18805992 <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Tiffany Kennedy<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Looking at the ever-growing community of Harry Potter, we have seen a variety of changes since its first introduction, to today, especially when we look at how the internet facilitated this growth. Web 2.0 has changed the way that communities work and grow. This can be seen through the large fanbase of Harry Potter (Rowling, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2003, 2005), which is one of many communities to grow up with Web 2.0 from an incredibly young age, especially in reference to the film fanbase (2001). First published in 1997, Rowling did not have a mass media marketing team for her first published book, there were no adverts or posters but a community formed, creating a media giant that most people in Western society had heard of. Rowling\u2019s empire was built off of words, and not just the words that she wrote, the word of mouth was her strongest ally and with her fanbase growing up with the internet and watching it change, this allowed for the introduction of Web 2.0 to herald the fans, becoming one of the largest fan based communities. Through social media we can see how houses from the Harry Potter school \u2018Hogwarts\u2019 has created different communities online; that these communities band together through social media in order to share their same ideologies; and how growing up online specifically changed how this community was created. Looking against the background of works by Henry Jenkins\u2019 \u201cAfterword: The Future of Fandom\u201d (2013), as well as Jenkins\u2019 \u201c\u2018Cultural Acupuncture\u2019: Fan Activism and the Harry Potter Alliance\u201d (2015), and Cova, Kozinets and Shankar\u2019s \u201cConsumer Tribes (2007) I will discuss my belief of that the changes that occurred with Web 2.0 changed the Harry Potter community, to become a community that is not limited to the books that they gathered around, but a community that has chosen to allow these books to further their identity and growth as people, together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
From 1997 till now, The Harry Potter community has grown online to\nbecome one of the largest fan based communities. Those who grew up with the\nPotter series, mainly those who grew with the films, have expanded their\nideologies and sense of community through the further development of the web.\nRowling, the author of the series, has continually spoken about how her book\nhad been rejected by several publishers before its initial release, which\neventually allowed for a generation that grew up with the web to create a fan\nbase online. This online fan base eventually lead to films, due to it being a\nlarge growing fan base, and with the addition of Web 2.0, later a dynamic\ncommunity. Within the Potter realm, one of the key features is that students\nare sorted into different \u2018houses\u2019 at the fictional school of \u2018Hogwarts\u2019. This\nallowed for each child to gain an identity within this community, and\nfamiliarise themselves with something that was similar to their own schooling.\nAs Web 2.0 was born in 2006, these fans were one of the first communities to\nuse it to their advantage, especially at the age that they were creating their\nown identities. Jenkins (2013, p.358) discusses how the discourse surrounding\nWeb 2.0 \u201chas been animated by a hunger to develop a new, more empowered, more\nsocially connect and more creative image of the consumer\u201d which, when applied\nto the Harry Potter audience, has changed how this particular community works\nand has grown. Due to this change in the web, the Potter community found more\nways to interact. One of the most common participatory subject at this time was\nthe sorting into \u2018houses\u2019, as many created and participated in quizzes that\nwere about exactly that. This caused the community to grow online and offline,\nas people searched for others who were in the same \u2018houses\u2019 as them, becoming\n\u201cmore creative\u201d and continuing to be \u201canimated by a hunger\u201d (Jenkins, 2013, p,358)\nas they strived to belong somewhere. Due to Web 2.0 this was able to happen as\nthese fans were \u201cdrawn together by shared passions\u2026and often create new context\nby appropriating, remixing or modifying existing media\u201d further solidifying\ntheir place in this community due to the \u2018houses\u2019 the would create content for.\nThis change in the web allowed for fans to solidify their place in a community\nto ensure that it grows. Without this, I believe that the Potter fanbase would\nnot have been able to become what it is today. As this has facilitated intense\nrelationships with those online, as they are able to connect with each other,\non a basis of mutual understanding, and mutual self-presentation in an online\nworld where for the most part, are unable to actually see each other, thus\ncreating an identity for themselves online. This identity furthered their\nbeliefs on how they wanted others to perceive them, much like how horoscopes\nhave no scientific basis on influencing our lives, yet many people still\nbelieve that they do, Hogwarts houses have the same effect on those that are a\npart of the community. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Twitter is one of the main social media sites that actively\nshowcases what Web 2.0 is about. The read-write site, allows for people to\nhyperlink their \u2018tweets\u2019 through hashtags, connecting a variety of people\ntogether. This makes it easy for communities to form over the platform, which\nwe actively see with the Harry Potter community. Hashtags on twitter have\nallowed for this community to continue to have a voice, which Jenkins\u2019 talks\nabout in the term \u201cHarry Potter Alliance\u201d (2015, p.206). This \u201cfan activism\u201d\n(Jenkins, 2015, p. 2016) is an interesting concept that occurs online when a\nwhole fandom bands together in support or resistance of something, showcasing\ntheir solidarity on sites such as Twitter by using hashtags that support their\ncommunity. Hashtags such as \u201cDumbledoresArmy\u201d and \u201cPotterheads\u201d have been used\nin order to show their alliance to their community, as well as hashtags to show\ntheir supporting sides in a later online debate, tagging \u201ciStandWithJKRowling\u201d\nor \u201cBoycottDepp\u201d. In 2017 and in 2018, the author of the Harry Potter series,\nJ.K. Rowling, took to Twitter to show her support for an incredibly\ncontroversial casting choice of Johnny Depp in the series \u2018Fantastic Beast and\nWhere to Find Them\u2019, a continuation of the Potter world. This created quite a\nstir with not just hardcore fans but those who just watched the film with no\nneed to showcase their attachment online. As Depp has become a controversial figure,\nin light of the allegations his ex-wife Amber Heard made in their divorce case,\nmany were unhappy with his casting. Rowling felt the need to defend this choice\nonline, using Twitter as the platform to showcase her message, however, this\nbackfired within her own community. Instead, the community that once was under\nRowling\u2019s reign, had expanded due to the web, and their ideologies expanded\nwith it. The majority of this community who seek a role in activism criticised\nRowling\u2019s defence because it was not what the community was built on, and not\nwhat it grew to become. Using the algorithm that Twitter has, this become\nwidely known through out the Potter community which lead to the more recent\nfilm in this world to become the least profitable film in the Potter universe.\nThis is all due to the community that expanded beyond what books originally\ngave them, through the creation of Web 2.0. Jenkins discuss the notion that\n\u201cfan participation might lead to enhanced political agency and civic\nengagement\u2026they seem to offer a starting point for more contemporary work on\nfan activism\u201d (2015, p.207) which is evident through the Potter community\ngrowing beyond the author that start their fandom. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The whole of the Potter fandom was built off of \u2018buzz\u2019. Due to\nRowling never being published before, her success came from word of mouth,\nwhich later developed into words across the web as she continued to write and\ngain success. Cova, Kozinets & Shankar (2007) discuss the beginnings of the\nonline community associated with Potter. Early on the AOL executive \u201cset up a\ndedicated Harry Potter chatroom on the ISP homepage\u201d due to his son continually\ninsisting on this, well before web 2.0 came about. When web 2.0 started taking\noff the popular site \u2018fanfiction.net<\/a>\u2019\nstarted, showcasing all kinds of fan written content, which included \u201c258,760\nHarry Potter sequels\u201d according to Cova, Kozinets and Shankar (2007, p.181) in\n2006. This community continually growing up with the internet, pushing for more\nand more change within the limitations they were given online, eventually\npushing the boundaries until web 2.0 enacted change upon the online spectrum,\nallowing for this community to grow as they continue to create. Fans \u201chave\ninvested time, energy and financial resources\u201d (Cova, Kozinets and Shankar,\n2007, p. 190) into this community that has been created and the online world\nallows them to push this further as many fans want. Growing up with the change\nin the internet, with the occurrence of Web 2.0, has allowed for communities to\nenact further change, to create websites and forums that allow for their\ncommunities to be communicate, learn and belong. The Potter community actively\nshows that, even though Cova, Kozinets and Shankar (2007) heavily discusses the\nrelationship of fans surrounding Rowling, including the denial of information\nthrough the original printing of the series, they also showcase how in some\nareas during this time, the fandom grew beyond, doing much more than ever asked\nor thought. With this direct correlation with the internet, this community was\nable to spread across the world very early on. As Rowling\u2019s fame start with\nwhat was a \u2018buzz\u2019 in Britain through word of mouth, if this community did not\npush the boundaries of what communication was available to them, perhaps Potter\nwould not have spread as far and wide as it did.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There has been so much growth through the incredibly large\ncommunity that is dedicated to the series of Harry Potter. Without Web 2.0 I\nbelieve that this community would not have been able to evolve the way it did.\nThrough the \u2018houses\u2019 fans are sorted into, the online discourse of solidarity\nand the way in which those in the community grew up with the creation of Web\n2.0, it is evident that this change has had an effect on how the community has\ngrown. Henry Jenkins\u2019 \u201cAfterword: The Future of Fandom\u201d (2013), as well as\nJenkins\u2019 \u201c\u2018Cultural Acupuncture\u2019: Fan Activism and the Harry Potter Alliance\u201d\n(2015), and Cova, Kozinets and Shankar\u2019s \u201cConsumer Tribes (2007) act as an aid\nto this argument. As one of the first large fan bases to grow as a community\nthrough Web 2.0, the Potter community creates an interesting case study. With\nall this in mind, it is evident that as the internet grew, those who used it\nwere clearly able to form more awareness of themselves and others within the\ncommunities that they aligned themselves with online. Those in the Harry Potter\ncommunity were really able to move beyond it to more than just simply fans of a\nbook, but a true community where they have their own identities and\nrelationships.<\/p>\n\n\n\n REFERENCE\nLIST<\/p>\n\n\n\n Aguiton, C., &\nCardon, D. (2007). The Strength of Weak Cooperation: An Attempt to Understand\nthe Meaning of Web 2.0. Communications\n& Strategies<\/em>, 65(1). Retrived from https:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1009070<\/p>\n\n\n\n Cova, B., Kozinets, R., & Shankar, A. (2007). Consumer Tribes<\/em>. Oxford, UK:\nButterworth-Heinemann.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Grudz, A. Wellman,\nB. and Takhteyev, Y. (2011). Imagining Twitter as an Imagined Community. American Behavioral Scientist 55<\/em>(10).\n1294 – 1318. DOI:\n10.1177\/0002764211409378<\/p>\n\n\n\n Jenkins,\nH. (2015). \u201cCultural Acupuncture\u201d: Fan Activism and the Harry Potter Alliance.\nIn L.Geraghty (ed.), Popular Media\nCultures<\/em> (1st<\/sup> ed., pp 206-229. DOI https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1057\/9781137350374_11<\/p>\n\n\n\n Jenkins, H. (2013). Afterword: The Future of\nFandom. In C. Harrington., J. Gray., & C. Sandvoss (eds.), Fandom: Identites and Communities in a\nMediated World<\/em> (pp 357-364). Retrived from http:\/\/www.binaryspark.com\/classes\/Fandom\/readings\/Afterword%20-%20The%20Future%20of%20Fandom.pdf<\/p>\n\n\n\n O\u2019Reilly, T. (2009).\nWhat is Web 2.0<\/em>. O\u2019Reilly Media Inc.\nRetrieved from https:\/\/books.google.com.au\/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NpEk_WFCMdIC&oi=fnd&pg=PT3&dq=web+2.0&ots=OZQCSbnDGT&sig=fMg7Ech6pCYPqyc3e1J7BMLUs8Q#v=onepage&q=web%202.0&f=false<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thompson, C. (2008). Brave New World of Digital\nIntimacy. The New York Times. <\/em>5\nSeptember. http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2008\/09\/07\/magazine\/07awareness-t.html?_r=1<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" 18805992 Tiffany Kennedy Looking at the ever-growing community of Harry Potter, we have seen a variety of changes since its first introduction, to today, especially when we look at how the internet facilitated this growth. Web 2.0 has changed the way that communities work and grow. This can be seen through the large fanbase of… Continue reading Harry Potter and the Ever-Growing Community<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-490","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-communities"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/490","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=490"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/490\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":588,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/490\/revisions\/588"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=490"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=490"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=490"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}