Participatory Culture Wars, edited by Simone Driessen, Bethan Jones and Benjamin Litherland, is a collection of essays that look at the intersection of fandom and major social and political issues. While academic in nature these essays are quite accessible for readers with an interest.

When I said "intersection" above I mean more than that word might imply. This isn't simply about a group of fans of a show or celebrity who might also belong to a community that is marginalized in society, who then band together to resist or oppose a wrong (real or perceived) perpetrated by that entity. As important as that is, especially when that movement then looks beyond their initial show or celebrity to resist an industry or industries more generally, this book seeks to look at how the very idea of fandom can be used to analyze and understand political alliances, how political groups use social media communities to subversively spread their political ideology.

In looking at these ideas, from using influencers to indoctrinate their fans/followers to outright antifandom, the essays examine popular fandoms and what makes someone a fan by our current standards. Then show the parallels, the many parallels, between political groups and cultural groups and their fans and followers.

While these essays address and reference existing academic research and ideas, they also make clear the actual ideas they're referencing, which lets those outside academia follow the arguments and understand what is being offered. Some essays, depending on your particular areas of interest, may require a slower and closer read than others, but they are all accessible if you have an interest.

This is certainly essential reading for any academic working in the areas of social media studies, fandom studies and political science. Additionally, the general reader will gain a lot also, from simply a better perspective on what might seem like unusual alliances in the "culture wars" to being able to spot when they or a friend might be falling into a type of fandom that seeks to lead fans in a direction as compared to debating and discussing the object of their fanhood.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.

Where the fan and fury meet. This academic compilation focuses on anti-fandom: serious but heated engagement with fannish objects of all kinds. Fans have always been key to the construction of cultural texts. Even fans who don't particularly like the source material. The broader text covers everything from ambivalence to outright hate to breaking up with a beloved creator or series. Each chapter centres on a case study within fandom, with such a variety of topics covered: from Harry Potter to Britney Spears to boy's love (BL). The chapter on BL was particularly welcome and I think offers a unique and topical perspective. I didn't know about the social media phenomenon of young women "scaring" young men with videos depicting scenes from BL fandoms. A critical take is presented on this and all other topics. This isn't about validating anti-fandom activities, but rather accepting and understanding what anti-fandom is all about, especially in the interactive digital age.

I'm a fan fiction bookbinder so I am writing a review of this book from the perspective of a transmedia archivist and creator. I'm also an active guild member of Renegade Bookbinding Guild, which is inherently a space of political activism; and I am the person who coined the word "racebending" and led efforts to fight whitewashing in Hollywood. So my review is definitively from the perspective of someone deeply steeped in the civics of participatory culture.

This book is a collection of academic essays from the field of fan studies, while also placing fandom as a canary in a coal mine for cultural conflict. It talks about how MAGA itself is a fandom, and argues that "increased acceptability of overt racism and sexism...can't and shouldn't be peeled apart from fandom because it too both reflects and reproduces these power relations. It isn't that the far right used [fandom] to seduce unsuspecting fans into their ideology, but rather that both phenomena are powered by the same (previously largely submerged) cultural reality."

It's very dense, but I appreciated that it provided language to name phenomena I observe in my day to day fandom life--intra-fannish policing, blackwashing, plastic representation, etc. What will stick with me most is probably "residual fandom," what remains when attachment to the fandom has diminished. I appreciated that it pointed out that a lot of the "anti-woke" backlash, at it's heart, is bitterness around how media might be "pandering to the illegitimate desires of illegitimate people" in the eyes of the fans who deride diversity and inclusion. Lastly, what will stay with me is that when folks frame "true fans" as not toxic (ie No True Scotsman) it's also a way to protect the fandom and franchise for culpability.

An interesting and thought provoking read for those interested in fandom studies, particularly Harry Potter fans trying to figure out what to do about JKR.

The bibliography and notes coming at the end of each section makes sense as an academic book, but (especially when reading on a phone vs a computer or physical book) it means those notes feel unconnected. I paged past them without reading because there is no context with them so separated from the text. It would be difficult on a phone screen, but the notes should be at the bottom of the page they reference rather than at the end.
I thought this might read more like "popular" nonfiction. The type written for the masses rather than for a specific research community. This very much reads like a research paper for experts rather than something that the general public would understand and appreciate. It's fine as someone very into both fandom and anthropology, but I think it would be mind-numbing for much of a general audience.
Also, as I'm reading I'm hoping that this is before the final edit. There are some weird sentence constructions and some word choice issues. The word choice things aren't as important in non-fiction to me, but some of the sentences I've read three or four times before getting the point because the verb was in a weird spot or there were so many commas from subordinate clauses. Some of these could be broken into different sentences, but often rewording and changing the phrase order so the commas are less confusing can work.
Even as academic essays, some of these don't work very well for me because of terminology and differences in experience. The 6th essay is "Masks of Micro-Celebrity," and uses the term "facial regimes" to describe something other than face care/makeup (which is what I thought the term meant). Without any connection to English speaking audiences with some sort of similar fan phenomenon, I was lost and ended up skimming it to see if I could get any meaning out of it. In the end, I can't relate to the topic (nothing the authors described seemed familiar or recognizable as someone who doesn't really participate in fandom for micro-celebrities, or I guess they are describing influencers but the authors don't seem to detail them as such). Maybe fans from other cultures will understand that essay better than me. The other one that didn't really connect for me was the 10th essay on Danmu and Reaction Videos. I don't really use Twitch, which I think would be the equivalent to the media platform/fan interactions described. I understood the media the authors were discussing this time, but they were trying to use a metaphor about a house that confused me. Also, I'm not sure I got what they were trying to say in regards to male and female gazes because of the metaphor.
I generally enjoyed reading the other essays. There were a couple that could have benefited from a whole book even if said book was slightly less evidence-based and academically written.