----- Original Message ----- From: Bizarro7@aol.com
When one falls in love with a celebrity, the
chemical process of 'love' has been triggered toward an individual one
wants
to mate and bond with for purposes of procreation. Fanfic, fan art or any other sort of fantasy that satisfies that unattainable bond is inevitable, and has existed since that burly 'head of the tribe' first rose to prominence.
If one can be permitted to comment on this scientifically, this strikes me as a very biologically-deterministic view of sex, celebrity and fandom. For one thing, there exists a lot of material which suggests that "love" and the urge to mate has to do with more complex things than simply procreation; social bonding, relief of tension and the construction of cultural units: this material ranges from biological studies of bonobos (pygmy chimpanzees who appear to have sex more for social than procreative purposes) to queer studies, most of which revolves around the investigation and critique of social constructions of gender and sexuality. In fact, to construct sexual desire totally as a procreative urge is to ignore the large number of people both heterosexual and homosexual who engage in sex or sex-related activities for purposes other than procreation.
Similarly, the practices of fandom and of celebrity-following appear to take on more complex aspects than simply lust for a particular individual(s). Numerous studies (some of which have already been cited by more knowledgeable people than I) explore the potential of fandom for developing sub- and countercultures and interest groupings, some of which are admittedly sex-related, but others of which involve bonds around common tastes in fiction, shared politics or similar social experiences.
Secondly, the notion of the "burly head of the tribe" as the ideal lust object is also open to question (to say nothing of the notion of sexual attractiveness as the sole criterion for selection of leaders, but that's another story). Leaving aside the large numbers of anthropological examples of leaders, tribal and otherwise, whose sexuality is somehow restricted or socially constrained by their leadership role (Bill Clinton being in no wise typical!), there exists quite a bit of evidence to suggest that primate females of all species, humans among them, show quite a bit of variation in their choice of sexual partners, and that they are just as likely to select a mate based on intelligence or personality as much as looks (yes, it's true, the nerd really does get the girl sometimes-- although usually it's more like the girl prefers the nerd!).
I would actually be quite interested in hearing the views of people in other disciplines on the procreative versus non-procreative functions of fandom and the celebrity crush. Neil?
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com