Some overdue expansion
Written on Thursday, December 26, 2013 by Unknown
In this post I blabbed a bit about my thoughts on transmedia categories. I said I would expand on some of those thoughts, and I've got some time now so let's get to it.
If you don't want to go back to that post, allow me to quickly summarize. If you've already saw it, then ignore the following paragraph. So Andrea Phillips discussed in her book that there were two types of transmedia, West Coast (or Hollywood) and East Coast. I disagree. Well, at least with her choice of names. I've decided that I prefer the terms industry transmedia (in place of West Coast) and creator's transmedia (in place of East Coast). Industry transmedia uses bigger pieces of media that don't heavily depend on each other (just like in Phillips' version) and is usually done as a means to an end. The end is usually dollars, exposure, shares, or something else to that effect. Creator's transmedia tends to uses more intricate and occasionally smaller pieces of media, relies more heavily on social media (again, like Phillips'), and tends to be done for the love and expansion of the story. At least, this is how I've chosen to categorize them. If I want to make them truly stand apart then I would probably call these the extremes on a transmedia spectrum, with something in between. Both of those names come from the standpoint of the producer, not the audience, so this in-between would also need to be named similarly. I have yet to figure that out.
Now, here is where I expand. I do also think that transmedia can be categorized in other ways, perhaps with terms like audience-immersive transmedia, or maybe even audience-participatory. Something that describes the experience from the other side. These labels could even be combined. So maybe like Creator's audience-immersive transmedia. Or it can be specific to the tactics/medias used. Industry ARG/Video transmedia. Regardless, I have plenty of time to make up more names later. For now I just want to stick with the industry and creator differences.
So here's what I'm thinking. It's a loose theory, and I'm just spitballing here, but that seems to be the best way to collect my thoughts. Consider this a first draft of a possible thesis argument. It is going to be long, maybe even repetitive, so you should probably get a snack.
Creator's transmedia, in general, is the more versatile form of transmedia. This is due to the fact that industry transmedia has to appease the studios, so there are more rules and constraints. It is less about the art or the story, and more about how transmedia can be used to get The Ultimate Goal (be it money, views, fame, etc.). So logically, creator's transmedia tends to take more risks and do more experimenting. Failures are inevitable, as are successes. But they have more opportunities to fail and succeed because they take more chances. Creators want to create, even if they don't have much money, and they don't have a studio that will be furious if they bomb. It is possible that they will have a kickstarter fund, but again those don't always make a lot (and when they do it's possible the money was raised after or that they are actually moving closer toward the industry side) at least when compared to the wallets of the industry. So creators can break out of the box, maybe to see how far they can go. Industry, on the other hand, can use this to their advantage. They can watch the creators and capitalize on their successes while heeding their failures. They aren't going to copy a failed creator. In fact, they might even hire a successful creator (or team of them) for an industry project.
All of this means that the industry is not the true leader. The creators are the innovators that are moving transmedia forward. They are the ones changing the game, not the industry. This is unfortunate, because the industry's efforts can reach more people, and their transmedia is more polished because more money and many professionals went into it. The east gets none of those successes nor do they get any credit. Their existence is advantageous to the industry. As my dad said, it is kind of like pure vs. applied science. Pure science is all about studying and learning. There is no goal, just experimenting. But applied science is all about the end result and they use pure science as a means. Applied science is finding a cure for cancer, and they use the results of pure science (misc. studies about cancer cells for example) as they go. Cure is the end, pure is the means. I don't really know anything about pure vs. applied other than what I was briefly told, so forgive me if I am mistaken.
I've said a lot about how creators create for the love of the story or the sake of the art. They do to do, not to get. Industry is the opposite. So does this mean that the creators fail a lot more than succeed? Yes. Does this mean they never succeed? No. But when they do succeed, do they not become industry because they got bank/audience? Not necessarily. I think it is all about intentions. But don't creators want success and viewers and maybe some money too? probably, yes. So how are they not industry? This is exactly why I need to have a middle category. This category would cover those who make choices for both the story and The Ultimate Goal. And what about those who are creators that work in/with the industry? Can we call that industry with creator's transmedia or creator's in the industry transmedia or even something like industrial creator's transmedia? Yeah, sure. The point is that this is all very blurry. There is rarely a black and white scenario. Transmedia is and probably always will be a tricky thing to define.
I think this type of categorizing can be useful for analysis. If we have names for these things then we can better understand them, discuss them, and pick them apart. The picking is fun for me anyway. Rhetoric student after all. I just need to make all of this more clear, and then possibly utilize it within my greater thesis argument. It could be the key. Or maybe it's all total bullshit. We'll see.
I think that's enough for now. Did you enjoy your snack?
-Danny
(& parents, who were nice enough to discuss this and provide the basis for some of these ideas.)
