Vonnie, your definition of "media fandom" is really interesting! And also a little surprising to me. I consider what you're describing (mostly female, the slash-colored glasses, more squee-oriented than discussion-oriented) to be *part* of the mediafannish experience--and certainly a big part of my own mediafannish life--but not necessarily more dominant than the part that encourages examination and discussion of the minutiae of a show, its characters, its mythology, its relationship to other shows, etc. I see those two aspects of mediafandom as basically complementary; I can't think of a show that I would squee over, seek out fic and vids for, etc., without also wanting to discuss all its intricate details. To me, mediafannishness essentially implies an intensifying of the discussion about, and engagement with, a show.

Me, neither. None of that is in the Boxed Set descriptions, so I think it's just the culture that developed naturally -- not a rule, per se.

Well, it was the culture of two of the threads that formed the thread. The thread history was as follows: when Bitches (at the time, a more porny, less personal place) was overflowing with Clark and Lex, lo, we did branch off and form The Buffistas Go To Smallville (WX), and it was good. On the third day, Smallville was invaded by Mounties, and thus was born the Due South Thread (No Ray Wars!), and lo, it was also good. So while it wasn't part of the formal description, it was an understood part of the foundations.

Heroes is a show that seems like it would/should be very mediafannish (and I agree with how you're defining it, pretty much), but in general isn't, at least in my fannish wanderings. Mediafen in my experience seem to mostly like Heroes, but without going the extra step and being fannish about it.

Interesting. Do you think that's because it actually is a hugely popular show, so doesn't carry the added currency of being a semi-secret/cultish/overlooked show? Or that the fannish aspects of the show are in the text rather than the subtext?

Or that the fannish aspects of the show are in the text rather than the subtext?

I think this is a big part of it. A lot of what fans would latch onto and bring out is already in the show, which has such strong comic overtones. Also, there's no real leading romantic pairing, het or otherwise, which would provide another impetus for a lot of fic.

The thing with the mediafannishness thing, though, is I get that way about House. But I don't think House would work in Boxed Set.

Interesting. Do you think that's because it actually is a hugely popular show, so doesn't carry the added currency of being a semi-secret/cultish/overlooked show? Or that the fannish aspects of the show are in the text rather than the subtext?

I think it's more that the fannish aspects of it aren't the same kind of fannish aspects that generally draw mediafen to a show, as far as I can tell. Dana's got a good point about lack of pairings, but, then... that hasn't exactly stopped SPN, you know?

I actually think that it's that Heroes is a broader ensemble, where it's story/plot-driven rather than character driven. If that makes sense.

House is a common mediafannish text, though. It's just like Spooks -- in some ways, culturally appropriate for Boxed Set, but technically inappropriate.

I can't say why Heroes pings so many of us as not-really-mediafannish, but it does me as well. I think that popular shows can be mediafannish -- during its heyday XF was very popular, and it's like the ur-text of online mediafandom -- but Heroes is... just... not like that, for me. And although I see people squeeing about it and going into depth about it, I don't see the same kind of mediafannish practices happening around it that I do other texts.

I actually think that it's that Heroes is a broader ensemble, where it's story/plot-driven rather than character driven. If that makes sense.

Yeap, this. The lack of central pairing is another aspect of it. But then, Firefly was an ensemble without one main pairing that took the fandom by storm, and I'd totally call it a mediafannish show (despite the fact that I know almost as many male fans of the show as I do the females.) FF was more character than plot-driven show though.

I'm 1700 posts behind in Box Set because I'm trying to avoid the Heroes and SPN talk. I'm woefully behind on the first and I'm waiting for hiatus on the second. Otherwise, I'm up to date with BSG and DF and I'd love to discuss them on Sundays, but I am utterly incapable of skipping over what I don't want to read at the time. So I haven't ventured into BS since the beginning of January, and that makes me sad. By the time I catch up, there will be no point in responding.

Again, I have to point and nod at this statement. The thing is, I can be mediafannish about a number of shows, but if I can't go into a thread without being spolied for a show I really want to get into later, then it becomes an all or nothing situation. I would really like to share the squee and flail, but I can't unless I'm able to keep current with every single show--which just isn't tenable for me.

Vonnie, do you think The Office is media fannish, or does it fail to be, because there's no world building at all?