That word might not mean what we think it means.

[logovo]

Reading some stuff today I saw several people talking about aca-fans (acafans? AcaFans?) and I'm starting to wonder if they mean the same thing I'm thinking when I hear acafans, as in actual people in academia, writing, publishing, teaching or fanlore's entry. Are people now using that word interchangeably with fans who are just into meta? Anyone else getting that impression?

Also, I still haven't watched SPN and I'm trying not to read spoilers but I'M FAILING SO BAD. Because I'm weak and impatient.

Comments

Here from metafandom

[legionseagle]

I agree with your unease about anti-intellectualism being dangerous, but I'd query whether it was necessarily always what was going on when the acafen/other fen wars start up. Last time this came around, for example, I recall one self-proclaimed acafan (who turned out to be an undergraduate majoring in English literature - nothing wrong with that, but doesn't actually cut it on definitions one and two of "acafan" that you use above) telling two people each of whom had at least Master's level degrees that they were "anti-intellectual" because they were arguing against deconstruction being necessarily the one true way to approach a text. Not thinking that Barthes is the one true god doesn't make you (in the words of yet another acafan in the same kerfuffle) "someone who thinks anyone who graduated [from] high school is an academic".

The fact is, both anti-intellectualism and academic snobbery seem to be factors fuelling the tensions in fandom about meta in general and "acafan" is just one of those flashpoint words whose meaning shifts because people have already got a lot of history bound up in previous ways in which it has been used.

Re: Here from metafandom

[logovo]

Yeah, It seems easy enough to throw the word around.

I haven't seen conversations where someone acted like that, but I tend to follow these type of conversations only up to a point. Also, I could have a Master's level in Finance, but doesn't mean I would have the same tools as that English undergraduate. Although being called an anti-intellectual would be one way to *really* piss me off.

Thing is, I don't give the same weight to anti-intellectuals and academic snobs, because of my personal experience. I've found both extremes very offputting, but overall anti-intellectualism has tended to shut down conversations a lot quicker than someone bringing out their oh-so-shinny credentials.

Re: Here from metafandom

[legionseagle]

Thing is, I don't give the same weight to anti-intellectuals and academic snobs, because of my personal experience.

I think this goes to the heart of the point I'm making. If your personal experience is that shiny credentials don't impress you - which is a position I share - then conversation won't be shut down if someone starts being an intellectual snob. That makes it easier to perceive as less of a personal problem than anti-intellectualism. However, this attitude overlooks the people whose life experience has been different, and who feel vulnerable to those with "shiny credentials" because they're closer to the bottom of the heap and traditionally the people with the shiny credentials have been the ones telling them that they're inferior, ineligible and not wanted here. Those people have probably got a long history of being shut out of debates - often quite brutally - and dismissing the chippy attitude which results (as someone did further up the thread) as "They're oppressing me by using big words" seems to be missing quite a major dimension to the argument.

Re: Here from metafandom

[jonquil]

You raise a good point.

I was raised that feeling ignorant means that you have an opportunity to educate yourself. That assumes agency, and in particular the sort of self-confidence needed to say "Hey, I don't understand what you're talking about, would you explain?" (Which is, in my case, a professional skill. You'd be amazed how many people sigh in relief when somebody *else* asks that question.)

If you've been raised that asking for explanations *always* leads to disdain and mockery, and that, as you say, fancy words are being used as weapons, you're going to have a different perspective.

Re: Here from metafandom

[logovo]

*wince* Yeah, I get how the academic credentials could be used that way, I just haven't seen it yet, either because I'm not paying enough attention (very likely) or don't read enough outside my usual circle.

Re: Here from metafandom

[logovo]

dismissing the chippy attitude which results (as someone did further up the thread)

Have to go and re-read that.