J-Rock Ramblings

This is a more serious article concerning the meaning of a "fan". I realize this is not following the theme of my website, but this is something I wanted to express and I present it here under the "technical" column instead of the "humor" one.

In the fandom of jrock, one comes across, at one point or another, fans that don't follow your own definition of being a "fan". This might happen in a discussion, forums online or any other means fans can meet and discuss their fandom. While discussing, some definitions contrast darkly with other people's views of fandom, and some are just quirky little differences. For example, "fangirling" is not always seen as a good way to express an individuals liking for an artist or work, and varies greatly in opinion among many fans. Some people try to impose their definition on others, or try to set rules according to their own definition of a fan. But why do so many people disagree? Essentially, I'll discuss what is a fan, what are the "requisites" for being a fan, and if some fans are more important or have more privileges then others, among other things.

I have come across these questions many times in the past few years, since I became more involved with other fans from my fandoms on the online community. Before, I knew I was a fan of the artists I liked, but debates and opinions of others forced me to express exactly why I consider myself a fan, and what is, essentially a fan in my opinion. I'm not accusing any specific fandom, or individuals, or want to achieve anything in this text but express a different view on fandom for some, and agreement for others. This is only me, stating my opinion. You are free to agree, disagree, or stand in between.

A fan, according to my computers dictionary is "a person who has a strong interest in or admiration for a particular sport, art form, or famous person". This is probably not the most general definition, but we can see that in the case of jrock, you can have admiration for the person, the art, or both. Interestingly though, fan is a derivative of fanatic: "a person filled with excessive and single-minded zeal". This is not unlike the term "otaku" which has various meanings, but one meaning is "a very obsessed individual in one individual or thing". Connotations of "fan" and "otaku" have not always been positive, and this can be explained by the fact that some individuals are too obsessed and their reality is compromised. This is not to say that there are other reasons, but being a fan can be very serious business.

And that is the case in the jrock fandom. Some fans are very devoted to their favorite artist and that is just fine. However, it is when fans start to impose their views of the "right", "appropriate", "pure", or "real" fan that things start to heat up. Some fans don't agree on what is said by the other party and flame wars ensue. These wars are not very welcome in fandom from other fans, and some bite the bait and make it worst. It creates an atmosphere of competition and unsettled fans. This is not only found in jrock, but in all other fandoms as well.

One aspect that is debated is the amount of songs you've heard from an artist. Some people think that a fan cannot call themselves a fan without having heard more then one song. I disagree. If you like an artists one song, you can be a fan of the artist. Why? because you like one of his songs. Isn't that enough? For some it isn't. They must have listened to other songs and know the average repertoire of an artist before being a fan. But what's the difference between one song and many songs? In both cases you like at least one, and in both cases you can like the artist in return as well. The individual might not be able to get more songs, or is unable, or doesn't want to, but they are still a fan. Besides, not everyone will like all the songs of a certain artist.

I think that you can also be a fan if you have not heard any music, but only know of the artist. Then you are a fan of the artist. For example, if the artist is part of another band, but you haven't listened to any of the other songs, you are still a fan of the artist. I do believe that there has to be at least one thing you like from the person or his work to make you a fan, or else you are a fan of the name. But then again, that's still a fan too.

Do you have to not only know the songs, but know the artist as well? I think not. This has kind of been discussed above, but one can be a fan of a song or songs, but not necessarily a fan of the artist himself. Some people who just listen to songs will never go and find out any personal information of the artist, but they are still a fan of his songs, and of the person who wrote them. Others, who do find out much more about an artist, are also a fan of the artist, the only difference being that they know more about him then others.

So does knowing more about an artist make you more of a fan? No, it does not, it only demonstrates your passion and interest for the person more than others. The fact that you can tell all the stats of an artist to someone who knows none does not make you anymore of a fan, because in the end, you already were one when you started to like the artist and his work and knew nothing about him. It doesn't make you more special or more of fan if you do know more, just able to appreciate everything more.

Does one who'se been a fan for longer have some sort of seniority/superiority over the fans that have only just begun being fans? No, though this is pretty widely spread in fandoms. It doesn't help that fanclubs work on this principle as well. So, for some cases, yes, you have more privileges then others, but it does not make you superior in any way. This can also tie in with the amount of information you know of the artist because you've been a fan longer. Yes, it is nice to be able to say that you were a fan at the very start, but that was only because you were lucky enough to have had the chance to discover someone you liked so soon. Others just don't have the opportunity to do so or haven't gotten the opportunity until just then. So many factors affect who you can come across an artist or not that the fact that you were a fan from the start is just coincidence really.

Do you have to have merchandise/official merchandise/anything related to the artist to be a "real" fan? No, just liking the artist and/or his song(s) will make you a fan, like I've said before. It does not make you "more" of a fan if you have one cd or if you have their whole discography and everything else they have been related to in the market. You don't even need to have anything at all, since you can hear the artists song on the radio (yes, even for jrock, there is such a thing as online radio and podcasts and so many other things were it can be listened to) and become a fan. Of course, being a fan will most likely lead you to buy their things, but you don't have to. Yes, buying their CD or single will help support them, and if you are devoted to the artist, you will buy them, but it is not necessary. The people who do not buy anything are not "disrespecting" the artist in any way. It is a personal choice to want to invest in whatever you want to invest in. You should not be "forced" to buy the CD's or whatever else there is because you are a fan.

There are also many other factors that affect fans of jrock, and why this is more of an issue in this fandom. In the case of jrock, many people do not have access to the material the artists produce since they are mainly found in Japan. Some are lucky and can find them in their own town or in chinatowns, and others are old enough and have jobs and credit cards so that they can order online. Others are poor, have other priorities or do not want to use the methods available to them, be it is their choice. Having all their items only demonstrates your willingness to get them and the means that you possess to be able to get them. Not superiority.

Do you have to be in a fanclub to be a "true" fan? No, you do not, since being a fan in the first place does not require you to be. However, it also does not make you a "true" fan. A fan can have the means and access to be able to become a member of a fanclub, but essentially, this comes to the same argument presented above, about merchandise. The only difference among fans that are in a fanclub and those that are not, are the privileges. Access to information, tickets, discounts, which are all enjoyable to fans, but does not make them "truer" fans. In the eyes of papers and lawful things, you are an "official" fan, but not a greater fan then the others that are not in the fanclub.

If you like the artist and the music more then most people, does it make you a bigger fan? Not really no. It just means that you like them more. But you are a fan, just that the others might not like the artist or music as much as you. Besides, I think it gets kind of complicated to determine just who likes someone more then someone else.

Do you have to have a certain attitude toward the artist and his work to be a fan? In this case, yes, but only when it comes to ethics and respect. One can criticize the artist, complain about them, obsess over them just as much as anybody else that is not necessarily an artist. Fans even have a right to fangirl if they want to. Sure, it's not very productive having conversations about a certain persons butt or the others shiny colorful hair, but it is a means of expressing things they like about the person. The only problem is when it becomes dangerous or disrespectful, or even unethical for the artist and people surrounding him, the other fans and everyone else to be associated with a fan. Stalking is not safe, and disrespectful. Sure, you may think you are a fan, and you might have been, but crossing the line makes you stop being a fan and become whatever it is you are doing, like a stalker if you stalk. These kinds of behaviors or attitudes are plainly not accepted in most societies, so this shouldn't be very debatable.

However, respect is often not present in fans. This does not mean they are not a fan, but they are not respecting the individual. It is, yes, their choice to do disrespectful things, and this I guess, can never really be solved... For instance, should people write fanfics about the artists? I think they can, even if it is implying other realities that are untrue, however, this is not always very respectful is it? The artist might not like it, but then again, it's just fiction. Everyone has rights to express what they think, and if they express it through writing, then essentially it is OK. What about other things like parodies and such? Same thing, I guess. But, fans have to realize that there are copyright issues if you do not handle their material properly and you can face repercussions. Fan or not, copyright material still needs to be treated right. (Downloading is illegal, in the States, and people do it anyway. This is probably the only thing that is slack in the copyright for the moment, regarding jrock).

So the dictionary tells us that a fan is "a person who has a strong interest in or admiration for a particular sport, art form, or famous person", and I believe that a fan is just that. Nothing else makes you more important or superior, more right or more appropriate. A person is simply a fan, so long as you have a "strong interest" in whatever it is you like.

Layout and graphics made by me.
Picture of An Cafe from Livejournal An Cafe Comm and Gackt/hyde pictures from the internet somewhere.
Brushes used are from www.photoshopbrushes.com and endlessrain.org