So lately I have not been posting anything. This is because I had final exams and projects, and last week I flew home where I've had family obligations to attend to.
But alas, this is the final week of my thesis project. Luckily I got a little bit of extra time to finish. Honestly I was overloaded with the amount of school work and job work I had to do but now I have a lot more free time to focus. Hooray!
Sorry but no image for that one because googling for images about focusing just gets me a bunch of pictures of the damn car. To kick things off I think I should probably employ one of my many talents - list making. Time to figure out what I have to do this week. 1.Litvestigation- Yea, I know. I have to finish it. I'll get there. 2. Another video? -If I have time I'd like to make one more. Unfortunately I do not have access to all of the gadgets and gizmos that are available at my school, but I do still have a few tricks up my sleeves. 3. Bonus topics-I wanted to discuss the differences between analyzing a TV show versus a web show but it is not extremely pertinent to my thesis project (I mean it is but I can live without it). So this is another one that falls into the "If I have time" pile. 4.Make a new theory- This is the hardest part. I need to figure out a possible way to look at transmedia storytelling that is more effective than The Scene Function Model. I can make a nice useful metaphor here but I am not quite sure what transmedia is similar to. Or at least the LBD project in particular. Things swerve in and out so much, which makes mapping it very difficult. But I'll keep brainstorming. 5. Conclude- After I propose my theory and make a metaphor I will need to conclude. That shouldn't be too bad. Ideally I don't have much left of the mandatory stuff and I will just have to gauge how much time I have for the bonus material. I also wanted this to be a project more heavy in the transmedia (utilize social media and video more) but this was an experiment after all. Until next time. (Which should be soon!) -Danny
Yesterday I had a meeting with my advisor and she brought to my attention that the current tone of my posts is a tad depressing. Or as she said, "Quit being such a Debbie Downer." Thanks, prof.
To that I say: Hey now, I think I have every right to be stressed out during the final weeks of my thesis.
But okay, I looked back on the posts and I see what you mean.
This meeting also had some positive results and I definitely feel much more confident about my thesis project as a whole.
Because guess what internet, I AM ALMOST DONE. WOOOO!!!!
[via www.retreatbyrandomhouse.ca]
I mean I clearly still have stuff to do, but I am very close.
We mapped out most of the rest of what I need to do. I get to start the fun part where I get to make up my own theory. Yay!
Also, this Friday I will be doing a talk about my project and I will try to post the powerpoint that I will make for it once it's done. And possibly the transcript of the speech. We'll see.
Anyway, that is all for now. I need to go back and make a couple of edits. Actual thesis posts to come later. Random tangent: The previous "Hey now" has now inspired the use of a song that I think is appropriate...
Nothin' like some good music to get you pumped! And simultaneously nostalgic. Because omg the video. -Danny
This is usually how I feel when my advisor and I talk about my thesis. But that's okay. It is called a "rhetoric major" for a reason. Insert some kind of joke about rhetorical questions here. Insert horribly cheesy laugh track after said joke. In response to a previous post my advisor asked the following questions:
Do kernels and satellites rely on the knowledge of the viewer? Can an
analysis be nuanced enough to account for both the "novice viewer" and
"fully immersed"?
Ithink I addressed this (very very briefly) in my video when I talk about some of the problems with the Scene Function Model. The developers of that model tested it on students. When they talked to them about which scenes they
thought were kernels and satellites, the new viewers found certain
scenes to be kernels while returning viewers or fans did not. This was
because the fans had previous knowledge about the characters/plot. The new viewers lacked this knowledge and therefore thought that everything was much
more important. So I think that the answer to this is two-fold. Yes,
kernels and satellites can rely on the knowledge of the viewer, but they
don't always have to.
Let's say Lizzie rants about some event that
already took place and new viewer just jumped in on that episode with no
other knowledge about the show. They might consider the rant to be important (and a kernel) because
it summarizes previous pertinent information. But a returning viewer would call
this repetitive information (and thus a satellite). So this case
would rely on prior knowledge. But what if the viewer jumped in during
the event? Then it wouldn't matter if they knew the background of the
characters, because clearly this plot development was important and
changed the course of the episode/series. This might be a bad example,
but I hope the point is at least somewhat clear. And I don't know if an
analysis can be nuanced enough, because I am an informed viewer already
and am thus already biased. Perhaps if someone else were doing this
about something I haven't seen I could answer this question more
thoroughly.
I also think this question was in response to the book comparison problem, which is even more complex. When talking about kernels and satellites, should we consider the book? For this thesis, I think I am going to say no. The show needs to stand on it's own because I am analyzing transmedia, not adaptation theory or something like that. It is also a modernization, so character motivations are different, events have different impacts, and there are more opinions provided than in the novel. Basically, it is different enough that even though readers like to compare and contrast and will definitely experience the show in their own way, calling an event a kernel or a satellite based on how it played out in the book would be incorrect. Pride and Prejudice takes place over 200 years ago in England during the time of the landed gentry. The Lizzie Bennet Diaries takes place in 21st century United States and uses a hell of a lot more technology. Expectations are not the same. Motivations are not the same. Actions have different repercussions. Central themes (like marriage/relationships) play out much differently. So I just cant say that X scene is a kernel because it was a kernel in the novel. It wouldn't make sense to do that every time. Yes, sometimes the book and show are very close and kernels/satellites are the same, but this is a parallel. Which, you know, tends to happen in adaptations. It's not an unwritten commandment that everything must be taken exactly the same way. Sorry book lovers. I am a Janeite too, but I just can't analyze the show that way.
Hopefully this all made sense. And professor, let me know if I didn't fully answer your questions. I'd love to hear your response.
I'm pretty stoked that I actually came to a conclusion about the book issue. Wohoo!
Before I finish up my litvestigation (yes, I did just make up an awesome new word) I'd like to play a little game. Well, in a minute.
Right now, I have basically hit a wall. And that's bad. Really bad. Because it is almost the end of the semester which means that this thesis needs to be done. Soon.
I'm not really sure what to do at this point. It's frustrating. And I am verging on disaster mode.
Whoever told you senior year of college is a breeze is a big fat liar. I don't remember who told me this, but I'm certainly not happy with them. It was probably someone who didn't have a required thesis project. Damn those lucky stress-free people.
So here is my problem: Even though my analysis section has been started, I haven't actually analyzed anything.
Which is why I'd like to get back to this fun little game. I'm making it up right now, and it shall be called "Name That Event!" I was thinking about going with "Name that kernel/satellite!" but I didn't like the slash.
Goal: I need to identify some kernels and some satellites.
In a previous post I showed you a timeline that a fan had created. This timeline basically made it clear to me that it will not be easy to identify kernels and satellites because there are far too many pieces of media. But if I had to try, here are a few ways I might name some events. (For a review about what events, kernels, and satellites are, check out this video!)
Name That Event!
Option 1:
KERNEL - Lizzie's Videos
SATELLITE - Everything else
Option 2:
KERNEL - Lizzie's Videos
KERNEL - Certain twitter accounts of major characters
SATELLITE - Everything else
Option 3:
KERNEL - All videos by all characters
SATELLITE - All social media accounts
Option 4:
KERNEL - All videos by all characters
KERNEL - All twitter accounts
KERNEL - Lydia's sex tape website
SATELLITE - Everything else
Option 5:
KERNEL - Certain videos by Lizzie, Lydia, and any other character that explicitly moves the story along
KERNEL - Certain tweets, pinterest boards, or other social media content that explicitly moves the story along
KERNEL - Websites that explicitly move the story along (such as Lydia's sex tape website)
SATELLITE - Videos that do not do much or forward the story and only provide fluff
SATELLITE - Social media that does not do much nor does it forward the story along
SATELLITE - Websites that have no function other than to exist and sometimes re-post information that can be found elsewhere
Option 6:
Some other combination of previous pieces of previous options Or make something else up on the spot
_______
Yea guys. This is irritating. You with me now?
But in general, if the game continued and someone were to ask me about specific episodes or something, I could play like this...
Name That Event!
Q: Episode 1
A: Kernel!
Q: Collins and Collins + Maria of the Lu videos
A: Satellite!
Q: Episodes 60 and 98
A: Kernels!
Q: The San Francisco Photo/Twitter Adventure
A: Tough one. It could do either way. Leaning more towards satellite?
Get the idea?
And do you also get the problem? How do I know what is significant and what isn't? Would twitter be the main social media kernel in the social media realm, but a satellite in the greater transmedia story? And what does this tell us?
My conclusion is that this tells me that kernels and satellites cannot be the primary form of identification. Even if I were to use the Scene Function Model (which would make this process a lot easier), that is only actually supposed to be used for television. I need a new model. The Transmedia Function Model or something.
And then there are a whole bunch of other questions about fan participation and such that I just don't even know what to call, let alone whether or not they should be considered. I mean is a fan's question canon if Lizzie responds to them on twitter? What is that! I don't know!
This whole transmedia form is entirely different than what narrative theory usually deals with. But that doesn't mean I'm abandoning narrative theory all together. It just means I need to use it in a new way and possibly change some of the rules to suit my project.
UPDATE (4/18/14): I found some YouTube playlists that people made. One is called "The Essentials" and I swear to god it's almost like this person found all of the kernels for me. If only I had found it sooner! The other one is called "The Darcy Heavy Episodes" which could also be considered a kernel playlist for those only focused on the romance as the driving force of the show. I don't really think that would be accurate, but whatever.
Most thesis/theses require a literature review. This is when you look for readings that are relevant to your project and then write a paper about your findings. You do not add any new information. Or at least, this is what I have been told, as I've never actually needed to do one before.
So maybe I should make mine more fun? I mean, this isn't a traditional thesis, and my posts certainly aren't in standard paper format. But I still need to do something similar to a lit review. Maybe mine will just have more pictures? I'm still working on the finer details.
One thing that is both a blessing and a curse is the major lack of literature on The Lizzie Bennet Diaries. It is a blessing because it gives me more freedom to come up with my own ideas, and it is a curse because it gives me more freedom than I actually need. A the moment I'm feeling more of the effects of the curse half.
"Lack of literature? What are you talking about? I've read tons of articles about LBD."
Yes, there are plenty of reviews and blog posts out there, but technically those aren't the sources I'm supposed to be relying on. I need some books or peer reviewed academic journals. And unfortunately, not enough people have recognized the genius that is LBD yet. I am positive that they will one day, but as of this post there really isn't much for me to use.
When I can find them, I will use articles directly about LBD, but in the mean time I will focus on works about transmedia and other similar projects.
"A long time ago, we used to be friends but I haven't thought of you lately at all. If ever again a greeting I send to you, short and sweet to the soul I intend. Ah ah ah ahh ahh. Ah ah ah ahh ahh..."
"If you love something, then let it go." Said no one who ever belonged in a fandom ever.
They
also don't say things like "I accept every decision this
author/director/creator made without second guessing it or having any
kind of opinion about it."
Yep. Letting things go and accepting change are two things that die hard fans can be really bad at. And internet fandoms are just as ridiculous. They also love to use abbreviated terms. Take for example...
Ship/Shipping (other fun versions can be found here*):
This
is an abbreviation of the word "relationship" and basically means you
are rooting for a relationship to happen/continue. Ex. "I ship Stefan
and Elena." A sub category of shipping is "otp" or "one true pairing."
*for a much longer explanation go here (note to my advisor, this website claims it originated with fans of The X-Files)
Fans
are passionate. Very passionate. Borderline crazy passionate. (Okay, not all of them.) Some of
them are even like, "There's a line? Well we definitely have to step
over it then. Lines are for irl conversations only, and even then it
will still be crossed."
So the creators of The Lizzie Bennet Diaries
had an interesting dilemma. They wanted the show to be a modern
adaptation, but how modern were they allowed to make it? How far off
could they go from the original text that would a) please fans of the
novel and b) appeal to new fans (who may or may not have liked/read the
novel). As I have established, fans are freakin' passionate. They have
needs. They have feels. And messing too much with the original content
could make Janeites go berserk, but then not messing enough could make new fans roll their eyes.
The first line of Pride and Prejudice is iconic. Any English major can probably quote it to you, as could any Austen fan. LBD tried to incorporate it as best they could (honestly, I didn't exactly love what they did) because not doing so would have upset P&P fans.
The
show was also written by feminists, who don't consider the first line
to be a truth. So they changed things, the ending especially, so that it
fits into a modern feminist context. Austen was more constricted by her
time period and the ending of the novel is indicative of that, but not
really suitable to 21st century ideals. Lydia can't marry Wickham in
this era, because what he did to her in LBD's version is morally wrong and unforgivable (this, of course, is arguable—but not so much my point).
What
might happen if there was a major deviation from the original text?
Would an audience be lost? What if the deviation wasn't so "major"? To
what extent are they allowed to change? What is the audience comfortable
with?
I
know that there have been occasions where some Austen fans have been
like "Hell no, that is not supposed to happen" but then other times
where they say "I really like how you updated this particular scene."
Sometimes both of those statements exist in the same comments thread,
and other times it can be a vast majority pulling one way or the other.
There are major benefits and limitations to adapting. You have a built in audience which is a plus, but as I said you also need to appease them and new viewers too. It is certainly a predicament.
I seem to only have more questions than when I started, but that is why I am writing them out.
Now that the history section is done and I've defined most of the things that I need to define, I will be focusing on analysis.
This is the more abstract part of the thesis, where I ask questions and use what I've learned to try and figure things out. This is both the fun and the hard part.
Some topics I may cover: If We Change, Will They Watch? - talking about the need to adhere to the novel to a certain extent, and what the changes might mean
The Differences Between Analyzing a TV Show and a Web Show - why certain things are both the same and different, looking at plot versus character
Narrative Theory - more stuff? I'm not quite there yet.
Some things I may create:
The other timelines (if possible) - like big social media events (i.e. the Wickham scandal or Jane's sad pinterest board)
Another video - maybe one that describes The Scene Function Model more fully
More twitter/social media conversations - with advisor, and possibly other people
These aren't necessarily in order.
But for now, this is a week by week update-as-I-go point in the thesis.
I have a meeting tomorrow, so we'll see what happens.
