The “Articulation” of Emotion and History: Research on The Practice of Writing History with Fanfiction Group of The Age of Awakening

WANG Run; YU DongLin

PDF(1620 KB)

Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2023, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (11) : 61-80.

Specific Topic / Television Studies in the Era of Social Media

The “Articulation” of Emotion and History: Research on The Practice of Writing History with Fanfiction Group of The Age of Awakening

WANG Run ,
YU DongLin

Author information +

History +

Abstract

The historical TV series “The Age of Awakening” set off an upsurge in the creation of historical fanfiction on LOFTER, providing a case of local Chinese fanfiction creators participating in historical writing. This paper studies this through qualitative research methods such as online ethnography, text analysis and in-depth interviews, aiming to explore the new mechanism for participating in historical writing and subcultural community interaction among subcultural youth groups in the new media era. The study found that the fanfiction group carried out historical writing through subcultural ways such as design of “time travel” plot, substitutional imagination and coding on “Moe” principles. Besides, they carried out dialogue, negotiation and emotional cohesion under the framework of following the platform logic and mainstream values. The managing of subcultural community to form the “articulation” of emotion and history through the embedding and integration about the development of fanfiction community, business logic, internet governance and historical context. However, the sustainability about subcultural community of historical writing faces the uncertainty. This paper can contribute to understand the mechanism of public historical writing in digital subcultural platform, as well as the creative transformation in the subcultural context in China’s Internet Society.

Key words

historical writing / fanfiction / subculture / digital memory / articulation

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

WANG Run , YU DongLin. The “Articulation” of Emotion and History: Research on The Practice of Writing History with Fanfiction Group of The Age of Awakening[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2023, 45(11): 61-80

References

List( Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within ) Chart analysis

[1]	保罗·斯威特曼(2004/2012). 游客还是旅客?“亚文化”、自反性身份和新部族社交.载安迪·班尼特,基思·哈恩·哈里斯(主编),《亚文化之后:对于当代青年文化的批判研究》(中国青年政治学院青年文化译介小组)(第99页). 北京: 中国青年出版社. Cited in this article [2]

[2]	蔡骐(2014). 网络虚拟社区中的趣缘文化传播. 《新闻与传播研究》,(9),5-23. Cited in this article [1]

[3]	曹冉(2013). 《同人粉丝:对一种网络亚文化群体的分析》.苏州大学硕士论文.苏州. Cited in this article [1]

[4]	陈新(2012). “公众史学”的理论基础与学科框架. 《学术月刊》,(3),117-123. Cited in this article [1]

[5]	陈新(2013). 自媒体时代的公众史学. 《天津社会科学》,(3),137-141. Cited in this article [2]

[6]	丁汉青, 杨立奇, 余冰玥(2022). 赠礼与回礼:“UP主-粉丝”间的礼物交换机制研究. 《新闻春秋》,(1),66-74. Cited in this article [1]

[7]	杜嘉慧(2021). 新媒体时代的历史书写——从《明朝那些事儿》到公众号铲史官. 《传媒论坛》,(3),22-24. Cited in this article [1]

[8]	何旻(2017). 论中国互联网媒介中的文学生产、筛选与批评——以“J家闲情论坛”同人文为对象. 《河南社会科学》, 25(5),91-95. Cited in this article [1]

[9]	亨利·詹金斯(1992/2016) 《文本盗猎者:电视粉丝与参与式文化》(郑熙青译). 北京: 北京大学出版社. Cited in this article [2]

[10]	胡疆锋, 陆道夫(2006). 抵抗·风格·收编——英国伯明翰学派亚文化理论关键词解读. 《南京社会科学》,(4),87-92. Cited in this article [1]

[11]	何威(2018). 从御宅到二次元:关于一种青少年亚文化的学术图景和知识考古. 《新闻与传播研究》,(10),40-59. Cited in this article [1]

[12]	何威, 李玥(2020). 戏假情真:《王者荣耀》如何影响玩家对历史人物的态度与认知. 《国际新闻界》,(7),49-73. Cited in this article [1]

[13]	黄典林(2020). 在文化与结构之间:斯图亚特·霍尔传播观的范式整合,《南京社会科学》,(10), Cited in this article [1]

[14]	黄顺铭, 李红涛(2015). 在线集体记忆的协作性书写——中文维基百科“南京大屠杀”条目(2004-2014)的个案研究. 《新闻与传播研究》,(1),5-23. Cited in this article [1]

[15]	胡岑岑(2018). 网络社区、狂热消费与免费劳动——近期粉丝文化研究的趋势. 《中国青年研究》, 6,5-12. Cited in this article [1]

[16]	马中红(2015). 《无法忽视的另一种力量:新媒介与青年亚文化研究》. 北京: 清华大学出版社. Cited in this article [2]

[17]	蒋兆雷, 叶兵(2010). 关于都市“萌文化”现象的研究. 《中国青年研究》,(3),75-77. Cited in this article [1]

[18]	杰弗里·丘比特(2007/2021). 《历史与记忆》(王晨凤译). 南京: 译林出版社. Cited in this article [2]

[19]	李红岩(2020). 如何应对“人人都是历史学家”的时代. 《探索与争鸣》,(9),36-38. Cited in this article [1]

[20]	李开(2017). 表征·意指·接合——斯图亚特·霍尔的意识形态批判初探. 《新闻与传播研究》,(3),5-19. Cited in this article [1]

[21]	李娜(2014). 美国模式之公众史学在中国是否可行——中国公众史学的学科建构. 《江海学刊》,(2),149-156. Cited in this article [1]

[22]	李娜(2019). 《公众史学研究入门》. 北京: 北京大学出版社. Cited in this article [1]

[23]	李宗洋(2021). 《融合文化视域下的同人社群文化研究》.兰州大学硕士学位论文.兰州. Cited in this article [1]

[24]	林品(2016). 青年亚文化与官方意识形态的“双向破壁”,《探索与争鸣》,(2),69-72. Cited in this article [1]

[25]	刘书亮, 朱巧倩(2020). 论二次元文化的概念流变及其文化消费特征. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(8),22-26. Cited in this article [1]

[26]	刘海龙(2017). 像爱护爱豆一样爱国:新媒体与“粉丝民族主义”的诞生. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(4),27-36. Cited in this article [1]

[27]	莫里斯·哈布瓦赫(1992/2002). 《论集体记忆》(毕然、郭金华译). 上海: 上海人民出版社. Cited in this article [2]

[28]	王洪喆, 李思闽, 吴靖(2016). 从“迷妹”到“小粉红”:新媒介商业文化环境下的国族身份生产和动员机制研究. 《国际新闻界》,(11),33-53. Cited in this article [1]

[29]	王敏芝(2020). 走出亚文化理论的迷思——基于数字时代网络亚文化的探讨. 《文化研究》, 43(4),50-62. Cited in this article [1]

[30]	王艳勤(2013). 民间写史与学院史学:对立中的共谋. 《人文杂志》,(2),77-82. Cited in this article [1]

[31]	王晴佳(2018). 为什么情感史研究是当代史学的一个新方向?《史学月刊》,(4),5-10. Cited in this article [1]

[32]	王润, 吴飞(2020). 从“御宅族”到“正气少年”:弹幕互动中的亚文化资本汇集与认同构建. 《现代传播》,(2),86-90. Cited in this article [1]

[33]	王希(2013). 西方学术与政治语境下的公共史学——兼论公共史学在中国发展的可行性. 《天津社会科学》,(3),131-136. Cited in this article [1]

[34]	孟钟捷(2014). 从德国范式看公众史学争议的起因、进程与影响. 《江海学刊》,(2),157-161. Cited in this article [1]

[35]	玛格丽特•麦克米伦(2009/2021). 《历史的运用与滥用》(孙唯瀚译). 桂林: 广西师范大学出版社. Cited in this article [2]

[36]	钱茂伟(2014). 公众史学的定义及学科框架. 《浙江学刊》,(1),80-86. Cited in this article [1]

[37]	斯图亚特·霍尔, 托尼·杰斐逊(1976/2015). 《通过仪式抵抗:战后英国的青年亚文化》(孟登迎、胡疆锋、王蕙译). 北京: 中国青年出版社. Cited in this article [2]

[38]	陶庆梅(2022). 史观重建:从“主旋律”到“新主流”. 《文化纵横》,(3),88-96. Cited in this article [1]

[39]	吴畅畅(2021). 视频网站与国家权力的“内卷化”. 《开放时代》,(6),186-201. Cited in this article [1]

[40]	吴舫(2020). “何以为家”?商业数字平台中的同人文写作实践研究. 《中国青年研究》,(12),30-37. Cited in this article [1]

[41]	吴玥, 王江楠, 刘艺萱(2021). 她们为何在同人社群自愿创作:以群体认同与情感付出为视角. 新闻与传播研究, 28(S1),108-125. Cited in this article [1]

[42]	尤学工(2021). 融媒体背景下的历史教育. 《河南师范大学学报》,(4),102-106. Cited in this article [1]

[43]	张文青(2021). 《“自嗨”的同人:詹金斯媒介文化理论视角下的LOFTER同人粉丝文化研究》.兰州大学硕士学位论文.兰州. Cited in this article [1]

[44]	赵丽涛(2019). “后真相”时代青年网络爱国主义教育的挑战与应对. 《中国青年研究》,(5),11-16. Cited in this article [1]

[45]	张磊(2021). 新时代献礼剧的情感召唤和价值认同——以《觉醒年代》为例. 《中国广播电视学刊》,(10),89-91. Cited in this article [1]

[46]	曾一果(2020). 从“圈地自萌”到“文化出圈”——社交媒体环境下“饭圈”文化的自我突破. 《学术前沿》,(19),6-13. Cited in this article [2]

[47]

Conard

(2015). The pragmatic roots of public history education in the United States. The Public Historian, 37(1), 105-120.

https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2015.37.1.105

https://online.ucpress.edu/tph/article/37/1/105/90636/The-Pragmatic-Roots-of-Public-History-Education-in

Cited in this article [1]

[48]

Foster

(2014). Online and plugged in? Public history and historians in the digtal age. Public History Review, 21, 1-19.

https://doi.org/10.5130/phrj.v21i0.4295

https://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/phrj/article/view/4295

Cited in this article [1] Abstract

This article examines the complex and powerful relationship between the internet and public history. It explores how public history is being experienced and practiced in a digital world where ‘you’ – both public historians and laypeople – are made powerful through using the world wide web. Web 2.0 is a dynamic terrain that provides both opportunities and challenges to the creation of history. While it may facilitate more open, democratic history making, the internet simultaneously raises questions about gatekeeping, authority and who has the right to speak for the past. Though the web provides new avenues for distributing historical information, how these are used and by whom remain pressing questions.

[49]	Frisch M. (1990). A shared authority: Essays on the craft and meanings of oral and public history. New York, NY: State University of New York Press. Cited in this article [1]

[50]	Ho S. (2007). Blogging as popular history making, blogs as public history: The Singapore case study. Public History Review, 14, 64-79. Cited in this article [1]

[51]	Jordanova L. (2000). History in Practice. London, UK: Hodder Arnold. Cited in this article [1]

[52]	Kelly R. (1978). Public history: Its orgins, nature and prospects. The Public Historian, 1(1), 16-28. https://doi.org/10.2307/3377666 https://online.ucpress.edu/tph/article/1/1/16/87981/Public-History-Its-Origins-Nature-and-Prospects Cited in this article [2]

[53]	Kean H.& Martin P. (2013). The public history reader. Oxford and New York, NY: Routledge. Cited in this article [1]

[54]

Gardner

J.B.

(2010). Trust, risk and public history: A view from the United States. Public History Review, 17, 52-61.

https://doi.org/10.5130/phrj.v17i0.1852

https://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/phrj/article/view/1852

Cited in this article [2] Abstract

In the public history and museum communities today there is much difference of opinion over the concept of ‘radical trust,’ which basically argues for us to give up control and trust the public to develop content for our websites and exhibitions and provide direction for our work. Most public historians and curators are happy to share authority with the public, but are we now expected to yield all authority? Are we now taking historian Carl Becker’s well-known phrase ‘everyman his own historian’ and updating it to ‘every person his or her own curator’? What is the role of historical knowledge in a world of opinion? Unfortunately, at the same time that many of us are embracing risk online, in a world we have little control or even influence over, we seem to be stepping back from risk taking in our museums, on our own turf. We’ve become risk averse—afraid to make mistakes, afraid of trying new approaches and tackling the historically controversial or the ambiguous. Rather than the ‘safe place for unsafe ideas’ that Elaine Gurian proposed, we have become no more than safe places for safe ideas. We need to push back on both fronts. Public historians should be thought leaders, not followers—not wait to see what the future holds for us but rather try to shape that future.

[55]	Gardner J.B. & Hamilton P. (2017). The past and future of public history: developments and challenges. In Gardner & Hamilton (Eds.). Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press. Cited in this article [1]

[56]	Glassberg D. (1996). Public History and the Study of Memory. The Public Historian, 18(2), 7-23. Cited in this article [2]

[57]	Green T. (2018). Challenge or opportunity? postcolonialism and the historian. In Maerker, A., Sleight, S. & Sutcliffe, A. (Eds.). History, memory and public life: The past in the present (pp. 48-64). London and New York: Routledge. Cited in this article [1]

[58]	Grele R.J. (1981). Whose public?Whose history? What is the goal of a public historian? The Public Historian, 3, 40-48. https://doi.org/10.2307/3377160 https://online.ucpress.edu/tph/article/3/1/40/89480/Whose-Public-Whose-History-What-Is-the-Goal-of-a Cited in this article [1]

[59]	Groot J.D. (2009). Consuming history: Historicans and heritage in contemporary popular culture (second edition), London and New York: Routledge. Cited in this article [1]

[60]	Hall S. (2005). On postmodernism and ariculation: an interview with Stuart Hall. In D. Morley & Kuan-Hsing, Chen (Eds.), Critical dialogues in cultural studies (pp. 131-163). London, UK: Routledge. Cited in this article [1]

[61]	Noiret S. & Cauvin T. (2017). Internationalizing public history. In Gardner & Hamilton (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of public history (pp. 37-58). Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press. Cited in this article [1]

[62]	Olick J.K. & Robbins J. (1998). Social memory studies: from “collective memory” to the historical sociological of mnemonic practices. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 105-140. https://doi.org/10.1146/soc.1998.24.issue-1 https://www.annualreviews.org/toc/soc/24/1 Cited in this article [1]

[63]	Rosenwein B.H. (2002). Worrying about emotions in history. The American Historicaal Review, 107(3), 821-845. Cited in this article [1]

[64]	Rosenzweig R. & Cohen D. (2005). Digital history: A guide to gthering, preserving and presenting the past on the web. Phiadelphia, PA: University of Phiadelphia Press. Cited in this article [1]

[65]	Thelen D. (1995). History after the enola gay controversy: an introduction. The Journal of American History, 82(3), 1029-1035. https://doi.org/10.2307/2945110 https://academic.oup.com/jah/article-lookup/doi/10.2307/2945110 Cited in this article [1]

[66]	Tyrrell I. (2005). Historians in practice: The practice of American history (1890-1970). Chicago, IL: University Of Chicago Press. Cited in this article [2]

[67]	Weller T. (2013). History in the digital age. London, UK: Routledge. Cited in this article [1]

[68]	Yang G. (2010). Alternative genres, new media and counter memories of the Chinese cultural revolution. In Mikyoung Kim & Barry Schwartz. (Eds.). Northeast Asia’s difficult past (pp.129-146). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Cited in this article [1]

Funding

National Social Science Fund “Research on the cultivation path of national identity in the practice of youth red memory in the digital age”(21CXW022)

PDF(1620 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections

Recommended

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export