Subjectivity in this context simply refers to the acknowledgement of multiple viewpoints. A common trope of transmedia extensions is to reframe canonical events from another character's perspective and/or focus a narrative extension around a minor character who the audience might find intriguing , but has previously not been the dominant subjective focus of the primary text .
Henry Jenkins poses that having students shift their perspectives, or examine an event or issue from multiple perspectives, allows them to break down their biases and arrive at a deeper understanding of what underpins a particular issue. Jenkins' examples are primarily historical (e.g. the value of students looking at the Civil War from the perspective of both the North and the South), but this principle could be productively applied across disciplines.
Many scholars continue to prize the myth of scholarly distance and objectivity, which poses an immediate barrier to an embrace of subjectivity as a guiding principle of our work. Contemplating the application of this principle to transmedia scholarship, subjectivity affords us an opportunity to debate across platforms. Co-authorship needn't be a wholly harmonious process to be productive, and one dynamic way of acknowledging these "multiple viewpoints" might be to encourage scholars with differing subjectivities to offer points and counterpoints in a variety of media forms, offering the reader multiple perspectives on an issue or text.
Principle in Practice:
Wendy Hsu's video conference paper
|Previous page on path||Conceptualizing Transmedia Scholarship, page 12 of 17||Next page on path|