alixtii | Classism and Working-Class Characters in Fandom

Entry tags:

Classism and Working-Class Characters in Fandom

kattahj made me think about the intersection of racism and classism in deciding who gets written in fanfiction. Now, of course I think it is silly to say that "it is really just about class" or "it's really just about race"; the two work intersectionally in complicated ways. But if we agree with

kattahj that CoC's are more likely to get written if they aren't coded as working class (and I've come to this conclusion about my own writing already long ago) then it'd be interesting to see if we tend not to write working-class white characters in the same way.

I'm not including the crew of Serenity at all in this analysis, since they exist within a completely constructed fictional socio-economic system created precisely for the purpose of making the main cast's lives seem interesting, but I think we certainly do respond differently to Simon than, say, Jayne (in my part, with identification with the former and almost complete disinterest with the latter). The Weasley family, were I even to know enough Harry Potter canon to speak intelligently about them, would probably be set apart under the same logic. Similarly, I'm not including vampires or other characters that are unable to participate in the normal socioeconomic structures because they are set apart as nonhuman.

I don't tend to watch shows with a lot of working-class characters, since they are less likely to provide me the type of wish-fulfillment I'm looking for in my entertainment (which is precisely the kind of dynamic I'm talking about here), so, um . . . it's a rather short list. Please help me add to it!

Notes
By "class" I mean the sociological something-or-other (I'm much less versed in class theory than I am in gender, queer, or even race theory) which is the cumulative result of economic status and a complex system of social markers (occupation, neighborhood of residence, accent, speech patterns, education, circle of friends, etc.). I'm assuming that fandom could[n't] care less what Rupert Giles' salary as a Watcher was, but that his education and breadth of knowledge make him attractive to write; Buffy's ability to quote Sartre and Arthur Miller seemingly without effort disqualifies her from being working-class. (And yes, this assumption is itself classist in fascinating and disturbing ways, ways which I wish I knew enough class theory to be able to problematize further.)

I'm taking it for granted that our source canons deal horribly with class issues (as they do with racial ones), but that there are objectively interesting working-class characters in our canons (in the way that there are interesting female characters and interesting characters of color).

Nonwhite racial cultures are (almost?) automatically coded as working-class. I feel this is important to mention despite the fact that since all of these characters are white, it doesn't apply to any of them. But this is a reason why even if classism seems a sufficient explanation for why working-class characters of color get written less, that classism would still in all probability be racially-motivated. The way we construct the class structure is itself racist.

Feel free to criticize any of my assumptions in the comments; I'm in over my head here.

Okay, now let's get to the list. . . .

Faith
It certainly cannot be argued that Faith does not get written in Buffy fandom, especially concerning her status as only being a recurring character to has nowhere near the screentime of an Anya or Tara. Now part of this just down to Eliza Dushku being Eliza Dushku. But if we look at her character, what do we see? A character whose working-class coding and Slayerness are so caught up in each other that they interact in interesting ways. While at the beginning of her arc Faith is living her life in a run-down motel, her Slaying provides her an outlet to escape from the very beginning, as she manifests the "want, take, have" mentality (she is effectively able to rely on her Slayer capabilities to produce cultural capital), and the overall structure of her story is ultimately one of upward mobility; by "Chosen" she is still coded as working-class in terms of social markers, but she is relatively free of economic concerns and so those social markers are able to be fetishized without playing any meaningful part in the actual life of the character.

Xander Harris
Like Faith, Xander gets a lot of fic. Not much written by me, but in m/m slash fandom I know he's commonly paired with Spike. Angel, and other men.

Now Xander's family is coded as poor and in some ways working-class (and this is uniformly portrayed as a negative), but I'd argue that while Xander is made to materially feel the effect of his family lower economic status, he is always coded as firmly middle-class in terms of social markers. As a geek figure, he is an easy and deliberate audience identification figure, and speaks a language which is coded in many ways as middle-class white male. Note also that like Faith he is upwardly mobile; by the end of the series he is, however implausible, solidly middle-class in terms of not only social but also economic indices.

Cindy Mackenzie
When Mac was introduced, her class issues dominated her character: she was the perpetrator of an elaborate con in an attempt to get back at the rich kids and to get money for a new car which she desperately needed. Then the show itself went on to seriously drop the ball on these issues, never bringing up money in regard to Mac again, focusing only on her solidly-coded-middle-class computer skills, having her date an 09er, and show up at college without a word as to how she was paying for it. Mac gets a decent amount of fic, being involved in several popular het and femslash pairings.

Veronica Mars
Everything above for Mac goes double for Veronica. Veronica was never meaningfully coded as lower-class, as she spent her childhood as a honorary 02er. As the eponymous character, she features in a large share of VMars fic.

Rose Tyler
Obviously, there is a whole lot of Rose fic, by virtue of her being the female lead of the first two seasons of new Who. Just as obviously, Rose is freed from the constraints of her working-class life when the Doctor rescues her from the shop where she works while retaining several of the relevant social markers (her accent being the most obvious, I believe? British culture is not my specialty).

Jackie Tyler
I don't know how the fic writers respond to Jackie, who unlike Rose maintains her class identification until the very very end (when she and alt!Pete get together). Obviously she is written less than Rose, but exactly how much so I have no clue.

Dean and Sam Winchester
I don't watch this show, and thus don't know anything about them (except that Sam makes a really hot girl--I do read the genderswap). I know, of course, that there's a massive amount of fic written about them.

Kendra, Normal, Sketchy, and Other Dark Angel Characters
Do these even get written at all? I'm not really familiar with the fandom, but my impression that the main white characters to get written were Logan--obviously not working-class--and Jensen's character (who probably falls under the nonhuman exemption). Lydeker's not exactly working-class either (although his coding is rather complicated).

Conclusion (tentative since the preliminary sample size is so small)
There does seem to be some interest in working with characters who still carry the social markers of a working-class identity, as in the cases of Faith and Rose Tyler. (How deep and accurate these social markers are, both in the source text and in fic, is a question I am not qualified to answer, although I think there are meaningful ways that both characters do begin to act in accord with a middle-class ideal as they become upwardly mobile economically.) Re-reading the comments to my March 2007 post linked above, it seems fandom is perfectly willing to play with characters who are coded as working-class in what

heyiya calls a UK discourse of class, in which "class is experienced as written and performed in the body," but less eager to do so according to what she calls the American discourse in which class is more closely linked to cultural capacity and thus "is experienced as mobile: you get educated, you become middle class." (I'm condensing a lot of thought here;

heyiya, is there something crucial I've missed or misrepresented?)

I do think that fandom is less likely to write working-class characters, in general, than middle-class (and upper-class) characters. My intellectual and emotional responses to how problematic this is are somewhat in contradiction.

Even if the true nature of their working-class status is in dispute, it does seem that enough working-class white characters do get written to be able to say that they get written more often than working-class characters of color, and thus classism in fandom is not a sufficient explanation for why working-class characters of color are not written as much as one would otherwise expect. This conclusion shocks approximately no one.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Except for the part where there are almost always other Brits, both white and PoC saying the same things, yet everyone gets shot down as being Americans who don't know anything about how race works in the UK.

A lot of white people in the US get defensive about race for those same reasons. They think talking about race is disturbing the fragile harmony. It's called privilege.

I was debating whether to post something to this effect and had more or less decided against, but I completely agree.

There are different levels of dominance of different kinds of discourse about race in the US and UK, and in that sense

peasant_ is right: there is more emphasis on racial conflict in the US public sphere than in the UK equivalents. BUT the kinds of critiques of privilege that get made more and more often in fandom are not the dominant US discourses but critiques of them, and that's why it annoys people so much when they are countered with slightly different dominant discourses from a different (but not all that radically different at the end of the day) location.

I tried to post about this once here though I think I hedged too much with the personal to actually make much of an intervention.

the kinds of critiques of privilege that get made more and more often in fandom are not the dominant US discourses but critiques of them, and that's why it annoys people so much when they are countered with slightly different dominant discourses from a different (but not all that radically different at the end of the day) location.

Thanks for that. I have a tendency these days to knee-jerk to a default 'it's the bloody Yanks thinking everyone is the same as them again' position. It interferes with my ability to express things calmly so it is good to have an alternative POV stated.

One of the problems is that as the largest minority nationality on LJ, we Brits tend to dominate the non-US centric discourse ourselves, so as with largest minorities everywhere we have a tendency to think we are always right :oD

Of course in my case I always am right ;o)

I am glad you can hear what I am saying.

I want to point you that it is in effect exactly the same thing that everyone has been saying to you below, though. Perhaps you've seen the discussions of "tone" in race debates and how it is easier for some voices to be heard than others? I am afraid that the contrast between your response to my comment and the comments by nonwhite British and American fen is a bit of a case in point on that one.

Seconded. It's not often I feel like I'm getting "not american privilege" along with my white privilege but it's making me uncomfortable :/

Okay, to use your own tools back at you - you are only saying that because you have American privilege. Reading your profile you are an American, or at least sufficiently immersed in their culture that you read as one. So you have been immersed in the 'antagonism' model of racial situations, hence it is not surprising that you will interpret any response to them, including this one, according to the antagonistic model.

Yes, some Brits do use the American tools that were developed in an American context to address American problems, because people will use any toolset that attracts them. But that does not mean they are any more correct to use them in a British context than the Americans. For every Brit who likes those tools I could easily produce five of every background who thinks the whole methodology of the argument is a load of bollocks. Who is to say who is right and who is wrong? Could such a concept of rightness even be applied to a socio-political situation where you can only ever hope for majority consensus of opinion, never universality?

Besides, I was not addressing the question of whether the British analysis of race is any better than the American one, I was simply trying to describe the contrast between the two systems as I have observed them, to help explain to

alixtii why there is so frequently a problem - a thing he has commented on several times.

I am aware that a lot of people involved in these sorts of discussions are heavily invested in the idea of whole-world problems and solutions, and therefore wish to play down the national differences. As a geographer I naturally am more interested in the contrasts and similarities between nations just as as a historian I am interested in the differences and similarities between time periods. I therefore tend to focus on them and raise them where other people tend to blur things together. And of course as a Brit I am very aware of what US dominance of the LJ fandom space means.

Personally I think we can learn some things from American analysis of racial problems - I think multiculturalism sucks and has been a failed experiment and we need to start to look around for alternative models, in which case the US one can have things to offer. But the US model also has deep flaws, and to take the whole thing on board without due consideration for the differences between our countries would be insane.

Who is to say who is right and who is wrong?

The people being oppressed. In this case, not white people, regardless of country. If PoC in the UK say that something is a problem, the Nice White People of the UK do not get to say, "no it's not, because you're coming at it from an American perspective", which is what I consistently see happen.

But there are also plenty of non-white Brits who believe the American model to be flawed. That is what I meant by 'of every background'.

Besides, I don't agree with your belief that the people who are being oppressed have the final say. That is the whole point of this - I don't buy into the model. If you want me to accept the model you favour you will have to explain, with an awful lot of examples, exactly how it is applicable across all cultures and time periods and why the model that I currently favour is in fact so flawed. I am not incidentally encouraging you to do this since I have neither the time nor the patience for what would doubtless be a very lengthy and probably ultimately upsetting discussion and one which I would not expect - given quite a lot of past experience - to actually change either of our standpoints one jot, I am simply saying that is what you would have to do first if you wanted me to accept your viewpoint.

Besides, I don't agree with your belief that the people who are being oppressed have the final say.

The people who are being oppressed don't get the final say as to whether or not they're being oppressed?

Yes of course they do. But that doesn't mean that their analysis of how the world works and how the problems of the world can be solved is automatically correct. When I am experiencing homophobia I am in a good position to know how I feel about it, but I don't suddenly become an expert on how to solve the problem and all heterosexual people must automatically assume that everything I say on the subject is correct. And if I start to insist that all heterosexuals should do exactly as I say then, I believe, that is reinforcing the very distinctions and problems that I wish to get rid of.

When I say that I don't believe in the model I really mean I don't believe in the model - not just as regards racism where I happen to belong to the privileged majority but also as regards all the issues where I belong to the disadvantaged group.

There is more than one way of looking at the world.

Thank you. You have expressed what I was able to feel but couldn't fit in to words.

Besides, I don't agree with your belief that the people who are being oppressed have the final say. That is the whole point of this - I don't buy into the model.

Yes, well, that would be your privilege, wouldn't it?

It's your business (and privilege) if you don't accept the model. Heck, plenty of Americans don't accept it either. Sadly, the model doesn't require your belief in order to work painfully, powerfully well... but if you don't have to see it, or if you don't need to understand that model in order to provide you with useful survival skills (as most PoC do), then no amount of people trying to convince you will make a difference.

Here's what I'd suggest. If you've found plenty of non-white Brits who believe that the UK example is all about teh harmony (incidentally, there are plenty of Americans who think our society is racially harmonious too), then listen to them. Then if you still don't understand why some Brit non-white people go with the "conflict" model, go listen to them too. Your problem seems to be that a lot of the people saying this are American; fine. Ignore us and go talk to just the UK folk. The bottom line is, listen to the people who know best, rather than forming your own opinion in a vacuum (or under the partial influence of Americanocentrism, or your resistance to it). As you said, you don't have the time or the patience for a discussion on the subject, so don't talk. Just listen.

It's your business (and privilege) if you don't accept the model. Heck, plenty of Americans don't accept it either.

*nods*

That's a fact that sadly gets lost in many of these internet discussions of racism across geographical boundaries, whereas Americans often seem to be perceived to unanimously accept the academic models of racial injustice which are used when fen talk about racism. But the truth is that there is plenty of resistance on both continents, which leads one to suspect there may not be a meaningful geographical difference.

I haven't formed my opinion in a vacuum, I do listen as well as talk and that includes to UK folk. I also like to ask questions and elicit responses by posing theories and opinions. I do understand why some non-white Brits believe in the conflict model - that is their prerogative and I have no quarrel with them. I am very happy to agree to disagree on how the world works and why it works in the way it does. What I won't do is adapt my method of discourse to comply with the requirements of a model I don't believe in, especially if to do so would actively be harmful according to the model that I do believe in. I am aware that this is annoying to people who do believe in the 'patriarchy' model, but there isn't much I can do about that. If people don't want to agree to disagree then that also is their prerogative.

Can I point out, incidentally, that at no point in my comments have I said that I personally believe racial relations in Britain to be entirely harmonious - I've never mentioned what I do or do not believe on that subject. You seem to be just assuming you know what I believe based on my description of the difference between the US and the UK. I was describing the general ethos of the two countries as it strikes me, not my own beliefs, opinions and experiences.

Well, I'm a student of anthropology [are we exchanging qualifications now?], and I understand the need for different approaches in different cultural contexts, but: The US and UK are not that different. There are different historical contexts and the major minorities are different (which need to be taken into account), but at the end of the day, it's not the completely alien context you make it out to be. Why do you think the same 'tools' appeal to people living in America and Britain? And to say that they were developed entirely in an American context is plainly erroneous, do you really think that there was no exchange of ideas across the Atlantic before the Internet allowed black Americans to mind meld with minority groups around the world? Or do you just think that only white people were capable of travelling and writing?

And I would think that the POC/BME people living in both contexts who find that they do have a lot in common would have a little bit more knowledge of the contexts in which they live than you. Which I actually thought that you might be acknowledging in your original post, because you just might as well slap a 'By white people' in the middle of both those sentences for all you thought about what the people who are most affected by all this philosophising might think themselves.

Of course we don't even have the right to decide whether we're oppressed or not.

[How's my tone?]

No, it is not a completely alien context, but many of the things that lie at the roots of racism are different - the proportions of various ethnic groups, our perceptions of self identity and what we invest that in, the history of how we view our culture in relation to other people, and the very solutions we have tried to find to racial issues. To ignore all that strikes me as foolish. Where I think the main difference lies though, for the purpose of this discussion, is in willingness to talk about racism. Now obviously my knowledge of the US is not extensive, I've only visited it once and had contact with Americans here on LJ, plus of course experienced the sort of American culture that they export to our country. My experience though is that Americans talk about racism all the time whereas in the UK it is very seldom mentioned. Hence I characterise the UK as having a perception of harmony whist the US has a perception of antagonism. These of course are descriptions of the overriding 'typical' ethos of the two countries, not of every individual within that country. So yes, there will be people in each country who differ from the norm of that country, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the majority of those who see racial problems as a conflict issue in this country do themselves belong to an ethnic minority. That is exactly what I would expect, in fact - the people who are on the wrong side of disadvantage will frequently see a conflict where the privileged don't. But my observation of the Americans is that they are, all of them collectively as a nation, more willing to accept the conflict model as the default, and hence seem to think about and interpret these issues in those terms. They seem to do this incidentally not just for discussions of racism but all these socio-political questions. Now I could well be mistaken in my impression of them, Alixtii has just pointed out that there are apparently plenty of Americans who believe in the harmonious system. I mainly posited the theory as an explanation for those people who I keep seeing saying 'why oh why don't the Brits agree with everything we say'. There are of course many possible reasons why people might not agree with something another person says - I was suggesting a possible one.

Okay, I'm going take a step back here and ask: Just what are you saying?

Because you're giving the impression that you think white British people's (your?) experiences should be privileged over those of non-white Brits who are (for the most part) in closer agreement with non-white Americans than white Brits. This isn't because racism in America is the same as racism in Britain but because the situations are close enough that the same tools are useful for analysing both.

eg. in your experience British people don't talk about race and racism. In my experience we do, but let's say we're less open about it than Americans. Does that mean that the same feelings and ideas aren't at work underneath? I can't count the number of times the 'clash of civilisations' model has been used with respect to British Muslims, for example. And, as has been said before, even though there may be different models (conflict and consensus) used, the same hierarchy is in place.

Maybe you should stop accusing people of not listening to you and as plainly as possible, just say what you mean.

My original comment was describing a perceived difference in the general culture of the US as opposed to the general culture of the UK, and positing the theory that this difference was contributing to why so many discussions between Brits and Americans on race result in the Brits apparently denying the existence of racism.

I was not saying that I personally thought there was no racism in Britain.
I was not saying that I thought that every single other Brit believed that racial matters are best viewed as an attempt to avoid disrupting harmony.
I was not saying that I personally think there is something particularly wrong with viewing racial matters in Britain as a conflict.

I am describing a difference between the two countries as I perceive it.
I am, coincidentally as a result of issues brought up in the comments, stating that I do not believe the 'patriarchy' model of society and all the things that follow from believing in it.
I am characterising certain stances and beliefs as 'American' simply because I have predominantly seen them stated by Americans and heard an awful lot of Brits describe them as a load of old bollocks, but I am willing to accept that there are plenty of Brits who believe in those things and Americans who don't.
And finally I am, right now, trying to prove to myself that it is possible for me to discuss racism in public with strangers because it is clearly an issue that matters to me since I just can't seem to leave it alone.

What was it that I said that made you think I wanted to privilege white opinions over non-white?

Americans and heard an awful lot of Brits describe them as a load of old bollocks, but I am willing to accept that there are plenty of Brits who believe in those things and Americans who don't.

You know what I bet you'll find? That in both countries, the people likely to believe it's bollocks are WHITE and the people who don't, are NOT*.

Maybe, just maybe, that should tell you something.

*Not to say there won't be some whites who do believe in it and some PoC who don't, but overall, both in the UK and US, that is how it shakes out.

See, nobody is saying that you are saying that there is complete racial harmony in the UK. What we are saying is that your generalisation of how 'people' in the US and UK see racism is flawed. Most BME people in the UK probably don't see the same harmony within the system that white Brits do, therefore you appear to be privileging white opinions over non-white, and by saying that 'Brits' in general don't agree with the model of racism seen by a lot of American POC (and many non-white Brits) you are setting what I've seen as an opinion predominantly held by white people as the default.

And that comment you made about people most directly affected not having the right to have the last say about their oppression/the fact that you were able to accept

heyiya's explanation with roughly a million times the grace and comprehension than you did virtually identical explanations by Americans/BME non-Americans didn't help matters.

I've mostly given you the benefit of the doubt here and assumed that you really want to talk about racism, and not just so that you can get a pat on the head for being the enlightened white ally, and not just so you can get POC to go out of their way to enable your enlightenment. But I really don't have the time to keep this going, so unless your reply to me is really outrageous, I'm probably going to bow out of this discussion at this point.

Maybe you should stop accusing people of not listening to you and as plainly as possible, just say what you mean.

*cough* serial deleter (http://community.livejournal.com/deadbrowalking/241375.html?thread=1626847#t1626847)*cough*

Where I think the main difference lies though, for the purpose of this discussion, is in willingness to talk about racism. Now obviously my knowledge of the US is not extensive, I've only visited it once and had contact with Americans here on LJ, plus of course experienced the sort of American culture that they export to our country. My experience though is that Americans talk about racism all the time whereas in the UK it is very seldom mentioned.

We get together on weekends and picnic in the park and we have our weekly talk about racism. Someone usually brings an apple pie. Sometimes we pack our handguns in the picnic baskets but during the winter we wear them in holsters underneath our coats, which are all red, white, and blue, except in New York, where everyone wears black.

there was no exchange of ideas across the Atlantic before the Internet allowed black Americans to mind meld with minority groups around the world?

are you going to start babbling about pan africanism or some such crazyness?

*sits down to mind meld with you some more*

[How's my tone?]

It is made of awesome!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Classism and Working-Class Characters in Fandom

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK

Re: To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK

Re: To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK

Re: To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK

Re: To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK

Re: To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK

Re: To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK

Re: To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK

Re: To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK

Re: To save you a trip to my profile page, I live in the UK