Consumer-to-fan cultivation model Figure 7. Consumer-to-fan cultivation model 84
Creative Component Introduction Fandom originates, at least in part, as a response to the relative powerlessness <strong>of</strong> the consumer in relation to powerful institutions <strong>of</strong> cultural production and circulation. (Jenkins, 1992, p. 278-279) Through writing this critique, I hope to capture and represent all that I could not express academically. Fandom, as Jenkins (1992) mentioned, fights institutional constraints, and therefore, when fandom is examined, it is limited by academia‟s impersonal analysis. As a fan, one possesses an unbridled enthusiasm for one‟s “object <strong>of</strong> consumption” (Gray et al., 2007, p. 11). According to Sandvoss (2005), such “emotional intensity . . . cannot be measured quantitatively. [So] for the purpose <strong>of</strong> empirical investigation and academic analysis, we therefore need to turn to observable aspects as defining marks <strong>of</strong> fandom” (p. 6). <strong>The</strong>refore, through this critique, I will trace my fandom and provide observable evidence <strong>of</strong> my cultivation as a fan. By the end <strong>of</strong> my ethnographic journey, I was cultivated to the degree <strong>of</strong> an educated academic-fan; however, I remained outside <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Sherlock</strong>ian community. Jenkins (1992) believes “fan reception cannot and does not exist in isolation, but is always . . . motivated, at least partially, by a desire for further interaction with a larger social and cultural community” (p. 76)”. I, therefore, will treat this critique as an introduction into the realm <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sherlock</strong>ian scholarship. Considering my case study was <strong>Sherlock</strong> <strong>Holmes</strong> (<strong>2009</strong>), a critique enables me to examine, from the perspective <strong>of</strong> a fan, aspects <strong>of</strong> the film that cultivated my interest. I will therefore critique the film‟s effort to capture the contradictory canonical themes <strong>of</strong> magic and science, and incorporate my academic-fan findings by integrating my ethnographic experience with enchantment and the relativity <strong>of</strong> reality. Overall, however, I wish to capture “the original purpose <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sherlock</strong>ian activity . . . enjoyment – an exaggeration, not an abandonment, <strong>of</strong> the childish excitement with which the original readers, and succeeding generations, read the <strong>Sherlock</strong> <strong>Holmes</strong> tales” (Redmond, <strong>2009</strong>, p. 316). 85
- Page 1 and 2:
The Case Study of Sherlock Holmes (
- Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents Attestation of Au
- Page 5 and 6:
List of Figures Figure 1. Abercromb
- Page 7 and 8:
Attestation of Authorship I hereby
- Page 9 and 10:
Abstract This study investigates a
- Page 11 and 12:
Abercrombie and Longhurst‟s audie
- Page 13 and 14:
and Morgan‟s (1990) and Shanahan
- Page 15 and 16:
two and turn them into action” (G
- Page 17 and 18:
Jenkins (1992), however, would disa
- Page 19 and 20:
that to be a secondary phase, a res
- Page 21 and 22:
they designed their continuum, were
- Page 23 and 24:
economistic theory, alongside Aberc
- Page 25 and 26:
informs us that we take our communi
- Page 27 and 28:
Methodology This chapter explains t
- Page 29 and 30:
albeit in Sherlock Holmes for Dummi
- Page 31 and 32:
Figure 2. Original model from Maste
- Page 33 and 34:
and like many, have a stereotypical
- Page 35 and 36:
Drawing from Shanahan and Morgan (1
- Page 37 and 38:
Model My research advocates the the
- Page 39 and 40: Creative component Critiques Regard
- Page 41 and 42: ethnographic position is made on tw
- Page 43 and 44: Table 2. Ethnographic order of prod
- Page 45 and 46: Good Doctor to placate any qualms t
- Page 47 and 48: preconception was derived from its
- Page 49 and 50: and Watson in defeating Lord Blackw
- Page 51 and 52: The common picture of Holmes is of
- Page 53 and 54: “embrace of fiction” (p. 606) a
- Page 55 and 56: was lost. Therefore, Doyle‟s orig
- Page 57 and 58: this was the only Holmes novel the
- Page 59 and 60: 9). While the tale and its quick pu
- Page 61 and 62: his feet with a cry of pleasure.
- Page 63 and 64: Cultivation analysis: Official seco
- Page 65 and 66: their flaws and their frailties, in
- Page 67 and 68: may suggest, this film is not a dir
- Page 69 and 70: Holmes in the role of supporting ac
- Page 71 and 72: have endeavoured to intertwine and
- Page 73 and 74: Official secondary products: The Pr
- Page 75 and 76: 245). Redmond‟s (2009) statement,
- Page 77 and 78: “shocking affair of the Dutch ste
- Page 79 and 80: cited in Jenkins, 1992, p. 32). In
- Page 81 and 82: The fan Sandvoss (2005) believes th
- Page 83 and 84: emotional, or cognitive); they tres
- Page 85 and 86: knowledgeable fans [who] may . . .
- Page 87 and 88: negative connotation, for it no lon
- Page 89: Figure 6, the consumer-to-fan culti
- Page 93 and 94: esponsible, Lord Blackwood, played
- Page 95 and 96: short and are exposed as fraudulent
- Page 97 and 98: Conclusion We take our communicatio
- Page 99 and 100: References Abercrombie, N., & Longh
- Page 101 and 102: Davies, D. S. (2009). The further a
- Page 103 and 104: Doyle, A. C. (2005k). The case-book
- Page 105 and 106: Jenkins, H. (2007). Afterword: The
- Page 107 and 108: Signorielli, N., & Morgan, M. (1990
- Page 109 and 110: Bibliography Ackroyd, P. (2001). In
- Page 111: Miller, P. V. (1994). Made-to-order