Loading ...
I heard a lovely portmanteau word just the other day that I hadn’t heard before. I don’t think it originated with my source, but still, I’m low-key mad I didn’t come up with it myself even as parallel evolution.
Fandomentalist.
If you don’t know, a portmanteau is a combination of two words and the concepts of those words into something new which aptly describes a fusion of both. “Motel” is one of the more famous examples, being coined as small places to stay for the night started to spring up around the U.S. in response to the proliferation of the automobile. They were hotels designed specifically for motorists who didn’t need anything fancy or long-term, just a (hopefully) clean bed and a shower. Motor hotels. Motels.
Fandomentalist brings together “fan” or “fandom” and “fundamentalist,” the former of which I’m sure you all are familiar with and the latter which speaks to a particular kind of religious mindset which believes in holy texts such as the Bible or the Koran as literal and unalienable truths. Word of God, not to be questioned by mere men. The fact the scriptures in question were written by, or at least translated by, mere men, and thus taken literally are full of outdated, confusing or even outright contradictory content does not bear consideration by a fundamentalist, and in extremes can lead to a justification of all manner of bad behavior even though you’re professing to be following a faith and/or prophet that seems to want you above all to treat your fellows upon this Earth with kindness. Not to mention that in America a lot of the preachers over the decades that have been the most vociferous and hardline in their denouncements of sin and straying from the Word sure seem to get caught sinning and straying a lot. In any case, it’s rough going when you stake some or all of your personal identity on ground that may not be solid enough to support your strict adherence.
But being a Catholic or Muslim at least has the weight of centuries of legacy and tradition behind it. Pop culture? Star Wars hasn’t even been around for fifty years and yet there are people out there who treat it like a religion, proselytize it tirelessly to others and brook no suggestions that might violate their sense of canon (and guess where the term “canon” originally came from?). They’ve memorized every line of the movies and can quote them to you at need, or with no need at all, and if you posit the opinion that, say, Star Wars is not the greatest thing ever, they can get viscerally angry.
And you know what? I’ve felt it at times. That instinct to defend the things I love against outsiders (heathens!), or worse Those Who Should Know Better (heretics!). The feeling of being personally attacked even though all someone said was, “I don’t like Ghostbusters” and the urge to explain to them why they are wrong, or push them away if they remain unrepentant.
But the Fandomentalist takes that feeling and forgets that ultimately this was a goofy movie about professional supernatural exterminators made by a studio for profit, and sends death threats to those who would dare threaten their childhood and by extension of that their sense of self. They forget that these properties are about entertainment and having a good time, and turn on even their fellow disciples if they dare show a hint of deviance or schism. The forums become filled with sects and at least the threat of violence, which unfortunately has at times gone beyond mere threats.
So yeah, Fandomentalist. The Fandom Menace. So next time you get worked up over your favorite bit of pop culture, take a deep breath and remember that it’s all just opinions in the end and Star Wars is already a mess of contradictory lore already despite being not quite halfway to the Century mark. It’s no hill to die on, and certainly no hill to kill or even cause misery on, for sure.
One thought on “Fandomentalist dogma…”
Honzinator
Fundamentalism was born in … Princeton Unioversity in response to a sermon a Baptist gave in a New York Presbyterian church …. honest.
Muslim literalism is mandated in both the Quran and the Sunnah … it’s one of the key responses to what Muslims claim is deliberate, political revisions of what Christians call the old and New Testaments (though the assertion that Constantine deliberately undermined his own Arianism in Church Councils is … hard to take seriously historically – there are SOME more plausible arguments that admit of reality, but those go against other close to core Muslim teachings).
Ever since H.L. Mencken’s taking the worst statements by some Fundamentalist somewhwre and running with them, however, it’s off to the races.
Higher Criticism, which provoked “The Fundamentals” on the other hand, is very like how Greeks studied the Iliad and Odyssey, and was the technique used to set the Biblical corpus in the first and second instances, and it’s falled increasingly from popular favour as it’s leading practitioners make assertions of fact later disproven be archaeology, genetics, linguistics, et cetera, down to the claim that Troy/Ilium, was a myth, like Herod’s port-city, Caesarea, or the Sanhedrin. But the people making those assertions, like the Fundamentalist Anglican Bishop Berkeley who has a University named after him in part for “calculating” (incorrectly from a literalist perspective, it turns out) the creationist age of the earth, have credentials, so the people who used to push Progressive Mainline Christianity (and terrible anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic bigotry – hey, their atheist/agnostic kids often still do!), elide past or excuse those whoppers and pretend they’re nothing like Clarence Darrow’s performance in a Tennessee courthouse.
History … it’s merciless to everyone who thinks picking “the right side” supersedes one’s duty to the Truth and to treating others with respect.
Comments are closed.