverse of this text will be aligned in a way to outline how the text is kept ‘culturally active’ as a result of the fan community appropriating the narrative elements to sustain the text and prolong their experiences with the text. In doing so, it can be argued that the text, both in terms of its narrative content as well as fan practices, lies squarely in the realm of speculative fiction, comprising of fantasy and science fiction elements along with traces of spiritualism.

4.2

The OA and Storytelling

According to Baker, sci-fi as a genre “tend(s) to contain elements that emphasise science or reason; the imagination; alternative worlds and ‘our own’, the world that produced it” (7). In this regard, Netflix’s The OA certainly qualifies as a sci-fi text. On the other hand, Todorov’s classification of the ‘fantastic’ points to a ‘hesitation’ between a ‘supernatural explanation’ and a ‘natural explanation’ in the sense that “the provenance of strange phenomena remains unexplained” (Baker 11; emphasis in original). The fantastic, Baker argues, thus illustrates elements that are perceived precisely because of their absence and status as the ‘other’ in the dominant and realistic structure within the narrative. According to The Encyclopaedia of Fantasy, the term ‘fantasy’ includes the following definition: A fantasy text is a self-coherent narrative. When set in this world, it tells a story which is impossible in the world as we perceive it. … when set in an otherworld, the otherworld will be impossible, though stories set there may be possible in its terms. (John Clute and John Grant 337–8)

The OA touches upon topics that are common in sci-fi texts but also veers into the direction of fantasy, with the inclusion of a dimension, an ‘otherworld’ that is not unlike the viewers’, yet distinct from it. The surrealism that fantasy texts are often preoccupied with is evident in the interdimensional travel that is a central element in The OA. A common science fiction trope, it can also be placed in the realm of the fantastic, as The OA is concerned primarily with how the interdimensional travel takes place, in this case through interpretive dance movements. Furthermore, while both science fiction and fantasy feature imaginary worlds and their transformative potential, The OA’s unique portrayal of parallel universes hints once again at a speculative nature of the text that sits squarely between fantasy and science fiction. Diving into certain aspects of spiritual mysticism,

142

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

The OA features elements of ‘healing,’ ‘metamorphosis’ and the relationship to ‘reality’ (Clute and Grant 338–9) while also employing science fiction elements outlined by Baker. The web television show released its first part on Netflix on 16 December 2016 and the second part on 22 March 2019. The show, which was initially planned to be told in five parts,4 was cancelled on 5 August 2019, which drew the attention of a number of celebrities, producers and media figures. In this section, I discuss the content and themes of The OA to elaborate upon the immersive practices and performativity of its audiences, its overall impact and the question of genre not only based on the narrative, but also in relation to the mediation of the show and the lived experiences of its fans. The OA follows the story of a young girl named Nina Azarova who turns blind after a school bus accident that was arranged by the Russian mafia. Her fellow classmates drown as a result of the accident, whereas Nina suffers from a neardeath experience (NDE) and is revived. After her NDE, Nina excels at playing the violin. Nina’s father, a Russian oligarch, in an attempt to protect Nina from the Russian mafia, sends her to a boarding school for the blind in the USA. However, before reuniting with her, Nina’s father dies and she is now under the care of her aunt, who runs a brothel in the USA. A middle-aged couple arrive at the brothel to adopt a baby from Nina’s aunt, but decide to adopt Nina instead. To ensure that her identity remains a secret, they decide to call her Prairie and raise her as their own. When Prairie reaches her 21st birthday, she has a dream about her father that causes a nosebleed, which she assumes to be a premonition. Leaving a note for her adoptive parents, she travels to New York, as she believes that is where she will meet her father, and disappears for seven years. When she is found again, she has strange scars on her back, calls herself ‘the OA’ and her vision has been completely restored. She befriends four high school students and their teacher from her neighbourhood in Crestwood and tells them about the time she went missing. She had been taken captive by a scientist named Hunter Aloysius Percy (Hap) along with four other people, all of whom had suffered NDEs. Hap studied their NDEs and discovered that they had found a way to travel between dimensions by performing a choreography of five specific movements that were given to them because OA believes the Captive Five to be angels (with ‘OA’ standing for ‘Original Angel’) and Hap to be an ‘angel hunter.’ Once Hap learns these Five Movements, he abandons OA in the middle of a deserted road because of 4

https://www.indiewire.com/2018/07/the-oa-season-2-netflix-fantastic-five-season-plan1201989088/

4.2 The OA and Storytelling

143

her refusal to cooperate with him, and travels to another dimension with the other four captives. With the help of the Crestwood Five OA travels to the dimension to which Hap had taken the four captives and attempts to free them while working against Hap, who is trying to chart an inter-dimensional map. In doing so, OA discovers the House on Nob Hill that seems to be a key element in unlocking the mysteries of inter-dimensional travel. In the meantime, Hap employs robotic arms to perform the Five Movements to take himself and the OA to a dimension where she will stop trying to fight him and will finally cooperate with him. As a result, they end up in what can be perceived as ‘our’, i.e. the viewer’s dimension, and the show takes a metanarrative turn in which the OA actress Brit Marling and the Hap actor Jason Isaacs interact as actors of the respective characters. Based on its plot, the show’s narrative can be analysed according to the various dimensions portrayed in Fig. 4.1. The ‘OA Dimension,’ in my analysis, refers to the dimension wherein the Captive Five were in Hap’s custody, from which Prairie/OA broke free and returned to Crestwood and to her adoptive parents. The ‘Nina Azarova dimension’ refers to those diegetic scenes that take place in the dimension that OA travelled to after the school shooting to reunite with the other captives. In this dimension, Nina never had a NDE and was not adopted and renamed Prairie and did not live at Crestwood, which also means that this version of her never met the Crestwood Five. The final dimension is the ‘Brit Marling dimension,’ which OA/Prairie/Nina jumps to towards the end of the finale of Part 2, wherein the set design implies that this is the metadiegetic dimension in which the OA is just a character in a television show played by Brit Marling and Hap is the antagonist of the show played by actor Jason Isaacs. However, it also continues to remain a part of the story, as one of the Crestwood Five, namely Michelle/Buck are still referred to by their character name and not the actor’s name, and also because Isaacs refers to Marling as his ‘wife,’ staying in character with Hap, who is obsessed with OA, whereas in the audience’s reality, Isaacs is not married to Marling. It is important to note that those characters who experience NDEs, particularly the Captive Five, travel to what I refer to as the ‘guardian angel dimension.’ The characters seemingly only ‘pass through’ this dimension and do not stay there for long periods. Nonetheless their actions and interactions in the guardian angel dimension have a significant impact on the various dimensions where they live out their lives. The guardian angel dimension carries a spiritual tone that will be explored in the analysis that follows. Storytelling and Format of The OA The OA, which Ana Cabral Martins defines as a “genre-defying thriller sprinkled with touches of spirituality and mystery,” has a complex formatting. Martins

144 Fig. 4.1 The three dimensions between which characters of The OA seem to travel

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

Brit Marling Dimension

OA Dimension

Nina Azarova Dimension

argues that the show, which released all of the episodes of Part 1 and, later, Part 2 at once, is better identified as a “long-form movie” (90). Based on its 16 chapters and its narrative continuity, Martins argues: The OA is one of “the purest pieces of auteur filmmaking,” coming directly from the mind of its creators, writer-director Zal Batmanglij and co-writer-star Brit Marling. …The OA is clearly using cinema’s structures and even languages … [to illustrate that] [t]he interplay between long-form storytelling, literature, and cinema and a division into chapters is territory being explored on multiple fronts, both in theatrical cinema and in Netflix’s on-demand, streaming distribution model. (90–2)

With the show being pitched to producers from the get-go as a five-part series with eight chapters each, it can be argued that the creators of the show already had the narrative structured to be self-contained in the long-form at the time of pitching. Part 1 and Part 2 of the text are both structured as an 8-hour story with strong continuity featuring a start-middle-end format that lends depth and the potential to continue the narrative further. Commenting on its editing as well as mode of delivery, Martins claims: The OA has a very deliberate sense of pace when it comes to its chapters: the “opening” credits arrive nearly an hour into the first chapter to never appear again, further underlining how cinematic it is. The chapters are not so clearly identified as such in their names, but the boundaries between each installment is incredibly porous. While the episodes have end credits, they don’t appear in auto-play mode. The only indication of a change in episode is an ethereal “separator,” an image with a circular point of light that lasts the five seconds it needs so that Netflix plays the following episode right away. (91)

4.2 The OA and Storytelling

145

This auto-play is characteristic of the binge-mode of viewing that has grown increasingly popular with SVOD services such as Netflix. This binge-mode is evidently suitable to the long-form narrative of The OA as it encourages the consumption of all the chapters of a part in one sitting. The narrative of The OA continues to escalate, inviting a viewing of the text right up to its conclusion, irrespective of the length and its distribution into 16 chapters over the two parts. The release of the complete season, or in this case, the complete Part, stands in contrast to the logics of appointment television’s gradual pace of episode-centric content delivery. In comparison, Netflix encourages season-centric appointment viewing, which is indicative of both the changing viewing practices and the unity and continuity of the text, as is evident in how the opening credits of The OA were delivered to the viewers. A conclusion, therefore, in this long-form storytelling, is not achieved in the episode but at the end of the content provided. By way of Johnson-Smith’s evaluation and definition of each of these television narratives, The OA can be identified as a ‘sequential series’ characterized by a “narrative developing from episode to episode, requiring the audience to have viewed earlier episodes in order to understand the narrative—it may be short or long in duration” (52–4). Given the three diegetic dimensions of Part 1 and Part 2 of The OA (see Fig. 4.1), it becomes evident that the show is a sequential series, since the audience has to view the episodes in the specified order for maximum comprehension. However, the sequential nature and demand of sequential viewing on the part of the audience is also outlined by the narrative structure of the show and the use of suspense to maintain the interest of the audience in the show (Johnson-Smith 54). With this in mind, it is hardly surprising that, after the premature cancellation of the text, the fan community of The OA rebelled against Netflix, as they felt deprived of the conclusion of the text that was planned by the show’s creators to be delivered towards the end of five Parts. Storytelling and Creators of The OA As a result of the show’s premature cancellation by Netflix, which served as both distributor and producer of The OA, the fans as well as the cast members of the show opened up a dialogue about the unfinished story. While the fans took to social media to make their discontent known, so did the cast members. For example, the actress and show creator, Brit Marling, expresses her dejection over the show’s cancellation on her Instagram handle. In Marling’s interactions with the audience on social media, one can determine that while she in no way criticises Netflix for cancelling the show, she firmly places herself as one with the audience, reinforcing their connection with the show and with her, and also empathising with their efforts to revive the show. Netflix, on the other hand, as

146

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

a result of their decision to cancel the show, is often portrayed by fans as the force that opposes them and whom they must battle for the sake of continuity of the media text. For example, in Brit Marling’s interaction with one of the fans, the latter claims that she is fighting ‘late capitalism’ channelled by Netflix. When the show was cancelled after the release of the second part on 5 August 2019, it was Marling who broke the news to her audiences and fans on social media.5 Her message to them stated that she and Batmanglij were saddened by the news. In her message, she explained why she liked to work with speculative fiction: It’s hard to be inspired to write stories about the “real” world when you have never felt free in it. As a woman writing characters for myself and other women, it has often felt to me as if the paved roads for travel in narrative are limited. Perhaps one day I will be evolved enough as a writer to pave my own roads in “reality” (Elena Ferrante!), but to date I have often felt stymied. I can write about the few women “on top,” but then I am perpetuating the same hierarchies that oppress us (and just asking to shift the oppression to someone else). I can write about the vast majority of women on the economic bottom, but the power of moving images and charismatic actors often glamorizes or perpetuates the very stereotypes the film hopes to critique. I can write about self-deprecating women who expose abundant gender inequalities for a good laugh, but then, as Hannah Gatsby pointed out in her brilliant story Nanette, I am in some ways trading my humiliation for my paycheck and the chance to be let in. (Brit Marling on Instagram)6

Marling’s, and indeed other celebrities’ interaction with the fans via social media, when posited among the structures of the mediaverse signifies the consequences of celebrity culture and their influence on the consumption of media texts. Firstly, contemporary celebrities become commodities in their own right, which is connected to the “consumer society and the relentless drive to convert everything and everyone into commodities that can be sold like items on a supermarket shelf” (Ellis Cashmore 1–2). Marling’s brand is arguably a mix of the media texts she is associated with, such as The OA, Sound of My Voice (2011) and Another Earth (2011) as well as her interactions with her fans that are documented on her social media handles, such as the one previously mentioned. Marling’s persona, as is the case with all celebrities present and active on social media platforms, is endowed with more meaning on her social media handles depending on her self-presentation strategies. In her post above, Marling aligns herself with figures that seek to empower women. By categorising herself as one opposed to those

5 6

https://www.instagram.com/p/B0ykCdLJYD5/?igshid=i1eh6h5w4d7q. https://www.instagram.com/p/B0ykCdLJYD5/?igshid=i1eh6h5w4d7q.

4.2 The OA and Storytelling

147

‘hierarchies’ that oppress women, she creates a bridge with her fandom, particularly the women in her fandom, offering identificatory potential. Additionally, she turns self-critical when she claims to “trade her humiliation for a paycheck,” which adds to how her fans perceive her and construct an image of an illusory closeness to her based on this knowledge of her. The production of her celebrity in this manner certainly influences not only the parasocial relationships that fans tend to forge with her but also the consumption of the text. For example, numerous comments made by fans to this post express their gratitude for creating The OA and also their appreciation for the part she played in the show. One of the fans comments: Brit, I‘m a lifelong fan of sci-fi and other types of work, whatever you may like to call them. I’ve been a very big fan of your work ever since seeing Another Earth, followed by several more movies as well as The OA. I am saddened that you have felt this way. The world at large needs change. But you must know by now that you have a big following and that we all love you dearly and support you. Thank you for giving your creations to us. You are a work of art. (Comment by Instagram user ‘bubster1969’ on Marling’s post)

The user’s comment indicates that Marling’s celebrity as a result of her producing and starring in texts such as Another Earth not only made her visible but also enabled the user to migrate to other texts associated with her. Furthermore, having formed an image of Marling based on her work and the meaning derived from it, the user indicates that she is a significant figure when it comes to social change and that they are grateful for what Marling represents, further adding to her celebrity production. One must note, however, that the celebrity is also imbued with power when it comes to textual production. While Marling’s message indicates that she is deeply sad to not have seen The OA to the end, there is also a hint of lack of control over the production and distribution of the text, which is dominated by Netflix. This power over the text is made ambivalent because, even though a celebrity, she is unable to sway Netflix concerning the show’s continuity, yet she certainly demonstrates more control over contextual meaning-making as a result of her social media following. In Brit Marling’s interaction with her fans on Instagram, two key functions of social media platforms emerge when concerned with media texts such as The OA and its audiences. Firstly, the platforms serve as sites for fantext and fannish pleasures, and, secondly, these platforms not only establish but enable the transformation of self-branding celebrities. While fans tend to form parasocial relationships with media figures (real and fictional) through the consumption of media, social media platforms complicate these relationships. As their social

148

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

media presence makes celebrities not only more visible but also suggests that they are more accessible, the platforms create an illusion of intimacy between the celebrity and the fan. The fan can now express their affect to the celebrities. Although the majority of these statements go unacknowledged, celebrities do tend to respond or react to a small number of these expressions, thereby fueling the notion that they are ‘within reach’ of the fans and contribute to the impression that the parasocial relationship can therefore become reciprocal as opposed to being one-sided. However, it is precisely this illusion of intimacy—or, as Chris Rojek terms it, ‘presumed intimacy’—that enables the pleasures of connection that mark being a fan (Presumed Intimacy n.p.). It is also crucial to note that reciprocity of connection is of little consequence to the fan, since the fan may enjoy the presumed intimacy despite being aware of the fact that it is an illusion. The pleasures of connection are seen as an integral part of the pleasures of fandom (Mark Duffett 277). Duffett points out that fans tend to seek out celebrities and force encounters with them since they “feel a particular sense of entitlement” regarding knowledge of these celebrities, while the celebrities orient towards their fans differently, given that their knowledge of the particular fan is extremely limited or even non-existent. Duffett argues: Face-to-face meetings are seen as better than moments of media consumption, because they enable fans to expand their knowledge of the performer into new areas and also to redress some of the asymmetries typical to the fan-celebrity relationship. Such meetings also provide opportunities for fans to acquire souvenirs. They use their agency here to advance their structural position. (278)

However, in celebrity-fan interactions via social media networks, the relationship is characterised differently. The fans retain their knowledge of the celebrities via mainstream media and what the celebrities tend to reveal about their lives through their verified social media handles. The verification that these handles are truly managed by the celebrities (or, in some cases, companies or individuals representing these celebrities) impact their perception by their fans as well. The asymmetry of knowledge is evident here, given that the fan possesses more information about the celebrity than vice-versa. However, when the celebrity reacts or interacts with the fan on social media, this asymmetry appears to be momentarily suspended. The celebrity, in this case, is able to contextualize the fan dialogue based on the topic of the particular social media post and frames their response accordingly.7 7

This aspect concerning fan-celebrity relationships via social media platforms is further explored in the Good Omens case-study.

4.2 The OA and Storytelling

149

As to the second function that emerges based on the examination of Marling’s post, she is able to provide a framework for her brand by characterizing her social media presence through her interactions on social media platforms with her fans. Chris Rojek argues that celebrities “influence the emotional composition of populations” and that they “have bearing upon moral density. That is, the background expectancies of obligations and responsibilities that we recognize with each other” (Presumed Intimacy n.p.). In consideration of The OA mediaverse, the narrative sets the tone for the character played by Marling as being sympathetic, empathic, kind and strong. These attributes are transferred to the actor and further amplified through her self-branding practices on social media platforms, as is the case with Marling, who presents herself as sympathetic towards the fandom when grieving the cancellation of the text, and also as a strong woman who wishes to emulate other strong women through her art. I term this particular attribution that occurs in context of paratexts and intertexts as ‘post-object projection,’ as the consumption of a text creates the framework for attributing certain qualities to the celebrity, which are projected onto them based on the characters or roles they play, thus further influencing the consumption and perception of other texts that they are associated with. It is important to acknowledge that post-object projection is not the only manner in which celebrity-fan relationships may be defined, but rather one of their possible dimensions that have bearing on media consumption practices. The notion of post-object projection, as the name suggests, occurs after the consumption of a text that features the media celebrity in question. The context of their persona within the framework of a particular text is what enables the projection of certain attributes to the media celebrity outside of the text or in other texts that they may be part of. In this vein, paratexts have a dual role. Firstly, they certainly influence the overall impression one may have of the celebrity. Secondly, the post-object projections serve the paratextual function, thereby (re-)framing the celebrity or the text featuring the celebrity according to certain aspects. This is evident in Marling’s post and the fan reactions to it, but it is transformed in the case of Jason Isaacs’ celebrity. Isaacs is popular for playing the antagonist not only in The OA, but also in the Harry Potter films, Star Trek: Discovery, The Patriot (2000), and Peter Pan (2003) among numerous others. Isaac’s Twitter bio, at the time of writing, refers to him as ‘failed deatheater,’ ‘tightly-clad space pilot’ and ‘Angel Hunter,’ thereby indicating that he ironically frames his Twitter persona through some of his most popular roles. As indicated in the DSC case-study, Isaacs often uses his Twitter to express his views on society and politics. Fans often take pleasure in referencing the various characters he plays as they react to his social media posts. For example, in a post criticizing the former American president Donald Trump, numerous

150

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

responses referenced the various characters he plays, such as a user stating that they read the post ‘in Lucius’s voice,’ referring to his role as Lucius Malfoy in the Harry Potter films.8 In another post celebrating 20 years of the film The Patriot, fans respond with comments appreciating his role in the film and the pleasure they take in hating his character.9 Here, the post-object projection takes on a different tone. The fans do not see Jason Isaacs as evil or as an antagonist outside of his texts but nonetheless project the attributes of the characters he plays in their reactions to Isaacs’ expressions and musings. The pleasure here rests on making and recognizing intertextual and paratextual references as such rather than only connecting with the celebrity. In light of the various pleasures of fandom as described by Duffett, this particular fan-celebrity exchange can be identified as a pleasure of performance. Employing the term ‘hook’ as what transforms an audience member into a fan, Duffett suggests that actors, writers, directors and figures associated with media texts are potential access points for becoming a consumer of a particular text and “they allow people of different identities to follow the same phenomenon” (262–3). The performances of media figures, whether live or staged and recorded, carry the potential to hook a fan. Duffett argues that to be engaged by performances fans are taken “with the pleasures and possibilities that those individuals can offer to them” (264). The various performances of Isaacs, particularly the ones in which he is the antagonist, also serve as hooks for his viewers to become fans, and to employ those hooks in their interactions with him on social media. Interestingly, in light of his performance as Hap in The OA, the pleasures taken in his performance also moved from the diegetic to the extradiegetic. For example, in a Tweet where Isaacs thanks the fans of The OA for their continued support despite the show’s cancellation,10 one of the fans responds: What kind of experiment are you doing Hap??? What do you mean by “magic”? What did you do to The OA? #SaveTheOA (Btw love your work Jason I know you are somewhere deep down..). (backic211 )

Through their response, the fan demonstrates the pleasure of consuming the text and their engagement with Isaacs’ performance. Their playful response to Isaacs’ Tweet accusing him of ‘doing something’ to OA illustrates their enjoyment of 8

https://twitter.com/amyltsx/status/1328482063494811649. https://twitter.com/jasonsfolly/status/1325868265458053121. 10 https://twitter.com/jasonsfolly/status/1166064304988262400. 11 https://twitter.com/backic2/status/1166084134827102210. 9

4.2 The OA and Storytelling

151

engaging with Isaac’s character and adds a layer of meta-commentary to both the text and the celebrity. This rather playfully engages with the notion that Isaacs is truly Hap and that the mad scientist has jumped dimensions and somehow taken over Isaacs’ body to demonstrate their fandom, particularly by appreciating Isaacs’ performances and then spiritedly noting how Isaac might be buried deep down by Hap’s consciousness. In the case of The OA fandom, the pleasures of performance extends to the audience not only to the extent of taking pleasure in the performances of the actors but also engage in a performance in their own right, particularly that of the Five Movements. The performance of these movements as part of the #SaveTheOA campaign was addressed by Marling on her social media as well. Marling’s message goes on to discuss how she and Zal together imagined the world of The OA: “We imagined movements that got unlikely people in rooms together, got them moving, got them willing to risk vulnerability for the chance to step into another world” (Brit Marling on Instagram). Marling and her co-writer Zal Batmanglij create the impression of being storytellers, particularly emphasising this role as far the show is concerned. Their self-presentation via social media handles as storytellers enables them to communicate and interact with the fans of the show in a way that implies solidarity between the two parties against those responsible for the cancellation of the show, namely Netflix. Additionally, the critical commentary on contemporary culture also shines through in the communication between the celebrities and the fans of the show, as the current global preoccupation with representation is also evident in the hype and synergies surrounding The OA. In the social media post discussed above, Marling comments on empowering women around the world and writing stories about them in a way that critiques current practices that attempt to marginalise them. In doing so, she mentions other women who write stories about women such as Hannah Gatsby and Elena Ferrante, further identifying herself as a storyteller. This identification and self-presentation is also evident in social media posts by those who work with her. For example, user ‘@clairekiechel’ tweeted the following:12 Brit Marling is the only woman ever who created, wrote, produced AND starred in her own one hour Drama, and she doesn’t get enough credit for that milestone because she’s so humble If you’re making one of your lists, or looking for something to binge The OA Part II is on Netflix (Claire Kiechel) 12

https://twitter.com/clairekiechel/status/1200482634939240448.

152

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

Claire Kiechel, to whom the Twitter handle belongs, is a TV writer who has worked with Marling on The OA. In a series of Tweets by Kiechel,13 they identified Marling as a humble individual, a master storyteller and a significant influence on herself. Additionally, Kiechel demonstrates an understanding of binge-watching culture prevalent in consumption of web television, and believes that Marling’s work is deserving of a ‘binge-watch’ because of how they perceive Marling’s celebrity. Marling conveys this image not only to a co-worker like Kiechel but also to her audiences and fans through her performance on social media. For example, Marling, who is active on Twitter and Instagram, often discusses the processes involved in the creation of The OA:14 I have been telling stories with @z_al one way or another since we met when I was 18. At first we just told each other stories back and forth in our dorm rooms, later our living rooms (Brit Marling)

With this Tweet, Marling makes visible her role as a storyteller alongside Zal Batmanglij, with whom she has a shared history, and also illustrates the use of the second screen by the producers or creators of the show, which tend to inform the experience of consuming the show by its audiences. The notion of the second screen and its use by celebrities and public figures is discussed in greater detail in the analysis of the Good Omens mediaverse Storytelling in The OA Storytelling is of particular import not only for the examination of the show’s format but also at the diegetic level, as it is one of the key themes of the show, especially in Part 1. Prairie’s character,15 from the pilot episode onwards, is seen as the central figure to the narrative. Given Prairie’s circumstances, she is pressed by family members, doctors and the press to tell them what had happened to her during the seven years that she had been missing. Unwilling to share the details with them, Prairie seeks her own audience of the Crestwood Five, to whom she narrates the events of the past seven years. The Crestwood Five include four high school students, namely Steve, French, Buck (or Michelle), Jessie and their teacher, Betty Broderick-Allen, also referred to as BBA. As Prairie, who refers to herself as the OA and asks the Crestwood Five to do the same, begins her 13

https://twitter.com/clairekiechel/status/1200814177725472768. https://twitter.com/britmarling/status/1109118641100988421. 15 The chapter uses the various names for the character of Prairie / Nina / The OA / Brit based on the function or action the character performs in context of the analysis, thereby identifying which ‘persona’ suits her best. 14

4.2 The OA and Storytelling

153

explanation in an abandoned house in the neighbourhood in the middle of the night, the scene begins with her lighting candles as the others sit around her to listen. She is identified as the subject of the gaze not only through visual focus but also through narrative techniques, in that she, for example, asks the Crestwood Five to close their eyes and imagine in their mind’s eye the scene she is setting for them. Here, while the Crestwood Five are expected to utilise their imagination, the audience, for whom the OA is the subject and storyteller, sees the events unfold visually, illustrating a diegetic layer in which the viewer of the show is also OA’s audience, and experiences her tale visually as well as aurally, while the Crestwood Five only experience it aurally via OA’s narration (“Homecoming” P1 Ch1 00:54:04). OA’s storytelling is also addressed intradiegetically by her adoptive parents. Early in the show, as a young Prairie encounters problems in her sleep such as sleepwalking or using sharp objects, perhaps as a result of her difficult past, her adoptive parents have her examined by a doctor who states that “Prairie believes her father’s alive and sneaking her messages about where to find him in dreams. She also believes her dreams are premonitions, and that the Russian mafia are after her” (“New Colossus” P1 Ch2 00:11:54). Nancy tries to defend Prairie, arguing that she is just a kid telling ‘tall tales.’ However, the doctor believes that Prairie’s ‘tales of grandeur,’ which she believes to be real, are indicative of “early signs of serious mental illness” (P1 Ch2 00:12:00). Dreams are of great significance here, for it seems to be the meeting point of Nina’s and Prairie’s life, as it is in fact in Prairie’s dreams that she is able to become Nina in the sense that she can identify as Nina, Azarov’s daughter, who still lives in Russia and speaks Russian. It is through dreams and the mind’s eye that OA is able to switch dimensions and become Nina, which entails accessing Nina’s memories and thoughts and mannerisms, given that in this dimension, Nina’s life took a different turn than that of the OA. Additionally, the narrative suggests that Prairie/OA’s dreams are premonitions, and it is also implied that she is made aware of the school shooting that takes place in the finale of the first Part through a dream that she has. Furthermore, the doctor’s indication that her ‘tales of grandeur’ are indicative of mental instability is also significant, as in the Nina Azarova dimension, she is, under false pretences, held at an institution for the mentally ill by Hap, who in this dimension is a psychiatrist. It is by mocking her unreliable statements that Hap is able to separate the Homer16 of the Nina Azarova dimension from the OA, who is the reason 16

‘Homer’ is the name of one of the Captive Five that Prairie grows particularly close to. Interestingly, the naming of the character is significant given the importance of ‘storytelling’

154

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

she travelled inter-dimensionally in the first place to rescue Homer from Hap. As the narrative unfolds the theme of inter-dimensional travel, the text veers into the realm of the speculative, leaning into further possible and imaginary worlds. With imaginary worlds and parallel dimensions being employed in works of both fantasy and science fiction, the question here is to locate the various tropes of both sub-genres in The OA to then explore how fan activism in case of The OA differs from that of Trekkers.

4.3

The OA and the Spiritual

The main antagonist of the series is Hap, who is revealed to have taken Prairie and four other people captives to study their NDEs and scientifically identify the existence of an after-life. While initial scenes with Hap in his custom-built lab and cage to hold the captives as well as his approach to studying the captives does point to the ‘mad scientist’ trope that is often featured in works of science fiction, the subject of his study and his objective concerning the afterlife is more suited to spiritualism than science. Hap’s transition from mad-scientist to, as OA calls him, angel-hunter, is indicative of the show’s genre mixing of science fiction and fantasy. After Prairie makes her first attempt to escape from Hap, she experiences yet another NDE when Hap catches up with her and strikes her at the back of her head (“Champion” P1 Ch3 00:57:03). The NDEs in the series, which are the guardian angel dimensions, appear to be imaginary worlds, wherein the landscape is different, and where Prairie is not visually impaired. While she is having her NDE, Prairie is shown to be meeting a figure she calls ‘Khatun,’ who is reminiscent of a guardian angel, as she often gives advice and prophesizes Nina/Prairie/ OA’s future, thereby veering once again into the realm of the fantastical and mystical. Since this is Prairie’s second NDE, it is also her second interaction with Khatun, the first one being during her first NDE with the school bus accident, when she was still Nina Azarova.

in the series. Homer is identified as the figure behind the Greek epics Iliad and Odyssey, and one of his works are also featured in the series when French breaks into OA’s house. The discovery of Homer’s text, among others, are instrumental in French deducing that OA was indeed spinning tall tales, and that the name of the author served as inspiration for the name of Hap’s captive. Moreover, one can also draw parallels between OA’s captivity and interdimensional journeys and that of Odysseus in Odyssey, but to do so is beyond the scope of this study.

4.3 The OA and the Spiritual

155

In her first interaction with Khatun, the latter offers Nina the chance to remain with her in the guardian angel dimension, or the afterlife, because Khatun cannot bear to see the suffering and pain that awaits Nina. Nina insists on returning, upon which Khatun seemingly takes away Nina’s eyesight as she does not want Nina to see what awaits her, indicating that the guardian angels wield significant power. Not only can Khatun take away Nina’s eyesight, but also return it, as the audience later learns, and she furthermore has the power to foresee the future, lending a spiritual tone to the character. This spiritual tone is further accentuated by the aesthetics, particularly the otherworldly lights floating around the dark space they are in, the bluish glow from a pond-like surface at Khatun’s feet, the imprints on Khatun’s face and also the fact that Khatun speaks Arabic and Nina speaks Russian and both seem to understand each other perfectly (P1 Ch1 1:05:23). After Hap hits the back of her head, Prairie narrates that she is aware that she is dead for the second time. Khatun, who functions as Prairie’s guardian angel, offers her, once again, the chance to find peace in the afterlife and to circumvent the pain that being alive comes with. In her interaction with Khatun, Prairie learns that to be alive is to suffer and experience pain, not unlike the belief systems of Buddhism and Jainism, once again attesting to the spiritual nature of the text. Khatun’s offer of peace in the afterlife also entails being reunited with her father for eternity. The positive attributes and offers from Khatun in this guardian angel dimension highlight its nature as some kind of heaven, as it is indicated in various scenes in the show that Prairie desires nothing more than to be with her father. In her NDE, Khatun gives Prairie a living bird to eat, saying that it is the ‘seed of life’ and will give her knowledge that will help her escape from ‘a great evil,’ which presumably means Hap (“Away” P1 Ch4 00:01:49). Prairie consumes the bird and upon revival seems to indeed have learned something from consuming the ‘seed of life.’ When she is returned to her cell, she speaks to the other captives and tells them about her encounter with Khatun, explaining that they are not lab-rats for Hap’s experiment. She tells them that they are angels, to which Scott, another captive, reacts with great scepticism. Homer, the captive who bonds closely with Prairie, asks her how she knows that they are angels, and it is then that she reveals that upon being revived, her vision has returned. Hap, who does not know of her ability to now see, continues with his experiments until an intimidated Scott tries to bargain with him and tells him about it. It is only after observing the captives practicing the two movements that they received during their NDEs that Hap begins to question what they are doing and where those movements come from. Interestingly, the audience witnesses Homer’s NDE, which later turns out to be the Nina dimension and not a guardian

156

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

angel dimension, as is the case with Prairie. It is because of OA’s advice to eat something alive that Homer learns of the second movement, hinting at the notion that OA might be his guardian angel. Scott, in his attempt to bargain for his freedom and life, tells Hap that Homer and Prairie believe they are angels and are hoping to open the celestial door to by performing the movements and escaping Hap (“Paradise” P1 Ch5 00:45:00). It is only when performing the movements brings Scott back to life that Hap begins to take them seriously. Additionally, Scott receives the third movement in his death, but it is unclear whether he travelled to his guardian angel dimension or whether he has a guardian angel. Interestingly, when Homer replays Scott’s NDE to Hap, both the audience and Hap learn that Scott’s NDE is the Brit Marling dimension, particularly when he says that Hap called OA “Brin or something” and that there were cameras and light everywhere (“Nina Azarova” P2 Ch7 00:12:04). This scene is pivotal as it allows Hap to map his way to this particular dimension based on Scott’s testimony and this is where Hap, OA and Steve land in the final scenes of the finale of Part 2. However, both Scott and Homer’s NDE are distinct from those of Prairie/Nina/ OA as they present the notion that their NDEs also serve as dimensions that may be travelled to, whereas OA’s NDE has the more spiritual afterlife quality to it, and where she may choose to remain permanently. As the captives receive the third and fourth movement, getting closer to their goal, a transformation can be observed in Hap’s scientific sensibility. While Hap earlier was focused on collecting data and noting soundscapes from the Captive Five’s NDEs, after learning of the movement’s potential, particularly the aspect of Scott being brought back to life, he is more focused on learning the movements and on receiving the fifth and final movement to be able to travel inter-dimensionally. In the scene where OA explains to the Crestwood Five that as they learned the movements, so did the ‘Angel Hunter’ Hap, there is a cut to Hap observing the Captive Five over CCTV practicing the movements. The mise-en-scene contributes to the transformation of Hap’s villainy from scientist to spiritual antagonist. In the background heavy metal music plays as Hap methodically practices the movements. Hap’s corkboard is covered with symbols that denote the movements, and which appear like mystical symbols (Fig. 4.2). Among the pin-ups on the corkboard is an image of an angelic figure with wings and a blade (Fig. 4.3). Hap’s character development reflects the show’s move from science fiction to spiritual fantasy, with Hap vacillating between the quest for truth of a scientist and his obsession with the mysticism surrounding the inter-dimensional travels that the ‘angels’ see as their ticket to freedom from him, thereby fulfilling his role as the ‘Angel Hunter.’

4.3 The OA and the Spiritual

157

Here, parallels may be drawn between the ‘Angel Hunter’ and the Biblical figure of Lucifer, as well as his depictions in mainstream media, such as, for example, the popular CW series Supernatural. In the series, Lucifer is often seen hunting other celestial figures, particularly archangels such as Gabriel, Michael and Raphael, underlining his status as an angel hunter. Lucifer also caused the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden by tempting Eve into eating the fruit of knowledge. Hap’s relationship to the pursuit of knowledge, particularly that of the afterlife, the soul or human consciousness is parallel to that of Lucifer’s questioning God and God’s authority in that Hap is not content with not unravelling the greater mysteries of life and death and the afterlife.

Fig. 4.2 Hap observing the Captive Five performing the movements

Yet another instance that marks Hap’s dual role as ‘mad scientist’ and ‘angel hunter’ is the scene with his friend Leon. Leon was Hap’s mentor during Hap’s residency. Leon and Hap seem to be in a competition regarding the NDE study, in which they both experiment on their respective captives. Leon’s character is introduced in the show with little pomp. He appears first and only in “Forking Paths” (P1 Ch6). The scene that introduces Leon opens with a pan shot of the hospital where they meet, followed by Hap and Leon walking down a sterile hallway in the hospital with pale yellow walls lit by overhead lights. Hap relates to Leon a particular dream of his, wherein he is a rat and his leg is caught in a trap. He is aware of the irony of this dream, as it reverses his status of scientist: “I’m a scientist and I dream of being a rodent.” (P1 Ch6 00:07:07). Interestingly, the rat-scientist relationship is also alluded to by Prairie after her second NDE. As she tries to explain her NDE to the other captives, she says,

158

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

Fig. 4.3 The archangel image on Hap’s wall

“We’ve been acting like lab rats. Lab rats are only powerless because they don’t understand that they’re in an experiment. But they’re just as much a part of it as the scientist, in some ways even more. See, we could take it over” (P1 Ch4 00:11:12). Prairie thus suggests that they can take control of the experiment. In their conversation, Leon and Hap refer to their captives as a collective without individual identity markers, indicating that beyond their use in the experiment, the captives mean little to the two scientists. The two enter the mortuary, which is where Leon’s captives—who are not shown but merely mentioned—are held. Leon comments on how the location of the mortuary for his ‘lab’ is perfect as that wing of the hospital is ‘dead.’ The two enter a room and begin to unpack and prepare sandwiches on an operating table. The room is, similar to the hospital hallway, sterile and contradicts the bright colours of Prairie’s NDE as well as the furtive pace and chase of Homer’s NDE. The impression of the captives as a collective pitted against the individual scientist is intensified in Hap’s interaction

4.3 The OA and the Spiritual

159

with Leon wherein one can identify Hap as the more reasonable scientist than Leon, whose answers are curt and who maintains an emotional distance from his captives. Furthermore, in the following interaction between the two, one can identify Hap’s sense of exclusion and loneliness as well as Leon’s ruthlessness towards their respective captives: Hap: So… the other day I found myself feeling, uh… resentful. That ever happen to you? Leon: Mmm. Hap: My subjects seem… so united. They… have this tribalism that sustains them somehow. … Rituals. Mutilation. Leon: Attempts to explain existence to control pain. Hap: I know all that but I still… I couldn’t help feeling outside of it all, somehow. Leon: You are on the outside. Stay there. Hap: Well, I mean, in some ways we work together, no? Leon: Lab partners go home at night. Subjects sleep in the experiment. Hap: How do you not get attached? Leon: I enforce turnover. You know this. Potassium chloride. Then into the incinerator. (P1 Ch6 00:08:01)

This interaction also indicates the complexity of Hap’s ‘mad scientist’ and ‘angel hunter’ traits. When Hap shares some of his findings regarding the movements, Leon threatens Hap to get more information. Leon is distraught to the point of committing murder when he finds out that all his investment in his life’s work might be for nothing given what Hap has told him. Hap, taken by surprise, defends himself and drowns Leon. This is significant as Hap, who is also drowning the Captive Five to induce their NDEs, does so to Leon as well, but with no intention of reviving him. With the Captive Five, his ‘angel hunter’ and ‘prison ward’ side is reflected, while in the incident with Leon, the audience sees the mad scientist defend himself and his experiment by committing the act of murder. Hap is taken aback by what has transpired and immediately exits the abandoned wing of the hospital. On his way out, he hands a key to one of the members of the hospital staff and instructs them, “Excuse me. Call the police. Give them that for access to the abandoned morgue. There are people there that need help” (P1 Ch6 00:15:02). The ‘people that need help’ are Leon’s captives. Hap’s statement adds yet another layer to Hap’s already complex characterisation, since he does not represent absolute evil. Hap’s character is frequently shown to be sympathetic, and he seems to express human needs and desires, which are evident in his strong desire to be with OA. OA can be seen as a triggering factor for Hap, as before meeting her,

160

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

he had been devoted to his study of the Captives’ NDEs with little to no variation in his routine. It is only after he takes OA captive that things begin to change, with the Captive Five attempting to assert control over their situation and Hap’s experiments, leading to them discovering the movements as means of inter-dimensional travel. Moreover, with the arrival of OA, Hap expresses interest in her as an individual as opposed to the indifference a scientist would usually treat a lab-rat with, and this change also leads to him taking note of the other captives as distinct individuals, particularly Homer because of his close relationship to OA, in whom Hap expresses romantic interest. OA, therefore, is the agent of change for Hap, who—although once a firm believer in the logic of scientific inquiry—starts to consider the mystical system that the Captive Five believe in, and accordingly changes his own behaviour and actions in accordance with the role that they have carved out for him. In this vein, Hap’s character represents the leap of faith and marks the turn towards spirituality, given that he now seems to accept the belief system of the Captive Five despite not having experienced any NDEs himself. David A. Kirby discusses how mad scientists were formerly portrayed in a uniform manner and in doing so, served as a “narrative shorthand in visually oriented media. Because audiences quickly recognize these scientist caricatures, entertainment professionals do not need to devote valuable time to establishing character backgrounds” (292). This was done, for example, through a series of visual cues such as eccentric hairstyles, such as the ‘Einstein’ haircut, thick glasses, a lab coat etc.. However, in more current depictions, the character of the mad scientist reveals an inherent complexity, while continuing to “represent generalized anxieties about the inaccessible, privileged, and potentially dangerous nature of science” (Kirby 293). Hap certainly represents the rational scientist until his meeting with OA, who embodies the mystical and spiritual elements of the narrative. A more ‘tribalistic’ side of him is revealed gradually when he notices the ‘groupism’ of his victims, as he describes to his peer Leon. Eventually, upon learning about the Movements and what they can accomplish transforms his rationality and mark his descent into obsession that is beyond rational. Hap’s moral ambiguity is highlighted when, for example, upon learning that the first two Movements can revive the dead and heal grievous injuries, he asks Prairie to run away with him to some remote place where they can heal people and make a living. This desire to do something good for society is at odds with his kidnapping the NDE survivors and performing experiments on them, highlighting the moral complexity that not only underlines his mad scientist but is also associated with the character of Lucifer in popular culture, such as in the poem Paradise Lost by Milton or in the titular character’s portrayal in the television series Lucifer (2016–2021). His being labelled ‘Angel Hunter’ with the

4.3 The OA and the Spiritual

161

image of the archangel on his wall marks Hap’s position on the precipice of the scientific and the spiritual, with him leaning steadily towards the latter, perhaps even arguing for the spiritual bringing forth the mad scientist in him. According to Clute and Grant, ‘spiritualism’ in fantasy texts can be defined as follows: In philosophy, the term refers to any system of thought that affirms the existence of an immaterial reality, but in modern parlance [spiritualism] refers to a religious faith asserting that communication is possible between our world and the souls which have passed into an immaterial afterlife. Such communication is achieved via a medium, associated with a “control” in the spirit world, who may orchestrate various kinds of signals and ectoplasmic manifestations during a séance, which continues with the control summoning other spirits to answer questions posed by participants and deliver messages from the astral plane. (891–2)

In her dreams, when Nina—who is now adopted by an American couple and is renamed Prairie—sees her now-dead birth father and hears him calling out for her, this is yet another scene that points to an ‘afterlife.’ The afterlife becomes the central theme of the narrative when Hap takes her captive for her NDE and she meets the other captives, eventually learning the truth about Hap’s experiments and her second encounter with Khatun. Khatun seemingly has knowledge about the future, as she claims that even if Prairie returns to the captives, they never escape. Revealing a “form of travel unknown to humans” (P1 Ch4 00:02:00), Khatun sets the aspect of inter-dimensional travel as significant to the Captive Five’s escape and also as the objective for Hap. In this particular NDE, one can observe inscriptions on Nina’s father’s face that are similar to Khatun’s, indicating that he is dead and now in the afterlife. Although the same is true for Prairie, she has no such inscriptions, implying that she does have the option to return. Before returning to life, Prairie catches a glimpse of Khatun’s wing, hidden in her robes, and after eating the ‘seed of light’ offered to her by Khatun and returning, Prairie seems to have learned about the existence of both the afterlife and angels. Interestingly, the afterlife here both does and does not correspond with an immaterial afterlife. It is deemed a parallel dimension where a counterpart of the individual exists, at least as far as the Captive Five and Hap are concerned, and their lives have taken different turns based on the choices they have made, as suggested by both OA in her narration to the Crestwood Five and in the concept of ‘forking paths’ that is repeatedly brought up in the narrative, especially in the episode “Forking Paths”: The best way to think about it is like this… There are all these dimensions, worlds, alternate realities, and they’re all right on top of each other. Every time you make a

162

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

choice, a decision, it forks off into a new possibility. They’re all right here, but inaccessible. The NDEs were like… a way to travel through them, but temporarily. We wanted… choices, chances. The movements would allow us to travel to a dimension permanently. Stay there. A new life… in a new world. (P1 Ch6 00:04:20)

In declaring the traveling to another dimension as living another life, it is the realm in which OA meets Khatun that may be seen as the afterlife, given that it is there she goes immediately after dying, both during her first NDE in the school bus and the second one when Hap struck her in the back of the head. While Scott and Homer do not seem to have guardian angels, OA remarks that Renata, one of the Captive Five, learned from her guardian in her NDE that one of the side-effects of inter dimensional travel is amnesia (P1 Ch6 00:03:02). Furthermore, in accordance with Clute and Grant’s assertion, the narrative indicates the existence of ‘souls passing’ into the afterlife, in OA’s traveling to Nina’s body in the parallel dimension, with OA and Prairie’s memories intact and, later, after uniting with Nina’s ‘spirit,’ she is also able to tap into Nina’s memories, particularly after the point when Nina and Prairie’s lives diverged in different directions. This intersection of parallel dimensions and the afterlife where souls and spirits can travel marks the text’s position as squarely between science fiction and the fantastical. Another example that illustrates this duality is the use of customised mechanical robots by Elodie and Hap to perform the movements, thereby eliminating the requirement of four more individuals to perform the movements to travel between dimensions. In this case, elements generally found in science fiction texts, i.e. robots, are used as agents of the fantastical. The narrative’s format and content both allude to a genre fusion, which is of particular import when considering fan practices and activism. Yet, the conclusion of Part 2 of the show adds another layer to the narrative.

4.4

The Intradiegetic Utopia

The term ‘utopia’ can be substituted neither for ‘fantasy’ nor for ‘science fiction’ but nonetheless overlaps with both genres. In the context of science fiction, for example, Alcena Madeline Davis Rogan traces the notion of ‘utopia’ to Sir Thomas More’s Utopia (1516) in relation to the “no place” and “completely idealized space” which “serves as a blank slate … intended to estrange the contemporary reader from their conditions of existence, thus allowing them to see their own world in a new light” (309). In contrast, ‘eutopia’ is identified as a “good place,” which is elucidated in great detail with the intention to enable the

4.4 The Intradiegetic Utopia

163

contemporary reader to compare it to the society they are living in and determine a ‘better’ version of their own society (Rogan 309). The OA’s narrative is indicative of a search for a kind of utopia, both as a space and a place. Shortly after meeting Homer in captivity, Prairie forms a special bond with him which transcends the boundaries imposed by the dimensions they travel to. This is indicated by OA’s persistent attempt to rescue Homer from Hap, for which she is willing to give up an eternity of peace with her father and life as she knows it in the OA dimension. Rejecting the environ where she is not with Homer, OA’s character suggests that her personal utopia hinges not on an ideal society or culture, but on an individual. When OA questions another dimension traveller, Elodie, on how she and Homer may escape Hap, Elodie’s answer, however, is suggestive of the notion that this personal utopia is impossible, as they cannot escape Hap: “Why do you think the bonds between some people are so powerful? It’s because they exist across many dimensions, like a cosmic family. You, Hap, and Homer, you belong within the same constellation. You’re travelling together” (P2 Ch7 00:30:30). Although OA denies wanting to travel with Hap, Elodie suggests that a part of her wants to do so because their connections are strong enough to echo in other dimensions. This theory is the possible explanation for not only the strong connection between OA, Homer and Hap, but also what denies the possibility of utopia and, therefore, grounds for the story itself. This notion is elucidated in the link between utopia and fantasy, as “successful utopias have … little or no room for story” (Clute and Grant 977). Although Clute and Grant’s definition of utopia as “rendering in bodily form … an argument about society” is concerned with an idealised society, it is applicable to the notion of personal eutopia in OA’s case primarily as her understanding of her existence is no longer encompassed by the society she lives in but by the bonds she creates across various dimensions and universes. It could be argued that similar to how she seeks a dimension in which she is united with Homer without the threat of Hap disrupting their union, Hap, too, attempts to chart a map of the various dimensions in search of his own personal eutopia wherein OA does not seek to get rid of him but accepts his role as her companion. It could thus be argued that Part 2 of the series concludes with Hap having found his personal utopia in the Brit Marling dimension, in which she apparently does not think of him in a negative light. In this vein, the Brit Marling dimension is the physical, geographical space that grants him the ideal solution to his most pressing problem. The oscillation between OA seeking her utopia with Homer on the one hand and Hap finding his and forcing OA to go along with him on the other hand

164

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

is mirrored in the metamodern oscillation between the uncanny and the marvellous and the sublime as suggested by Sara Helen Binney.17 Binney discusses the supernatural and the fantastic in various texts and concludes that the oscillation between the two may be linked to the feeling of the sublime, which “is provoked by something vast or infinite … [and] is again followed by a turning back into the self,” a turn which is compared to the “metamodern pendulum … where the same movement is enacted between different opposing concepts” (Binney). A sense of the sublime that is provoked by the discovery of the dimensions and the means to travel to them is expressed by both OA and Hap. For OA and the rest of the Captive Five, their moment of discovery gives way to hope of both freedom from Hap and a belief that they are significant parts of a grand design, indicated by their status as ‘angels.’ Hap, too, is part of this grand design as the ‘angel hunter’ and therefore separated from the Captive Five not only in his experience of the sublime but also in his reaction to it. Far from empathising with the Captive Five in their joint discovery of the dimensions and therefore setting them free, Hap uses the knowledge of the movements and the dimensions to satisfy his personal agenda, which involves an absolute separation of OA from Homer due to not only his personal desire for OA but also as a part of the aforementioned ‘grand design’ where his conviction—that he must hunt down OA and deny her the personal eutopia signified by her union with Homer—is strengthened and marks all of his actions. Furthermore, the existence of the dimensions and the movements to travel between them evokes feelings of both the uncanny and the marvellous. As previously mentioned, the Captive Five view it as their salvation, whereas the Crestwood Five experience it as something new which unites them as individuals that otherwise have nothing in common. Both groups reflect the uncanny nature of the dimensions and the movements, wherein “the apparently supernatural event is caused by hallucinations, dreams, or trickery” (Binney). In the series, it is dance and death that causes the supernatural event and then leads to the ‘marvellous,’ which is reflected in OA jumping into the body of Nina and Hap jumping into the body of Dr. Percy, among others. The ‘marvellous’ here is indicated in the “magic [that] exists in an unproblematic way” (Binney) in that neither OA nor Hap question the ‘hosts’ of their consciousnesses, given that they are beginning to understand the laws of inter-dimensional travel. These characteristics of the metamodern pendulum implied in the oscillation between the marvellous and the uncanny and the experience of the sublime are also reflected in the audiences’ reception of the show.

17

http://www.metamodernism.com/2015/04/02/oscillating-towards-the-sublime-2/

4.4 The Intradiegetic Utopia

165

The notion of the ‘grand design’ that was previously mentioned, with the Captive Five being an integral part of it, is adopted by some of the fans of the show, believing that they two are part of this ‘grand design’ and have an integral role to play in the revival of the show. This manner of active participation and lobbying is characterised by structure of feeling, wherein audience members perceive their engagement with the show as a lived experience that underlines their participation in the fandom, identifying those practices that allow them to perform their fandom collectively. The notion of ‘structure of feeling’ as elucidated by Williams is further delineated in the actions of The OA fandom where they do not see the show’s cancellation as ‘fixed,’ but import it into the fandom as a quest in the sense that the cancellation must be ‘undone’ as the text remains fluid and open to a myriad of audience interpretations. For example, one of the fan theories on the OA Subreddit hypothesises the show heading into the direction of “alien or alien abduction and possibly a future dimension” by examining certain uncanny features in the show, such as “The ufo on OA’s [sic] dress, the sound from Saturn, the galaxies floating around Khatun [sic] and Old Night”18 (u/Kittinlovesyou). The fan and Reddit user further states: “I’m pretty sure we would have seen the captives on a UFO in stasis and maybe experiencing a ‘matrix’ like experience to keep their minds busy on the long trip to Saturn. And that possibly there is an intelligent Octopus species that lives on or near Saturn.” In their discussions in the comments section of the post, the user also remarks: “And like I said it could be possible to continue the show with time jumps. I would love to see that happen. I believe in impossible things.” Numerous fan theories, including the one by user u/Kittinlovesyou are suggestive of fans’ meaning-making and appropriation practices, which particularly address the uncanny tones of the show and invite forensic fan practices from where such theories crop up and gain traction. The user’s remark concerning their faith in ‘impossible things’ is noteworthy, as they charge the show with containing such impossible ideas that they want to have reason to believe in, similar to that of Reddit user u/PCClarity (see below). Additionally, the fans of The OA often remark that they continue to be pleasantly surprised by the show and that it seems to evoke positive emotions while viewing, or re-watching the show. This affectation towards the show can be linked to the metamodern yearning for eutopia. Beyond the notion of personal eutopias, the binary oscillation that is characteristic of metamodernism is also evident in the questioning of perspectives and narration in The OA. In “To Engage in Literature,” Nadine Feßler suggests that 18

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/comments/mra07e/ufo_connection_more_details_in_c omment_section/gumkqp8/?context=3.

166

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

certain characteristics of postmodernism such as authenticity, ethics, aesthetics and engagement are “pushed to the foreground” in metamodernism.19 Claiming that metamodernism marks the renewal of interest in authenticity and realism, Feßler considers metamodern authors “to seek for ways to engage the reader again” and identification with characters to “[make] it impossible not to care,” which is why contemporary texts try “to find ways that allow (or even force) the reader to be involved in what is presented to them, without falling back into a distanced mode” (Feßler Metamodernism). This entails presenting a set of ‘real characters’ and dealing with ethical issues that often tend “to narrate from ‘uncomfortable’ perspectives” (Feßler). Futhermore, Feßler emphasises that metamodernism marks a return to the “so-called narrativity which entails nothing else than a return to the simple joy of story-telling” which, as previously explained, is a significant theme in The OA, particularly in Part 1. The aesthetics of certain scenes also allude to the metamodern character of the show. For example, the scenes where OA interacts with Khatun are characterised by a dream-like atmosphere, with wisps of purple light illuminating the seemingly infinite room that Khatun is seated in. The presence of a pond from which Khatun ‘fishes’ out a bird for Prairie to swallow and become OA, and the presence of her dead father walking the landscape outdoors further elaborate the otherworldly appearance of the place. In contrast to this is the scene featuring OA taking Nina’s place in the performance with the octopus (“SYZYGY” P2 Ch4 00:47:00). The artificial, performance-oriented appearance is emphasised by the backdrop, which looks like a darkened theatre. Nina, wearing a fitted full-length maroon dress, is tied to a chair in the middle of the stage when a curtain drop reveals a gigantic tank with an octopus that wraps its tentacles around Nina’s arm. In the course of the scene, the octopus, who is interacting with OA telepathically, appears to be a threatening, imposing figure, stating that it can easily end Nina’s life, thus further highlighting its difference from the peaceful quaint aesthetics of OA’s NDE. OA’s interaction with the octopus, named Old Night, explores the future of humanity, particularly when Old Night suggests that he holds hope for humanity and therefore chooses to interact with humans through Nina, whose body is the temporary host for OA’s consciousness. Additionally, Old Night offers to help OA rescue herself and ‘the others,’ thereby becoming a symbol of hope in the narrative. This hope is also reflected in the audience’s consumption of the show, and not least because of the connotations associated with the term ‘angel’ as “a messenger of God” who “almost invariably [embodies] a sense that something is being 19

http://www.metamodernism.com/2012/05/29/to-engage-in-literature/

4.4 The Intradiegetic Utopia

167

made visibly that is otherwise ineffable, or of too heightened a nature for human perception” and who, when “encountered in its pure form, … has a tendency to bear news (Clute and Grant 29).” Angel figures furthermore have a “powerful association with a living religion” and register “as a beacon, signalling the presence of a higher state of being” (Clute and Grant 29). In The OA, the titular character is short for ‘Original Angel,’ something that Khatun also ascribes to Prairie. This notion of the ‘original’, or the first of its kind, is linked to the authenticity and ‘genuineness’ (OLD).20 The connection between the angel and authenticity is also layered in case of The OA mediaverse. Diegetically, the Crestwood Five often doubt OA’s recounting of the events of her past and believe that she is spinning tall tales. French and Steve in particular spend time verifying OA’s tales, especially in the final episode of Part 1, by calling up the ALS society to confirm the existence of Evelyn, who gave the Captive Five their final movement. In the consecutive scene, French breaks into OA’s house in Crestwood and finds books on angels, oligarchs, near death experiences and also The Iliad, which leads him to believe that OA was, indeed, lying to them. He informs the others in the Crestwood Five group and all of them are shocked and disperse in grief. It is through the act of faith in OA as an angel and in her story, however, that the Crestwood Five eventually reconvene and prevent a shooting at their school. Their performance of the movements during the school shooting threat triggers a series of events which they believe leads to OA finally traveling to the dimension in which Homer is and they realise that OA told them the truth (“Invisible Self” P1 Ch8 00:28:04), granting her credibility. With OA’s passing into the Nina Azarova dimension, all that she explained about her being an angel and Hap being an angel hunter is confirmed on the visual level, while the Crestwood Five have only her word for it and hold on to that, lending sincerity to their faith in OA. Furthermore, the idea that the movements OA taught them—which only enable inter-dimensional travel when performed with ‘perfect feeling’—helped them to prevent the school shooting, increases her authenticity in the sense of “truthful correspondence between inner feelings and their outward expression” (Wendy-Marie Marie). When the fans of the show turn to secondary screens to discuss it and, moreover, reflect upon their feelings after viewing it, they similarly lend authenticity to the show, as indicated in expressions of how the show has resonated with them deeply:

20

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/authenticity.

168

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

[T]his show plays with your expectations, plays tricks on your mind, and straps you to the machine until you’re totally in sync with it and it becomes more real than the reality around you. It becomes an experience, more immersive and elliptical in its length than a feature film could ever be by nature, and more transcendent in its storytelling prowess and production values than a normal television show so that the medium and method of delivery becomes a laughably inadequate container when you consider it’s coming through a rectangular box. … The series’ genius also lies in our slow, perfectly paced indoctrination into its madness. It starts where we’re at, in “reality,” giving us a few outside-the-box elements to ponder, but always gives our skeptical minds an out at first (she’s crazy, it’s just a dream / delusion, it’s just a story, etc.), using the 5 as a surrogate audience to filter our doubts through. The more we become connected, bought in, sucked in—the show knows the right moment to strike and suck us in further. It sets us up with little slices of the movements, and right when our guard is down, it unleashes them in full fury, and in a beautifully orchestrated sequence, Scott’s blood travels backwards and he’s resurrected. This is the first moment when the show takes things to another level, almost “jumps the shark”—but it comes at just the right moment, when we’re just psychologically supple enough, when we want to believe. (Reddit user u/PCClarity, emphasis in original)21

The user’s perception of the show aligns with the collective interpretation of The OA fandom and generates the notion of a shared community and feeling in their viewing of the series and engaging in a certain manner of fan practice that is informed by historical events, such as the Trekkers’ lobbying for the return of their show. The fan protests and lobbying of in The OA mediaverse is marked by the influence of new media, particularly exhibiting their fandom on social media platforms and using them to gather momentum. Furthermore, noteworthy is the user’s consideration of the medium, particularly when they suggest that the medium and delivery method of the series are ‘laughably inadequate’ to convey its grand narratives, yet manage to do so. How, in this assessment, the show tends to contradict notions of reality in small doses to appease the sceptics but eventually ‘unleashes’ the supernatural, unexplainable and the uncanny in ‘full fury’ in a manner that invites viewers to believe in the narrative again speaks to a perception of authenticity, both in terms of the ‘originality’ of the narrative and as enabling audiences to reflect on the show in the various fan practices outlined below.

21

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/comments/b9womf/how_the_oa_has_transcended_ film_and_television/

4.5 The Extradiegetic Vision and #SaveTheOA

4.5

169

The Extradiegetic Vision and #SaveTheOA

Towards the end of Part 2, in one of the final scenes, OA, who is also now able to tap into Nina’s memories and accept her as a part of her being, is seen levitating while Hap’s robots perform the movements in the Nina dimension, whereas the Crestwood Five are simultaneously performing the movements in the OA dimension. As a result, Hap and OA are seen landing in a dimension that appears to be a movie set. When characters have previously travelled between dimensions in the show, they usually tend to die or collapse. In “Overview,” both OA and Steve, despite being in different dimensions at the time, collapse. Karim, who witnesses OA’s fall through the rose stained-glass window of the house on Nob Hill peeks over at what appears to be the set of a movie where one can see OA unconscious and the ground next to her with a smattering of blood (See fig. 4.4). The mise-en-scène is comprised of rotating cameras, a number of people surrounding the scene, the chairs of actors and film producers, and even a wig that OA seems to be wearing, which Hap removes as he cradles her unconscious body, suggesting that it is indeed the set of a film or TV show. Another individual who tries to help addresses OA as ‘Brit,’ which is also the name of the actress who plays the roles of OA and Nina Azarova. Furthermore, Buck from the OA dimension, who is known as Michelle in the Nina Azarova dimension, appears on the set, and despite not being able to see Karim, who is calling out to her, approaches the cardboard cut-out of what would have been the rose stained-glass window through which Karim witnesses everything. The audience soon realises that this is the set of OA as they are addressed as Brit and Jason respectively, which are the names of the actors playing the characters. The OA relies upon suspense and complex narrative structures that are peppered with clues not only for the protagonist but also the extradiegetic audiences i.e., the viewers of the show. In the show, for example, in the Nina Azarova dimension, Karim and OA attempt to piece together Nina’s life and relationships in their mission to escape Hap and rescue the other members of the Captive Five. Additionally, in Part 2, the Crestwood Five, who are grieving OA’s death and struggling to believe that she did, in fact, jump dimensions and reunited with Homer, look for clues to confirm this hypothesis. Interestingly, this is accomplished through another aspect of spiritualism, with BBA acting as a ‘medium’ who is able to communicate and sense the presence of certain people from the parallel dimension. Homer, too, in Part 2 appears to suffer from partial memory loss and attempts to piece clues together to learn the truth about his travel from the OA dimension to the Nina dimension and Hap’s manipulation. The show, therefore, presents a complex narrative that corresponds to the intradiegetic

170

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

Fig. 4.4 The mise-en-scène indicating the characters are on a movie set

dimensions (Fig. 4.4). From the initial episode onwards, the character of Prairie, calling herself OA, establishes suspense as she seems to have undergone drastic changes, such as regaining vision after being blind since childhood and the appearance of mysterious scarring on her back along with her refusal to talk to her adopted parents, the medical staff and the media about what transpired in those seven years when she was ‘missing.’ By putting together the group of the Crestwood Five, and narrating the events of her ‘missing years’ to them, she establishes a dedicated audience, both on the intra- and extradiegetic level. In addition to learning more about what happened to Prairie, members of the audience also engage in practices of forensic fandom. Addressing the “narrative complexity of media storytelling” in television, Jason Mittell asserts: Since the late 1990s, dozens of television series have broadened the possibilities available to small-screen storytellers to embrace increased seriality, hyperconscious narrative techniques such as voice-over narration and playful chronology, and deliberate ambiguity and confusion. These trends … are tied into transformations within the television industry and technologies of distribution that have enabled programs to be viewed more consistently by smaller audiences and to still be considered successful (Mittell on spreadablemedia.org)

Mittell suggests that these dedicated smaller audiences make certain media “drillable” because they “encourage a mode of forensic fandom that invites viewers to dig deeper, probing beneath the surface to understand the complexity of a story and its telling. Such programs create magnets for engagement, drawing viewers

4.5 The Extradiegetic Vision and #SaveTheOA

171

into storyworlds and urging them to drill down to discover more” (Mittell). The OA qualifies as such a drillable text, for example because the voice-over narration enables a link between the extradiegetic audience and the Crestwood Five as OA begins to explain her encounter with Hap and the Captive Five because both the extra- and intradiegetic audience, experience OA’s story, albeit differently. The chronology too, is playful with flashbacks and jumps between OA’s childhood as Nina, her later years as Prairie, and then her time as OA. With its drillable attributes and creation of suspense as well as genre-bending, the show forges a forensic fandom. This is particularly evident in the protestations of the fans upon the show’s cancellation after Part 2. The conclusion of Part 2 seemingly ends in a cliff-hanger, with Hap having finally travelled to a dimension where he believes OA will not antagonise him, and as he accompanies an unconscious OA in the ambulance, Steve is seen climbing into the ambulance as well, addressing Hap as Hap and not Jason, implying that he knows what Hap is up to. With the central focus of the two parts being getting away from the antagonist Hap, it would be likely that in continuity, Steve/ Patrick Gibson would now aid OA in eluding Hap. This, however, does not come to pass, as Netflix cancelled the show and no Part 3 was released. The show’s cancellation was met with strong reactions from fans, who began to protest in various ways through the affordances granted to them by new media technologies, which: have also fundamentally changed television narrative, and they have profound implications for the kinds of programming and for the ways in which audiences are understood. Because of new viewing technologies and viewing practices …, programmers have developed increasingly sophisticated narratives to retain audience attention …. This narrative complexity is augmented by new technologies that make it possible to view television outside its normal broadcast schedule. As a result, the current moment is characterized by narrative experimentation, as programmers, aware that television itself is undergoing great change, find themselves free to challenge narrative conventions. (Charles Tryon 305)

In the final episode of The OA, the characters are perceived to have entered a dimension that, by a significant number of viewers, is identified as the dimension of the extradiegetic audiences, where Brit Marling is addressed by her ‘real name.’ The Subreddit of the show, “r/TheOA” includes what are identified as ‘theory directories’ for Part 1 and Part 2 of the show titled, ‘The Unfinished

172

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

House’22 and ‘The House on Nob Hill’23 respectively, which serves as a wiki put together by fans of the show who engage in activities of a forensic fandom and theorise about the show. Among the theories in ‘The House on Nob Hill’ is a category titled, ‘Main and Recurring Theories/Questions’24 within which a thread titled ‘Dimension 3 is our dimension’25 is hinting at the popular theory that the cancelled show is in the dimension of the extradiegetic audiences, who must now take actions to ‘save the show.’ The fans of the show indeed take advantage of the affordances of new media technologies to perform their fandom. Reminiscent of the efforts of Trekkers to bring back their beloved Star Trek, fans of The OA engaged in immersive practices to lobby for their cancelled show, sparking an initiative that has been identified with the hashtag #SaveTheOA. This fan initiative #SaveTheOA can be linked to metamodernism, which Luke Turner defines as26 a term that has gained traction in recent years as a means of articulating developments in contemporary culture … [T]he discourse surrounding metamodernism engages with the resurgence of sincerity, hope, romanticism, affect, and the potential for grand narratives and universal truths, whilst not forfeiting all that we’ve learned from postmodernism. Thus, rather than simply signalling a return to naïve modernist ideological positions, metamodernism considers that our era is characterised by an oscillation between aspects of both modernism and postmodernism. We see this manifest as a kind of informed naivety, a pragmatic idealism, a moderate fanaticism, oscillating between sincerity and irony, deconstruction and construction, apathy and affect, attempting to attain some sort of transcendent position, as if such a thing were within our grasp. (Turner)

With Brit Marling’s assertion upon the show’s cancellation that she is fighting late capitalism, she aligned herself with the fandom that began lobbying to revive the show and protest its premature cancellation. Informed about Netflix’ production practices, particularly concerning the renewal of shows, numerous fans—some of which are celebrities in their own right—took to social media to express their desire to have the show renewed. Affect towards the show and its cancellation led to numerous activities and forms of protest, which included the recreation 22

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/wiki/theories https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/wiki/theoriesparttwo 24 https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/wiki/theoriesparttwo/questions#wiki_main_theories_ and_questions 25 https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/wiki/theoriesparttwo/questions#wiki_dimension_3_is_ our_dimension 26 http://www.metamodernism.com/2015/01/12/metamodernism-a-brief-introduction/ 23

4.5 The Extradiegetic Vision and #SaveTheOA

173

and performance of the Five Movements, choreography videos for the same, fanmade films, fan fiction, all night vigils, watch parties and recommending The OA to others, hunger strikes and the cancellation of Netflix subscriptions. Activities and statements were frequently accompanied by the hashtag #SaveTheOA, which indicated the fan’s hope that the show would be picked up again. A significant portion of the fan activism in the #SaveTheOA movement took place digitally, including means of interacting and engaging with media producers to provide real time feedback and make demands on the media they would like to consume. Furthermore, the desire for the show’s revival stems from the knowledge that the creators, Marling and Batmanglij, had initially planned for five parts or seasons, and that the second part ended with a cliffhanger. This, combined with the longform continuity that the unique formatting of the show commanded, indicates the audiences’ desire to see the ‘grand narrative’ of The OA through to completion. Turner claims that the speculative school of thought was “empowered by network culture” within the framework of metamodernism, which “describe[s] the climate in which a yearning for utopias, despite their futile nature, has come to the fore” and therefor is “descriptive rather than prescriptive, an inclusive means of articulating the ongoing developments associated with a structure of feeling” (emphasis in original). Falasca-Zamponi argues that Williams’ concept of ‘structure of feeling’ is crucial in viewing the past as open to continuously changing interpretation, and is worked over and over (101–2). The forensic fandom of The OA view the narrative content as a ‘past’ that they collectively share. With it being a drillable and spreadable text, the fandom then interprets the story as their past to determine their actions in the present with a view to what they want out of the series and its producers in the future. In this manner, the fandom pins their collective utopia on the revival of the series. Further underlining the narrative’s speculative nature, the yearning for utopia can be located on both the diegetic and extradiegetic level of the The OA mediaverse. The conclusion of Part 2 led numerous audience members to state that the characters, particularly OA and Hap, had landed in ‘their dimension’ and their reality, and that it was their responsibility to help OA and also help the show, since helping OA also meant aiding Brit Marling. This popular fan theory gained immense traction due to the features of forensic fandom that characterized the audiences of the show and led to numerous discussion threads on social media platforms such as Reddit, Facebook and Twitter. Fans uploaded their renditions of the Five Movements on these and other platforms with captions that often indicated their performance being in aid of OA/Brit Marling. One of the fans, as part of protesting against the show’s cancellation, went on a hunger strike for days

174

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

outside the corporate offices of Netflix on Sunset Boulevard in Los Angeles.27 Brit Marling and Zal Batmanglij visited the protestor, offered her water and food, and talked to her about the show. The site of the protest can be identified as a performance space based on the patterns of performance identified by Richard Schechner (176), in that it became a gathering space for many fans of The OA who utilised it to engage in actions of protest against the cancellation of the show,28 ranging from performing the interpretative dance moves of the show to holding placards and creating chalk drawings on the sidewalk. Compared to the Trekkers’ letter-writing campaign, this protest is more complex and relational, mainly as a result of the interaction among the media prosumers and the structures of the mediaverse. Fan protestors’ performances and immersive practices are significantly characterised by the dialogue between the users about the media text, and specifically by the role of delivery platforms and social media channels as spaces for media users and producers to interact with one another. Furthermore, social media platforms and channels also serve as sites to mark these fan practices as ‘cultural aviators,’ which according to Jenkins constitute “elements which give audiences something to do” (Jenkins et. al 136). ‘Cultural aviators’ identify those aspects of fan practices that encourage fans to engage with the show and the community surrounding it, eventually transforming them into “foragers for information” concerning the show. Cultural aviators “provide fans with the resources they need to talk about the program” (Jenkins et. al 136). Additionally, forensic fans re-watch shows to deconstruct the narrative and unpack layered meanings, adding further complexity to their reception of the text. It is crucial to investigate the pleasures derived from being a forensic fan to identify the culture of a fandom. This can be done through the mediaverse framework, as indicated above, by examining fan activities on social platforms and delivery channels and their consumption practices via data from distribution networks such as Netflix. Corresponding to that, Subreddits and pages or groups dedicated to the show invite spreadability through cultural aviators, such as identifying theories concerning the show, including the one that asserts that the show The OA has entered the audience’s dimension and that it is up to them to ‘save the show,’ thereby sparking the #SaveTheOA initiative. Additionally, the mediaverse focuses on the behaviours of media consumers and producers in tandem with each other and the media text beyond media migration practices. The performance spaces within the mediaverse also play a crucial role in reshaping what previously has 27

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/oa-netflix-cancelled-fan-hun ger-strike-emperial-young-a9080061.html 28 https://www.insider.com/the-oa-fans-protest-netflix-office-photos-interview-2019-8

4.5 The Extradiegetic Vision and #SaveTheOA

175

been identified as parasocial relationships. While parasocial relationships are most commonly seen as non-reciprocated, the communication enabled by social media platforms as performance and exhibitionist spaces in their own right enables a form of post-object parasocial relationship where interactions between fans and media figures may occur. Marling addressed the protestor who went on a hunger strike in a social media post: The other day Zal and I pulled over to offer a bottle of water and food to a young woman who has been protesting the cancelation of the show on a street corner in Hollywood. As we were leaving, [sic] she said “you know, what I’m really protesting is late capitalism.” And then she said something that I haven’t been able to forget since: “Algorithms aren’t as smart as we are. They cannot account for love.” Her words. Not mine. And the story keeps going inside them.29

The various ways in which fans protested against Netflix’ decision to cancel the show exceeds their desire to see the show to its end in that the conversation between the fan who went on hunger strike and Brit Marling points towards a yearning for a better reality in which the show is not cancelled, and how this may be achievable through love, which they believe is the message of the show, underlining its metamodern feature. Among numerous fan theories is one in which the fans express hope for the show and its continuity by asserting that Netflix’s announcement concerning the cancellation of the show is a publicity stunt and that the show is in fact not really cancelled. One of the explanations leaning into this theory is provided by a Redditor in the r/TheOA Subreddit: First I would like to say this is my first post in this sub reddit and I’m not sure if anyone else had thought of this before... Here is my theory: Is it possible that the cancellation from Netflix for season 3 is a part of the show. You see that have just landed in a reality VERY similar to ours where the characters are actors in a show. So, what if Hap (now Jason Isaacs) has purposefully had the show cancelled in order to keep Prairie trapped in Brit’s mind. What if we have a part to play in saving her by saving the show. What if this was all a part of the greater plan! (u/FandomHow)30

This particular user’s assertion illustrates their perception of The OA as a grand narrative and simultaneously demonstrates their yearning for its continuity, which

29

https://www.instagram.com/p/B1hKgS9pUZG/?utm_source=ig_embed https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/comments/j732v1/is_it_possible_that_the_cancellat ion/

30

176

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

they believe is “part of a greater plan.” Responses to this theory include both optimistic and pessimistic views towards the suggestion, e.g. when one of the users comments that they believe that the show is about faith: “The entire point of having faith, as articulated by the show, is that you still have it when things seem impossible, when all the evidence is against you. That kind of faith is its own reward and a mode for living, one that binds people together” (u/JerzyZulawski). The theme of ‘faith’ or taking a ‘leap of faith’ is broached in the show in numerous instances. One of these was previously discussed in the case of Hap, whose transition from scientist to angel hunter is marked by faith. Furthermore, the Crestwood Five are asked to take a leap of faith and trust that OA is telling them the truth about what happened to her. Similarly, the Captive Five must also find credence in OA’s theory concerning NDEs, their being angels, and that interdimensional travel is possible. In this regard, OA is repeatedly put to test as a reliable narrator, which is codified into the aspects concerning storytelling at the diegetic level. At the extradiegetic level, however, fans perceive that it is the fan community that must have faith in the show’s message and continuity—that it is a ‘part of a greater plan’ as u/FandomHow’s post above indicates. The hope of the fandom and their continuous striving towards prolonging their experience of the show through social media campaigns contributes to the overall romanticizing of the show by its fans. However, the fans are also accompanied by the cast members and creators of the show in promoting the idealism surrounding the text. For example, Brit Marling has acknowledged the fans’ efforts and written that it is the fans who are “authoring the story:” [S]tanding on street corners in the hot sun in protest. You are meeting new people in strange recesses online and sharing stories about loss and renewal that you never thought you’d tell anyone. You are learning choreography and moving in ways you haven’t dared moved before. All of it is uncomfortable. All of it is agitation. All of it is worth something. … You’ve broken the mold of storytelling. You’re building something far more beautiful than we did because it’s in real time in real life with real people.31

The fans of the show, far from being powerless, are engaging the producers, the delivery channels and other fans of the show in a dialogue through the very performance of their fandom. Brit Marling’s acknowledgment of their lobbying practices indicates that the fans and their fandom are being observed. This observation, however, also extends to the general media consumer as a result of the networked mediaverse. 31

https://www.instagram.com/p/B1hKgS9pUZG/?utm_source=ig_embed

4.6 Shared Interpretations and Performances in The OA Fandom

4.6

177

Shared Interpretations and Performances in The OA Fandom

The pervasiveness of media enables an interaction, especially on social media platforms. With these platforms serving as performance spaces for audiences and fandoms, non-viewers of the show also observe the fans performing the fandom. Their fannish practices convey their attachment to and impression of the media text, which might entice non-viewers to react by dismissing the fandom or by viewing the show for themselves. Fan practices thus become part of the paratextual framework that influences the consumption of a text. Furthermore, the structure of the mediaverse which comprises social media platforms and delivery channels, also allows for the analysis of the development and consecutive popularity of ‘preferred readings’ of media texts. As Tulloch argues, although “different meanings and pleasures are available to viewers of science fiction, certain shared interpretations do occur again and again” (Tulloch and Jenkins 125–6). The shared interpretations allow for a media text to be encoded with certain preferred meanings by the producers. In The OA, however, the IRL (In Real Life) theory that suggests that the Brit Marling dimension is, in fact, the extradiegetic viewer’s dimension, is derived from the show’s narrative elements. The existence of multiple dimensions in the diegetic universe, once confirmed, allowed for the assumption that the extradiegetic audiences inhabit one of the potentially infinite dimensions that the show explores. In the final episode’s climax, the use of the actor’s ‘real’ names, and the exchange between Nina Azarova and Hap, wherein the latter suggests that he will carry them to a dimension where she does not believe herself to be the OA, caters to the speculation that the Brit Marling dimension is the extradiegetic audiences’ dimension. Using this to support the notion that they would like to ‘jump’ to a dimension where the show is not discontinued is indicative of fans’ yearning for a quasi-utopia concerning the obsession of their fannish desires. Taking these cues from the narrative elements, the forensic audience gathers in virtual performance spaces such as Reddit to engage in a dialogue about their preferred readings, which allow for a potential snow-balling effect. This structure of the mediaverse, therefore, serves as a site for sharing and circulating preferred readings and their exchange among audience members (see fig. 4.5). Preferred readings, in turn, also spark performative actions among fans, and this performance of one’s fandom is in turn indicative of their immersion in a particular text. The engagement with the uncanny and the sublime elements of the show, given its unique genre tropes and formatting, form the central core of fan text and fan dialogue. Fan text, according to Hellekson and Busse, refers to “the entirety of

178

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

•The OA •Genre bending •Long-form storytelling via web television The Media Text

•Nelix - cancellaon of shows; binge watching; long-form storytelling and sequenal series •Reddit - site for fan performance and pracces

Networks and Plaorms

The Paratexts and Intertexts

•Metamodern narrave •Fantext and fan dialogue as paratexts •Celebries as paratexts and post-object projecon

Spectators •Forensic fandom •Lobbying and campaigning •Pleasures of performance •The second screen and parasocial relaonships

Fig. 4.5 The OA mediaverse

stories and critical commentary written in a fandom (or even in a pairing or genre), [which] offers an ever-growing, ever-expanding version of characters” (7). Fan dialogue in this project refers to the interaction among fans of one or many texts. As for the fan text of the show, which often takes the form of fan fiction or fan-made films and other bricolaged appropriations, the themes of cosmic families, interpretive dance movements, deep human connections and the blurring lines between reality and fantasy are most significant. An example of this is the fan-made film Invisible River (2020-present) created by Fleeting Films.32 The film centres around a group of strangers who forge a close bond due to their mutual obsession with The OA. The creators of the film explicitly state that the film, although a result of their fannish affinity towards the show, is not a traditional fan fiction text in the sense that it does not pick up the narrative from where the original show left off. It is rather a reaction to the show and its cancellation and is to also prolong their continued experience of The OA. The Reddit handle of the production team of Fleeting Films, when asked what or who the film is for, stated: [W]e’ve talked a lot about this on my Youtube Channel, Facebook, Reddit, and Discord, to ensure our intentions are clear. 32

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11134484/

4.6 Shared Interpretations and Performances in The OA Fandom

179

The intent is simply to share art. Many fans in here have shared their artwork inspired by The OA. As an aspiring film creator, my art work tends to be in video form. This idea was born last April, when I asked a couple friends at dinner “would you learn the movements, and make a video with me?” When they said yes, we began. But after one weekend, the ideas kept flowing and we ended up writing—backwards—an entire, two hour feature film. The description is listed on IMDB and I‘ll post here as well: “After millions across the globe become obsessed with a mysterious new TV show, one super fan in particular takes his dedication to a cosmic level. On a mission to discover his purpose, he uncovers something greater about our existence, despite the constant ridicule that surrounds him. Crossing paths with several unexpected strangers along the way, he learns that ultimately we’re never really alone and are all far more connected than we might realize.” We are not attempting to pick up the story where Brit and Zal left off. We would never step on their toes or intrude on that which isn’t ours. But we are sharing the perspective of how some superfans, ourselves included, may respond to the show, or be inspired by it, or how it might alter the course of their lives.33 (Reddit user ‘fleetingfilms’)

Here, the production team identifies themselves and the cast of the fan-made film as ‘superfans,’ underlining their dedication towards the series, which inspired them to create the bricolaged product of The Invisible River, arguably with the intention of separating themselves from the other fans of the series. The first chapter of the fan-made film Invisible River is titled ‘Synchronicity’ and opens with similar visual effects as the opening of any episode of The OA, with a text that reads, ‘inspired by Brit Marling & Zal Batmanglij’ and that the film is made ‘in association with #SaveTheOA Movement,’ highlighting the partaking in this movement as one of the main undertakings of the superfans. Certain compositional elements of scenes in the fan-made film refer to the original show, such as the face of Prairie/Nina/Brit on a torn up magazine cover, or voice-overs of Steve and Prairie/Nina/Brit from the show. Brit and Zal appear on a tablet screen giving an interview and discussing The OA as something that brings people together and allows them to ‘connect about something’ (00:01:36). They further discuss their roles as storytellers, which especially in the case of Brit Marling, underlines her post-object celebrity as a storyteller. The chapter Synchronicity also references the fandom of The OA and prominent fan practices such as fans lobbying and demanding for the next season’s release dates from the producers, while also 33

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/comments/emo2gs/the_first_trailer_for_the_oa_fan_ film_invisible/fdpz8o4/?context=3.

180

4 The Metamodern Utopia in The OA Mediaverse

departing from the audience’s neomatic world in the sense that in the film, the producers have already renewed the series for 3 seasons. The radio host in the film states, “It’s fascinating to see how far fans would go to get what they want,” as a reference to the superfans of the series (00:04:15). The film also discusses the role of social media and its influence on the populace at large, which seemingly ‘enslaves us’ to the point where people give up privacy to electronic devices. This is an interesting juxtaposition with the utopian view that The OA fandom arguably has of the world of social media that enables them to band together and share their love and passion for the series. The fan-made film discusses how it took ‘a couple of graduates from Georgetown,’ referring to Marling and Batmanglij, to “wake up humanity and to break up the monotony of our existence by altering the narratives we’d allowed ourselves to become accustomed to. Ironically, the key to accomplishing this has been hidden within the same mechanism that enslaved us to begin with,” and the visual shows the Netflix logo on a television screen, highlighting the web producers role in bringing The OA to those who would later become ‘superfans’ and then prematurely cancelling it, sparking outrage among the same (00:11:57). The creation and consumption of the fan-made film not only enriches the fans’ experience of the show but also highlights the overall pleasure of fandom, particularly when considered alongside the prominent fan practices in The OA fan community. Duffett highlights the pleasures of connection, appropriation, and performance within a fan community, and how the practices associated with these pleasures may be connected to fans’ social identities (275–315). Particularly concerning the pleasures of performance, Duffett argues: “It involves the fan being active in suspending disbelief, making meaning and participating” (296). This particular pleasure of performance can be contextualized in case of The OA fan community and also with reference to the fan-made film Invisible River. From the onset, the fans who made the film ‘have addressed it as a fan-made product that highlights their affect towards the show. This labor of love for the show along with the theories proposed by the forensic fandom and the #SaveTheOA movement are again indicative of the pleasures of performance. The suspension of disbelief that Duffett mentions is certainly complex in relation to The OA. The performance of the Five Movements and uploading them on social media, for example, is not suggestive of the fans believing that they can jump dimensions the way OA does in the show, but rather indicative of their investment in the show and their desire to see it to its ‘rightful’ end. In employing social media platforms as the site to convey their fan identities, fans aim to spread the word not only about the show but also alert the production and distribution channels associated with it to demand its continuity. In this vein, the

4.6 Shared Interpretations and Performances in The OA Fandom

181

mediaverse aids in identifying the fan community of The OA as engaging in a counter-performance to participate in the fandom, which also involves lobbying and campaigning for the object of fannish obsession. Moreover, theories proposed by fans that highlight the notion that the Brit Marling dimension is the audiences’ reality is grounds to engage in fan activities such as performing the movements and connecting with other fans and prosumption practices that underline the pleasures of fandom. With the concluding scenes of Part 2 indicating that the show has entered the dimension of or the one close to the audiences’ reality, the audiences use this narrative technique as a means to express their fandom and also to become part of the narrative via pleasures of performance. In the dialogue and the interactions within the fan community, a significant number of fans are not concerned with the suspension of disbelief or winning over other fans and having them believe that OA has entered ‘their’ dimension. Instead, the show is, in the words of Mittell, ‘drillable’ in that the fan text invites the members of the fan community to deconstruct the complexity of the narrative and take pleasure in participating in these fan activities and collective fan engagement. Among these pleasures, as already mentioned, are the pleasures of connection with celebrities and media figures associated with the text. In this context, the celebrities may be identified as serving a paratextual function, and engaging with them may be seen as a means of allowing paratexts to influence one’s consumption practices and meaning-making, which in turn influence the popular and preferred meanings and interpretations associated with the text among its producers, prosumers and consumers. The fan community of The OA therefore demonstrates the notion of the fan as critic of not only the text but also the textual production and distribution. Furthermore, in the consumption of the celebrity, which serve the paratextual function, as is the case with Jason Isaacs and Brit Marling, the fans tend to engage in post-object projection. This concept is evident not only in the case of the celebrities of The OA, but also extends to other types of public figures, such as authors or politicians. It is further explored in the following case study of Good Omens, which examines the literary celebrity of Neil Gaiman and how post-object projection manifests among the fans of the author and the text, and also dives into the use of the second screen, not only on part of the audiences and fans but also members of the production team, authors and auteurs.

5

The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

Good Omens was released as a web television series on Amazon’s SVOD platform Prime Video in 2019. The show is created and written by Neil Gaiman, who is also the co-author, alongside Terry Pratchett, of the book that the series is based on. The series features prominent actors David Tennant as the demon Crawley and Michael Sheen as the angel Aziraphale. Although I do not examine this text as an adaptation, it is crucial to address the intertextuality concerning the novel and series because of the prominence of the Good Omens fan community.1 Fanlore, a wiki created by members of various fandoms for fan input, addresses the fandom of the novel Good Omens. According to the wiki, the fandom grew louder after the release of the web television series, which led to: kicking off a widespread Good Omens fandom revival that seemed to consume all of fandom. The TV series introduced many new fans to Good Omens and caused many long-time fans of the book to rediscover or revisit their love of the novel. It also prompted an explosion of fanworks, including fanfiction, fanart and meta, some of which analysed the differences in themes and tone between the book and TV series. This explosion of fannish activity was aided and abetted by the fact that actor Michael Sheen was an enthusiastic onlooker and participant in the fandom, responding to fans on Twitter when tagged, referencing and praising fanworks, and making unequivocal statements of support for fandom. Author Neil Gaiman, who wrote the TV series, also encouraged fans on social media and tirelessly responded to Asks of every kind about the book and show on his Tumblr. (Fanlore) 1

The question of the series’ authorship and its standing as an adaptation must be addressed. Since the analysis focuses solely upon the series, I will not be examining the text as an adaptation. While I address the presence of the novel and its longstanding fandom, which cannot and should not be dismissed when examining the fandom as a whole, the content of the series itself will be analyzed as independent of the novel, circumventing questions of fidelity and paratextuality that are not relevant to this study.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2024 A. Shah, The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43739-8_5

183

184

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

From this Wiki, one can ascertain that the Good Omens fandom has made its presence known and is prominent on various social media platforms such as Twitter and Tumblr. Additionally, the fandom is supported by celebrities associated with the text, most importantly Michael Sheen and Neil Gaiman, who regularly interact with fans. There is also a great surge in number of fantexts that circulate among the fandom since the release of the web television series. Hence, the interpretation and appropriation of Good Omens by its audiences is crucial in a holistic examination of the text. Good Omens, by virtue of its complex relationship with the audiences and its producers, as well as certain narrative tropes, also qualifies as a fantasy text, not least since Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman, the creators of the Good Omens storyworld, are prominent figures in the canon of fantasy fiction. Terry Pratchett is the creator of the Discworld series fantasy books, and Gaiman is the author of a number of texts that feature elements of fantasy, fairy tales and magical realism such as American Gods (2001) and The Ocean at the End of the Lane (2013). Both Pratchett and Gaiman boasted a dedicated fan following before the release of the television series, and due to the migratory practices of media audiences, these fans, too, converged in the Good Omens fandom after the release of the series.The first season of the series Good Omens was released on 31st May 2019 on Prime Video and was also broadcast on BBC Two (UK) from 15th January to 19th February 2020. It stars Michael Sheen as the angel Aziraphale, David Tennant as the demon Crowley and Frances McDormand as the voice of God, i.e. the narrator. The premise of the show is the teaming up of Aziraphale and Crowley, who respectively represent heaven and hell on earth, to prevent the Apocalypse and the coming of the Antichrist so that heaven and hell may rage a final battle against each other on earth, thereby wiping out all of humanity. The two protagonists form an unlikely friendship and aim to prevent the Apocalypse as they, over the centuries, have grown to enjoy their lives among humans. When examining the fandom, canon and fanon concerning the text, I will consider both the novel as well as the series. Overall, the focus of my analysis, however, remains on Gaiman as the writer of the series.2 Good Omens features a number of tropes of fantasy fiction, which I will highlight in the following section. The purpose of illustrating these tropes is to support the notion that the audiences of media texts treat genre-specific tropes of the texts as ‘talking points’ to interact with other audiences, as pointed out in the Black Mirror case 2

While Pratchett also served as co-writer of the novel, he did not contribute directly to the series and also does not have the celebrity presence on social media that Gaiman commands, as a result of which Pratchett’s part in the text does not feature heavily in this analysis.

5.1 Good Omens: The Myth and the Prophecy

185

study, as well as use them as points to annotate, appropriate and circulate the appropriated text. Fantexts, as a result, stem from genre tropes identified by the fan communities. One of the goals of this project is to examine the text with an interdisciplinary lens, and especially include new media in the examination of televisual media texts. This not only involves the integration of the analysis of content and the signs of television with how those concepts are understood in the literary sense, but also examined in light of new media practices and within the scope of the mediaverse, which accounts also for delivery and distribution alongside production and consumption practices, and consequently informing the genre within this particular medium.

5.1

Good Omens: The Myth and the Prophecy

John Fiske and John Hartley argue for the structure and language of television as akin to that of speech. They claim that television is: “ephemeral, episodic, specific, concrete and dramatic in mode” (Fiske and Hartley 2–3). In their seminal work on understanding and reading television, they employ linguistic tools and semiology to better comprehend the medium in its own right (22).3 Brian Attebery states: “The very origins of the structural analysis of literature are tied to traditional fantastic genres such as fairy tale and myth” and that “most histories of structuralism trace it back to linguistics” (81). Based on Saussurian techniques of analysis, Attebery argues that structuralism involves the “break[ing] down [of] cultural product or expression into a set of constituent parts and then examine the way those parts were articulated” (81). Attebery examines the work of Russian formalist Vladimir Propp on the grammar-like structure of the fairy tale or magical folk tale genre, which is governed by four laws: 1. Functions of characters serve as stable, constant elements in a tale, independent of how and by whom they are fulfilled. They constitute the fundamental components of a tale. 2. The number of functions known to the fairy tale is limited. 3. The sequence of functions is always identical. 4. All fairy tales are of one type in regard to their structure. (Attebery 81–2)

3

To relate the theory of semiotics to television, Fiske and Hartley look at signs and codes, and derive a means of application of these Saussurian tools to television (22). Consequently, the examination of television content has been closely linked to structuralism.

186

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

Attebery suggests that Propp’s model is also applicable to modern fantasies such as The Hobbit and The Wizard of Oz (Attbery 82). Propp’s model is indicative of narrative devices such as prophecy and providence as key to the modern fantasy tale, which “subordinates the characters to the roles they are to play” (Attebery 82). Prophecy and providence, informed by the mythical structure of the narrative, can thus be identified as a key aspect of fantasy fiction, and this also applies to Good Omens. Propp’s work, which was further developed by A. J. Greimas, identifies characters as belonging to “conceptual categories that play out their oppositions in the story,” an aspect he identifies as the actant (Attebery 83). Greimas argues that fantasy fiction is characterized by actant rather than actor. However, Attebery counters that a character can be both actor and actant, and that “modern fantasies are free to draw on both traditions and to create complex characters” that may be “overlaid with specific character traits” which identify them as more than “story functions” (Attebery 83). Considering the functions of the actant and the actor in a narrative as well as the characteristic of the myth and the prophecy in fantasy fiction, I examine and highlight these aspects in Good Omens as a work of fantasy fiction in correlation with the practices of the Good Omens fandom and its interaction with the producers. The Oxford English Dictionary distinguishes four meanings and uses of the term ‘mythologize’.4 Each of these can be identified with examples in the series of Good Omens to highlight mythology as a key element of the text. The first entry defines the term ‘mythologize’ as “To interpret in mythological terms or with regard to mythological features; to expound the symbolism of (a story, fable, etc.),” and the second as “To recount a myth or myths; to create a mythology.” If one were to consider the Bible as a mythological text, Good Omens certainly ‘expounds’ upon the symbolism of the stories and fables in the Bible, and even employs some in their entirety through existents or events in the series. For example, the pilot episode “In the Beginning” (S1 E1) begins with the ‘Voice of God’ narrating how the world was created, hence the title. The Voice of God alludes to the Garden of Eden, which is shown in the scene where a snake with black and red scales and beady eyes emerges from the ground and tempts Eve to bite into an apple from the Tree of Judgment (00:02:01). Upon doing so, Adam and Eve are expelled from the Garden of Eden. The existents and events in the series carry a cultural meaning augmented by Biblical references, which further mythologize key elements of the text as second-order sings as understood by Fiske and Hartley (26). These second order signs themselves are also known as ‘myths,’ and 4

“Mythologize, v.” OED Online, Oxford UP, March 2020, www.oed.com/view/Entry/ 124699. Accessed 17 April 2020.

5.1 Good Omens: The Myth and the Prophecy

187

are said to be “validated from two directions: first from the specificity and iconic accuracy of the first order sign, and second from the extent to which the second order sign meets our cultural needs (Fiske and Hartley 26). In Good Omens, the imagery of a naked Adam and Eve appearing to have covered parts of their bodies with leaves after eating from the Tree of Judgment is rooted in cultural signifiers. The myth is further built upon as the narrative progresses, with allusions made to Biblical beings such as the angels Gabriel and Uriel and the demons Dagon and Hastur, as well as the presence of what is referred to as ‘The Antichrist—The Adversary, Destroyer of Kings, Angel of the Bottomless Pit, Prince of This World and Lord of Darkness” (“In the Beginning” S1 E1 00:18:46). The latter character is further mythologized by the allusion of Sister Mary to horns and hoofs, which she believes are characteristic of a demonic entity, yet the Antichrist lacks these. However, when the scene is punctuated by what one can argue to be the ‘Hand of God,’ showing a card trick with three cards alluding to the three babies that are about to be switched, the final card, which represents the Antichrist baby, is laden with the exact image that Sister Mary refers to—a satanic figure with horns, the face captured in a snarl, with the figure holding a trident. While the angel Aziraphale, the guardian of the Flaming Sword according to the Bible, and the demon Crowley both feature in Good Omens as symbols of a preexisting myth, they are subject to renewed mythologization by writer and showrunner Neil Gaiman. Contrary to identifying them by strict moral codes as good and evil, Good Omens suggests a different image of the two individually as well as together. Gaiman’s Aziraphale, for example, is depicted with light-coloured wings and a light smile playing around his lips. He is portrayed as a being who enjoys fine cuisine, classical music, adores old books and also owns an old book shop in England. Crowley, on the other hand, is depicted with dark-coloured wings to identify him as being the ‘Ying’ to Aziraphale’s ‘Yang,’ who wears designer sunglasses, listens to the band Queen and drives a Bentley. Gaiman’s writing and Tennant and Sheen’s portrayal of Crowley and Aziraphale respectively have mythologized these particular avatars of the two Biblical characters, highlighting Gaiman’s illustration of the two as mythological icons among the fandom of Good Omens that contradicts that of other texts. Tennant’s Crowley and Sheen’s Aziraphale embody the myth of the demon and angel in a unique manner, especially when one examines fantexts on the subject. This projection of the two characters has earned them immense popularity and led to their mythologization, which firmly establishes Neil Gaiman as the ‘creator’ of these mythologized existents and also cements his position as the extradiegetic ‘Prophet’ concerning Good Omens. Attebery identifies prophecy and providence

188

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

as narrative devices that are often seen in works of fantasy fiction where providence relates to fate and prophecy stands for “the shape of the story you are about to read” (82). Prophecy in this sense works in Good Omens on both the intradiegetic and the extradiegetic level. On the intradiegetic level, the Voice of God narrates how the universe was created. When Aziraphale and Crowley have their first conversation after the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden, Aziraphale alludes to ‘The Great Plan,’ and describes it as “Ineffable—beyond understanding and incapable of being put into words” (“In the Beginning” S1 E1 00:03:01). The scene ends with Aziraphale sheltering Crowley from the rain with his wing and the Voice of God stating: “Well… Good Omens, being a narrative of certain events occurring in the last eleven years of human history, in strict accordance, as shall be shown, with The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch.” To begin with an omnipresent narrator referred to as the Voice of God in itself is an act of providence and foreshadowing, given that this narrator certainly knows more about the diegetic world than any of the characters. In this manner, the Voice of God invokes the author, writer and show runner Neil Gaiman, who as the ‘implied author,’ creates the omnipresent narrator and knows more about the text than the narrator itself. The Voice of God furthermore introduces certain characters by outlining their function in the progression of the narrative, thus serving as a prophet. For example, in the second episode of the series “The Book” (S1 E2), the first of the Four Horseman of the Apocalypse, War, is shown walking through the chaos of a peace meeting gone wrong, where all the leaders ended up shooting each other. The Voice of God narrates: “She’s the first of four. And you can’t have a war without her. She’s been killing time for so long now. Time, and sometimes people. And now, 60 centuries of waiting are about to end” (“The Book” S1 E2 00:06:12). This narration comes soon after the scene where the Voice of God introduces the Summoner of the Horseman and states that he is about to make a delivery—all of which the audience observes within the next few minutes of the scene, further cementing the Voice of God’s credibility in prophecies. Additionally, the term ‘prophecies’ is employed in the title of Agnes Nutter’s book—The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, which the Voice of God claims was the only text that was filled with accurate prophecies of the future, evidenced by “Prophecy 2,214,” which read: “In December 1980, an Apple will arise no man can eat. Invest thy money in Master Jobbes’s machine and good fortune will tend thy days” (S1 E2 00:12:04). The prophecy, as was indicated later by Anathema’s mother, came true as the descendants of Agnes Nutter invested money in the company Apple and reaped great rewards from that

5.1 Good Omens: The Myth and the Prophecy

189

investment. Additionally, when Aziraphale stumbles upon Nutter’s book by accident and begins to read it, the prophecy warns him that his cocoa is growing cold. At first, Aziraphale seems to struggle deciphering the meaning of this prophecy till the camera, with an internally focalized view, focuses on his mug of cocoa. Aziraphale gasps with shock upon realizing that his actions were predicted by a witch centuries ago, and also by the fact that he has finally come across a book that makes accurate prophecies (S1 E2 00:50:01). The narrative later mentions a number of prophecies that come true, implying that importance of prophecies and prophesizing in the series, and that Neil Gaiman, as the implied author behind the Voice of God, serves as ‘the prophet’ for the fan community associated with Good Omens. The notion of inspired bard or poet as a prophet corresponds to the idea of Neil Gaiman as an inspired writer, but also complicates the concept as a result of an interesting connotation concerning Gaiman and the narrator as well as the characters in Good Omens. Gaiman employs the Voice of God as the omnipresent but invisible voiceover narrator of the series. However, given the high degree of intertextuality concerning Biblical myths and celestial figures, God narrating the events of the series is made fantastically possible in this work. It indeed appears to be God who is interpreting the words of Gaiman, cutting the latter as a superior figure in the Good Omens universe. In a hierarchy of omniscience of the figures, characters such as Aziraphale, Crowley, Anathema and the Horseman are positioned under the Voice of God, for the narrator knows more than the characters, and that the Voice of God in turn is placed underneath Gaiman, who as the writer and showrunner exercises absolute control on the narration. Additionally, in the Good Omens fandom, Gaiman is certainly regarded as a prophetic ‘revealer’ in that he actively engages with the fandom on social media platforms such as Twitter and Tumblr, and often confirms or dismisses fanons—“the fans’ creation of details, plotlines, and characters unsupported by the original texts” (Reijnders et. al 6)—that are proposed by the fandom. When “a media producer uses fannish ideas, jokes, or other contributions in canonic texts,” the fanon becomes an ascended fanon (Reijnders et. al 6). Gaiman’s role as a ‘revealer’ and as one who ‘ascends’ fanon can be highlighted through the following examples. On Neil Gaiman’s official Tumblr page, he often provides an insight into the ‘making of’ Good Omens,’ both the show and the novel co-written with Terry Pratchett. The characters of Crowley and Aziraphale, among others, are attributed further features exceeding the text on Gaiman’s social media. Not only does this, in the sense of intermediality, prolong the enjoyment of the fans of Good Omens but it also underlines Gaiman’s position in relationship to the text and the fandom,

190

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

as he does have the final say as far as the canon is concerned, while the fandom circulates all that he reveals or prophesizes further via different social media platforms. For example, in one of his Tumblr posts,5 Gaiman reblogs a question a fan had asked him so as to settle a dispute between the fan and their partner concerning Good Omens: Hi Mr Gaiman. My husband and I just watched Good Omens for the ninth time and realised there’s something tartan under the seat in the Bentley when they pick up Anathema, and Aziraphale takes whatever-it-is out when they get back to his bookshop. Our current theories are that it’s a diary or planner (my husband), or it’s a notebook (me – because Aziraphale doesn’t have a phone to take notes on!) Can you settle this? (Tumblr user ‘Zadusk’)

While this may, at first glance, seem like a ‘satellite’ in Seymour Chatman’s terms,6 in relation to audience and fan practices, these kind of questions and disputes are rather common (54). Fans not only have their own set of preferred meanings when they read a text, but often seek for affirmation considering textual authenticity based on the premise that all the existents of the text have a purpose. The ‘tartan’ object, on the surface, does not contribute to the plot in a way that affects the sequence of events further (as opposed to, for example, Agnes Nutter’s book, which does in fact have consequences for characters and plot progression). However, for fans like the Tumblr user above and their partner, these ‘satellite’ existents also have bearing on their interpretation of the text. Neil Gaiman responds that “It’s a tartan box of shortbread. In case they got peckish on the journey” indicates that he is familiar with these disputes among fans and takes them in stride. His witty response is fitting in the sense of the text’s ‘Britishness’ and of Aziraphale simply ‘being himself.’ Good Omens can be identified as a British text because of Neil Gaiman being British and one of the producers of the series being the BBC, as well as the location names of the story or the British accent of most characters. The ‘tartan box of shortbread’ that Gaiman describes further increases this play on Britishness, as it alludes to the Walkers shortbread packaging. The prompt removal of the box by Aziraphale when he gets out of the car is in line with his somewhat prim and proper character and is supported by his eating and drinking habits as well the third episode “Hard Times” (S1 E3 00:13:04). 5

https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/189765925821/hi-mr-gaiman-my-husband-and-i-justwatched-good 6 Chatman differentiates between major and minor plot points, which he calls ‘kernels’ and ‘satellites’ respectively. A satellite, according to Chatman, is “a minor plot point … [that] can be deleted without disturbing the logic of the plot, though its omission will, of course, impoverish the narrative aesthetically” (53–4).

5.1 Good Omens: The Myth and the Prophecy

191

Aziraphale’s hospitality, homeliness and caring nature are repeatedly highlighted in scenes where he tries to positively influence Warlock and prevent him from being a vehicle for evil. Gaiman’s elaboration upon this particular aspect of the text further defines Aziraphale’s character outside of the text, and contributes to further mythologizing the character among the fandom. Gaiman’s ‘all knowing’ness concerning Good Omens shines through in his interactions with the fandom, where he is called upon to settle canonical disputes. To Gaiman’s titbit concerning the box of shortbread, user ‘btab66’ commented: “Aww that’s so adorable” and over 1,600 users (at the time of writing) ‘reblogged’ or ‘liked’ Neil Gaiman’s reply to user ‘Zadusk’s’ query, indicating that the fandom took note of the piece of information, insignificant as it might appear to the plot. Gaiman presents the characters he creates as entities that are separate from his invention. For example, user ‘feanedhell’ wrote to Gaiman on Tumblr7 : So I am finally watching Good Omens, I know, I’m late. Loving it so far but I have to object, during the flashback in Paris Aziraphale says the best crepes are in Paris, that is simply not true, the best Crepes are in Bretagne, Paris wish they had our crepes. A proper crêpe blé noir in Bretagne is amazing, you should try them if you ever get the chance.

To this user’s statement, Gaiman replied: “You need to take that up with Aziraphale, I’m afraid, not with me,” further cementing the characters as mythical figures ‘beyond’ the author’s control. This mythification has its roots in the metafictional quality of fantasy fiction as outlined in Attebery’s structural differentiation of fantasy fiction: “One difference between fantasy and the genres of realism and naturalism is that fantasy typically displays and even celebrates its structure. … This tendency is one reason that fantasies often take on a metafictional dimension” (83). This metafictional dimension highlights the fictitious or even ‘impossible’ nature of a fantasy fiction text, also in relation to defamiliarization through fantasy fiction’s complicated relationship with ‘reality’: Although fantasmatic texts do not attempt to copy nature, it would be quite wrong to assume that they are completely autonomous. They also must necessarily be related to reality but in an oblique rather than straightforward, ‘realistic’ way. (Petzold 14)

7

https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/190876207121/so-i-am-finally-watching-goodomens-i-know-im.

192

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

A text such as Good Omens, with its high level of intertextual references to mythical figures, certainly is metafictional in that it invites the reader to examine the fictionality and the fantastical aspects of the text. This also occurs on the level of audiences making inferences and identifying covert motivations and mythologies within the text. While Chatman addresses that in theory the story abides by the “normal laws of the physical universe,” fantasy fiction is characterised by the very defiance of these laws, and making this defiance obvious through metafictional aesthetics, as will be explored in the following analysis of the episode “Hard Times” (S1 E3).

5.2

Good Omens: A Metafictional Reading

Episode three of the series Good Omens is characterised by diegetic breaks in narrative continuity, both in the episode itself and in comparison with the other episodes. In the previous two episodes, a sense of narrative continuity was maintained through temporal progression and the narrator’s descriptions. As indicated above, the pilot episode begins with the Voice of God narrating how and when the universe came into being, and the audience also sees Adam and Eve expelled from the Garden of Eden after being tempted by Crowley. Furthermore, Crowley and Aziraphale are seen discussing the events with each other. This pronouncement is followed by the credits, indicating the point where the narrative commences, and also that it spans eleven years, which is what the audience would expect to see. In the following episode, “The Book” (S1 E2), the Voice of God further highlights the events that continue to transpire within those eleven years, but also includes the death of the witch Agnes Nutter in the year 1656, emphasizing her importance for the series. Visually, this diegetic break, i.e. the digression from the storyline that was to span the eleven years and highlight the coming of the Antichrist, is made evident by placards in the shots preceding the scene with Agnes Nutter’s prosecution (Fig. 5.1) Such shots with placards that indicate a diegetic break from the Antichrist narrative are also of great significance in the episode “Hard Times,” which illustrates the development of Crowley and Aziraphale’s relationship over the centuries. The features that mark Good Omens as metafictional are particularly conspicuous in “Hard Times.” Employing the placards, the timeline of the episode “Hard Times” is divided up over 6,000 years, of which the following years are focused on: 3004 B.C., 33 A.D., 41 A.D., 537 A.D., 1601 A.D., 1793 A.D., 1862 A.D., 1941 A.D. and 1967 A.D., with their respective significance addressed in the episode. In the scene that covers the year 3004 B.C., the placard indicates that Aziraphale

5.2 Good Omens: A Metafictional Reading

193

Fig. 5.1 Still from the Good Omens episode “The Book” (00:08)

and Crowley are in Mesopotamia, where Noah is building his ark for the ‘Great Flood’ (“Hard Times” S1 E3 00:01:09), although neither Noah nor the ark are depicted, but only pairs of animals being shepherded to, presumably, the ‘Ark.’ There is also a unicorn running away from the ‘Ark,’ which Crowley addresses, and which suggests why unicorns are ‘extinct’ from the contemporary ‘neomatic’ society. The unicorn incident is metafictional in that it exposes the ‘seams’ of the fantastical storyworld. Another instance that emphasizes the fantastical is the scene in 1793 A.D. in which Aziraphale, dressed as an aristocrat, is in France during the French Revolution because he was craving crepes from Paris (“Hard Times” S1 E3 00:11:01). He is imprisoned simply because of his ‘aristo’ appearance and is to be beheaded by the guillotine. He is unable to save himself or perform any miracles because the angels in heaven believe that he has been performing too many “frivolous miracles” (“Hard Times” S1 E3 00:11:26). Crowley steps in and rescues him despite great risk to himself. In this rescue process, a number of ‘impossible’ things happen, such as Aziraphale’s shackled hands being freed by a click of Crowley’s fingers, and Aziraphale’s appearance changing from ‘aristo’ to an ‘ordinary citizen’ with a quick flourish, once again highlighting the series’ unique style of juxtaposing historical pointers with fantastical elements conveyed through visual

194

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

techniques. This points to its metafictional character not only through visual special effects and diegetic improbabilities but also through the temporal diegetic disruptions. Temporal shifts such as the one identified in Good Omens are particularly relevant to fantasy because “they typically occur not at the level of narrative discourse but at that of the story itself. Rather than having a narrator artfully rearrange time in order to heighten suspense or anticipation, fantasy can move its characters into the past or future” (Attebery 88). As the development of Aziraphale and Crowley’s relationship spans 6,000 years in story-time and only 28 minutes in discourse-time, the rearrangement of time at the level of narration is particularly significant. There are also instances in the series that employ the fantastical characteristic of temporal shifts at the diegetic level. A case in point are the deliveries made by Lesley, an ordinary postman (and human), to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. In the episode “The Book,” Lesley delivers a package to the Horseman War in the Middle East, which signals the beginning of the ‘end of days’ (S1 E2 00:03:00). In “Hard Times,” the audience is introduced to the Horseman Famine, who is disguised as a businessman that owns a number of food outlets and diners and is seen enjoying fine dining because he “loves people not eating enough at fancy restaurants” (S1 E3 00:45:59). Lesley delivers a package to him in what the placard at the start of the scene claims to be Iowa, USA. The time elapsed between the two deliveries in story-time is only a day, but given the spatial distance of the settings, this would be impossible. By Saturday morning, Lesley is back in England to make two more local deliveries to Horseman Pollution and Horseman Death in episode four titled “Saturday Morning Funtime” (S1 E4 00:08:30). While making the last delivery, Lesley is run over and killed by a truck—yet, although dead, he is having an ‘out of body’ experience that only lasts long enough for him to deliver a message to the Horseman, who says: “Now, don’t think of it as dying. Think of it as leaving early to avoid the rush,” implying that Lesley is about to be whisked away to an ‘afterlife’ (S1 E4 00:11:06). Another aspect that points to the impossibility of Lesley’s deliveries is the conversation he has with his partner Maud before making the local deliveries. When Maud protests his going to work on a Saturday morning, Lesley replies that while the delivery company he works for is only about 80 years old, the ‘delivery job’ was ‘booked’ by the head office approximately 6,000 years ago (S1 E4 00:05:02)—a logistical impossibility that underlines the fantastical aspects of the entire situation and is achieved through minimal special effects, as Lesley is not being zapped from one location to other but one can markedly identify him and his delivery van at all locations. Special effects are, however, made obvious when, for example, Horseman Pollution wears their ‘magically blackened’ crown or when the

5.2 Good Omens: A Metafictional Reading

195

Horseman Death has Lesley whisked away in a dark cloud after the message has been delivered. With these scenes, it becomes clear that fantasy fiction texts need not shine through special visual effects but that fantastical elements can also be inferred from narrative aspects such as temporal changes. According to Attebery, the manipulation of time on the diegetic level as well as the narration “invite(s) metafictional readings. … however, metafictional fantasy tends not to close in on itself, implying that there is no connection between discourse and reality, nothing outside the text” (89). Hence, the fantastical perception of reality in Good Omens and its relationship to the audiences’ understanding of reality is achieved through those very structural features that make the text fantastical—such as the temporal irregularities embedded in the story—and the shift in the basic order of things or ‘laws of the known universe’—e.g. the miracles performed by the angels and demons—which expose the ‘seams’ that make up a work of fantastic fiction, which can further be illustrated with the example of the aberrations caused by Adam Young, the ‘Antichrist’ in Good Omens. In a conversation with Anathema, Adam Young learned about conspiracy theories through the magazines that Anathema lent him, and which left a deep impression on him. By virtue of being the Antichrist, Adam is able to ‘make things happen’ as if by magic, such as when he makes an entire nuclear reactor disappear simply by thinking about it. The question here is not how Adam makes that happen, but how the audience infers that it is indeed Adam who made it happen. During the discussion with Anathema, Adam learns of a number of things “not taught at school” (“Hard Times” S1 E3 00:36:07). Anathema mentions “clubbing baby seals,” “genetically modified food” and “nuclear power stations,” which Adam comments are “rubbish.” The scene contains a closeup of Anathema when she mentions the ‘conspiracy theories,’ which is interspersed with a closeup shot of Adam focusing on what Anathema says. Concerning the nuclear power stations, Adam brings a child’s perspective to them when he says, “we went to one on a school trip, and there was nothing bubbling, and there wasn’t any green smoke and there weren’t anyone in those space suits, and it was so dull,” to which Anathema replies, “Well, yes, but we need to get rid of them.” Later in the episode, Adam relays what he learned from Anathema to his father, who dismisses him (“Hard Times” S1 E3 00:49:43). In one of the final scenes of the episode, Adam reads a magazine that features nuclear power reactors on the cover, and finally is seen going to sleep, presumably thinking about what he just read (“Hard Times” S1 E3 00:52:00). The shot then zooms in on the sherbet lemon candy lying next to Adam on his bed. When the scene then cuts to a nuclear power station that is abuzz with activity, the reactor is depicted as completely empty except for a single sherbet lemon candy in there, similar to

196

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

the one on Adam’s bed, thus enabling the inference that it is Adam who, through his ‘miraculous powers’ made the reactor disappear even though the station continues to produce power—again without any special effects, thus firmly placing the fantastical on the diegetic level rather than visual discourse.

5.3

Good Omens: A Modern Fantasy

Edward James identifies J. R. R. Tolkien, along with C. S. Lewis, as the father of modern fantasy (James 62–3). The body of research material that Tolkien assembled and created for his Lord of the Rings trilogy centred around the fictional land of Middle Earth, which has played a significant role in identifying key characteristics of fantasy fiction (James 64). A number of these characteristics are included in Clute and Grant’s Encyclopaedia of Fantasy. Rather than treating these terms and characteristics as a ‘checklist’ that mark the genre of fantasy fiction, I use them as discussion points to elaborate how the conventions of the genre are perceived by audiences which appropriate and recirculate the fantasy text. I thus examine the manner in which Good Omens problematizes these conventions and finds its place as a work of modern fantasy. A modern fantasy such as Lord of the Rings and a significant number of works of fantasy fiction afterwards feature the following characteristics: thinning, wrongness, quest, recognition and eucatastrophe (James 64, italics in original). In relation to Lord of the Rings, James describes thinning as “a decline from its former state, partly due to the actions of Sauron, the Dark Lord” (64). Thinning thus requires an instigator that causes the decline of the storyworld. In Good Omens, the thinning is the deteriorating state of the world once the Antichrist’s powers began to manifest, notably through an 11-year-old, which corresponds to Pratchett and Gaiman’s use of irony and satire in their works, as the fate of the world in the Good Omens universe seemingly rests on this young 11-year-old. As a result of this, one may identify the disappearance of the nuclear reactor, or the ‘discovery’ of Atlantis as related to the thinning. Moreover, thinning in Good Omens is brought about by celestial beings such as the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse or the ‘Hell Hound’ that is sent from hell to be by Adam’s side during the apocalypse. Therefore, in Good Omens, thinning takes multiple forms as a result of there being more than one instigator. Whereas wrongness in Lord of the Rings manifests in the Nazgul or the ‘Eye of Sauron,’ (James 64) it takes a comical yet fantastical undertone in Good Omens. All the ‘odd’ happenings that Witchfinder Newton Pulsifer associates with Tadfield, where the Antichrist lives, imply the Antichrist as the cause of the

5.3 Good Omens: A Modern Fantasy

197

wrongness, which causes the thinning. The wrongness in Tadfield also explains the reason for Anathema’s presence in the village. As a result of her occultist abilities, she finds herself at Tadfield and is seeking the cause of the wrongness so as to set it right. In this sense, Anathema and Newton can be identified as attempting to heal the wrongness (James 64). The correction or healing of the wrongness is characterised as a quest that the heroes embark upon. In Lord of the Rings, this quest is undertaken by the Fellowship of the Ring, who aim to destroy the One Ring. In Good Omens, a number of characters seek to prevent the ‘end of days’ or the apocalypse, Newton, Anathema, Crowley and Aziraphale. Crowley and Aziraphale, however, may be identified as the ‘heroes’ beyond the quest they embark upon. As principle characters, they have more screen time than any others and are credited before any other cast members. Their specific miraculous or fantastical powers also elevate their standing in the quest, as they are not only immortal but also possess the foreknowledge to prevent the apocalypse from happening, indicating that the fantastical abilities of the heroes on the quest are embedded in the genre itself. The text, therefore, is fantastical because of the traits of significant characters. As to the typology of quests suggested by Mendlesohn, the one in Good Omens that requires saving the Earth and all of mankind from the apocalypse can be identified as an ‘intrusion quest’ in which “the fantastic breaks into the primary world (which might or might not be our own)” (James and Mendlesohn 2). This definition indicates a varied connotation of the ‘primary’ world: Tolkien’s greatest achievement, however, in retrospect, was in normalizing the idea of a secondary world. Although he retains the hint that the action of LOTR takes place in the prehistory of our own world, that is not sustained, and to all intents and purposes Middle-earth is a separate creation, operating totally outside the world of our experience. This has become so standard in modern fantasy that it is not easy to realize how unusual it was before Tolkien. (James 65)

Relying on Clute’s claims, James declares that after Tolkien, it was no longer necessary for fantasy writers to justify the worlds they created by providing a link to what Tolkien dubs the ‘Primary World’ created by God, and a writer’s ‘sub-creation’ of a Secondary World (James 65). Concerning Good Omens, one is certainly provided with points that serve as a bridge between the ‘Primary World’ and a ‘Secondary World,’ which includes Heaven and Hell and its occupants. Most of the events of Good Omens seem to take place in the ‘Primary World’ that is recognizable to audiences largely through references to historical events, such as the Blitz during the Second World War or the performance of Hamlet at the Globe Theatre in Elizabethan London. Intertextual and biblical allusions,

198

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

in turn, underline the ‘Secondary World’ created by Gaiman (and, in the novel, Pratchett). Considering that according to Tolkien, the ‘Primary World’ is created by God, the fact that the narrator in Good Omens is the ‘Voice of God’ adds an interesting spin to the relationship between the Primary and Secondary Worlds, which arguably mirrors the relationship that Petzold addresses as that between the fantasmic and the neomatic world. The ‘Voice of God’ in Good Omens serves as an overt narrator not only by means of a voice over, but in some cases also by interacting with characters directly, e.g. when the narrator inquires after the ‘Flaming Sword’ that was given to Aziraphale (“Hard Times” S1 E3 00:00:24), which further characterizes the narrator as omnipresent and omniscient similar to the ‘God’ of the Primary World. The Secondary World, in turn, is present mainly in the portrayal of the existents and events in the text, such as the appearance of the demon Crowley. Crowley, who tempted Eve into eating the ‘Forbidden Fruit’ has snake-like eyes, wears a black robe with black wings and has red hair. As the series progresses, he develops a personality that distinguishes him from other demons. He is attached to his Bentley, terrorises his houseplants to ensure that they grow lush and verdant, and he is rather lazy. He has an arrangement with Aziraphale that they do not pit themselves against each other as they would simply ‘cancel each other out’ (“Hard Times” S1 E3 00:07:15). In this sense, one could identify Crowley as an element of the Secondary World that Gaiman has crafted, complete with its own set of rules. Eventually, the fantastic makes itself known as a manifestation of the Secondary World within the Primary World when Crowley suggests that he can work a miracle to rescue Aziraphale on numerous occasions (eg. from the Nazis or from being beheaded during the French Revolution) or to ensure that Shakespeare’s Hamlet grows popular at Aziraphale’s request. The fantastical thus is embodied by the elements of the Secondary World, which James claims to be “part of the basic structure of many fantasies” (65). Furthermore, Tolkien’s employment of plot devices is “commonly found in subsequent fantasies” (James 65). Among these is the journey around the map of fantasyland, which is the secondary world. As is the case with the God cast into the role of creator of the Primary World and the Voice of God as narrator, the map of fantasyland in the case of Good Omens is a complex feature by virtue of the space portrayed. The majority of the segments in the Secondary World are the same or similar to the Primary World, such as small English villages or city neighbourhoods like Soho. However, the diegetic spaces in Good Omens also include Heaven and Hell, with its own mise-en-scène, which can arguably be deemed as fantastical and therefore categorically belonging to the Secondary World created by the text’s producers. Moreover, the plot device of the journey is

5.3 Good Omens: A Modern Fantasy

199

something that Good Omens accomplishes through the fantastical diegetic spaces despite its similarity to the Primary World. According to James, Tolkien uses escape, separation, temptation and walking as further elements of fantasy fiction (65, emphasis mine). James provides the example of “Gandalf’s escape from the Balrog” and links it to Christ’s Resurrection (65). The instance of escape in Good Omens can be found in the case of the Antichrist himself, who, through comic confusion, escapes the notice and monitoring of celestial forces on both sides and thus causes the complications that drive the plot forward. Additionally, escape as an element can also be identified in the literal escape of Crowley and Aziraphale towards the end when they are being reprimanded by Hell and Heaven respectively (“The Very Last Day of the Rest of Their Lives” S1 E6; henceforth referred to as “The Very Last Day” 00:32:24). Interestingly, in both cases escape happens by means of mistaken identity. In the first example, Warlock, the son of the American ambassador, is mistaken as the Antichrist, which leads Crowley and Aziraphale to play a role in his upbringing and attempt to influence him, while in the latter example, Crowley and Aziraphale switch their vessels (or bodies), which allows them to escape death by holy water and hellfire respectively (“The Very Last Day” S1 E6 00:43:00). As for separation, both examples for escape also relate to separation. The Antichrist is separated from those who are expected to monitor him and bring about the Apocalypse and Crowley and Aziraphale are also separated from each other to face their punishment. They go through such a separation a number of times, e.g., when they argue over ‘Holy Water’ that Crowley requests from Aziraphale in the year 1862 at St. James Park, or in their approaches to finding the Antichrist in Tadfield, or when they are reporting to their respective ‘offices’ in ‘Heaven’ or ‘Hell,’ allowing them to embark on separate journeys around the numerous locations on the map of fantasyland. James furthermore identifies temptation as a device that “brings drama into the confrontation between good and evil” (65). The complexity concerning God as creator of the Primary World and the Voice of God as narrator of the Secondary World in Good Omens also extends to the element of temptation. In the traditional sense, good is represented by the angels and celestial figures while it is the demons and hellish creatures that embody evil. However, as with the many ‘twists’ on traditional plot devices that mark the series, Good Omens thrives on the shift in these traditional connotations, occasionally making them a subject of mockery and parody. The angel Aziraphale and the demon Crowley join forces to save mankind from an Apocalypse that is engineered by ‘Hell,’ with heavenly figures doing nothing to prevent it as they, too, are spoiling for a fight with Hell to decide ‘once and for all’ which body is superior. Considering the predicament

200

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

faced by all of mankind should this supernatural battle ensue, Aziraphale and Crowley would certainly be considered ‘good,’ while other angels and demons would be collectively seen as ‘evil.’ Gaiman often toys with the idea of what it means to be ‘good’ or ‘evil’. One of these is when Crowley refuses to be thanked or be called ‘good’ when he aids Aziraphale, occasionally even getting furious about it (“Hard Times” S1 E3 00:11:10). Other examples are the characters Agnes and Anathema Nutter. Agnes Nutter, a witch persecuted by Witchfinder Pulsifer, in the process of her execution manages to kill those who had been condemning her, including the Witchfinder. She leaves to her descendants a book full of her prophecies about the world to come, all of which are deemed accurate. The book is inherited in the present timeline by her descendant Anathema, who defines herself as an ‘occultist,’ mostly a negatively connoted term. However, she also plays a significant role in averting the Apocalypse, thus categorising her as ‘good’ for mankind. Tellingly, she accomplishes this feat with the help of Newton Pulsifer, a descendant of Witchfinder Pulsifer. The parallelism with which both characters transcend their negatively connoted ancestors further plays on the elements of modern fantasy fiction through a twist in traditional narrative structures, intertextual references, and characterization, which in one manner subvert audience expectations and yet meet the expectations of seasoned fans of Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman’s works.

5.4

Good Omens: Fantasy Fiction Meets Fanfiction

Fan audiences’ appropriation of a text through fan practices is performed not only to prolong one’s enjoyment of the text but to meet the very expectations the audience member has concerning the text. With the author identified as the ‘sub-creator’ of the ‘Secondary World,’ one can argue for a ‘Tertiary World’ that is created by those audience members who engage in fannish appropriation and textual remodelling. It is indeed a remodelling in the sense that the audience member as author takes the ‘Secondary World’ and adds a further level of ‘subcreation’ that makes the text their own. In this section, I explore this notion of the fan-made ‘Tertiary World’ by examining a work of fanfiction from the Good Omens universe in relation to the characteristics of fanfiction as laid out by Francesca Coppa. Coppa introduces a ‘5 + 1’ rule by fans in The Fanfiction Reader: Folk Tales for the Digital Age. The 5 + 1 stands for “Five Things That Fanfiction Is, and One That It Isn’t” (2). According to Coppa, these features of fanfiction are:

5.4 Good Omens: Fantasy Fiction Meets Fanfiction

201

1. Fanfiction is fiction created outside of the literary marketplace 2. Fanfiction is fiction that rewrites and transforms other stories 3. Fanfiction is fiction that rewrites and transforms stories currently owned by others 4. Fanfiction is fiction written within and to the standards of a particular fannish community 5. Fanfiction is speculative fiction about character rather than about the world 6. (+1) Fanfiction is made for free, but not “for nothing” (Francesca Coppa 2–15) With the concept of the ‘Tertiary World’ Coppa’s third and fifth rule are of particular import as they highlight the significance of augmenting the already crafted ‘Secondary World’ and illustrate that the focus of what I call the ‘Tertiary World’ created by fans are characters. Like most other texts that gained fan traction, Good Omens developed a dedicated community that engaged in creating fanfiction and fan art. Among the many works of fanfiction dedicated to the text, the most popular ‘tag’ associated with Good Omens is that of the ‘Ineffable Husbands,’ which is centred on the relationship between Aziraphale and Crowley. The Ineffable Husbands The ‘Ineffable Husbands’ is the most popular ‘ship’ in the Good Omens fandom. In a glossary to her seminal work, Sheenagh Pugh defines ‘Shippers’ as “Fanfic writers and readers for whom relationships between characters are paramount” (244). For the shippers of the ‘Ineffable Husbands,’ the relationship between the titular ‘husbands’ Aziraphale and Crowley is of utmost importance. In weighing fanfiction as a genre in its own right with its own literary rules and merits, Pugh argues that it is composed primarily when dedicated fans either want ‘more of’ or ‘more from’ the text (19). In the case of wanting ‘more of’ the text, Pugh employs the example of Sherlock Holmes as conceived by Arthur Conan Doyle: However many cases the great man solved, it would never have been enough for them [the fans]; they would never have been ready for the story to end. They did not particularly want Conan Doyle to do anything differently, just to carry on with what he was doing, and when his death intervened they stepped into the breach. (Pugh 19)

Pugh indicates how fanfiction authors take up the baton to ‘continue the saga’ so as to ensure that the fandom continues to receive fresh material and enjoy the universe and its components that they are fans of. In case of the desire to want ‘more from’ a particular text, Pugh provides the example of Star Trek. While Star Trek was incredibly popular with its audiences, a significant number of female

202

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

fans felt compelled to expound upon the text’s characters in the show to give them more emotional depth and more significant parts to play in the Star Trek universe, which they accomplished by writing fanfiction (19–20). Pugh claims that most early fanfiction writers were women: This was, I think, a case of wanting “more from” rather than “more of.” Some fans, often female, wanted the action to slow down enough to give the characters and relationships time to evolve; they wanted more overt emotion and personal interaction than the scriptwriters were giving them. They wanted vulnerability in the characters too, so that they could feel with and for them. (20)

In the case of the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ trope, one can argue that the fanfiction writers of this trope also want ‘more from’ the text, specifically concerning the relationship between Crowley and Aziraphale. The Good Omens shipping wiki has a page dedicated to the ‘Ineffable Husbands’8 that describes it as the “nonbinary ship between Aziraphale and Crowley from the Good Omens fandom.” The prominence of the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ ship within the fandom indicates that the fans wanted to experience the two characters differently than what was provided in the novel and the series. According to the fandom wiki page of the ‘Ineffable Husbands,’ the state of this ‘ship’ is ‘semi-canonical’ and the ‘Status of Relationship’ is indicated as ‘Best Friends: In Love (stated by Neil Gaiman),’ which indicates that this trope is perhaps an ascended fanon.9 The page also states: “On AO3,10 Ineffable Husbands is the most written ship for both Crowley and Aziraphale.” The great number of fanfiction works dedicated to the trope highlights its popularity. On Neil Gaiman’s Tumblr, the user ‘moonkidphrase’ reblogged user ‘fandom’s’ “A History of Good Omens”11 that details the history of the text’s popularity and reception: People have been shipping Aziraphale and Crowley since as early as 2001, with people on LiveJournal calling them ineffable since 2005. Ineffable Husbands was solidified as their ship name when it began to trend in March, coinciding with the release of the first trailer. By June 3rd, the pairing had debuted at #1 on the Ships

8

https://shipping.fandom.com/wiki/ineffable_husbands. When “a media producer uses fannish ideas, jokes, or other contributions in canonic texts,” the fanon becomes an ascended fanon (Reijnders et. al 6). 10 AO3 stands for ‘Archive of Our Own,’ a fanfiction archive run by the Organisation for Transformative Works, of which Francesca Coppa is a board member. 11 https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/189458398546/moonkidphrase-neil-gaiman-contin uants 9

5.4 Good Omens: Fantasy Fiction Meets Fanfiction

203

list, where it stayed for twelve weeks, until September 9th when it was displaced by Reddie (Richie Tozier & Eddie Kaspbrak) after the release of IT Chapter 2. Ineffable Husbands is the ship of the year for multiple reasons: they are an angel and a demon—not human, and therefore not defined by their gender or sexuality, they’ve spent 6,000 years taking risks to help save each other, a love that surpasses the end of the world. They also have completely opposite approaches to plants, which @dotstronaut captured perfectly in the ship’s top post from 2019. (Tumblr)

The blog post confirms the ship’s popularity stemming from its defiance of normative gender roles and sexuality. Neil Gaiman’s reblogging and engagement with this post also suggests his affirmation of the ship’s popularity with the fans of Good Omens. He writes: “This is so lovely. And inspiring. And an honour. Thank you, Tumblr folk. I think my only correction of any kind would be that people have been shipping Crowley and Aziraphale since the Book was published in 1990.” Fannish expression concerning the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ ship, given its long history before the release of the show, may have functioned as a paratext in the sense of influencing how the ship is played out in the series. The affirmation of the relationship between the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ also comes from the actors who play Crowley and Aziraphale in the series, David Tennant and Michael Sheen. In an interview recorded by Showbizjunkies.com,12 Tennant and Sheen discuss their characters’ relationship as follows: Michael Sheen: They compliment each other so well, the characters. The better you are at trying to be your character, actually what it does is it makes the relationship better. That’s the engine of the story and the engine of that relationship. It was easier for me because I decided that early on that Aziraphale just loves Crowley. And that’s difficult for him because they’re on opposite sides and he doesn’t agree with him on stuff. But it does really help as an actor to go, ‘My objective in this scene is to not show you how much I love you. And just gaze longingly at you all the time.’ That really does happen. David Tennant: But then Crowley absolutely loves Aziraphale. He hates that he loves him. It’s really annoying for him. So, they’re both going through that. Michael Sheen: There is a sort of wonderful love story in this. I think a lot of the fans of the book kind of like that when they think about the characters, there’s an interesting love story going on. It’s never explicit in this, but it’s there. It is there.

12

https://www.showbizjunkies.com/tv/good-omens-david-tennant-michael-sheen-interv iew/

204

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

David Tennant: There’s something about that kind of co-dependency and that kind of eternal relationship that has a kind of mythical quality to it and yet is very human and mundane. Michael Sheen: And they’ve just got each other. There is no one else. .... No one else could understand what it was like be an angel or a demon on earth for all these centuries. (Rebecca Murray)

Tennant and Sheen indicate the existence of something very ‘human’ about the relationship between Crowley and Aziraphale that appeals to the viewer, despite those two characters not being human. This is reflected in the strong affinity that Crowley and Aziraphale have towards humankind. Their curiosity, preoccupation and, later, love for humanity remains an underlying theme in the series, as they wish to avert the Apocalypse to preserve their way of life amidst humans and enjoy the delights of human quirks by cutting themselves off from their respective ‘Head Offices.’ The appeal of being and living among humans and exploring the nuances of the relationship between the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ is a defining feature of works of fanfiction in this trope. While fanfiction does govern and regulate itself with fans acting as agents to enforce the regulations, it can certainly be identified as a tertiary augmentation to the ‘Secondary World’ created by the producer of the text. Among the numerous works of fanfiction on the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ uploaded by fans on AO3, I examine the text Five Times Aziraphale Saves Crowley (And One Time He Fails) written by ‘Captain_Kieren’ (henceforth referred to as Five Times).13 The title is reminiscent of Coppa’s 5 + 1 features that outline works of fanfiction, which will be used to highlight its characteristics. This text is set outside of the eleven years that cover the coming of the Antichrist and the Apocalypse which forms the main body of the series. As outlined above, the third episode “Hard Times” elaborates upon ‘the Arrangement’ and the relationship between Aziraphale and Crowley over many millennia is also temporally removed from this time span. There are six chapters in Five Times, each of which begins with an approximate time of the setting. The first chapter titled ‘Holy Water’ is set in ‘London, 12 years before the end of the world,’ the second chapter titled ‘Exorcised’ is set in ‘Venice, 200 years before the end of the world,’ and so on, reminiscent of the placards indicated in Fig. 19. In this sense, each chapter could be identified as a substitute for a scene that features Aziraphale and Crowley. While the series itself features a narrator and often uses external focalization, e.g., when the Voice of God inquires after the Flaming Sword, the 13

https://archiveofourown.org/works/19103938/chapters/45391867#workskin.

5.4 Good Omens: Fantasy Fiction Meets Fanfiction

205

work of fanfiction does not feature an overt narrator. The narration is presented with the character’s perspective, which allows the writer to illustrate how Crowley and Aziraphale perceive each other, thereby providing an opportunity to examine their individual perception of their relationship. Five Times can be deemed as democratic in more than one way. AO3 user ‘Captain_Kieren’ makes their work readable for free on a fanfiction platform. It does not require a publication process in the traditional sense but is made available to fans worldwide with a shared desire to continue their enjoyment of a certain text and its characters, thus being positioned outside of the literary marketplace (Coppa 2–15). Less obvious democratic features of this particular work are the various ‘tags’ associated with the text, which work as filters and enable fans to find precisely the type of fanfiction they wish to read. This highlights that fans can turn to fanfiction with a particular need concerning the original text and their interpretation of it. The additional tags used by the author of Five Times are highlighted in Fig. 5.2. The ‘additional tags’ section is also where the fanfiction author addresses the tropes among the many popular ones that exist exclusively for works of fanfiction. Aside from these tags, the work can also be filtered by its popularity, which is evaluated through the numbers of ‘Bookmarks,’ ‘Comments’ or ‘Kudos’ on AO3.

Fig. 5.2 Categories that the fanfiction text Five Times Aziraphale Saves Crowley (And One Time He Fails) falls into according to the text’s author, user ‘Captain_Kiernan’

The democratic characteristic of fanfiction, especially when it comes to the plethora of works with tropes to choose from, is based on the assumption that those who engage with fanfiction educate themselves about the most common

206

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

tropes concerning works of fanfiction. Hence, fanfiction writers and readers carry with them a significant portion of knowledge concerning the ‘original’ text they are reading and writing about. Some of the tropes of fanfiction are evident in Fig. 5.2, such as the ‘Category,’ which the author claims to be ‘M/M’—which indicates that this is a work of male slash fiction, signifying that the work of fanfiction leans into a (perhaps even sexual) relationship between the main characters. Fanfiction has a long-standing tradition of slash fiction originating with the first ‘slash’ pair from Star Trek, Kirk and Spock. Slash fiction highlighted marginalized desires in fanfiction to be vocalized and eventually became a popular trope in works of fanfiction. In the case of Good Omens slash fiction, however, the M/M pairing can certainly be identified as controversial because celestial beings are, even according to Gaiman,14 not gendered. In this sense, the genre of fanfiction is additionally democratic as it allows space for the fanfiction writer and reader to illustrate their desire to see the Aziraphale and Crowley pairing as male slash. Another aspect that becomes evident through the filters and tags of Five Times is the use of characters created by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett. Based on the existence of a body of literature that features a demon named Crowley and other archangels such as Michael and Gabriel, which also feature in the work of fanfiction, ‘Captain_Kiernan’s’ work appears as original as Gaiman and Pratchett’s, adding another layer of intertextuality. Hence fanfiction, like fantasy fiction in general, works to mythologize certain existents by developing a body of literature dedicated to these existents. However, in this form of mythologization, the fanfiction text also adheres to the second principle of fanfiction suggested by Coppa, i.e. ‘Fanfiction is fiction that rewrites and transforms other stories.’ The transformation works in two ways. Firstly, the canon of the ‘original text’ transforms as it merges with fanon such as the popular trope of the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ and, secondly, through adding a layer of intertextual references for those who do engage with works of fanfiction, thus altering their perception of the storyworld and its components. Coppa’s second principle also leans into the notion of other popular tropes in works of fanfiction such as sequels, prequels, crossovers, in-between scenes and alternate universes. According to Pugh, a crossover is defined as a “story in which characters from two different source properties interact” (242). The argument for originality can be problematized with the concept of a crossover in texts such as Good Omens that in themselves are already heavily intertextual. While ‘Captain_Kiernan’s’ Five Times does not fall 14

https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/188765930786/hello-neil-i-have-a-question-and-athank-you

5.4 Good Omens: Fantasy Fiction Meets Fanfiction

207

into the crossover category, it does nod to it in the second chapter ‘Exorcised’,15 which opens with a note that says: Nobody: absolutely not a soul: Me: SUPERNATURAL REFERENCE (‘Captain_Kiernan’)

The author’s note here implies that they have made a reference to another text, CW’s long running series Supernatural (2005–2020) in this particular chapter. While ‘Captain_Kiernan’ does not lean into a crossover in the sense of writing a character from Supernatural into their Good Omens fanfiction, they do so by invoking the exorcism chant that became popular among the fans of Supernatural.16 The inclusion of this reference to another text cements the text’s identity as a work of fanfiction, allowing for a rewriting or transformation of another story. Furthermore, Coppa emphasizes ownership as a key characteristic of fanfiction, “Fanfiction is fiction that rewrites and transforms stories currently owned by others” (6). This particular principle draws upon the archontic nature of fanfiction. Fanfiction builds upon a text that is written by ‘others.’ Drawing on Derrida’s definition of the archive, Abigail Derecho identified fanfiction as archontic in the sense that it is perpetually open and accrued upon and also used by marginalized groups for critical commentary (61–7). According to Derecho, in the seventeenth century, the male ownership of texts circulated among the public was, at a certain point, challenged by entries made to the archive by women, which was in direct conflict with the male authored texts, but also necessary for the female voice to be heard (67). As a result, despite the ownership of a text or a body of text rested with a particular dominant group, its hegemonic practices were challenged when the subordinate group found its voice by adding to the archive. In contemporary writing practices, the ‘subordinate’ group is composed of the fanfiction authors who treat the text as archontic and add to it, often with an agenda to be critical or inclusive, while the dominant position rest with the author of the text who does own the components of the text that the fanfiction author uses, often imposing their legal rights of ownership to prevent their work from being ‘hijacked’ by fanfiction authors. An example of this is Anne Rice. Pugh examines accounts from Rice’s website and interactions to highlight her objection with fanfiction: 15

https://archiveofourown.org/works/19103938/chapters/45391915#workskin. The show Supernatural is focused on the Winchester brothers who hunt supernatural creatures. In numerous encounters with demons during the show’s 15 year run, characters perform exorcism by reciting a Latin chant.

16

208

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

“In her [Rice’s] view “her characters” belong to her; they sprang fully formed from her head and only she has a right to play with them, to decide what they would or would not do and how they shall develop—even, indeed, whether they shall live or die” (Pugh 15). Pugh particularly explores the commercial aspect of Rice’s attitude towards the ownership of her texts and characters as it enables her to earn a significant sum of money. However, fanfiction is, in most cases if not all, a labour of love and not for profit making, as Coppa indicates with her ‘ + 1’ principle in that “Fanfiction is made for free, but not ‘for nothing.’” Contrary to Rice, Neil Gaiman encourages fanfiction concerning his texts, and while he admits he does not read fanfiction written on his texts,17 he himself wrote fanfiction of works by H. P. Lovecraft and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle,18 highlighting his endorsement of this particular practice of fan communities. By doing so, it can be argued that Gaiman supports fanfiction as a labour of love by the fans of the text, and that it is seemingly this affect towards fan appropriation and getting more of and more from a particular text that justifies the statement that fanfiction is not made ‘for nothing.’ Additionally, Good Omens employs characters that are canonical in the sense of possessing a canonical body of literature that features them, such as ‘God’ or the ‘Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse’ or even a demon named ‘Crowley,’ which can lead one to argue for Gaiman (and Pratchett for the novel) having treated these characters as archontic in the sense that he furnished them with attributes that defined his perception of these characters, which is precisely what fanfiction authors tend to do to the characters they love—make them their own. Therefore, it would be improbable for Gaiman to establish ownership over the character of, for example, ‘God,’ in a way that would through copyright and ownership laws, prevent other individuals from writing about them, even if they do so in the context of Good Omens. Therefore, while Gaiman is certainly in a position to exercise his ownership over the text Good Omens, the prominence of fanfiction texts set in the Good Omens universe suggests how ownership does not stand at odds with the desire for appropriation and circulation of the appropriated text among the fandom. According to Coppa’s fourth and fifth principle concerning fanfiction, she asserts that fanfiction is “fiction written within and to the standards of a particular fannish community” and that it is “speculative fiction about character rather than about the world.” Elaborating upon the former, Coppa argues that fanfiction is 17

https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/188040731516/hi-neil-just-curious-have-you-evercome. 18 https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/186169517411/hello-youre-happy-with-people-wri ting.

5.4 Good Omens: Fantasy Fiction Meets Fanfiction

209

“fiction produced inside the community and within the culture of fandom. One could argue that every girl to some degree invents fanfiction for herself: alone in her bedroom, she wonders “what if” and changes the story in her head” (7). Working further with this thought experiment of the fans’ ‘what if’ concerning the text, Coppa asserts that when this thought experiment is written and circulated among fellow fans is when it can be identified as fanfiction “and begin to be shaped to community norms and expectations” (8). Calling fanfiction a “case study in community production and reception,” Coppa seeks to apply the laws of community formation and functioning to those who share and read works of fanfiction and that within this community, fans are “people who have been in fandom for a while, and in several fandoms over time, have been exposed to and/ or accultured into a set of practices and values that has had some continuity” (8). The exposure and development of those values and practices that define the fanfiction community are also what make it democratic. Fanfiction works organized by tags as seen in Fig. 20 exist so since those are the tags that fanfiction readers have sought over time. For example, the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ trope, whose popularity I discuss above, is one of these tags. Other instances of the regulations of the self-regulating fanfiction community also point towards the beta-reading culture or the commenting culture, where fans leave comments appreciating or criticising the work of fanfiction that they consume. Fanfiction as a community divides itself by these distinct practices and defining features that allows for navigation within the community. For example, a fan may opt for a particular pairing of characters of a particular text, and then have the option to view fanfiction that features this pairing in a platonic or sexual sense, that is to say, fanfiction is saturated with enough texts and tropes to satisfy the needs of most if not all fans concerning what they want from the text. ‘Captain_Kiernan’s’ fanfiction Five Times, as illustrated in Fig. 20, specifically caters to fanfiction readers that belong to the age group ‘Teen and Above’ and are looking for the Aziraphale/ Crowley pairing, among other additional tags such as ‘hurt/comfort’ or ‘fluff,’ both of which belong to the jargon of fanfiction communities as well as other tags such as ‘Greek Mythology’ or ‘minotaur.’ Furthermore, ‘Captain_Kiernan’s’ fanfiction Five Times can certainly be examined in light of Coppa’s assertion that fanfiction is concerned with character(s) of a text as opposed to the storyworld. Sheenagh Pugh asserts that fanfiction authors often regard canon as ‘raw material’ when composing fanfiction. Identifying and understanding the ready-made cast of characters that fanfiction readers are already aware of is key to composing fanfiction that readers would respond positively to because this ready-made cast is already ascribed set characteristics to in the ‘original’ text (Pugh 69). This

210

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

comprehension is necessary perhaps due to the affect exhibited towards the characters by fanfiction readers and writers, who do not think of them in ownership terms i.e., ‘my characters’ but identify them as belonging collectively to the fandom community that loves them, i.e., seeing them as ‘our characters.’ According to Pugh, this ‘love’ for the characters is key because: Most fanfic writers are convinced they could improve on something about it; that is why many of them write. But because they care about it, they want it shaped rather than misshapen, bent rather than broken. And for no aspect is that more true than for the treatment of characters, for whom many fanfic writers and readers quite genuinely feel love (Pugh 67)

Additionally, fanfiction authors often strive for the mimetic effect when employing the ready-made cast of characters in their work. Characters are embedded with distinctive traits and voices by their authors in a way that it is only by miming these distinct traits and voices that a fanfiction author can truly hook fanfiction readers, especially those who identify themselves as ‘character junkies’ and wish to read fanfiction that exclusively features their favoured character(s): “So whatever other talents a fanfic writer has and wishes to practice, she must to some degree be mimetic, able to reproduce the character, created by writers, actors and others, who has become familiar, even real, to the reader” (Pugh 70). Considering ‘Captain_Kiernan’s’ fanfiction Five Times, some of these aspects can certainly be identified and seen as coinciding with Coppa’s fifth principle of the fanfiction speculating about the character than the world. Each of the fanfiction’s chapters deals with an event that enables an interaction between the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ and allows one to observe their dynamic relationship. Some of these chapters dive into what may be considered as historic or mythological events to then speculate about how Aziraphale and Crowley may react or interact with the particular event in the backdrop. An example of this is the third chapter in the fanfiction text titled, ‘Thrown,’19 wherein Crowley has been ‘assigned’ to kill the ‘minotaur’—a popular figure in Greek mythology. In some accounts of the myth, it is Theseus, the king of Athens, who ends up slaying the minotaur. While the fanfiction author ‘Captain_Kiernan’ alludes to this, it is not what ends up happening in their version of the tale. The user writes:

19

https://archiveofourown.org/works/19103938/chapters/45458833#workskin.

5.4 Good Omens: Fantasy Fiction Meets Fanfiction

211

So, this is how it happens. Theseus, king of Athens, is not a hero in any sense of the word. He is not led through the labyrinth by a golden thread, nor does he kill the Minotaur. In fact, Theseus dies inside the labyrinth after wandering through its twisting halls for three days without water. Where these myths come from, Crowley has no idea. They’re all complete nonsense. Crowley finds the loser-king’s corpse about ten feet from the exit. The demon rolls his eyes and steps over the body, continuing down the corridor that will lead him to the monster. Crowley will not get lost. All he has to do is follow the stench of rotting flesh… (‘Captain_Kiernan’ Five Times)

While one could argue that the fanfiction author altered an aspect of, arguably, a largely accepted canon of Greek mythology, it would seem appropriate in this context for the fanfiction text to do so to exhibit fidelity to the relationship between Aziraphale and Crowley, who became drawn into the killing of the minotaur, and in this joint operation, further express their mutual appreciation for each other. Moreover, the fanfiction author ‘Captain_Kiernan’ embeds the characters with the voice and traits that they possessed in the ‘original’ text, such as Aziraphale’s delight in acquiring books or traveling all over the world in search for exotic delicacies. The mimesis is also reflected in Crowley whenever the fanfiction author focuses on his appearance, for example his ‘snake-like eyes’ or calling Aziraphale ‘angel’ in certain situations and his sardonic humour. The fanfiction author ‘Captain_Kiernan’ accomplishes this form of mimesis to a degree due to the first-person perspective they adapt in their narration of events, wherein Aziraphale and Crowley’s opinion of each other is made apparent, especially for those who enjoy this particular pairing and rally behind the ‘Ineffable Husbands’ trope. The fidelity to the original characters, which is enjoyed by the fanfiction readers, can also be identified in some of the comments left by the readers to this fanfiction text. For example, user ‘nbj’ comments on the third chapter: “It’s incredible how you keep these stories so perfectly in-tone for the series. Well done! Am looking forward to reading the rest!”20 while another user ‘Jellybe’ commented: “This is one of my favourite fanfictions! All the chapters are so well written and you matched the characters perfectly. I really enjoy this and your ideas are so incredible!”21 Both comments demonstrate the affect for fidelity in terms of speculating about the character(s) of the text, aligning with Coppa’s fifth rule of fanfiction. In ‘Captain_Kiernan’s’ fanfiction text, she employs the 20 21

https://archiveofourown.org/comments/231154000. https://archiveofourown.org/comments/235542892.

212

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

character-narrator voice, where the reader is given insight into Crowley and Aziraphale’s feelings towards their relationship, which is the main focus of an ‘Ineffable Husbands’ fanfiction text. This narrative voice stands in contrast to the one in the series, where Gaiman employs the ‘Voice of God’ to narrate the events of the text in a voiceover and in occasional engagement with the characters, but also largely through zero focalization, wherein the Voice of God peppers the narrative with foreshadowing statements. In the fanfiction text, however, the focalization is internal, which drives the trope of the male slash relationship that this text features. Although the narration is changed dramatically from the series, it is not held against the fanfiction author or the text by the readers, perhaps because the narrative techniques employed in the series, which are a blend between the voices of the narrator, the character and the author that define a character’s figure behaviour, are replicated to a certain degree by the fanfiction author ‘Captain_Kiernan’. For example, one can compare the following excerpt from the fanfiction text to the series: In the middle of the devastation, lounging on a singed, velvet couch, popping grapes into his mouth, is Crowley. The demon barely looks up to acknowledge Aziraphale’s approach, but when the angel stops in front of him with his arms folded and a very cross look on his face, Crowley sighs lightly and says, “Hello, Aziraphale,” in a very cheery tone. “Long time no see. Ever find that flaming sword?” “Oh!” Aziraphale says in frustration, stamping his sandaled foot. “Crowley! I knew it was one of your kind behind this! But I never imagined you would sink so low as to do this!” Crowley smiles at him behind his eyeglasses, lazily popping another grape into his mouth. “And what, exactly, do you think I’ve done, angel?” There are vague singe marks on the edges of his black chiton. Aziraphale’s mouth falls open. He gestures around them at the burned palace. “There were people living here, Crowley! Humans! Children! How could you be so heartless?” Crowley sits up on his elbows, finally gazing around. “Ahh,” he says, sucking air between his teeth. “Yikes. Must have fallen asleep. I had wondered why everyone went so quiet…” Then he looks at Aziraphale, who is frowning at him. “This wasn’t me, angel.” He flops back down on his couch. “Sorry to disappoint.” (‘Captain_ Kiernan’ Five Times)

The ‘cheery tone’ with which Crowley greets Aziraphale is also evident in the third episode of the series “Hard Times,” when Crowley and Aziraphale meet as Noah as building his ark (00:00:04). In the scene, Crowley also mentions the Flaming Sword in what can be argued as a taunting tone, similar to the one

5.5 Neil Gaiman and Celebrity Culture

213

adopted by ‘Captain_Kiernan.’ Additionally, when Crowley rescues Aziraphale from execution during the French Revolution, Aziraphale assumes Crowley is responsible for all the killing during the French Revolution, to which Crowley replies that he had nothing to do with it, and that only humans are capable of killing each other with ‘clever machines’ and Aziraphale seemingly believes him (S1 E3 00:13:12). This particular incident is rather similar to when Aziraphale accuses Crowley of causing the destructive fire in the excerpt above and then believing Crowley when he says it was not him who had caused it. Furthermore, one may argue that Gaiman’s interaction with the fandom online, where he suggests that the characters he created have taken on a life of their own, as illustrated previously, hint at how it may be possible for a fanfiction text to maintain fidelity to the original when the authorial voice behind a character is less obvious. Additionally, it is also indicative of Gaiman’s employment of social media and the influence he wields among his fandom to enable the mythologization of his characters. To that end I discuss Gaiman’s use of social media in the section below to highlight the second-screen experience for Gaiman and his fans.

5.5

Neil Gaiman and Celebrity Culture

Although the first scholarly journal dedicated to the topic of celebrity and stardom, Celebrity Studies, was first published in 2010 (Suzanne Leonard and Diane Negra 28), the concept of celebrity arguably is as old as the mechanism of the fame itself. It is the dichotomy between being ‘ordinary’ and being ‘exceptional’ that is often identified as “a central tenet of the field” (Leonard and Negra 28). The concept of celebrity, the industry that produces it, and the understanding of celebrity as a cultural field have undergone dramatic changes with the emergence of new media. Prior to the 19th century, celebrity relied on the notion of being “special, different, and distinguished by achievement or birthright,” after which it was democratized as a result of “the advent of print cultures, vaudeville theater, and human interest journalism, which burgeoned in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries” (Leonard and Negra 28). With Web 2.0 and media becoming increasingly pervasive, self-presentation for social and cultural benefit became a pillar of the neoliberal media user in that visibility and reach provided value for cultural exchange. Contemporary celebrity culture in close affiliation with social media and strategies of self-presentation has called for a re-evaluation of the field. Celebrity culture as a cultural field invokes the Bourdieusian concept of ‘field,’ which Joe Moran describes as “a semi-autonomous, structured system with its own internal logic, rules of operation and inherently hierarchical relationships

214

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

created by the struggle between agents from whichever form of capital is appropriate to that field” (4). Moran identifies the dominance of cultural capital in the field of celebrity culture, specifically focusing on the absence of economic interests, which stands contrary to the belief that the self-presentation strategies employed by contemporary celebrities and micro-celebrities are for economic gain. This contradiction mirrors the presumed difference between the nature of, so to speak, an ‘entertainment celebrity’ i.e associated with popular culture as opposed to the literary celebrity (Moran 1). Gaston Franssen and Rick Honings also point to this dichotomy and raise the question of addressing literary authors as celebrities: A long-established tradition associates literary prestige with intellectual pleasures, cultural capital and elitist refinement, while celebrity is sooner linked up with popular entertainment, commerciality and mass production. (2)

Franssen and Honings claim that following a rigid dichotomy of literary and popular culture invites complications, especially when considering aspects such as gender, as they claim that “‘Women’s literature’ is often associated with entertainment, commerce and a culture of hypes, whereas authentic literature is often alleged to be a male domain” (2). Emphasizing the difference between the two types of celebrities, Moran classifies the literary celebrity as one that is valued by ‘cultural elites’ as opposed to the celebrity produced by commercial mass media that is seen as, by association with popular culture, “formulaic and onedimensional” (3). However, the development of the celebrity of the literary field has ascribed the logic of capitalist exchange and market value to one’s literariness, and Moran suggests that this is a result “of a complicated process in which various legitimating bodies compete for cultural authority and/or commercial success and regulate the formation of a literary star system and the shifting hierarchy of stars” (4). As the exchange of capital can no longer be separated from the literary culture due to the growing pervasiveness of new media and along with it the commodification of all culture, it is becoming increasingly difficult to clearly distinguish between the literary celebrity in the mainstream and entertainment celebrity. Moran, too, problematizes the categorization of the literary celebrity as ‘high culture’ and the entertainment celebrity as ‘low culture’ by identifying the hybrid nature of the literary celebrity’s authorial presence among traditional cultural hierarchies and the mass-market hype of contemporary culture that allows for the literary figure to be globalized. He argues that certain literary figures are “more read than read about,” while celebrity authors are ones “who are reviewed and discussed in the media at length, who win literary prizes, whose

5.5 Neil Gaiman and Celebrity Culture

215

books are studied in universities and who are employed on talk shows” (6). Literary celebrities, Moran argues, are caught between “the legitimacy of culture and the less ambiguous sanction of the market place” and are “‘crossover’ successes who emphasize both marketability and traditional cultural hierarchies” (6). In this sense, the literary celebrity is at a crossroads in the contemporary media culture, the dynamics of which are often defined by audience engagement along with the literary exceptionalism that produces the literary of the literary celebrity. Given that the mediaverse is focused on the interaction between its structures so as to be able to examine how social and cultural contexts are multifaceted with great complexity, it provides a framework within which the shifting culture of the literary celebrity and their audiences may be analysed. In this context, the mediaverse does not provide yet another means of categorizing the celebrity/audience interaction but rather posits the varied dimensions as a frame for analysing individual interactions in their own right to then retheorize the very social and cultural contexts within which these take place. With this function at the forefront, Neil Gaiman’s dual literary and entertainment celebrity will be closely examined to highlight how practices unique to a certain audience, prosumer, or producer may illustrate the cultural field of the celebrity. While there are scholars that claim that commercialism has eclipsed the literary world and is indicative “of the final collapse of cultural values in the face of relentless consumerism and bitter exigencies of mass production” (Moran 7), it is worth pointing out that “with the emergence of the modern literary marketplace the author began to achieve an independent status and became a candidate for public esteem” (Moran 7) and the surge in mediatization in contemporary society has made celebrity omnipresent. The question of what makes an author a celebrity is a complex one, as “literary success takes different forms that cannot simply be lumped together” (Franssen and Honings 2). Furthermore, there is the question of authority over authorship: “An author’s stature is created within a variable tension field of power relations where different parties claim authority, writers themselves, obviously, but also their peers, critics, readers, fans, the media, literary agents, journalists, publishers, translators, theatres and film studios, and so on” (Franssen and Honings 2). While these agents within the field of literary production and literary celebrity production may stake a claim for determining the value of the author and their work, one must still identify as to what figure retains significant authority over the author figure and over the author’s text, especially in the age of convergence and prosumption practices such as the work of fan fiction. While Barthes’ ‘Death of the Author’ argues for the dismissal of authorial intent when examining a text, such authorial intent is, in contemporary media consumption culture, crucial in determining canon as well as fanon, and thereby

216

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

shaping the nature of the text’s consumption and appropriation. Authorial intent, therefore, can no longer be dismissed, especially when considering the kind of solid fan base that Neil Gaiman’s celebrity boasts. Here, once again, a networked system like the mediaverse can inquire into the nature of Gaiman’s celebrity that invites re-evaluation of established conventions such as Barthes’ claims concerning textual interpretation and the author’s significance or the lack thereof. Fame and literary authorship underwent a transformation in the last three centuries. Franssen and Honings claim: Various economic, technological and ideological developments in the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries created the breeding ground for a new notion of authorship: the disappearance of patronage as a source of income, the industrialization of the book printing process, and the evolution of a world picture that centers around the individual forced the writer to present himself as an independent, unique individual with his own style. (8)

This revolution concerning literary authorship can be mirrored in the three developments that seemingly underpin the production of celebrity: “mediatization, personalization and commodification” (Franssen and Honings 7). To understand Gaiman’s celebrity in relationship to his fandom, it is crucial to examine how these developments may be traced in the production of his celebrity. Mediatization, according to Franssen and Honings, is “seen as the interrelation between media technological change and social-cultural practices as well as institutions” (7). The advent of Web 2.0 facilitated social media networks, which have not only become part and parcel of the individual’s daily life, but also bread and butter for corporations and institutions as well as celebrities who utilise the cultural exchange that takes place over these networks and platforms. The growth and pervasiveness of these platforms and their affordances led to the application of self-presentation strategies to increase one’s popularity and cultural worth. The factory of celebrity production, according to P. David Marshall, rests with the “continuity of discourse around the presentation of the self for public consumption” (Celebrity Studies 36). Marshall further argues: “public sphere in the era of representational media was actually much tighter and more centrally controlled and perhaps manipulated” (Celebrity Studies 40). Self-presentation strategies and power can be linked to Foucault’s notions of the self and of governance. Marshall notes the importance of the genealogy of celebrity in identifying the relationship between celebrity and knowledge and power through the Foucauldian lens (Companion 14–6). Foucault’s discourse concerning control and manipulation of the social order through governmentality is applicable to the celebrity in that through the social and cultural reproduction, the celebrity is not only legitimised

5.5 Neil Gaiman and Celebrity Culture

217

but venerated (Rojek Celebrity 36). Public consumption is made possible by the variety of new media platforms and formats that have embedded themselves in the media user’s everyday life. As for Neil Gaiman, one can argue that he situates himself in the everyday lives of his fan community not only via the texts he has authored, whose mediatization is enhanced through audiobooks, ebooks, printed books, comic books and screenplays, but also by his presence on a number of social media networks that facilitate celebrity-fan-interactions, such as Twitter and Tumblr and his own website.22 As for ‘personalization’ as a development that characterizes contemporary celebrity culture, Franssen and Honings quote Driessens to explain it as “‘the (increasing) centrality of the disembodied individual over the collective,’ resulting in increasing attention to the personality and the private lives of celebrities” (7). While one could argue that Gaiman’s decision to be present on social media platforms and to have a dedicated website could stem from the personalization of his celebrity, it is interesting to note the nature of this personalization. His personalized space on these social media platforms—i.e. his social media handles and the interactions that take place within this space—are not characterized by, for example, sensationalism, scandals or invasion of his privacy. Rather, the space is utilized by Gaiman’s fans to get to know him as the authorial voice behind the texts that they are fans of. The interactions and queries on his Tumblr and Twitter vary from the appropriation of his works, e.g. in the form of fan art, to questions concerning beloved characters or events from Gaiman’s works and, in general, the art of writing. For example, Gaiman, in collaboration with the BBC and Twitter users, created an audiobook titled Hearts, Keys and Puppetry that was, upon completion, made available to the public.23 The collaboration took place over eight days and featured 124 contributors including Neil Gaiman. Therefore, Gaiman’s celebrity is marked by a number of highly mediatized and transmedial texts. This is affirmed by the FAQ (frequently asked questions) section of his website,24 which urges audience members and fans to comb through the FAQ so as to not have to answer same or similar questions repeatedly. While there 22

https://www.neilgaiman.com/ https://www.fastcompany.com/1475513/neil-gaiman-bbc-and-124-twitterers-make-fic tion. 24 https://www.neilgaiman.com/FAQs. The FAQs are divided up into the following categories: 23

1. Contacting, Contracting, Inviting, Interviewing, or Mailing Neil 2. On Gaiman 3. Advice to Authors

218

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

are a few questions concerning Neil Gaiman personally, there are a significant number of questions concerning the works he has authored or the art of writing, indicating that for Gaiman’s fans, the author is alive and well. Most of the FAQs can be related to what is identified as the third development in celebrity culture—commodification as “the process in which the celebrity becomes both the marketable product and the producer of labor” (Franssen and Honings 7). In the case of Gaiman, commodification takes place in the form of the texts he produces i.e. the result of his labour as well as that of his person. The various texts authored by Gaiman have achieved significant popularity to develop not only a fandom but to also invite studios and institutions to adapt those texts, further commodifying his celebrity. Additionally, as a result of the mix between celebritization of culture and the transformation of the literary celebrity culture, Gaiman’s person is ascribed incredible value, especially at literary and media events such as book launches, educational institutions, media premiere events etc. This commodification is evident on Gaiman’s website, for example the following FAQ: Q. How can I get Neil Gaiman to make an appearance at my school/convention/event? A. Contact Steven Barclay at the Steven Barclay Agency. Tell him you want Neil to appear somewhere. Have him tell you how much it costs. Have him say it again in case you misheard it the first time. Tell him you could get Bill Clinton for that money. Have him tell you that you couldn’t even get ten minutes of Bill Clinton for that money but it’s true, he’s not cheap. On the other hand, I’m really busy, and I ought to be writing, so pricing appearances somewhere between ridiculously high and obscenely high helps to discourage most of the people who want me to come and talk to them. Which I could make a full time profession, if I didn’t say ‘no’ a lot.25 (https://www.neilgaiman.com/)

The very presence of this question in the FAQs implies that Gaiman gets asked this frequently and that the presence of his person is of great value, even according to Gaiman, who is charging an exorbitant rate to make an appearance at an 4. Books, Short Stories and Films (American Gods, Coraline, Good Omens, Neverwhere, Stardust, Other Books and Miscellany) 5. Comics 6. Films 7. Influences

25

https://www.neilgaiman.com/FAQs/Contacting,_Contracting,_Inviting,_Interviewing,_ or_Mailing_Neil#q5.

5.5 Neil Gaiman and Celebrity Culture

219

event. The value placed on him is indicative of his cultural capital and seemingly contributes to his economic capital. The commodification of the product of his labour accrues upon his cultural capital, for example the questions concerning official merchandise of his works on the FAQs page.26 Furthermore, social capital also plays a significant role in the development of Gaiman’s celebrity. Among the many other questions that Gaiman is asked, the FAQs includes one on his social media activity by a fan, Mike Moore: In choosing from the myriad e-questions you no doubt receive each minute, how do you decide which ones you will publicly display a response to? Submissions which 1) sound quirky and strange (without being disturbing) 2) with opportunities built in to further publicize your work, and which 3) ask questions you have always wished someone would ask you in formal interviews? (Just guessing) What are 5 questions you would love to be asked in an interview but do not tend to hear?27 (https://www. neilgaiman.com/)

Since Moore’s question made it to Gaiman’s official website’s FAQ, it can be assumed that not only is he asked the question frequently but that his fans and audiences are keen to interact with him on social media or via interviews. Moore’s question is concerned with identifying the nature of those questions that may earn a response from Gaiman, which is likely considered to be of great cultural value among the fandom, since the celebrity would not respond to every fan that addresses them. Attempting to engage the celebrity in a dialogue by the fan is termed the ‘pleasure of connection’ by Duffett, who identifies this as a common fan practice (277). Duffett argues that among the ‘primary pleasures’ derived from being a fan or part of a fan community is the “aim of encountering the performer and perhaps talking to them or receiving their autograph” (277). While one would have to physically ‘encounter’ the celebrity to get an autograph, engaging with them online and receiving a reply or any form of social media connection that can be displayed is celebrated in its own right, as it enables the fan to earn ‘bragging rights’ or being able to claim familiarity—or the illusion of familiarity—of some degree, to fellow fans. In this sense the mark left by the celebrity on social media feeds of their fans can act as a substitute for autographs. Gaiman’s answer to Moore’s question reads as follows: None of the above, really. Mostly I pick ones that either seem to need answering, haven’t been answered somewhere else on the site, or pass on interesting information. 26 27

https://www.neilgaiman.com/FAQs/Sandman#q5. https://www.neilgaiman.com/FAQs/On_Gaiman#q12.

220

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

Sometimes it’s just what catches my fancy. When the FAQ line was up and working we’d normally get between 30 and 50 a day (26 in so far today, and the day’s not half over) so answering them all is nearly impossible. I leave it to chance and whim. It’s not fair as it means lots of good questions don’t get answered, but (shrugs) there’s only so much time. And there are books and scripts to write. As to what questions I’ve love to be asked but never hear.... I’m not sure there are any, really. Interviewers are pretty inventive, and you lot have now asked about 9,000 questions on the FAQ line – leaving aside the mousecircus.com FAQs,—so I’ve been asked questions ranging from the obscure and erudite to proposals of marriage to people wanting to know if I can recommend good sushi in (town of choice). I’ve been asked what I’ve got in my pocketses28 and questions about the wing velocity of the laden vs. the unladen European swallow... I just blink, and answer, or don’t, and carry on. Does that help?29 (https://www.neilgaiman.com/)

This answer once again restores balance in terms of Gaiman’s standing as a celebrity, made evident by the volume of questions he receives from fans and audiences and his revelation as to being unable to answer all of them. He also alludes to the literary nature of his celebrity as he has “books and scripts to write.” His answer may also make him seem more ‘approachable’ as a celebrity given how he claims to answer questions according to his whims, which is something presumably all social media users tend to do. Additionally, the intertextual references and his use of language that is marked by a satirical, sardonic quality is indicative of his ‘Gaimanness,’ which his fans have come to appreciate. It is based on this fact—that Gaiman’s social media behaviour, despite him being a literary celebrity, is mirrored in the social media activity of most new media users—that one may apply the ‘second screen theory’ to Gaiman’s interactivity on social media with his fan community and the texts he produces. Lee and Andrejevic theorise the second screen and focus on the role it plays in understanding media consumption practices, especially in terms of real time feedback, which is crucial for the television industry and its agents (40–1). While the second screen certainly fits into the framework of the mediaverse at large in terms of viewing methods, it also has scope for expansion in the mediaverse network. Since the mediaverse network is supported by the pillars of audiences, producers 28

An instance of intertextuality, here the use of ‘pocketses’ is a nod to J. R. R. Tolkein’s The Hobbit, wherein Gollum hisses and often adds ‘es’ to the end of words. Gaiman’s use here implies not only how well versed he is with the fantasy canon but also how he believes his fans too will comprehend the reference, marking the Gaiman fandom with a particular quality i.e., of being connoisseurs of fantasy literature. In doing so, the interaction has the effect of being an ‘insider’ within the fandom, thereby underlining the parasocial relationship between Gaiman and those fans who understand and enjoy the reference. 29 https://www.neilgaiman.com/FAQs/On_Gaiman#q12.

5.5 Neil Gaiman and Celebrity Culture

221

and platforms, delivery channels and networks, the second screen too, can be used to theorise the relationship between these structures and ancillary screens. The framework of the mediaverse works as a spectrum within which the unique usage of each participant may be posited, such as with the case of Neil Gaiman and his following. Neil Gaiman, through his literary celebrity and products of literary labour, is a producer of media content, including his contributions to the television adaptations of his texts, as is the case with Good Omens, American Gods and Sandman. Being a part of the television industry that produces the text, he sits on the other side of the proverbial screen than the audience and thus contributes to how and what kind of text is delivered to the audience. It is in reaction to his production that audiences engage with the second screen “to share, reflect on, and react to” (Lee and Andrejevic 42). However, through the notion of the mediaverse network, one could also argue for the ‘second screen’ employed by Neil Gaiman, not only for the benefit of his fans and audiences but also for his own celebrity. Concurrent to the second screen theory, Gaiman’s use of the second screen as a producer of media content and as a literary celebrity invites real-time interactivity with and among his audiences, a textual or contextual stimulation as well as customized media consumption. Gaiman is a familiar figure when it comes to adaptations of his works due to his activity on social media and his active engagement with his fans. There is a great deal of interest in his writing process, which he addresses in a masterclass on the art of storytelling. He continues to engage with his fans on social media platforms such as Twitter and Tumblr, where the nature of this interactivity goes beyond promotion of his products. For example, as part of the Doctor Who Lockdown series of events,30 Gaiman participated in the live-Tweeting on April 11 for the collective viewing of the episode The Doctor’s Wife that was written by Gaiman for the BBC-produced series Doctor Who. The Doctor Who Lockdown was an event created by one of the producers of the show in March 2020 during the worldwide outbreak of Covid-19 because of which the global population at large was advised to self-isolate at home. The event involved scheduling watchalongs of select episodes from Doctor Who, each with a dedicated hashtag which was used to discuss the episode in the form of live-Tweets. ‘Whovians’ from all over the world live-tweeted during the watch-along. Not only fans and audiences of Doctor Who but also members of the production team and cast joined the liveTweeting, including Neil Gaiman, who live-tweeted during the watch along with the hashtag ‘#BiggerOnTheInside.’ Interestingly, Michael Sheen was also one of the celebrities who engaged during this live-Tweeting. While the audiences do 30

https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Doctor_Who:_Lockdown!

222

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

not see Sheen in this episode, he is the voice of the episode’s antagonist, House. Sheen’s association with Gaiman for this episode and for Good Omens, along with David Tennant’s involvement in both Doctor Who and Good Omens can certainly be identified as one of the reasons fans migrate from one series to the other, and in this sense provides a layer of intertextuality based on a shared cast and shared writing. Not only did Gaiman engage with his audiences by discussing the episode during the watch-along, but he also responded to their questions and comments. For example, to a Tweet by user ‘grassangel’,31 Gaiman responds with information concerning the production and behind-the-scenes action of the episode. This certainly lends the impression of intimacy to Gaiman’s social media handle as it appears that he is sharing information that the audience would otherwise not be privy to. Apart from this kind of engagement with the audience during the Doctor Who Lockdown, he also produced new content for Doctor Who that was made available.32 While making this new content available, Gaiman interacted with other members of the production team and cast, such as Arthur Darvill and Dan Starkey, further generating interest in his rapport with the team and presenting it to his fans and audiences, adding another layer to the impression of intimacy that his social media handle evokes. In this context, his literary celebrity is ‘personalized’, i.e. there is a great deal of interest among fans and audiences to know Gaiman as an individual separate from yet an integral part of the products of his labour. The feature of textual or contextual stimulation and customized media consumption is also evident in the Doctor Who Lockdown example. With Gaiman’s association with the text of Doctor Who explaining his virtual presence during the event on Twitter, his fans are provided a context within which his presence and the nature of his interactions with the audiences can be explained. This is evident in the previous example and another interaction: @scifichica: I’ve watched that episode probably 25–30 times. I still burst into tears when she says “Hello” & I don’t mean a delicate tear rolls down my cheek. Full on Ugly Cry. It hits me so deep in my heart. Perfection. @neilhimself: I’m so glad. #BiggerOnTheInside33

In this particular interaction, the context is provided by the Doctor Who Lockdown event, wherein the audience member praises the episode written by Neil Gaiman, to which he replies that he is pleased to have moved the fan in such a profound 31

https://twitter.com/neilhimself/status/1249149553061826560. https://twitter.com/neilhimself/status/1249061546359054336. 33 https://twitter.com/neilhimself/status/1249148724154163200. 32

5.6 The Second Screen and the Paratextual Function of the Celebrity

223

manner. The questions or statements during this event are primarily related to his work with Doctor Who and Good Omens. Here, Gaiman’s second screen is characterised by textual and contextual stimulation to which his interactions and engagement with others are the response. The customized media consumption for both the audience members as well as the celebrity is aided by affordances of Web 2.0 applications. In the case of Twitter, customization takes place through user profiles (with their respective @usernames), hashtags, trending topics etc. Each user can personalize the content they would like to see in their feed. This is also true for Gaiman as a user of Twitter. Moreover, the search tool and hashtags with metadata filters enables them to further look for specific content, customizing their experience with the social media platform, and choosing preferred content. With Gaiman, because of his literary celebrity he is tagged in numerous Tweets in a day from his fans and audiences, which automatically filters his content by way of the Tweets he is tagged in appearing in his notifications. Additionally, judging by the answer to Moore’s question on the FAQs page of the website, Gaiman responds to some of these Tweets by whim, further defining the parameters of the content he comes across on his social media handle. By means of live interaction, textual or contextual stimulation and customization of media consumption, the mediaverse framework explicates how the second screen theory might apply also to producers or representatives of media texts, especially in terms of how some of these figures are celebritized as a result of personalization that comes with interacting with audiences over social media platforms and Web 2.0 applications. In the case of Neil Gaiman, the second screen’s functionality is illustrated by examining his interactions with his fans as well as analyzing the common practices among his fandom and how his texts are received. In the mediaverse perspective, the author thus is very much alive and influential among his followers (Fig. 5.3).

5.6

The Second Screen and the Paratextual Function of the Celebrity

The Good Omens mediaverse has demonstrated the role of the literary celebrity as serving the paratextual function. Gray argues, “[M]arketeers [of media texts] often mobilize paratexts to proffer “proper interpretations,” some preceding the show’s arrival in the public sphere, thereby setting up pre-decodings” (Shows Sold Separately 81). In the case of Good Omens, the pre-decodings take shape not only by virtue of the source text that is adapted to television but also through

224

5 The Good Omens Mediaverse: Myth, Prophecies and the ‘Voice of God’

•Good Omens •Modern fantasy •Metaficonal •Adaptaon and sequel The Media Text

Networks and Plaorms

Paratexts and Intertexts

•Mythologizaon •Prophet, implied author and 'creator' •The Paratextual Funcon of Celebries •Pre-decodings

Spectators

•Tumblr and Twier - watchalongs, textual migraon and pleasures of connecon •AO3 - site for fanficon and fan performance

•Canon, fanon and ascended fanon •Fanmade 'Terary World' •Replicaon of authorial voice and mimesis •The second screen and the celebrity

Fig. 5.3 The Good Omens Mediaverse

the nature of Gaiman’s celebrity and the Good Omens fan community. While The OA case study illustrated the fan practices unique to the fandom due to the metamodern nature of the text, it is the authorial voice of Gaiman (and Pratchett) and his interactions with the fandom that characterize audience expectations from the text or its adaptation. Additionally, the authorial voice, boosted by the notion of Gaiman as a ‘prophet’ for the fandom and the creator of the ‘Secondary World’ and its existents, and the celebrity as serving the paratextual function also influences fantext to a great degree. The analysis of the fanfiction above indicated that fan authors often attempt to mime the authorial voice and retain textual fidelity to make the work of fanfiction seem mimetic. Additionally, the paratexts and intertexts surrounding Good Omens and its fandom also regulate production and marketing strategies as well as audience expectations and perceptions from the sequel. While the events of the sixth episode of the first season of the Good Omens web series concluded the events as they transpired in the novel, the producers of the show announced a second season in June 2021.34 In an interview, Gaiman stated that he and Pratchett had already plotted the sequel for Good Omens 32 years ago, prior to the release of the novel, implying that although there is no

34

https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/sci-fi/good-omens-season-2/

5.6 The Second Screen and the Paratextual Function of the Celebrity

225

novel for the series producers to use as ‘source material,’ the co-authors had discussed ideas for the sequel, and that Gaiman, who serves as executive producer for the series will ostensibly preserve the Pratchett- and Gaiman-esque tone in the series (Huw Fullerton, Radio Times). Furthermore, the mythologized nature of the text and Gaiman’s celebrity also has a significant impact on audience anticipation concerning the sequel. The mythologization of the text is renewed because of numerous elements surrounding the text. This includes not only Gaiman’s inclusion in the production of the sequel but also the reprisal of Sheen and Tennant’s roles as Aziraphale and Crowley, further regenerating the Ineffable Husbands trope. Gaiman’s use of Tumblr, Twitter and his website sets the tone of his engagement with his fans and illustrates synergies surrounding his products through, for example, watch-alongs and promotion of various adaptations of his texts. The nature of Gaiman’s literary celebrity coalesces with new media affordances and marketing strategies to highlight the importance of the second screen for the celebrity.

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

Contemporary media technologies and affordances are indicative of the constantly transforming landscape of television media. In examining the mediaverses of the various texts in this study, the complexities of the relationship between the text and its textuality are demonstrated. The discussion of genre at the beginning of each case study plays a significant role in distinguishing the texts, their production, consumption and delivery practices from one another, thus enabling a comparison of the texts and their respective cultural influences. The examination of genre characteristics performs two key tasks—firstly, those features of the text that subvert the genre are highlighted. Secondly, by demonstrating these features, the relationship between media producers, prosumers and consumers is highlighted through practices that promote preferred meanings and the decoding of textual interpretations. The genre labelling, and consequently the textuality of a text, can be identified and critically examined by the structures of the mediaverse. By building on previous research on the various texts of Star Trek, the opening case study of the Star Trek mediaverse set out with a discussion of the science fiction genre, which made apparent the concepts of space as the ‘final frontier’ in terms of exploration and conquest, thus coinciding with American pastoralism, transformation, and progress. In drawing parallels between the contemporary social, cultural, and political climate of America, texts of the Star Trek mediaverse, and DSC in particular, sparked debates among its viewers. Corresponding to the long, rich history of the text, the fan community of Star Trek has made waves for the image of fans and fan communities in general. After a successful campaign and revival of the text in the 1970s, the fandom became synonymous with lobbying and protesting networks when their beloved shows were cancelled. These grassroots campaigns have since transformed in their mediation based on

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2024 A. Shah, The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43739-8_6

227

228

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

the proliferation of digital and social media networks. Eventually, with the growing popularity of Star Trek and academic Trekkers legitimising the fandom, the Trekker community became not only more visible, but performed acts of cultural, sociocultural and political criticism—for example, reflecting the need for social justice and their disappointment in the Trump government, Trekkers took to social media platforms to sign petitions and align themselves with the Trump opposition. Moreover, the nostalgic mode of the newer iterations drew mixed reviews from Trekkers. On the one hand, some Trekkers expressed a great deal of appreciation for more equal representation and inclusivity while remaining true to the ‘spirit’ of Roddenberry’s Star Trek. On the other hand, some viewers participated in and cultivated hate-watching practices and took to social media platforms to express their discontentment, leading to initiatives such as #NotMyTrek. The genre tropes here played a significant role in polarizing audience opinions, as demonstrated by certain diegetic elements such as the tardigrade or the relationship between Michael and Spock. Here, the mediaverse helps to unpack the heterogeneity of the Trekker community by examining the concepts of media ‘spreadability’ and cultural diffusion. Not only consumers and prosumers, but also media producers as well as distribution channels, delivery platforms and social networks contribute to the ‘spreadability’ and ‘drillability’ of a media text. While the ascription of the term ‘fan’ is problematic when attempting to identify ‘active’ or ‘passive’ engagement, circulation and appropriation of media content contributes to its spreadability and also to the emergence of networks of media consumers and prosumers who engage with the content, and whose engagement media producers respond to in turn. Increased spreadability because of hype, promos, synergies, intermediality and transmediality contribute to the growth of the fan community in two ways. Firstly, as the corpus of texts within the Star Trek mediaverse grows steadily, audiences find different entry-points into the Trekker community through specific text(s), and in some cases even begin to self-identify as Trekkers as opposed to casual viewers. As these texts interact with paratexts and intertexts of the Star Trek franchise, audiences migrate to other texts and persist in their practices of appropriation and fantext production. Secondly, because spreadability is catalysed by the intermediality and transmediality of the franchise, the fandom grows increasingly heterogeneous in its array of fan practices, leading to cultural diffusion. The formation of collective identities and sub-communities due to cultural diffusion leads to fans and prosumers negotiating with the text in various ways. The negotiation process for a media text has three primary stakeholders: the producers of the content, the spectators (including fans and audiences) and

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

229

those platforms, distributors and delivery channels that make the sharing, circulation, and recommendation of media content possible. As a result of fan desires and impulses, for example, a significant number of female Trekkers led to the emergence of the ‘K/S slashfiction’ and numerous ‘shipper’ factions within the Star Trek fandom. The actions that influence how the media text spreads as well as its appropriations in turn affect its textual integration in the sense that media producers dissect those attributes unique to the text and employ them to engage in practices of media convergence based on audience expectations such as focused and socially inclusive narratives, diversification of content, broad marketing strategies as well as technological developments in the industry. It is as a result of this interaction between the stakeholders that their perspectives and roles expand to develop cultural trends of media production, distribution and consumption. Additionally, the consideration of streaming platforms such as Netflix, which double up as media production houses and distributors, grant greater flexibility in the sense that audiences no longer need to rely on broadcast television, appointment viewing or cable networks. Although the DVD as well as portable devices already partially fulfilled this function, particularly in the case of Trekkers who engaged in pleasures of collection of DVD sets, Director’s Cuts etc., it is the technology of streaming platforms that transformed the landscape of media consumption practices. However, complications concerning licensing, syndication and copyrights led to shows frequently being cancelled or brought up by rival platforms, often forcing audiences to subscribe to numerous streaming platforms to enjoy the transmedial text in its entirety. The pleasure of consuming a transmedial text is partly fuelled by intertextuality, thereby indicating the importance of paratexts and intertexts—a key component of the mediaverse. Gray discusses the relationship between texts and paratexts by outlining “the creative potential that is fostered by streamlining shows and their paratexts,” so that “the push and pull between different meanings among paratexts or between the show and a paratext will be responsible for some of the text’s vitality” (Shows Sold Separately 207). Arguably, those aspects of the newer shows DSC and Picard that distinguish it from the earlier iterations and engage with the same through nostalgia, paratexts and intertexts in the Star Trek canon become ‘talking points’ within the fandom. These not only highlight the features of the text that subvert or underline genre classification but also illustrate the importance of textual cohesion at the diegetic and extradiegetic level. Textual cohesion is crucial, and the mediaverse approach helps to examine and determine the cohesion of a specific text. Whether dominant meanings are cohesive or not across para- and intertexts is determined to a great degree by audiences and fans’ engagement with the concepts and examples of textual

230

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

revision, adherence to canon, ascended fanons and forensic fandoms. In the case of the Star Trek mediaverse, the long history of the show and its fandom makes textual revision particularly challenging. With each new iteration of the show, some audience members may ‘discover’ Star Trek, marking it as their entry point into the Trekker community and potentially their favourite series, while other Trekkers may protest these very changes to their perceived canon or attempts at textual revision, frequently stating that these go against Roddenberry’s vision, as indicated in the #NotMyTrek discussion. Disagreements among members of the fan community regarding the text and its textuality can lead to substantial debates and hate-watching practices that also shape Trekker identities. Additionally, the producers of DSC, in the process of textual revision—such as with the introduction of the new species of the Kelpiens and a never-heard-of sister of Spock—attempt to appease the fandom by tying the revised narrative threads to the Star Trek canon, further implying the importance of audience and fan expectations concerning textual cohesion. Therefore, my examination of the Star Trek mediaverse and its components reveals the heterogeneity of the fandom and their diverse opinions, which reflect the disparate and multifarious textuality of the various Star Trek texts and their interaction. The examination also exemplified the role of social media platforms that enabled a dialogue between the various stakeholders and served as sites for collective audience initiatives, thereby revealing their role as critics not only of the text but also of the production practices associated with it. Black Mirror, too, offers commentary on contemporary culture through embedding popular tropes of science fiction in its narratives, thereby demonstrating the continued importance of genre indicators that characterise its textuality. However, it deals with themes of technological innovation and progress quite differently. While Star Trek’s utopian view of society and the use of technology for the progress of all sentient life is indicated through the theme of exploration, the ‘final frontier’ and maintaining peace across galaxies, Black Mirror lends itself to themes such as techno-dystopia, the uncanny, violation of privacy and data rights, and the abuse of technology. Although the themes of both texts and their aesthetics can be categorised as science fiction under the umbrella of speculative fiction, their textualities distinguish between their science-orientation and their speculative fiction characteristics and mark their respective production and consumption cultures. With Bandersnatch, the engagement with the viewer at the metatextual level is made apparent in numerous ways. The text invites the viewer to ‘play’ and take control of the narrative while simultaneously discussing the theme of lack of control and free will. The scene in which Stefan is made aware

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

231

of being controlled illustrates the functions of mediation and remediation performed by computers and ancillary technologies, as well as how humans interact with these. Moreover, both texts also partake in a discussion of sexuality and gender in distinct ways. With DSC, particularly in the character arc of Adira, the theme of gender fluidity is remediated through the alien species of the trill host. In the Black Mirror’s episode “Striking Vipers,” the VR technology and its affordances serve as catalysts for the protagonists to think about their sexualities, while their virtual avatars raise questions concerning gender and its relationship with sexuality, thereby indicating the significance of the relationship between technology, culture and society and inviting discussions on queer identities in the virtual space which place the show in current cultural discourse. The genre differences and similarities between Star Trek and Black Mirror also manifest in the practices of their respective fan communities. The fan community of Black Mirror is not preoccupied with the continuity of the show, which could be ascribed to the anthology format of the series that does not necessitate narrative continuity across episodes.1 The fan community on Reddit, for example, is mainly centred on episode discussions and speculation on the technologies that are featured on the show or technologies that exist and seem Black Mirror-esque. The audiences of Black Mirror, therefore, also serve as critics of contemporary culture, but it is the techno-dystopian theme of the show that characterises their critique. Additionally, textual cohesion for an anthology text like Black Mirror is also achieved through the techno-dystopian theme, and particularly through its experimental (and, in the case of Bandersnatch interactive) nature rather than overlapping existents and plot points, as is the case with Star Trek. While Black Mirror speculates about and thus critically comments on societal progress through futuristic technologies in its episodes, the producers also experimented with the show’s format through Bandersnatch. The chooseyour-own-adventure film is interactive in the sense that it retains the potential to transform the viewer into a gamer or a player, consequently lending the text a metatextual quality which is significantly different from the interactivity that texts invite, for example, through fan interactions in fan communities. Textual revision and the desire for textual cohesion in Star Trek led to criticism of production

1

Although the show’s continuity had not been threatened like that of Star Trek and The OA, the producers have not announced a new season since the release of season 5 in 2019. With the creators of the show quitting the production house that produces Black Mirror, it seems unlikely that a new season will premiere in the near future (Ravindran, see https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/black-mirror-charlie-brooker-annabel-jones-net flix-endemol-shine-group-1203478778/).

232

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

practices and modes of delivery while simultaneously exemplifying the significance of social media platforms that enabled individual and collective fannish expression. On the other hand, the Black Mirror mediaverse revealed different aspects of the modes of production and delivery of the media text. In the case of Bandersnatch, collaboration is framed by metatextuality and interactivity. The content creators of the series collaborated with the platform Netflix, in this case also as both a co-producer and distributor, to explore the potential affordances it could lend to the film to make it interactive. That collaboration between the show’s producers added yet another dimension in the sense that through the interactivity and game-style affordances, the viewer is also invited to collaborate in shaping the narrative. The diegetic breaks in the viewing of Bandersnatch coincide with the awareness of Netflix as a platform, given that the interface of the platform that enables viewers of the film to ‘choose-their-adventure’ represents human-computer interaction. This form of interaction and human-centred design of a technological product is also embedded in the diegesis. Stefan’s awareness of being controlled and manipulated is reflected in the limited control that the viewer has over the narrative, as evidenced by the inevitable conclusion wherein Stefan is forced to murder his father. There is a further play on interactivity and metatextuality in Bandersnatch, particularly when Netflix makes it into the diegesis of the film. The viewer attempts to explain to Stefan that they are watching him on Netflix, which is ironically likened to another planet. Netflix’s interface, which is responsible for processing the responses of the viewer, also restricts the freedom of the viewer to predetermined choices, thus controlling both the content of the film and the viewer’s interaction with it. Nonetheless, while the control of the viewer over the narrative is restricted, it is more flexible than for other films and, in a typically Black Mirror-esque style, sparks speculation on the future of interactive narrative formats. Furthermore, the Black Mirror mediaverse, in its examination of the narrative links and genre overlaps across the various intertexts, signals how the concept of digital consciousness through various symbols such as cookies, consciousness replicators and VR devices contextualises those aspects of technological progress that contemporary society is preoccupied with, such as surveillance, data breaches, virtual avatars, digital anonymity and online sexualities. These topics and their depiction in the various texts of the Black Mirror mediaverse become distinct ‘talking points’ among the fan communities. The Black Mirror mediaverse, through Bandersnatch, explored the notion of collaborative culture in the sense that through the collaboration between designing interactive viewing interfaces in the production of the text and the interactivity and engagement of audiences during the viewing leads to a new experience of consuming a media text. The interaction between the viewer and a character via

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

233

a computer, and the interface of the film that enables interactivity, highlight its metatextuality in a way that allows viewers to recognise their role in the text, while the text becoming self-referential further acknowledges the presence of the platform that produces and delivers it, thereby blurring the lines between the fictional and the real world in a ludic manner. The collaboration, therefore, is made evident between the producer, the consumer and the platform that delivers the content. Collaborative culture takes on a different meaning in the investigation of The OA mediaverse, where collaboration manifests in two distinct ways among the stakeholders of media texts. In the first instance, the collaboration takes place among members of the fandom, and on occasion utilises social media platforms and networks to do so. The cancellation of the text without it having reached its final conclusion led to numerous protests and lobbying efforts both online and offline. These were often coordinated among the fandom to ensure that their voices were heard and therefore united the fandom through a common goal. In comparison to the lobbying and campaigning for the revival of Star Trek, The OA fandom notably positioned themselves outside Netflix’ headquarters and performed the Five Movements of the show, assembled with placards or went on hunger strikes to display their dedication and affect for the text. The manner of protestation, therefore, is linked to the diegesis, setting the fandom apart from the fan communities of other texts. Online, the fandom collectively used numerous hashtags, most notably #SaveTheOA, to start a dialogue about and persuade the streaming producer Netflix to reconsider the show’s cancellation. Monitoring fan dialogue on social media platforms provides producers with live feedback loops on how the texts they create are being consumed and by whom, with the potential to further streamline production, distribution, marketing, and publicity efforts. As was the case with Star Trek, The OA fan community also brings to the fore the notion of social media platforms as a site for fannish expression, albeit in a more positive tone than the hate-watching practices that aligned with #NotMyTrek. Secondly, the discussion of the post-object projection of the cast members of the show revealed that collaborative culture not only enriches the text and its textuality but also invites producers of the media texts to observe and engage with fan communities, particularly auteurs and celebrities associated with the text. Through social media platforms, Brit Marling, Jason Isaacs and other cast members and producers of The OA engage with the audiences and fans of the text. These celebrities remediate the attributes of their respective characters and channel them as part of their public persona and self-presentation strategies, thereby enabling audiences to extend their textual aspirations beyond the text— into the post-object projection—and simultaneously enabling celebrities to serve

234

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

the paratextual function that influences the consumption of the text. The fact that certain features of a character do not correspond to the celebrity figure does not matter to fans, just as the ‘accuracy’ or ‘logic’ behind the interdimensional travel as presented in The OA does not matter to them, since the suspension of disbelief and post-object projection augment the pleasures of performing one’s fandom. While the mediaverses of Star Trek, Black Mirror and The OA have all demonstrated the proclivity of producers and prosumers to comment on and criticise contemporary culture, it is mostly The OA’s narrative that takes on metamodern tones that highlight its metafictionalita. In the discussion of The OA’s metamodern features, the genre markers of the text were placed at the nexus of science fiction and fantasy fiction. This overlap is marked by various textual components, such as the transition of Hap’s character from the ‘mad scientist’ to ‘angel hunter.’ His study of the NDEs of the Captive Five drastically transformed after he learned of the Five Movements and their purpose. His study, which he had so far dealt with in a strictly scientific and detached manner, thus morphed into a quest for his personal eutopia. The character of Prairie/OA, too, made it her mission to find the dimension where she could unite with Homer and break free from Hap. The engagement with the possibility of an afterlife, angels and angel hunters, the uncanny, and faith mark the spiritual overtones and genre-bending aspects of the text. The themes and symbols of mysticism and spiritualism which allude to the metamodern nature of the text are picked up as topics of debates in discussion forums. While these themes and symbols point to Habermas’ notion of the post-secular, which argues that in the modern pluralist and secular society, religion continues to maintain influence and relevance in the public sphere (Habermas 17–19), these characteristics—according to Luke Turner—generally relate more pointedly to the metamodern as conveying aspects of storytelling and unreliable narration, the search for utopia, the re-emergence of hope, romanticism and affect, and the structure of feeling, all of which are evident in the narrative and also emphasized by the creators of The OA, particularly Brit Marling, via their social media presence and engagements with the fans. The metamodern nature of the text also characterises the fan practices surrounding the text. Apart from driving forward the discussion within the fan community, metamodernism also shapes the fannish expression and the performance of The OA fandom as especially forensic fans, deconstruct and unpack the text, adhering to what Turner identifies as “a yearning for meaning—for sincere and constructive progression and expression [that] has come to shape today’s dominant cultural mode.” While Habermas’ concept of the post-secular evaluates the “sociological debate on secularization” (17), metamodernism points to “informed naivety, a pragmatic idealism, a moderate fanaticism, oscillating between

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

235

sincerity and irony, deconstruction and construction, apathy and affect, attempting to attain some sort of transcendent position, as if such a thing were within our grasp” (Turner). In her protest of the show’s premature cancellation, the fan who went on a hunger strike informed Brit Marling that she was fighting late capitalism, the principles of which ostensibly led to the show’s cancellation. Numerous fans, through online and offline lobbying, aligned themselves with the idealism presented in the series, and sought their own collective eutopia in the continuity of the show, and through the pleasures of fandom. Their desire to see the text to its conclusion is also marked by the metafictionality of The OA. The metatextuality of Bandersnatch, in turn, manifests in the breaking of the filmic fourth wall when the viewer interacts with Stefan and the technological affordances that make the film interactive blur the boundary between the fictional world that Stefan lives in and the ‘real’ world of the viewer. Bandersnatch also becomes increasingly self-referential when the narrative changes slightly or characters behave differently in the ‘do-overs.’ Other texts of the Black Mirror mediaverse, too, reference each other through common existents and ‘easter eggs’. The experimentality and metatextuality of Bandersnatch, however, is different from that of The OA, for which it plays a crucial part in the show’s forensic fandom. The OA mediaverse illustrates how the text became ‘drillable’ because of narrative cues and hints that led fans to speculate and theorise about future seasons planned by the co-creators Zal Batmanglij and Brit Marling. In its final episode of Part 2, The OA also ostensibly broke the fourth wall and some characters travelled to a parallel dimension that is remarkably like that of the viewer, thus blurring the boundary between the ‘real’ world and the fictional world, thereby framing the text as metatextual. In the process of becoming metatextual, the text invited fans to enter the narrative universe of The OA and engage in fan practices that set it apart from other texts, such as performing the movements for interdimensional travel, hunger strikes outside the corporate offices of Netflix and the online initiative #SaveTheOA. Metamodernism and metatextuality, therefore, emerge not only as embedded in the narrative but also in the fan practices, particularly as a result of how the series concluded, thus significantly influencing the relationship between the spectator and the producer and/or distributor. The use of the second screen and engagement with the cast members and writers via social media further enabled the audiences to immerse themselves in the fandom and its performance. The second screen, as shown in the Good Omens mediaverse, is not only employed by fans and audience members but also those involved in the production of the text, particularly celebrities and public figures, such as the author and literary celebrity Neil Gaiman. The novel of Good Omens: The Nice and

236

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch boasted a large and dedicated fan community. Numerous fans of the text migrated to it because of the authors, Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman, who had a significant fan-following from their other works. Gaiman’s involvement in the production of the web series and his long-standing status as an author, master-storyteller and script writer enhance his literary celebrity. While celebrities shape the viewing habits of audiences, they also retain their individual public identities separate from the text, as is the case with Neil Gaiman. Gaiman’s celebrity is characterized by his literary accomplishments, fan engagements and social media presence. His literary works and style of writing as well as his self-presentation at literary events, conventions and during interviews contribute to his public persona and serve as paratexts in the sense that they add value to the texts he authors or contributes to. Gaiman’s popularity steadily grew with his successful publications and various works being adapted as web television series and/or audiobooks, thereby indicating that the literary celebrity cannot be separated from the ‘mainstream celebrity,’ not least due to heightened intertextualities and synergies of media and literary texts. Social media networks that Gaiman employs to directly interact with his fans provide the illusion of intimacy with the author, signalling the mediatization, personalization and commodification of his literary celebrity. The affordances of social media platforms like Tumblr and Twitter enable Gaiman to communicate with fans and advertise his exceptionalism as an author while mobilizing his fandom and encouraging consumption of various materials and texts, highlighting the commercial viability of his celebrity. Given his increased online presence, it can be argued that the celebrity, too, employs the second screen to contribute to the hype and relevance of the content they produce to maintain the ‘pleasures of connection’ with fans. Arguably, his online and offline activities supply the artistic and aesthetic value as described by Gray, thereby endowing his celebrity with a paratextual function. The paratextual function of the celebrity, therefore, is typified by the second screen, and further contributes to the tertiary world of the media text. Hence, the celebrity also affects textuality, while the social media platforms function as sites for community formation and for members of the communities to exchange ideas, information, and texts that in turn invite further appropriation and collaboration. Collaboration culture, as indicated in all case studies, is multifaceted. The analysis of fantext and fanfiction in the Good Omens mediaverse revealed yet another aspect of collaborative culture. The creation of tertiary worlds by fans, especially in the case of the Good Omens series, is connected to its metafictional nature. As with the metatextuality of The OA, the metafictional textuality of Good Omens is also embedded in the narrative, which is adopted by fanfiction

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

237

authors into works that maintain fidelity to the source text. The Good Omens mediaverse demonstrates the metafictional nature of the text by exposing the fantastical seams that emphasize its fictionality in a way that alerts audiences to the materiality of the text. Here, the blurring of the lines between the real and fictional worlds is not of import, however. Rather, their distinction comes into focus through the worldbuilding and mythologisation of the text, revealing primary and secondary worlds as understood by James and Mendlesohn. Through the metafictional nature of the text, the Good Omens mediaverse revealed the tertiary world created by fantexts and fanfiction. Characterised by the archontic principle, this tertiary world reveals the textual and interpretive competencies of audiences, particularly when certain ‘fanons’ make it to ‘canon’ and become ‘ascended fanon’, or when popular ‘ships’ characterize the performance of actors playing the characters of that ship. Tertiary worlds created by fans, therefore, aim not only at textual revision but can also contribute to textual cohesion. The common thread concerning collaborative culture and textual cohesion in all the discussed mediaverses highlights the notion that the framework of textuality of the respective text is largely determined by its contents, paratexts and intertexts, production, consumption and prosumption practices as well as platforms, networks and delivery channels that enable a dialogue between the various stakeholders. In the examination of the four mediaverses in this project, the cultural and social operations and interactions that guide the adeptness of the audiences were made apparent. The mediaverse, with its networked construction, is informed by the practices of its three stakeholders, taking into account the dynamics that Lamerichs mentions and applying them not only to the audiences but also to the interactions between the audiences, producers, and platforms. Media corporations and institutions as well as individuals responsible for media production are often tasked with monitoring these interactions to identify patterns of textual consumption, thereby developing textualities that the audiences seek. John Fiske employed Bourdieu’s notion of cultural capital to highlight how fans and non-casual viewers aim to distinguish themselves from casual viewers by accumulating ‘popular culture capital’ or ‘fan cultural capital’ (“The Cultural Economy” 31–4). This reveals the legitimisation of the fan in the media field. Popular culture, often delivered to audiences through new media technologies which proliferate in everyday lives, generates economic, social, cultural and technical capital for fans through the various practices they may engage in. Social media networks and delivery platforms, however, not only enable fans to perform their fandom to accumulate fan cultural capital, but also aid media producers in receiving feedback from the audiences and creating para- and intertextual synergies that adapt to the contemporary infrastructure of new media in terms of ‘spreadability’ and ‘drillability’. In this

238

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

sense, the fan or the fan community may be identified as capital that producers aim to accrue to maximise the potential of their productions. Here, it is crucial to address media convergence with the help of the mediaverse, to identify how television culture and, by extension as well as in other possible case studies, popular culture at large is being reshaped. As convergence culture shapes the production and consumption of media content, it also invites creative marketing, publicity, self-presentation, and fan performance strategies for the accumulation of the various Bourdieusian and fan capitals. With the mediaverse, the boundary between technological and cultural convergence is deliberately blurred to illustrate the interconnectedness of content manufacturing that demands collaboration between media producers, consumers and delivery channels, networks, and platforms. The mediaverse lens is equipped for the case-by-case examination because of its feature of ‘diverging’ as opposed to the ‘converging’ nature, which largely stems from a textual universe growing outwards, thus defining and redefining its textuality over time. The augmentation of technological and cultural progress in new media transforms a text so that homing in on the convergence culture practices that identify the change in media consumption and production are no longer sufficient. Instead, the mediaverse engages in possibilities of the enlarged roles and interwoven perspectives of producers, consumers, and platforms to integrate changing practices and map how and why media texts are becoming increasingly dynamic and what this might mean for the global media landscape. A concept as broad as the mediaverse, which focuses on media divergence as opposed to convergence, is not without its drawbacks. Since the parameters that define the mediaverse have immense scope, a mediaverse examination is at risk of becoming ambiguous or obscure. Due to heterogeneous producers, audiences and fans, there is a proliferation of media phenomena or texts that can be studied as part of a mediaverse. Certain phenomena and practices, however, are more prominent than others, which is why each case study has to discern relevant components to avoid overstating or overemphasizing the role of specific media subcultures. Nevertheless, the comprehensive scope of the mediaverse allows for interdisciplinarity and a mixed-methods approach. Furthermore, the mediaverse approach can be applied to big-data analysis as well as limited-sample based (n)ethnographies and examples, as in the present study. The position of the researcher, as an aca/fan, ethnographer and/or analyst can strengthen these examinations and continue to develop the analysis of the texts and textualities under investigation from different angles. This study thus serves as an invitation to further define and sharpen the mediaverse approach across divergent sub-fields, but also to open new lines of inquiry that I have not considered in detail, such as the

6

Conclusion: The Mediaverse Toolkit

239

roles of gender, ethnicity, and politics within a fan community. A further crucial aspect to consider is the temporality of a mediaverse. Due to its divergence, mediaverses are in a state of constant flux, particularly in instances of remediation. While the mediaverse text is potentially unlimited, it also can become outdated, at which point the approach can chart the history of the text and its influences. For example, the Star Trek mediaverse before the online streaming boom or the revival of the franchise with DSC would appear vastly different than how it is presented in this study—as the text expands, so does its mediaverse. In a study anchored by media audiences, spectatorship and reception, it is important to underline that the text and the pleasures associated with it are subjective and customised based on the very structures that the mediaverse employs, such as the paratexts and intertexts, accessibility to communities, media channels and distribution networks, and relationships with the producers. While the practices of audiences are individualised, they can be interpreted and contextualised using the mediaverse to mark cultural trends and behaviours in new media. This study underlines the input and imagination of both individual audience member as well as audience communities. In doing so, the mediaverse not only identifies the archontic and dynamic nature of texts and their respective textualities but also recognizes recurring practices among the stakeholders of new media. Thus, the mediaverse provides an efficient tool to unearth ideas and concepts of emerging media trends.

Works Cited

Abidin, Crystal. Internet Celebrity: Understanding Fame Online. Emerald Publishing Limited, 2018. Adler, Patricia A. and Peter Adler. Membership Roles in Field Research. Sage, 1987. Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Revised edition, Verso, 1991. Andreeva, Nellie. “#SaveLucifer: Can Warner Bros. TV Find New Home For Canceled Cult Favorite?” Deadline, Deadline, 12 May 2018, deadline.com/2018/05/save-lucifer-newhome-warner-bros-canceled-fox-1202388811/. Atkinson, Sarah. “Transmedia Film: From Embedded Engagement to Embodied Experience,” The Routledge Companion to Transmedia Studies, edited by Matthew Freeman and Raniera Rampazzo Gambrato, Routledge, 2019, pp. 15–24. Attebery, Brian. “Structuralism.” The Cambridge Companion to Fantasy Literature, edited by Edward James and Farah Mendlesohn, Cambridge UP, 2012, pp. 81–90. “Authenticity.” Oxford Learner’s Dictionary, https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/ definition/american_english/authenticity. Bacon-Smith, Camille. Enterprising Women: Television Fandom and the Creation of Popular Myth. Pennsylvania UP, 1991. Baker, Brian. Science Fiction. Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Barnes, Renee. Uncovering Online Commenting Culture: Trolls, Fanboys and Lurkers. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. Batzke, Ina. “From Series to Seriality: Star Trek’s Mirror Universe in the Post-Network Era.” Fighting For the Future: Essays on Star Trek: Discovery, edited by Sabrina Mittermeier and Mareike Spychala, Liverpool UP, 2020, pp. 105–125. Bernardi, Daniel Leonard. Star Trek and History: Race-ing Toward a White Future, Rutgers UP, 1998. Berry, R. M. “Metafiction.” The Routledge Companion to Experimental Literature, edited by Joe Bray, Alison Gibbons and Brian McHale, Routledge, 2012, pp. 128–40.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2024 A. Shah, The Mediaverse and Speculative Fiction Television, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43739-8

241

242

Works Cited

Binney, Sara Helen. “Oscillating Towards the Sublime.” Notes on Metamodernism, 2015, http://www.metamodernism.com/2015/04/02/oscillating-towards-the-sublime-2/. Bischoff, Mark and Ulrike Ordon. The Syntax of Film: A Glossary. 3rd edition, 2012. Booth, Paul, editor. A Companion to Media Fandom and Fan Studies. Wiley Blackwell, 2018. Bould, Mark, et. al, editors. The Routledge Companion to Science Fiction. Routledge, 2009. Bray, Joe, et. al, editors. The Routledge Companion to Experimental Literature. Routledge, 2012. Broe, Dennis. Birth of the Binge: Serial TV and the End of Leisure. Wayne State UP, 2019. Brojakowski, Benjamin. “Spoiler Alert: Understanding Television Enjoyment in the Social Media Era.” Television, Social Media, and Fan Culture, edited by Alison F. Slade et. al, Lexington Books, 2015. Brooker, Charlie, Annabel Jones and Jason Arnopp. Inside Black Mirror: The Illustrated Oral History. Ebury Publishing, 2018, ePub. Burgess, Jean. “Convergence.” Keywords for Media Studies, edited by Laurie Ouellette and Jonathan Gray, NYUP, 2017. Burlingame, Jon. “Composer Jeff Russo Boldly Takes ’Star Trek: Discovery’ Into New Musical Territory.” Variety, Variety, 21 Sept. 2017, variety.com/2017/artisans/production/ composer-jeff-russo-star-trek-discovery-1202564832/. Cabral Martins, Ana. “Netflix and TV-as-Film: A Case Study of Stranger Things and The OA.” Netflix at the Nexus, edited by Theo Plothe and Amber M. Buck, Peter Lang, 2019. Captain_Kieren, “Five Times Aziraphale Saves Crowley (And One Time He Fails).” Archive of Our Own, 6 June 2019, https://archiveofourown.org/works/19103938/chapters/453 91867#workskin. Canavan, Gerry. “Hope, with Teeth: On “Black Museum”.” Through the Black Mirror: Deconstructing the Side Effects of the Digital Age, edited by Terence McSweeney and Stuart Joy, Palgrave Macmillan, 2019, pp. 257–70. Carden, Clarissa and Margaret Gibson. “Living on Beyond the Body: The Digital Soul of Black Mirror.” The Moral Uncanny in Black Mirror, edited by Margaret Gibson and Clarissa Carden, Palgrave Macmillan, 2021 pp. 141–152. Carroll, Lewis and Joel Stewart. Jabberwocky. Candlewick Press, 2003. Cashmore, Ellis. Celebrity/Culture. Routledge, 2006. Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film, Cornell UP, 1978. Click, Melissa A. Anti-Fandom: Dislike and Hate in the Digital Age. NYUP, 2019. Clute, John and John Grant, editors. The Encyclopedia of Fantasy. Orbit, 1999. Coker, Catherine. “Not Your Daddy’s Star Trek: Rebooting a Franchise and Rewriting a Fandom.” Fan Phenomena: Star Trek, edited by Bruce E. Drushel, Intellect 2013, pp. 20–9. Consalio, Mia. Discourses of Race in Science Fiction. Newsday, 1996. Coppa, Francesca. The Fanfiction Reader: Folk Tales for the Digital Age. Michigan UP, 2017. ---. “Women, Star Trek, and the Early Development of Fannish Vidding.” Transformative Works and Cultures, no. 1, doi: https://doi.org/10.3983/twc.2008.044. Costello, Victor and Barbara Moore. “Cultural Outlaws: An Examination of Audience Activity and Online Television Fandom.” Television New media, vol. 8, May 2007, pp. 123– 143, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476406299112. Couldry, Nick, et. al Media Events in a Global Age. Routledge, 2009.

Works Cited

243

Dayan, Daniel and Elihu Katz. Media Events: The Live Broadcasting of History. Harvard UP, 1992. Derecho, Abigail. “Archontic Literature: A Definition, a History, and Several Theories of Fan Fiction.” Fan Fiction and Fan Communities in the Age of the Internet, edited by Karen Hellekson and Kristina Busse, McFarland, 2006, pp. 61–78. “Doctor Who: Lockdown!” Tardis, https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Doctor_Who:_Loc kdown! Drushel, Bruce E. Fan Phenomena: Star Trek. Intellect, 2013. Durham, Meenakshi Gigi and Douglas M. Kellner. Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks. Blackwell Publishing, 2006. Duffett, Mark. Understanding Fandom: An Introduction to the Study of Media Fan Culture. Bloomsbury, 2013. “Ephraim and Dot (Episode).” Memory Alpha, memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Ephraim_ and_Dot_(episode). Evans, Arthur B. “Nineteenth-century sf.” The Routledge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by Mark Bould et. al, Routledge, 2009, pp. 13–22. Evans, Elizabeth. Transmedia Television: Audiences, New media and Daily Life. Routledge, 2011. Falasca-Zamponi, Simonetta. “History, Ordinary Culture, and “Structure of Feeling”: Revisiting Raymond Williams.” Il Pensiero Storico, no. 5, 2020, pp. 99–118. “FAQs.” Neil Gaiman | FAQs, https://www.neilgaiman.com/FAQs. Feßler, Nadine. “To engage in literature.” Notes on Metamodernism, 2012, http://www.met amodernism.com/2012/05/29/to-engage-in-literature/. Fisher, Sue. “Identifying Video Game Addiction in Children and Adolescents.” Addictive Behaviors, 19, no. 5, 1994, pp. 545–553, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4603(94)900 10-8. Fiske, John and John Hartley. Reading Television. 2nd edition, Routledge, 2003. Fiske, John. “The Cultural Economy of Fandom.” The Adoring Audience: Fan Culture and Popular Media, edited by Lisa A. Lewis, Routledge, 1992, pp. 30–49. Frankel, Valerie Estelle, editor. Fan Phenomena: Harry Potter. Intellect, 2019. Franssen, Gaston and Rick Honings. Celebrity Authorship and Afterlives in English and American Literature. Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. Freeman, Matthew and Renira Rampazzo Gambarato, editors. The Routledge Companion to Transmedia Studies. Routledge, 2019. Friedman, Michael Jan. Kahless, Pocket Books, 1996. Fuchs, Christian. Social Media: A Critical Introduction. 2nd ed., SAGE Publications, 2017. Fullerton, Huw. “Good Omens Season 2 Release Date: Cast, Trailer, Plot for Neil Gaiman’s Sequel.” RadioTimes.com, https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/sci-fi/good-omens-season-2/. Gaiman, Neil. American Gods. William Morrow and Company, 2001. ---. The Ocean at the End of the Lane. William Morrow and Company, 2013. Gajjala, Radhika, Jeanette M. Dillon and Samara Anarbaeva. “Prosumption.” The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, edited by Patrick Rössler, Cynthia A. Hoffner and Lisbet van Zoonen, John Wiley & Sons, 2017, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/978111878 3764.wbieme0178. Garcia-Siino, Leimar et al. The Routledge Handbook of Star Trek. Routledge, 2022. Gennet, Gerard. Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation. Cambridge UP, 1997.

244

Works Cited

Geraghty, Lincoln. “Television Since 1980.” The Routledge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by Mark Bould et. al, Routledge, 2009, pp. 144–52. Gibson, Margaret and Clarissa Carden, editors. The Moral Uncanny in Black Mirror. Palgrave Macmillan, 2021. Gilbert, Anne. “Hatewatch with Me: Anti-Fandom as Social Performance.” Anti-Fandom: Dislike and Hate in the Digital Age, edited by Melissa A. Click, NYUP, 2019, pp. 62–80. Gill, R. B. “The Uses of Genre and the Classification of Speculative Fiction.” Mosaic: a Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature, vol. 46, no. 2, June 2013, pp. 71–85, doi: https://doi.org/10.1353/mos.2013.0021. Gjeslvik, Anne and Rikke Schubart, editors. Women of Ice and Fire: Gender, Game of Thrones, and Multiple Media Engagements. Bloomsbury, 2016. “Good Omens.” Fanlore, “Good Omens.” Fanlore, https://fanlore.org/wiki/Good_Omens. Graham, Nicholas. “The Media and the Public Sphere.” The Information Society Reader, edited by Frank Webster et. al, Psychology Press, 2004, pp. 357–65. Gray, Jonathan. Show Sold Separately: Promos, Spoilers, and Other Media Paratexts. New York UP, 2010. Gray Jonathan, et. al Fandom Identities and Communities in a Mediated World. New York UP, 2017. Griffiths, Mark D. and Alex Meredith. “Videogame Addiction and its Treatment.” J Contemp Psychother 39, 2009, pp. 247–253, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-009-9118-4. Habermas, Jürgen. “Notes on Post-Secular Society.” New Perspectives Quarterly, vol. 25, no. 4, October 2008, pp. 17–29, doi: https://doi.org/10.111/j.1540.5842.2008.01017.x. Hales, N. Katherine and Nick Montfort. “Interactive Fiction.” The Routledge Companion to Experimental Literature, edited by Joe Bray et. al, Routledge, 2012, pp. 452–465. Hand, Richard J. “Reflected Anxieties and Projected Dystopias: Black Mirror, Domestic Media and Dark Fantasy.” The Moral Uncanny in Black Mirror, edited by Margaret Gibson and Clarissa Carden, Palgrave Macmillan, 2021, pp. 19–39. Harrison, Ellie. “The OA: Fan goes on hunger strike outside Netflix HQ following series cancellation.” Independent, 27 Aug. 2019, https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertain ment/tv/news/oa-netflix-cancelled-fan-hunger-strike-emperial-young-a9080061.html. Hayward, Susan. Cinema Studies: The Key Concepts. 2nd edition, Routledge, 2001. Hellekson, Karen and Kristina Busse, editors. Fan Fiction and Fan Communities in the Age of the Internet. McFarland, 2006. Hepp, Andreas and Friedrich Krotz, editors. Mediatized Worlds: Culture and Society in a Media Age. Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Hess, Mickey. “Hip-Hop Realness and the White Performer.” Critical Studies in Media Communication, vol. 22, no. 5, August 2006, pp. 372–289, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/073 93180500342878. Hills, Matt. Fan Cultures. Routledge, 2005. ---. “Fandom.” The Routledge Companion to Imaginary Worlds, edited by Mark J. P. Wolf, Routledge, 2018, pp. 274–280. Iacovino, Kayla. “CBS CEO Les Moonves: ‘Netflix Wanted Star Trek.’” TrekMovie.com, 29 Feb. 2016, trekmovie.com/2016/02/29/cbs-ceo-les-moonves-netflix-wanted-star-trek/. “Ineffable Husbands.” Shipping Wiki, https://shipping.fandom.com/wiki/Ineffable_Hus bands.

Works Cited

245

James, Edward, and Farah Mendlesohn. The Cambridge Companion to Fantasy Literature. Cambridge UP, 2012. ---. The Cambridge Companion to Science Fiction. Cambridge UP, 2003. James, Edward. “Tolkien, Lewis and the Explosion of Genre Fantasy.” The Cambridge Companion to Fantasy Literature, edited by Edward James and Farah Mendlesohn, Cambridge UP, 2012, pp. 62–77. Jenkins, Henry, Sam Ford and Joshua Green. Spreadable Media, NYUP, 2013. Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New media Collide. NYUP, 2006. ---. Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers: Exploring Participatory Culture. NYUP, 2006. ---. Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture. Routledge, 1992. Jensen, Klaus Bruhn. “Intermediality.” The International Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and Philosophy, edited by Klaus Bruhn Jensen et al., John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2016, pp. 1–12. Johnson, Derek, editor. A Guide to Changing Channels. Routledge, 2018. Johnson-Smith, Jan. American Science Fiction TV: Star Trek, Stargate and Beyond. I.B.Tauris, 2005. Johnson, Mike and Kirsten Beyer, writers. Star Trek: Discovery—Captain Saru. IDW Publishing, 2019. ---. Star Trek: Discovery—The Light of Kahless. IDW Publishing, 2017. Kirby, David A. “The Changing Popular Images of Science.” The Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication, edited by Kathleen Hall Jamieson et. al, Oxford UP, 2017, pp. 291–300. Kozinets, Robert V. Netnography: The Essential Guide to Qualitative Social Media Research. 3rd ed. Sage, 2020. Lamerichs, Nicole. Productive Fandom: Intermediality and Affective Reception in Fan Cultures. Amsterdam UP, 2018. Lawson, Mark. “Sherlock and Doctor Who: Beware of Fans Influencing the TV They Love.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 3 Jan. 2014, www.theguardian.com/tv-andradio/tvandradioblog/2014/jan/03/sherlock-doctor-who-fans-influencing-tv. Lee, Hye Jin and Mark Andrejevic. “Second-Screen Theory: From the Democratic Surround to the Digital Enclosure.” Connected Viewing: Selling, Streaming & Sharing Media in the Digital Era, edited by Jennifer Holt and Kevin Sanson, Routledge, 2014, pp. 40–60. Leonard, Suzanne and Diane Negra. “Celebrity.” Keywords for Media Studies, edited by Laurie Ouellette and Jonathan Gray, NYUP, 2017, pp. 28–31, http://www.jstor.com/stable/j. ctt1gk08zz.12. Levinson, Jay Conrad and Seth Godin. The Guerrilla Marketing Handbook. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1994. Lizardi, Ryan. Mediated Nostalgia: Individual Memory and Contemporary Mass Media. Lexington Books, 2015. LoConto, David G. Social Movements and the Collective Identity of the Star Trek Fandom: Boldly Going Where No Fans Have Gone Before. Lexington Books, 2020. Macleod, Ishbel. “BBC Invites Doctor Who Fans to Pilot the Tardis in Youtube Takeover.” The Drum, The Drum, 22 Aug. 2014, www.thedrum.com/stuff/2014/08/22/bbc-invitesdoctor-who-fans-pilot-tardis-youtube-takeover. Marie, Wendy-Marie. “On the Search for “Authenticity”.” www.wendymariemartin.com, 2018, https://www.wendymariemartin.com/post/on-the-search-for-authenticity.

246

Works Cited

Marshall, David P. and Sean Redmond. A Companion to Celebrity. Wiley Blackwell, 2016. Marshall, David P. “The Promotion and Presentation of the Self: Celebrity as Marker of Presentational Media.” Celebrity Studies, vol. 1 no. 1, March 2010, pp. 35–48, doi: https:// doi.org/10.1080/19392390903519057. Marwick, Alice E. Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity, and Branding in the Social Media Age. Yale UP, 2013. Marx, Leo. The Machine in the Garden: Technology and the Pastoral Ideal in America. Oxford UP, 1979. McKee, Alan. An Introduction to the Public Sphere. Cambridge UP, 2005. Mendleson, Farah. “Introduction: Reading Science Fiction.” The Cambridge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by James Edward and Farah Mendlesohn, Cambridge UP, 2003, pp. 1–12. Mittell, Jason. “Forensic Fandom and the Drillable Text.” Spreadable Media, edited by Jenkins et al., web exclusive essay, https://spreadablemedia.org/essays/mittell/index.html#. YW_b-3nRb0o. ---. “Genre.” Keywords for Media Studies, edited by Laurie Ouellette and Jonathan Gray, NYUP, 2017, pp. 81–3. Mittermeier, Sabrina. “Unlikely Heroes?: Celebrity Activism in Times of Trump and Brexit.” Resist!: Protest Media and Popular Culture in the Brexit-Trump Era, edited by Giuliana Monteverde and Victoria McCollum, Rowman & Littlefield, 2020, pp-51–67. Mittermeier, Sabrina and Mareike Spychala. Fighting for the Future: Essays on Star Trek: Discovery. Liverpool UP, 2020. Monfort, Ray A. “A Brief History of Television for the Layman.” Hollywood Quarterly, Vol. 4, no. 2, 1949, pp. 197–200. Moran, Joe. Star Authors: Literary Celebrity in America. Pluto Press, 2000. Murphy, Graham J. “Dystopia.” The Routledge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by Mark Bould et al., Routledge, 2009, pp. 473–77. Murray, Rebecca, “‘Good Omens’—Michael Sheen and David Tennant Interview on Starring in the Adaptation of Neil Gaiman’s Book.” Showbizjunkies.com, 19 April 2019, https:// www.showbizjunkies.com/tv/good-omens-david-tennant-michael-sheen-interview/. "Mythologize, v." OED Online, Oxford UP, March 2020, www.oed.com/view/Entry/124699. Accessed 17 April 2020. Neil Gaiman, https://www.neilgaiman.com/. O’Day, Andrew, “Event TV: Fan Consumption of Televised Doctor Who in Britain (1963Present).” Doctor Who in Time and Space: Essays on Themes, Characters, History and Fandom, 1963–2012, edited by Gillian I. Leitch, McFarland, 2013, pp. 7–24. Ohannessian, Kevin. “Neil Gaiman, the BBC and 124 Twitterers Make Fiction.” Fast Company, 12 March 2009, https://www.fastcompany.com/1475513/neil-gaiman-bbcand-124-twitterers-make-fiction. Pak, Chris. “The American Pastoral and the Conquest of Space.” Terraforming, 2016, pp. 56– 97., doi:https://doi.org/10.5949/liverpool/9781781382844.003.0003. Pande, Rukmini. Fandom, Now in Color: A Collection of Voices. Iowa UP, 2020. ---. “What do you Mean by “Fan?” Decolonizing Media Fandom Identity.” A Companion to Media Fandom and Fan Studies, edited by Paul Booth, Wiley Blackwell, 2018. Peterson, Richard A. Creating Country Music: Fabricating Authenticity. Chicago UP, 1997.

Works Cited

247

Petzold, Dieter. “Fantasy Fiction and Related Genres.” Modern Fiction Studies, Vol. 32, no. 1, Johns Hopkins UP, 1986, pp. 11–20. Polla, J A. and Steve Cisler. “Connecting to the Global Internet.” Library Journal, 1976, pp. 38–40. Poster, Mark. CyberDemocracy: Internet and the Public Sphere. University of California, Irvine, 1995. Pratchett, Terry and Neil Gaiman. Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch, Gollancz, 1990. Pugh, Sheenagh. The Democratic Genre: Fan Fiction in a Literary Context. Seren, 2005. Rauscher, Judith. “‘Into A Mirror Darkly’: Border Crossing and Imperial(ist) Feminism in Star Trek: Discovery.” Fighting For the Future: Essays on Star Trek: Discovery, edited by Sabrina Mittermeier and Mareike Spychala, Liverpool UP, 2020, pp. 243–264. Reid, Robin Anne. “Fan Studies.” The Routledge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by Mark Bould et. al, Routledge, 2009, pp. 204–213. Reijnders, Stijn, et. al 2017. “Fandom and Fan Fiction.” In The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, edited by Patrick Rössler, Cynthia A. Hoffner and Lisbet van Zoonen, John Wiley & Sons: 1–12. Accessed March 31, 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/978111 8783764.wbieme0176. Renfro, Kim. “‘The OA’ fans are staging protests outside Netflix headquarters to save the show, and one woman is on her 4th day of a hunger strike.” Insider, 23 Aug 2019, https:// www.insider.com/the-oa-fans-protest-netflix-office-photos-interview-2019-8. Rieder, John. “Fiction, 1895–1926.” The Routledge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by Mark Bould et. al, Routledge, 2009, pp. 23–31. Roberts, Adam. “The Copernican Revolution.” The Routledge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by Mark Bould et. al, Routledge, 2009, pp. 3–12. Robinson, Michael G. “These are the Voyages? The Post Jubilee Trek Legacy on the Discovery, the Orville and the Callister.” Fighting For the Future: Essays on Star Trek: Discovery, edited by Sabrina Mittermeier and Mareike Spychala, Liverpool UP, 2020, pp. 81–103. Rogan, Alcena Madeline Davis. “Utopian Studies.” The Routledge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by Mark Bould et. al, Routledge, 2009, pp. 308–16. Rojek, Chris. Celebrity. Reaktion Books, 2001. ---. Presumed Intimacy: Para-Social Relationships in Media, Society and Celebrity Culture. Polity Press, 2016, eBook. Rooksby, Emma and Jean Hillier, editors. Habitus: A Sense of Place. 2nd ed, Routledge, 2005. Schechner, Richard. “Performance Studies: An Introduction.” 3rd ed, Routledge, 2013. Schmidt, Leonie and Jeroen De Kloet. “Bricolage: Role of Media.” The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, edited by Patrick Rössler, Cynthia A. Hoffner and Lisbet van Zoonen, John Wiley & Sons, 2017, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764. wbieme0116. Sheldon, Pavica. Social Media: Principles and Applications. Lexington Books, 2015. Siapera, Eugenia. Understanding New Media. Sage, 2017. Silverman, Riley. “Star Trek’s New Non-Binary Star Blu Del Barrio Talks Their Debut.” SYFY WIRE, 7 Jan. 2021, https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/star-treks-new-non-binarystar-blu-del-barrio-talks-their-debut Sim, Gerald. “Individual Disruptors and Economic Gamechangers: Netflix, New media, and Neoliberalism.” The Netflix Effect: Technology and Entertainment in the 21st Century,

248

Works Cited

edited by Kevin McDonald and Daniel Smith-Rowsey, Bloomsbury Academic, 2016, pp. 185–202. Stableford, Brian. “Science Fiction before the Genre.” The Cambridge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by James Edward and Farah Mendlesohn, Cambridge UP, 2003, pp. 15–31. Staff, StarTrek.com. “Bryan Fuller Named Co-Creator of New Star Trek TV Series.” Star Trek, 13 Apr. 2019, intl.startrek.com/article/bryan-fuller-named-co-creator-of-new-startrek-tv-series. Staff, StarTrek.com. “International Broadcasters Set for New Star Trek Series.” Star Trek, 13 Apr. 2019, intl.startrek.com/article/international-broadcasters-set-for-new-star-trekseries. Staff, TrekCore. “CBS Confirms STAR TREK 2017 Episodes To Arrive Weekly • TrekCore.com.” TrekCore.com, 3 May 2016, blog.trekcore.com/2016/05/cbs-confirms-startrek-2017-episodes-to-arrive-weekly/. Stanfill, Mel. “The Unbearable Whiteness of Fandom and Fan Studies.” A Companion to Media Fandom and Fan Studies, edited by Paul Booth, Wiley Blackwell, 2018. “Star Trek: Interview: Discovery: Executive Producer Olatunde Osunsanmi.” Sci-Fi Bulletin, 21 Apr. 2019, scifibulletin.com/us-tv/star-trek/star-trek-interview-discovery-executiveproducer-olatunde-osunsanmi/. Stever, Gayle S. “Parasocial Theory: Concepts and Measures.” The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, edited by Patrick Rössler, Cynthia A. Hoffner and Lisbet van Zoonen, John Wiley & Sons, 2017, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764.wbi eme0069. Stobbart, Dawn. “Star Trek as a Transmedia Storyworld.” The Routledge Handbook of Star Trek, edited by Leimar Garcia-Siino et al., Routledge, 2022, pp. 161–167. Storey, John, editor. Cultural Studies and the Study of Popular Culture. 2nd ed, Edinburgh UP, 2003. Tagg, Caroline, et al. Taking Offence on Social Media: Conviviality and Communication on Facebook. Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. Telotte, J. P. The Essential Science Fiction Television Reader. Kentucky UP, 2008. Travers, Ben. “‘The OA’ Season 2: Netflix VP Says ‘Fans Will Be Very Happy’ with New Episodes and Confirms Five-Season Plan.” Indiewire, 29 July 2018. Trifonas, Peter Pericles. “Technological Dystopia in the Science Fiction Genre.” Handbook of Theory and Research in Cultural Studies and Education, edited by Peter Pericles Trifonas, Springer, 2020, pp. 429–39. Tryon, Charles. “TV Time Lords: Fan Cultures, Narrative Complexity, and the Future of Science Fiction Television.” The Essential Science Fiction Television Reader, edited by J. P. Telotte, Kentucky UP, 2008. Tulloch, John and Henry Jenkins. Science Fiction Audiences: Watching Doctor Who and Star Trek. Routledge 1995. Turner, Luke. “Metamodernism: A Brief Introduction.” Notes on Metamodernism, 2015, http://www.metamodernism.com/2015/01/12/metamodernism-a-brief-introduction/. Utichi, Joe. “Charlie Brooker & Annabel Jones on the ‘HUGE Undertaking’ of Creating Interactive ’Black Mirror: BANDERSNATCH’ Episode—Deadline Disruptors.” Deadline, 20 May 2019, deadline.com/2019/05/black-mirror-bandersnatch-charlie-brookerannabel-jones-disruptors-interview-1202610099/.

Works Cited

249

Van den Akker, Robin et. al, editors. Metamodernism: Historicity, Affect and Depth After Postmodernism. Rowman and Littlefield, 2017. Van Maanen, Hans. “Pierre Bourdieu’s Grand Theory of the Artistic Field.” How to Study Art Worlds: On the Societal Functioning of Aesthetic Values. Amsterdam UP, 2009, pp. 53–82. Van Rooij, Antonius J. et. al. “Online Video Game Addiction: Identification of Addicted Adolescent Gamers.” Addiction, 106, 2011, pp. 205–212, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1360-0443.2010.03104.x. Vint, Sheryl. “Preface: Unheimlich Star Trek.” Fighting for the Future: Essays on Star Trek: Discovery, Liverpool UP, 2020, pp.1–4. Veel, Kristin. “Latent Memory, Responsibility and the Architecture of Interaction.” The Moral Uncanny in Black Mirror, edited by Margaret Gibson and Clarissa Carden, Palgrave Macmillan, 2021, pp. 153–169. Von Stackelberg, Peter. “Transmedia Franchising: Driving Factors, Storyworld Development, and Creative Process.” The Routledge Companion to Transmedia Studies, Routledge, 2019, pp. 233–42. Whitacre, Andrea. “Looking in the Mirror: The Negotiation of Franchise Identity in Star Trek: Discovery.” Fighting For the Future: Essays on Star Trek: Discovery, edited by Sabrina Mittermeier and Mareike Spychala, Liverpool UP, 2020, pp. 21–40. Williams, Raymond. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Oxford UP, 1977. Wright, Peter. “Film and Television, 1960–1980.” The Routledge Companion to Science Fiction, edited by Mark Bould et. al, Routledge, 2009, pp. 90–101.

Filmography “Angel of Death.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 2, chapter 1, Netflix, 22 March 2019. “Away.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 1, chapter 4, Netflix, 16 Dec. 2016. “Battle at the Binary Stars.” Kane, Adam, director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 1 episode 2, CBS All Access, 24 Sept. 2017. Berman, Rick. Star Trek Generations. Paramount Pictures, 1994. Black Mirror. Created by Charlie Brooker, Channel 4 and Netflix, 4 Dec. 2011. Black Mirror: Bandersnatch. Written by Charlie Brooker, House of Tomorrow and Netflix, 28 Dec. 2018. “Black Museum.” McCarthy, Colm, director. Black Mirror, season 4 episode 6. Netflix, 29 Dec. 2017. Carmen Sandiego: To Steal or Not to Steal. Humphrey, Jos, director, Netflix, 10 March 2020. “Champion.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 1, chapter 3, Netflix, 16 Dec. 2016. “Children of Mars.” Pellington, Mark, director. Star Trek: Short Treks, season 2 episode 6, CBS All Access, 9 Jan. 2020. “Context is for Kings.” Goldsman, Akiva, director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 1 episode 3, CBS All Access, 1 Oct. 2017. “Empire of Light.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 1, chapter 7, Netflix, 16 Dec. 2016. “Ephraim and Dot.” Giacchino, Michael, director. Star Trek: Short Treks, season 2 episode 5, CBS All Access, 12 Dec. 2019. “Forking Paths.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 1, chapter 6, Netflix, 16 Dec. 2016.

250

Works Cited

Frakes, Jonathan. Star Trek: First Contact. Paramount Pictures, 1996. Freaky Friday. Directed by Mark Waters, Walt Disney Pictures, 2003. Good Omens. Created by Neil Gaiman, Amazon Video and BBC Two (UK), 31 May 2019. “Hard Times.” Mackinnon, Douglas, director. Good Omens, season 1, episode 3, 29 Jan. 2020. “Homecoming.” Batmanglij, Zal. The OA, part 1, chapter 1, Netflix, 16 Dec. 2016. “If Memory Serves.” Scott, T. J., director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 2 episode 8, CBS All Access, 7 March 2019. “In the Beginning.” Mackinnon, Douglas, director. Good Omens, season 1 episode 1, Amazon Prime, 15 Jan. 2020. Invisible River Directed by Matthew P. Watts and Jacob Barton, Fleeting Films, 2020. “Invisible Space.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 1, chapter 8, Netflix, 16 Dec. 2016. “Overview.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 2, chapter 8, Netflix, 22 March 2019. “Magic Mirror.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 2, chapter 3, Netflix, 22 March 2019. “Mirror Mirror.” Haigh, Andrew, director. The OA, part 2, chapter 6, Netflix, 22 March 2019. “Mudd’s Women.” Hart, Harvey, director. Star Trek: The Original Series, season 1 episode 6, NBC, 13 Oct. 1966. “New Colossus.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 1, chapter 2, Netflix, 16 Dec. 2016. “Nina Azarova.” Holmer, Anna Rose, director. The OA, part 2, chapter 7, Netflix, 22 March 2019. “Paradise.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 1, chapter 5, Netflix, 16 Dec. 2016. “Saints of Imperfection.” Barrett, David, director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 2 episode 5, CBS All Access, 14 Feb. 2019. “Saturday Morning Funtime.” Mackinnon, Douglas, director. Good Omens, season 1, episode 4, 5 Feb. 2020. “Scavengers.” Aarniokoski, Douglas, director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 3 episode 6, CBS All Access, 19 Nov. 2020. Sleepy Hollow. Created by Alex Kurtzman et. al, Fox, 16 Sept. 2013. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Created by Rick Berman, and Michael Piller, Paramount Domestic Television, 3 Jan. 1993. Star Trek: Discovery. Created by Bryan Fuller, and Alex Kurtzman, CBS All Access, 24 Sept. 2017. Star Trek: Enterprise. Created by Rick Berman, and Brannon Braga, United Paramount Network, 26 Sept. 2001. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Directed by Nicholas Meyer, Paramount Pictures, 4 June 1982. Star Trek: Lower Decks. Created by Mike McMahan, CBS All Access, 6 Aug. 2020. Star Trek: Picard. Created by Akiva Goldsman, Michael Chabon, Kirsten Beyer, and Alex Kurtzman, CBS All Access, 23 Jan. 2020. Star Trek: The Animated Series. Created by Gene Roddenberry, NBC, 8 Sept. 1973. Star Trek: The Next Generation. Created by Gene Roddenberry, Paramount Domestic Television, 28 Sept. 1987 Star Trek: The Original Series. Created by Gene Roddenberry, NBC, 8 Sept. 1966. Star Trek: Short Treks. Created by Bryan Fuller and Alex Kurtzman, CBS All Access, 4 Oct. 2018.

Works Cited

251

Star Trek: Voyager. Created by Rick Berman, et. al, United Paramount Network, 16 Jan. 1995. “Striking Vipers.” Harris, Owen, director. Black Mirror, season 5 episode 1, Netflix, 5 June 2019. “Such Sweet Sorrow.” Osunsanmi, Olatunde, director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 2 episode 13–14, CBS All Access, April 2019. Supernatural. Created by Eric Kripke, Warner Bros. Television, 13 Sept. 2005. “Synchronicity.” Watts, Matthew P. and Jacob Barton, directors. Invisible River, Fleeting Films, 2020. Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaIgjPbKZq8 “SYZYGY.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 2, chapter 4, Netflix, 22 March 2019. “The Book.” Mackinnon, Douglas, director. Good Omens, season 1, episode 2, 22 Jan. 2020. “The Butcher’s Knife Cares Not for the Lamb’s Cry.” Osunsanmi, Olatunde, director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 1 episode 4, CBS All Access, 8 Oct. 2017. “The Brightest Star.” Aarniokoski, Douglas, director. Star Trek: Short Treks, season 1 episode 3, CBS All Access, 6 Dec. 2018. “The Doomsday Option.” Mackinnon, Douglas, director. Good Omens, season 1, episode 5, 12 Feb. 2020. “The Medium & the Engineer.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 2, chapter 5, Netflix, 22 March 2019. “The Menagerie Part 1.” Daniels, Marc, director. Star Trek: The Original Series, season 1 episode 11, NBC, 17 Nov. 1966. “The Menagerie Part 2.” Butler, Robert, director. Star Trek: The Original Series, season 1 episode 12, NBC, 24 Nov. 1966. The OA. Created by Brit Marling and Zal Batmanglij, Netflix, 16 Dec. 2016. “The Tholian Web.” Wallerstein, Herb, director. Star Trek: The Original Series, season 3 episode 9, NBC, 15 Nov. 1968. “The Very Last Day of the Rest of Their Lives.” Mackinnon, Douglas, director. Good Omens, season 1, episode 6, 19 Feb. 2020. “The Vulcan Hello.” Semel, David, director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 1 episode 1, CBS All Access, 24 Sept. 2017. “Treasure Island.” Batmanglij, Zal, director. The OA, part 2, chapter 2, Netflix, 22 March 2019. “Unification III.” Dudkowski, Jon, director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 3 episode 7, CBS All Access, 26 Nov. 2020. “Vaulting Ambition.” Culpepper, Hanelle M., director. Star Trek: Discovery, season 1 episode 12, CBS All Access, 21 Jan. 2018. You vs. Wild. Created by Robert Buchta, Bear Grylls and Delbert Shoopman, Netflix, 10 April 2019.

Social Media References Index @amyitsx. “I read this in Lucius’s voice.” Twitter, 17 Nov. 2020, 12:36 a.m., https://twitter. com/amyltsx/status/1328482063494811649. @backic2. “What kind of experiment are you doing Hap??? What do you mean by “magic”? What did you do to The OA? #SaveTheOA (Btw love your work Jason I know you

252

Works Cited

are somewhere deep down..).” Twitter, 26 Aug. 2019, 10:24 p.m., https://twitter.com/bac kic2/status/1166084134827102210. @boazhsan. “Sometimes it feels a bit lazy—as if the multiple species and the space exploration and the characters aren’t enough, and that constant attempts to push the envelope on the sci-fi side are required to maintain people’s interest.” Twitter, 13 Aug. 2020, 5:24 a.m., https://twitter.com/boazhsan/status/1293750174947241986. @boazhsan. “Star Trek Discovery definitely has some good stuff regarding special effects, imaginative creation of space environments, and character development. But the sci fi part can be hard to swallow... the spore drive with tardigrade DNA, the parallel universes and the time travel...” Twitter, 13 Aug. 2020, 5:21 a.m., https://twitter.com/boazhsan/status/ 1293749405066002432. @britmarling. “ .” Instagram, 23 Aug. 2019, https://www.instagram.com/p/B1hKgS 9pUZG/?utm_source=ig_embed. @britmarling. “the end of #theoa “ ”—last text to Grandma Vu. ((( first image in post drawn by: @vicenteniro ))).” Instagram, 5 Aug. 2019, https://www.instagram.com/ p/B0ykCdLJYD5/?igshid=i1eh6h5w4d7q. @britmarling. “I have been telling stories with @z_al one way or another since we met when I was 18. At first we just told each other stories back and forth in our dorm rooms, later our living rooms,… https://instagram.com/p/BvUOn3GhKSZ/.” Twitter 22 March 2019, 4:44 p.m., https://twitter.com/britmarling/status/1109118641100988421. @btab66. “Aww that’s so adorable.” Tumblr, 19 Dec. 2019, 7:18 pm, https://neil-gaiman.tum blr.com/post/189765925821/hi-mr-gaiman-my-husband-and-i-just-watched-good @bubster1969. “Brit, I‘m a lifelong fan of sci-fi and other types of work, whatever you may like to call them. I’ve been a very big fan of your work ever since seeing Another Earth, followed by several more movies as well as The OA. I am saddened that you have felt this way. The world at large needs change. But you must know by now that you have a big following and that we all love you dearly and support you. Thank you for giving your creations to us. You are a work of art.” Instagram, 5 Aug. 2019, https://www.instagram. com/p/B0ykCdLJYD5/?igshid=i1eh6h5w4d7q. @clairekiechel. “Brit Marling is the only woman ever who created, wrote, produced AND starred in her own one hour Drama, and she doesn’t get enough credit for that milestone because she’s so humble If you’re making one of your lists, or looking for something to binge The OA Part II is on Netflix.” Twitter, 29 Nov. 2019, https://twitter.com/clairekie chel/status/1200482634939240448. @clairekiechel. “seriously Brit is literally trying to change the way we tell stories, to make it so women are not just sex objects or dead bodies but complicated heroines. It makes me sad that there’s a whole group of men who make fun of The OA & her work while using its ideas in their own work.” Twitter, 30 Nov. 2019, https://twitter.com/clairekiechel/sta tus/1200814177725472768. @DragonEyed. “[Bandersnatch] [sic] I was curious to see what would happen if I choose nothing at all, and…” Reddit, 29 Dec. 2018, 1:10 a.m., https://www.reddit.com/r/blackm irror/comments/aafzdl/bamdersnatch_i_was_curious_to_see_what_would/. @EddieSteak. “Star Trek: Picard was so astoundingly atrocious that I think there must be malicious intent behind it. Michael Chabon is either a totally witless and incompetent writer, or he purposely torpedoed Star Trek out of his own personal disdain for it and

Works Cited

253

its fans. Either way, fuck him.” Twitter, 27 March 2020, 1:46 p.m., https://twitter.com/ EddieSteak/status/1243338525262712835. @emperor-paulpatine. “Hi Neil! Just curious; Have you ever come across fan crossovers of different works of youts that has made you actually think “Yes, that’s incredible?” much love from Scotland.” Tumblr, 30 Sept. 2019, 4:28 a.m., https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/ post/188040731516/hi-neil-just-curious-have-you-ever-come. @FandomHow. “Is it possible that the cancellation…” Reddit, 8 Oct. 2020, 2:39 a.m., https:// www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/comments/j732v1/is_it_possible_that_the_cancellation/. @feanedhell. “So i am finally watching Good Omens, i know, i’m late. Loving it so far but I have to object, during the flashback in Paris Aziraphale says the best crepes are in Paris, that is simply not true, the best Crepes are in Bretagne, Paris wish they had our crepes. A proper crêpe blé noir in bretagne is amazing, you should try them if you ever get the chance.” Tumblr, 17 Feb. 2020, 8:36 am, https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/190876207 121/so-i-am-finally-watching-good-omens-i-know-im. @goodby-my-own-lover. “Hello! You’re happy with people writing fanfiction of your works, but do you think you would ever write fanfiction yourself? And if so, what would it be of?” Tumblr, 9 July 2019, 2:08 p.m., https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/186169517411/ hello-youre-happy-with-people-writing. @HerPikaHighness. “The saddest thing for me to see is people claiming to love Star Trek for all its “boldly go” motto yet consistently wants [sic] to push Trek back into some confined box and never allow it to experiment and grow. They don’t want Trek to boldly go, they want Trek to boldly stay in place.” Twitter, 4 April 2020, https://twitter.com/HerPikaHi ghness/status/1246313765538353152. @jasonsfolly. “To all of you who have been inspired and connected by our tale of inspiration and connection, we love you and thank you and are humbled by you. To those of you who learned the movements and are hoping that they have magic in them...they do. You are the magic.” Twitter, 26 Aug. 2019, 9:06 p.m., https://twitter.com/jasonsfolly/status/116 6064304988262400. @jasonsfolly. “Only a German directing two Ozzies and a Brit could tell America’s story so brilliantly. If anyone misses cheering the rebels fighting for freedom against a deranged, bizarrely wigged dictator and his brutal henchmen, don’t worry. There’s another election in 4 years. #Babyface.” Twitter, 9 Nov. 2020, 7:30 p.m., https://twitter.com/jasonsfolly/ status/1325868265458053121. @Jellybe. “This is one of my favourite fanfictions! All the chapters are so well written and you matched the characters perfectly. I really enjoy this and your ideas are so incredible! I’m looking forward for more awesome good Omens storys thank you so much for sharing your writing and idea Talent!!” Tumblr, 30 June 2019, 5:09 a.m., https://archiveofour own.org/comments/235542892. @JerryZulawski. “U men ew ect vepa. The entire point of having faith, as articulated by the show, is that you still have it when things seem impossible, when all the evidence is against you. That kind of faith is its own reward and a mode for living, one that binds people together.” Reddit, 8 Oct. 2020, 9:41 p.m., https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/com ments/j732v1/is_it_possible_that_the_cancellation/ @kari_izumi. “Enterprise did a whole episode about Archer being horny for the XO he hated while his dog was dying and Voy gave of Janeway/Paris lizard babies. I doubt this show

254

Works Cited

can dig under those low bars.” Twitter, 16 Aug. 2020, 10 p.m., https://twitter.com/kari_i zumi/status/1295088185114898432. @Kittinlovesyou. “I definitely think they were going to go into science fiction, alien or alien abduction and possibly a future dimension…” Reddit, 15 April 2021, 7:25 p.m., https:// www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/comments/mra07e/ufo_connection_more_details_in_comm ent_section/gumkqp8/?context=3. “Main Theories and Questions.” r/TheOA, Reddit, https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/wiki/ theoriesparttwo. @moonkidphrase. “Tumblr Year in Review 2019 Good Omens.” Tumblr, 3 Dec. 2019, 3:34 p.m., https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/189458398546/good-omens. @Mr_Picard. “If it isn’t exactly like 90s Trek it’s “not Star Trek.” I get the “shock” of Trek adapting to modern television standards but I don’t get why these people are hatewatching when there’s literally hundreds of hours of 90s Trek for them to watch and bathe in their nostalgia.” Twitter, 4 April 2020, 9:28 a.m., https://twitter.com/Mr_Picard/status/ 1246338753037303808. @nbj. “It’s incredibly how you keep these stories so perfectly in-tone for the series. Well done! Am looking forward to reading the rest.” Archive of Our Own, 7 June 2019, 6:45 p.m., https://archiveofourown.org/comments/231154000. “Neil Gaiman.” Tumblr, https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/. @neilhimself. “And that was The Doctor’s Wife. THANK YOU FOR READING AND WATCHING. If you haven’t seen it watch https://youtube.com/watch?v=eVqW4X jZwC8&feature=youtu.be which @RattyBurvil and I and a special guest made for you. #BiggerOnTheInside.” Twitter, 11 April 2020, 9:47 a.m., https://twitter.com/neilhimself/ status/1249061546359054336. @neilhimself. “I’m so glad. #BiggerOnTheInside.” Twitter, 12 April 2020, 3:33 a.m., https:// twitter.com/neilhimself/status/1249148724154163200. @neilhimself. “It existed, and was shot, but we ran out of CGI budget, iirc. #BiggerOnTheInside.” Twitter, 12 April 2020, 3:37 a.m., https://twitter.com/neilhimself/status/124914955 3061826560 @Passing_Thru_Forest and @takeme-to. “Black Mirror [Episode Discussion]—S04E06— Black Museum.” Reddit, 18 June 2018, 2:07 a.m., https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/ comments/7mrqld/black_mirror_episode_discussion_s04e06_black/e0ufit6/?context=3 @PCClarity. “How The OA has transcended film and television and revolutionized the form.” Reddit, 5 April 2019, 11:08 p.m., https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/comments/ b9womf/how_the_oa_has_transcended_film_and_television/. @plants-and-fuck-knows. “Hello Neil! I have a question and a thank you!....” Tumblr, 2 Nov. 2019, 9:45 a.m., https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/188765930786/hello-neil-i-have-aquestion-and-a-thank-you. “r/blackmirror.” Reddit, https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/. “r/TheOA.” Reddit, https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/. @remotedockofthebay. “Black Mirror Season 5 Discussion Hub.” Reddit, 20 July 2019, 5:43 a.m., https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/comments/bwzmxr/black_mirror_season_5_ discussion_hub/eu9xyuv/. @seekunrustlement. “The doctor’s story in Black Museum.” Reddit, 26 Nov. 2019, 9:02 p.m., https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/comments/e1s305/the_doctors_story_in_b lack_museum/f8t99xg/?context=3

Works Cited

255

@ShadowMann9. “It already has, and it has dug tunnels even deeper. Magic tardigrade as a propulsion system? F-bombs in the armory, fidget spinner starship, cannibals in a mirror universe, “Galactic Treaty”, not a single Star Trek past 2009 is Star Trek.” Twitter, 17 Aug. 2020, 1:13 a.m., https://twitter.com/ShadowMann9/status/1295136600976891904. @SteepedCalla. “Black Mirror—Episode Discussion: Striking Vipers.” Reddit, 18 Nov. 2019, 1:49 p.m., https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/comments/bwznoy/black_mir ror_episode_discussion_striking_vipers/f7xz5fw/?context=3 @the_geminatory. “I would love to think that both him and Kurtzman are just talent-less hacks, but the answer is both. They are talent-less hacks and they meant to tear down everything that Roddenberry had envisioned. #NotMyTrek.” Twitter, 27 March 2020, 8:24 p.m., https://twitter.com/the_geminator/status/1243619998456840192. “The House on Nob Hill.” r/TheOA, Reddit, https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/wiki/theori esparttwo. “The Unfinished House.” r/ThaOA, Reddit, https://www.reddit.com/r/TheOA/wiki/theories. “Trek Against Trump.” Facebook, 29 Sept. 2016, https://www.facebook.com/TrekAgainstT rumpOfficial/?ref=page_internal. @zadusk. “Hi Mr Gaiman. My husband and I just watched Good Omens for the ninth time and realised there‘s something tartan under the seat in the Bentley when they pick up Anathema, and Aziraphale takes whatever-it-is out when they get back to his bookshop. Our current theories are that it’s a diary or planner (my husband), or it’s a notebook (me—because Aziraphale doesn’t have a phone to take notes on!) Can you settle this?.” Tumblr, 19 Dec. 2019, 7:18 pm, https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/189765925821/himr-gaiman-my-husband-and-i-just-watched-good.