To recap: My thesis is about transmedia storytelling, particularly how it relates to web series. My artifact was The Lizzie Bennet Diaries (or LBD), a scripted transmedia web show composed of video blogs and a lot of social media. It was very popular and has inspired many similar creations. While it was my baseline and primary example, I was also interested in exploring transmedia in general and how it is a viable format for contemporary narratives. After some investigating I discovered that there is not a lot of literature on transmedia (or web shows for that matter) aside from a few history-type books, but they don't even go into the concept of transmedia that thoroughly. There are few to no theories on the subject but many people do see the potential of this type of narrative storytelling. Because it is so unique and often quite complex, traditional analysis could not be done. I attempted to come up with a new way of looking at transmedia (streams and barriers), but whether or not it is any good doesn't really matter. The point is that we do need a new way to analyze these types of projects (webseries and transmedia) that isn't as limiting as standard film and television criticism.
Well, why did I write about all of this?
For one, I love it. I find it all to be fascinating and I just love web shows. I think they are an emerging form of media that will eventually be the norm and I think it's so great that it isn't as limiting as TV and film. Almost anyone can make a web show. And the fact that it can easily spread and go viral is amazing. Your audience is much more accessible. Which leads to the main reason why I study transmedia, which is that I love the interactivity of it. I was never able to immerse myself into a show like the way I was able to with LBD. And that, for me, was a total game changer. I want all of my stories to be like that from here on out. It brings the narrative to a whole new level. Or levels.
While researching all of this, I quickly found out that not everyone is on the same brain train as me right now. They don't all share my passion, and frankly there are still not that many people who even know what transmedia is. I hope that in a handful of years this wont be the case, but for now it's webseries that is making a name for itself. Transmedia may have to wait in the wings a little while longer until it's time for the spotlight. Still though, I was a little shocked by the lack of materials out there. Perhaps it would behoove some academics to spread their wings a little and learn more about some emerging types of narratives. Because seriously folks, I really really want to know what people think about this stuff. Other than research, I also learned quite a bit about transmedia through the process of actually writing this thesis. The first thing I learned is that transmedia is (to borrow from my professors vocabulary) wicked hard. This thesis was an experiment, and honestly I don't think my results were overwhelmingly successful. Not that the thesis itself is bad, but I don't think I really succeed when it came to "systematically dispersing elements across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated experience" (to borrow from Henry Jenkins). Almost all of my content was on this blog. Only one big part, my theory section, was done via different media and that was because it was a video. Otherwise, the twitter and facebook were rather useless and I just did not have time to make any other videos. So if I gained anything from this experience, it is some serious respect for content creators. Producing all of those elements and then managing all of those outlets is an incredibly difficult task. If I have any advice for future students that want to embark on a thesis such as this, it is: plan, plan, plan. If you want to make a transmedia thesis that is not only about transmedia, but is transmedia, then you need to make a calendar or something. Get organized and figure out how you're going to write and release it all. And find an awesome advisor who is open to trial and error. Props to my professor, who deserves some serious acknowledgements.
Speaking of my professor, she asked me three questions to consider while writing this conclusion.
1. Why was this important?
2. What does it teach us?
3. Where do we go from here?
Well, for #1 I would say it is important because it isn't going anywhere. Transmedia (and webseries) are here to stay. Almost all of the authors I read said the same exact thing. It may be slow burning, but it's catching on and they all couldn't wait to see what happens next. None of them knew what it meant for the future, but if I had to guess I'd say it also means some major changes for our culture and the way we experience stories. At least here in the US, current generations have been called passive and apathetic. But transmedia encourages participation and immersion, which will probably bleed into other areas of our lives as well - especially because not all transmedia has to be fiction. People want to interact, and they will. New technology and innovations will lead to a more active audience and perhaps a more active generation. And like many of those aforementioned authors, I also can't wait to see what happens. Hopefully I'll get to be a part of it.
Huh, I guess that kind of also answered #3 too. Well as for #2, I think it teaches us that we don't need to stick to the same old conventions and neither do our stories. As I said, people want to engage with narratives on a new level and both transmedia and web shows can provide people with that opportunity. It is exciting, fresh, and innovative. People can get closer to stories more than ever before and that is pretty remarkable.
I'm not sure what else it teaches us. Maybe in 20 years I'll have a better answer to that question. Once people start to take advantage of this medium and really put it to the test, then we will start to learn more. Maybe more about what it offers, what it can do, or what it means for entertainment as a whole. And not just entertainment, but the dissemination of information in general.
Maybe I'm just a little too enthusiastic, but I do hope that someday someone reads this and some of my enthusiasm can rub off on them.
But maybe by that time memes and gifs will be super outdated and old school. Just like those annoying "What people think I do/What I really do" memes. I've got to say, the rhetoric ones are really bad. Actually, 9% of the time any rhetoric gif or meme is going to be awful. What an unfortunate fact of life.
Time to wrap it up. Contrary to some of my previous posts where I stress out a lot over this thesis (I am just a lowly undergrad after all), I did have a blast writing it. Everyone else wrote long boring papers and I got to do a super fun blog about Lizzie Bennet! How awesome is that?!
Thank you so much to everyone who helped, encouraged, or simply tolerated me throughout this experience. And don't worry, I'll have a real thank you page up soon.
An overly detailed, uber comprehensive Lizzie Bennet Diaries timeline. Tweets and relevant tumblr posts included!
And it took forever. I'm getting tired again just looking at it.
Click to enlarge. You'll need to.
For any of the fans out there please let me know if there are any mistakes. I will fix them. And I will try to make the sizing and such better. But not right now. Later. Definitely later.
Some of my decisions on this have reasons, and some of it is off because the official website actually has a lot of little mistakes (that would only really matter to someone like me who would bother to make something like this). But still. It's totally awesome isn't it?
P.S. Anyone know how to upload a really large version of my timeline pic? I have a super zoomed in one but blogger is not cooperating. Nor is facebook, tinypic, g+...
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!
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.
What I mean is, there are certain events in the book that would be considered kernels. But maybe they play out differently in the series (perhaps not on Lizzie's videos but on someone else's or on a social media account). Does that mean they are less important? More important? The same?
Should I even be considering the book, or should I look at the show on its own?
My past post was in full defense of the show standing on its own. And in terms of entertainment and storytelling and such, I still stand by that. But when analyzing it with narrative theory, the book can come back into play if I so choose.
Here's what I'm thinking. There is a spectrum concerning adaptations.
From faithful reenactments to interesting modernizations to lose-but-you-might-never-have-known-it interpretations:
Okay, so that last one is Emma but you get the idea.
The first one is so obviously Austen and the last one is the opposite of obvious. LBDfalls somewhere in the middle. Some people may have never read P&Pbut they still love and watch the show. Some people, like me, have read the book and get all of the little jokes and references that they make. So does it turn to a question of viewership? Do kernels and satellites rely on the knowledge of the viewer? One of the problems associated with the Scene Function Model (a more specific version of kernels and satellites) is that the fans and novice viewers disagreed on the importance of certain scenes.
I mean, I can't watch LBD without being aware of the book. But I also know that the series can stand on its own. Then again, maybe I'm biased because I've read the book so many times. And maybe that doesn't matter, seeing as the show clearly has a following.
All right, I'm talking in circles now. But the issue still stands.
Can you believe that this was me being brief? I was way more detailed about this with my advisor, citing tons of examples and perceived conundrums.
I will address these questions again at a later date, along with a few more.
But I think we need another kind of timeline. Or perhaps a few timelines. My analysis section will likely have me looking at the narrative in new ways, so I think a visual could really help me.
One fan has already created something (click to enlarge):
"The main line are Lizzie’s videos, each color representing a location
(Lizzie’s room, vidcon, Netherfield, Collins&Collins, Pemberley
Digital and the Den), the stripes are Q&A videos.
Pink, on top, is for Lydia’s videos, and the two blues under are for Maria’s videos and domino/Gigi’s videos respectively."
While I like it, I will probably try to make my own more detailed version, and possibly a few others that will include some of the social media accounts and not just the videos.
I've gotta know what I'm looking at before I start making any assumptions.
If I make my own images, they will be posted here.
-Danny
UPDATE: I finally did it! Here is my very own version of an LBD timeline! It took forever, but it's done.
In honor of finishing one of my sections, I feel I deserve a reward. And my reward will be posting something just for fun.
So here it is...
Last year a mega fan got creative and decided to make LBD-opoly. Probably the best decision she's ever made. And I hope she doesn't mind me re-blogging the photos. They are just too amazing to link to. The creator's name is Katie. She is from Wisconsin. This is her tumblr. This is her post with her LBD-opoly photos. If you want to make one just like it, you can download it from her here. You can also see a video if you want. And finally here is LBD-opoly in all of its glory:
And if you want to see more closeups of the cards and such then you can check them out here. This is some truly amazing stuff. I would actually buy this.
Basically, if I think I've forgotten something important or if I run across some new information that doesn't fit into any previous categories, this is where it will go.
Like this little nugget for example:
In the show there is a sex tape scandal. Obviously not a real one because it's scripted. But there was a website and everything. You can find it (although it no longer works because it gets taken down in the storyline) on my list of links post. Anyway, for fun (well at least I hope so because I know that some people did think the show was serious/real) some fans created a petition to get it taken down. Here is that link.
Random, right?
But still pretty cool.
There's a lot of stuff like that. I'll add to this post as I see fit.
- Outstanding Creative Achievement In Interactive Media - Original Interactive Program: Bernie Su, Jay Bushman, and Alexandra Edwards [WON]
The show has also won many smaller internet awards and competitions. It is also frequently on top web series lists. If there are any particular wins that you feel I should include here, please post them in the comments and I will update accordingly.
Primary purpose: DVD set (still not yet released, but they're working on it), and compensation of cast and crew Ranking: As of 3/1/14 it is the 10th most funded project within the Film & Video category, and the 173rd most funded overall. Very good, I'd say. Now the Kickstarter was a huge success, is one of the top funded projects within the Film & Video category, and basically was all around awesome. However, it is not the main focus of this thesis so I will not be going into it any further. Of course, that doesn't mean someone else hasn't already. So if you are interested in learning more about the epic LBD Kickstarter campaign then check out this fantastic slide show with lots of cool facts.
Well I totally knew it too, but for different reasons. #ItWasABookFirstAfterAll
Ah, so many good gif sets. Too bad I actually need to write stuff. If I could I would just keep posting all of your great moments. But alas, I must move on.
So anyway, Julia Cho plays BFF and sidekick Charlotte Lu.
> Julia seems to wear quite a few hats. She is an actress, producer, a founded member of Artists at Play (a theater group, and probably does many other things as well that I have yet to discover. She has many skills such as signing, dancing, and piano (12 years! whoa!). She is fluent in Korean and can also do an assortment of accents. All in all she seems well trained and has a good chunk of credits (and some awards) to back her up. Julia has appeared on I'm in the Band (TV, ns), Hannah Montana (TV, ns), The Fresh Beat Band (TV, ns), Larry Crowne (Film), Whitney(TV, ns), Work It (TV, ns), Don't Trust the B In Apt 23 (TV, ns), Good Luck Charlie(TV, ns), Enlightened (TV, ns), Cougar Town (TV, ns), The Office (TV, ns), The Newsroom (TV, ns), 2 Broke Girls (TV, ns), It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia (TV, ns), Castle (TV, ns), and has had a recurring role on Scandal (TV). Damn Julia, that is a lot of recognizable work. Color me impressed. She has also been in a handful of films that I don't recognize, and a variety theater performances as well. Apparently Julia can do improv, which is not surprising based on her awesome moments in LBD. Julia also hopped on as producer to the excellent web show Hipsterhood (and she also briefly appeared in an episode). Man, I'm getting tired just from writing this. No wonder I loved Charlotte so much. Julia is awesome. Fun fact, the role of Charlotte was done via color-blind casting. The producers loved Julia so much that they decided to make her and her faux sister into the Lu girls, as apposed to the Lucas girls. Good choice Bernie! Going forward, we come to Maria Lu. Unfortunately, Maria is really more of a minor character so there aren't really any gifs or memes out there of her. There are plenty of screenshots though. Here's a cute one:
Maria is played by Janice Lee. She primarily appears in her own little spin-off show. While it doesn't really add much to the main storyline, it is a great example of what I like about transmedia. It isn't that her story is completely necessary, it's that it exists at all. It doesn't further the plot, but it expands the universe. For example, if you want a better understand of Charlotte's life, you can learn about her sister. You don't need to know about her sister, but she is a part of the LBD universe that fans want to be immersed in. I don't know if that really made sense, so I'll just talk about Janice now. > Janice clocks in at 5'1", is Chinese-Korean American, and has a B.S. Business Administration-Marketing from San Francisco State University. While she doesn't have a whole lot of acting work under her belt, I think that she's already accomplished a lot by getting that degree. Janice has appeared in Sync (Film), None of Them Will Collect My Soul (Short), and A Deal's A Deal (Short). It's still very early in her career so I'm excited to see where it might go. Other fun facts include: she is a die hard Harry Potter fan and enjoys baking. Well, it looks like I'm all done with the core families. But there are still some men that need to be discussed. First and foremost there is Mr. Ricky Collins. I'm already thinking "ugh" as I type his name. Not that the actor who plays him is bad, actually he plays him very well. He plays him perhaps a little too well, making the character just as annoying as he ought to be (maybe even more so). I also just want to make a little note here about the best LBD fan comment I have ever read. I don't remember where or when I saw it, but I copied it down because it was so good. Someone wrote: "I find Ricky Collins a little Austentacious." I just about died.
Too good, my friend. Too good. So Mr. Collins is played by Maxwell Glick. > I just learned something amazing about Maxwell just now. HE READS FOR AUDIOBOOKS. How cool is that!? And he's actually really good. He does mostly YA novels, which isn't surprising because his voice is well suited for it. I mean it's great that he acts and does other stuff, but this fact is definitely the most interesting thing about him right now. In my opinion anyway. Okay, I know, I need to tell you some other facts too. Maxwell is 5'7" and a Boston College Alum. He has a solid online presence having also appeared in lonleygirl15 and School of Thrones (both web shows). And he frequently interacts with fans, often through the username mrcheezypop (which is also his YouTube channel that he updates regularly). Other internet credits include Prop 8: The Web Series, Movie Mob, Night of the Zombie King, Broken Toy, and more. Some TV credits include The Office (ns), Castle (ns), and The Mentalist (ns). But still, the audiobooks are the coolest (even if I don't know any of the books he's read). Well Max certainly knows how to play irritating, but I don't know how well he can do sleazy. Of course, that was the job of our next fella. Here is the one and only villain on LBD:
Okay, maybe not evil. But definitely a sleazebag. Sorry Wes Aderhold. We know it isn't you in real life, it's just your character. George Wickham is not cool in my book, but I'm sure you are.
> Wes' real name is actually Thomas Wesley Aderhold. And I don't know why I've been including people's heights, but he's 5'11". Wes graduated with an MFA from the University of Oklahoma. Fun fact: he went to theater school with Laura Spencer (aka. Jane Bennet). Aside from acting, Wes is also interested in writing. He also seems like the kind of guy that's done some modeling, but I have no proof of that being an official thing. Just a lot of pretty photos when you do a google image search. Some of Wes' credits include: the lead in the Nickelodeon TV movie Wonder Girls, Prick (Short Film), Body of Proof (TV, ns), Lookbook (Webseries), Character (Webseries), various plays, and some commercials. He also apparently trained with the Grounldings which is awesome as they are known for spewing out many excellent comedians. He can also sing, dance, do some gymnastics, accents, and probably a lot of other stuff too. Seriously though, if he hasn't modeled I'm sure he will. I mean, do you need to go back to that shirtless gif? It's just bound to happen.
Last but certainly not least is our best buddy Fitz Williams.
If I could ever get a care package from Fitz, I'm sure I'd love it. And besides, who doesn't love Darcy's costume theater version of him.
> Are you perhaps wondering right now why Craig looks so familiar? Maybe you swear you've seen him somewhere before but you just cant put your finger on it? Well that's probably because Craig is the token black guy in like ALMOST EVERY COMMERCIAL EVER. Digiorno? Check. KFC? Check. Nokia Lumia? Check. Samsung? Check. More Samsung? Check. More Digiorno? Check. What about Coke Zero? Check. Oh yea, I wasn't kidding. And there are plenty more where that came from. But I should move on. So Craig's page on the LBD official website is funny but useless. IMDb is more helpful, telling me he is 5'10" and goes by the nicknames Vigo and King Busser Upper. Don't know what those mean. Some of Craig's other credits that aren't commercials include: Weeds (TV, ns), Private High Musical (Webseries), Craig and the Werewolf (Webseries), The Crew (Webseries), Compulsions(Webseries, created by Bernie Su!), Victorious (TV, ns), The Young and the Restless (TV, ns), A Good Knight's Quest (Webseries), Video Game Reunion (Webseries), 2 Broke Girls (TV, ns), Up All Night (TV, ns), 8.13 (Webseries), and currently stars in the brand new TV show Mixology. He has quite a few other webseries credits and seems to have had the most experience in that field than any other cast member did going into LBD. I hope his new show does well. I've already seen the first two episodes and it looks promising.
Phew.
That was a lot of information.
But the history about the cast is now complete! Yay! Thanks for reading this far.
