Nerd Alert! I seem to have written an essay. If you make it to the end of this post you have my admiration. I’ve been trying to write something on this subject for a while. As usual, inspiration strikes when one least expects it. I was compelled to put fingertips to keyboard after reading this insightful post on RA Frenzy. It’s also 2am. So whether this thesis will still make sense in the morning remains to be seen. Weird prose and typos abound; enjoy!

As some of you may have gathered from my various posts and commentaries on other blogs where we may have entered an exchange, I am fascinated by the fan fervor that surrounds Richard Armitage. It was, after all, my curiosity about this fervor that led me to watch North and South for the first time. I was incredibly curious to see the performance that inspired the formation of an army; a remarkable feet! As a sociologist burdened with unrelenting curiosity, social phenomena of unexplained origin tend to capture my attention; I want to know why, what makes it so. While the interest and enthusiasm for actors, artists and celebrities is nothing new, there is something quite unique about RA fans that has intrigued me enough to want to ponder and investigate this enthusiasm further. It has sparked a desire to understand that which even fans themselves have a hard time deciphering.
The aspect of the RA fan base that has caught my attention in particular, is the bewilderment many have expressed toward their own enthusiasm for this man. I’ve encountered many accounts of rapid decline into fanatic fervor that express confusion and bemusement at their own response to this actor. Most notably, many have little or no history of becoming enamored with an actor or well known person of any sort. This experience is something new, or at least something that has not occurred since they were a teen. Why? Why now? Why him? Is this about Richard Armitage, or something else? Is there an unrelated state of affairs in the lives of an inordinate amount of women that has led them all to fixate on the one man? – Unlikely? There is something about Richard, but one can’t quite nail down what it is. It’s many things (with which we are all familiar, so I wont attempt to itemise them here), but of those things, why is it that this particular actor has drawn thousands of women with no history of active fandom to flood message boards, create fan art, start blogs and write fan fiction? Richard Armitage is not the only handsome, talented, detailed actor to have enjoyed a stellar series of roles – so why is it him that has attracted such intense attention from a cohort of fans for whom enthusiastic fan fervor is a feeling quite foreign?
This question has been lurking around my mind now for quite some time. Readers of this blog will know that Richard Armitage has frequently appeared in my dreams, and I think this is perhaps why. I’m fascinated by the fans, by their bewilderment at their own fan fervor, and wonder what it is about RA that lures so many into such an acute brand of fandom. As to my own interest in this actor, it has been propelled, not only by my admiration for his artistry (and let’s face it, criminally good looks), but also the fans. My interest has become intertwined with my curiosity over the fan fervor that accompanies him. The meeting of these interests are now hard to disentangle and define. I am both a card carrying fan and a keen observer of his fandom. I too are surprised by my own interest in RA because my main passion in life is music, and it is in this domain that I usually follow the careers of artists, so to some extent I share a degree of bewilderment that others speak of.
I come from a world, however, in which fandom is done differently. It’s a world of independent arts, music and culture, of artists, musicians and actors; these people are my friends, peers and neighbours. This is my community. For me, actors and musicians are not other people “up there”, they are right here next to me. This world is imbued with a punk rock attitude that shuns placing people on pedestals, and this is a philosophy that I share. So whilst I am a card carrying RA fan, my appreciation of him is also grounded very firmly in the view that he is just an ordinary bloke. An ordinary bloke with an extraordinary talent, yes, but still ordinary, nonetheless – and it is this fact that I sense sometimes gets lost in fan fervor and most certainly in celebrity worship. I do not claim to be unique in holding this view. I note that many fans are very respectful of RA’s private life, and this is evidence that others share this belief. Even so, I still feel that I am inclined to “do” fandom in a different fashion (a fan with out high velocity fervor, you might say), and this difference in experience, in part, fuels my fascination with other fans.
Returning to the main subject of this post; getting to grips with RA fan fervor. It was while reading this post on RAFrenzy that it suddenly occurred to me what the critical ingredient of this fan fervor might be. In her post RAFrenzy explains how empowering and life changing it was to apply what she had learned in a women’s self defense class and yell STOP! to a suspicious stranger “It gave me power I really wasn’t sure I possessed until the moment of crisis”. The instructors of RAFrenzy’s class informed the group that research has found that women find it difficult to raise their voice to strangers, even when a circumstance requires it. What struck me about RAFrenzy’s post is how she relates the epiphany she had when she yelled STOP!, to when she extolled PHWOAR! in response to Richard Armitage. She explains that this had the same life altering effect on her as when she yelled STOP! “It was the passionate me, which I had buried for so long, rushing to the surface.”
I think that in this wonderful omission RAFrenzy has nailed, in part, what RA fan fervor is about. It’s an awakening of passion and desire that for so many women is dormant, unacknowledged or unexpressed. One of my favourite bands has been described as a act that “commands respect”. In a similar fashion, there’s something about RA, that for many women, commands a passionate response. In making this suggestion it is not my intention to claim that RA’s fans are a group of repressed sexual beings. One does not need to be repressed in order to be stirred by RA’s aura in such an intense fashion; that would be an entirely ridiculous (and offensive) contention. But I do wonder if something of a similar order is taking place. Not unlike the liberating experience of claiming power and authority through the raising of one’s voice to STOP! a man of ill-will in his tracks, PHWOAR! is the claiming of a different voice; that of desire. Perhaps always held, but not always expressed. PHWOAR! refutes the denial of desire and liberates it to an unleashed and publicly exposed status. RA fan fervor is one means through which this untapped desire and passion is ignited and expressed.
As RAFrenzy mentions in her post, in the face of threats to personal safety, most women are silent or meek in voice. They are powerless. What I am about to say may seem heretical in this supposed era of female sexual empowerment, but I do not believe that the modern woman is remotely as sexually liberated as we would like to think (see my post The modern woman is not sexually liberated, she’s more insecure than ever for more on this issue). I think our sexual expression is still bound and suffocating under the desire to please the other, at the expense and exclusion of ourselves (a generalisation, of course). Our own passion is denied, muted, and weak of voice. We don’t tend to yell PHWOAR! We just giggle and go mute. PHWOAR! is an unadulterated acknowledgment of passion, arousal and desire – all the things that good girls should not express.
In answer to the question; is there something about Richard, or something about the women that comprise his fan base that gives rise to such enthusiastic fan fervor – I would tentatively suggest that it is both. The culmination of a near impossible multitude of factors, that of exquisite talent, handsome manly looks and memorable roles, plus the complicated dynamics of desire that have been denied, forgotten or simply put aside, a casualty of women’s busy modern lives, have all collided in an army of women unable to restrain or control the thunderous chorus of PHWOAR! that RA seems to evoke.
In a previous post, A Caveat from Beatlemania for Richard Armitage Fans, I summoned parallels between Beatlemania and RA fan fervor, and the hypothetical dangers that lurk within. The other parallel that I did not connect at that time was the unleashing of women’s usually dormant or subdued passion and desire. Although RA’s fans are not screaming and crying hysterically as he walks down the red carpet, they are “squeeing” madly on the inside, and trying to understand why.
Stalking my curiosity about RA fan fervor is the feeling that some things should not be defined. As soon as we nail down and understand what drives passion, attraction and desire, the object of affection may cease to hold its majestic power. Nonetheless, the sense of bewilderment and question of why? is one that many fans seem to be genuinely confused and bemused by. I doubt that my contribution to the treatise on this issue offers any thing more than an inconsequential insight, so this question, no doubt, will remain open and continue to stir this perplexing debate.
I don't think this is inconsequential at all. I think the insight about female sexual insecurity is exactly right, and I think it's very smart to tie that to the Richard Armitage effect. So in my guise as blogger, I say, right on! This was well written and it fits a lot of pieces together that I have been trying to sort out for a long time.
In my guise as professor (sorry — it's hard for me to take off that hate), though, I wonder if you don't beg the question. If the claim is that watching Armitage is empowering for women, you still need to answer what it is about watching Armitage that is empowering.
I canNOT write any Armitage prose today, but I will be thinking about it and if a question pops into my mind I will pop back in. Let me stress that this is a really thoughtprovoking post, like the one that prompted it on RAFrenzy.
Thanks for the kind words, professor! I didn’t realise that was what I was saying!
I don’t think that *watching* RA is empowering, the empowerment resides in acknowledging, expressing and claiming one’s own honest primal *response* to what one is watching. He seems to evoke intense feelings of attraction. It’s the act of fully acknowledging and reveling in that desire that is empowering – for that is something that is supposed to be the domain of men. Women are expected to suppress their desires (if they should have them at all) – to not suppress them may interfere with their duty to serve others.
What one does with the response, however, may not be so empowering. Sending a photo of yourself in a bikini with your phone number to RA (as I understand some fans have done), is not empowering, it’s sad and pathetic. Acknowledging one’s own desire is empowering, requiring validation from the object of your desire, is not.
Perhaps when I’m less blurry eyed and more well rested I’ll think about this some more. Crikey! It’s 3:30am!
Very thoughtprovoking post!
I always wondered why there were some many married women with blogs about RA? I mean, you have a man at home, can´t you change him? Can´t you say what you really want or feel to your husband? Can´t you change his dress sense or make him go to the gym? I read the words once ´safely indulge themselves´ into fancraze in general.
No, women are not liberated at all and men feel not male anymore. Women have to behave as goddesses. I noticed that educated fangrrls will not easily say phwoarr. Now, on internet, they can anonymously. That´s liberating.
The question is, is RA object or subject in blogworld?
@Violet, and everyone really! – Thanks for reading my post! Nice observation about educated fangrrls finding their voice to say PHWOARR! Perhaps RA fan forums could be described as PHWOARR! safe houses ;)
I don’t think there’s necessarily a conflict with married women having blogs about RA. Of the few of these I have encountered, it is clear that RA is no substitute for their partners, who they profess to love very much. But I do wonder how some might respond if their husband/partner had an equivalent blog that focused on a female actor.
I think it’s a really important question you raise about RA being an object or subject, and it’s one that I tried to address in the Beatlemania post. I’m inclined to think he is treated as both. One of the things I am interested in is how people “do” fandom. I think fans ought to be mindful of finding a healthy balance between these two aspects of being a fan (object & subject), so as not to diminish the subject to an objectified state, or themselves to that of objectifier. In the blogs I’ve chosen to follow, I feel that I personally am able to achieve that balance.
Having had a chance to sleep on this, I think there is a quandary raised raised by my post – Although one ought not to deny the PHWOARR! factor, what one does with it is a question to contemplate. For me personally I think it’s an ethical one, because too much emphasis on the object as television totty has the potential for harm. “Responsible” fandom is a notion that interests me and I think finds fertile ground in the RA fan community, who in many respects exemplify best “fan practice” but in some quarters reflect fan practice it that is not so great as well.
Time to stop writing!
@Skully – It is 530am and I should be sleeping but the thoughts provoked by your post keep running through my head and as you say I am putting "fingertips to keyboard". I will not even try to attempt to speak to most of the points brought up but felt compelled to write my thoughts, however un-academic or unrelated they may turn out to be in this discussion (whew…I think I prefaced enough)
I love Gerard Butler. I enjoy the various roles he has played, enjoy looking at him and enjoy watching/reading interviews with him. I have many people in RL who I can be a "fangurl" with because they get the references and we have been silly & thoughtful in our discussions.
Richard Armitage is an unknown in North America. I have tried talking about him in my RL but there was so much explaining of who he is and what he was in that it became not worth mentioning (even though I still try & spread the word). Then one day on YouTube, I found Nat's "Stick Figure Richard" and through that found a circle of friends that got it. No more explaining!
So that is how I got here…but why did I stay and become a part of the fervor? "is there something about Richard, or something about the women that comprise his fan base that gives rise to such enthusiastic fan fervor" – I agree, without hesitation, it is a combination of both and the balance this group of "fans" has achieved keeps me coming back for more. I would not have not participated & commented if the scales were tipped either way – ie someone posts a comment about RA's gorgeous smile which sparks a discussion of dentistry & teeth and the difference between NA & British dental practices. This is just a very simple example of the balance I enjoy, and feel others do as well. Maybe we are searching for the balance which is missing in RL…I don't know.
The balance theme continues even in your last comment "a healthy balance between these two aspects of being a fan (object & subject)"
which I find interesting and I too have found the balance – which is why I will follow your Spooks blog wherever it may be.
- after reviewing what I have just written I don't think I bring any new insights but I want to thank you for the platform to express my feelings – which as Harry & Lucas discussed in 8.4
Harry:What do you think a psychologist will say about that?
Lucas:No idea, but I have a feeling it might be in Latin.
5:30am! Goodness me, and I thought I was crazed for being up at 4am. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I’m not sure whether it was intentional but you raise an interesting point about becoming “part of the fervor”. RA certainly is the reason that folks come to connect with each other online. The fervor itself is an infectious, self feeding machine. Perhaps it is the simple enjoyment of other fans that fuels the fervor. It’s a big part of the equation that I have not really accounted for thus far. It could be said that there is a fervor (appreciation, enthusiasm) for other fans, as much as there is for RA. Being idealistic for a moment, one could suggest that the sense of community is more important that the reason for the community in the first place.
Do you think perhaps there is also the "mysterious factor"? By which I think I mean, analyse all you can, but there is an area undefinable beyond. Charisma?
But, we should never stop trying to analyse, either; it's good brain exercise and good fun!
Have rambled through a number of RA blogs, and settled on 3-4, in which a healthy balance is sought between good discussion, and sometimes quite offensive silliness. Won't post on any of the others….
Judith – Absolutely! As a (social) scientist I’m probably not meant to admit this, but I do love the idea that some things are indefinable and will always remain beyond our full comprehension. I think it’s wise to stop and think about whether we want to investigate all things that are illusive to us. As I mentioned in my post, when this is done the thing or person that has captured our attention will loose its majesty and mystery… and thus the allure and fun of it all is lost. Consequently, even though I pose and repose the question ‘Why RA?’ That’s actually a question I’m weary to approach with any vigor for the very reason that you mention. Which is why I’m more inclined to focus on the fans instead.
just to clarify, "offensive sillines" does NOT apply to this site, or to the other three – don't want any misconception about that.
Scully, on going over your "essay", a thing that stands out (for me) is that sense of the observor, initially, and continued, trying to make sense, or integrate, a reaction to a particular actor. I do think it's thoroughly worth analysing. At the same time, one particular actor can appeal strongly to many different women, and not necessarily to others, who might be interested in the intelligent acting, but for whom, the actor does not have a physical appeal.
But I really am quite taken with the Observor/Analyst vs. the instinctive reaction. Integration?
What? There’s no offensive silliness on the Spooks Fan Blog? I must try harder then ;)
You’re spot on about the observer vs instinctive reaction thing (I call the later ‘participant’ I muse on this at the end of this post). It’s something we sociologists try and balance on a daily basis. We’re always observing life, even at times when it might be inappropriate. We just can’t help ourselves! The notion of just sitting back and enjoying the show without observing/analysing is not an all together foreign one, but one that I lament I am unable to do more often.
I always like when I see fan who say they don’t find RA especially handsome. Although I find that hard to understand (!), it does show that RA’s talent is the principle attraction, as it should be.
Sorry I dropped off the map there. This is going to be kind of disjointed, I fear.
I misread you originally, Skully, but I still think we need an answer to the question of “why does *Richard Armitage in particular* provoke this reaction of potentiating women’s acknowledgement of their inner passion?” There are lots of goodlooking actors and some of them are even talented and smart. Does Colin Firth have a fandom like this one? (Since this is my only fandom–I am exactly the kind of person you are talking about in your original post–I don’t have a lot of comparisons…)
I wonder whether you have formed any opinions about the (for lack of a better word, since I am not a sociologist) demographics of the population in which the reaction occurs. That is, I’ve noticed that the fans I have encountered (apart from those who post on youtube or unmoderated boards) tend to be well-spoken (which suggests a relatively high educational level or if not, a high level of self-education)–as Violet notes–and the people who are producing content (whether documenting his career, or derivative works) tend to be very meticulous (occasionally tending into the obsessive — the discussions about aspect ratio being an example). Their performance of fandom is thus in sync with the meticulousness of the actor they are fans of, which I find interesting. I also think, riffing on Violet again, that for me it’s not so much the anonymity of the internet–I gush about Mr. Armitage IRL too–but the fact that I don’t feel dirty about doing so, like I’ve somehow cheapened myself, as if I admitted in public that I was a fan of Twilight or something. That is, I am bemused by my reaction to him/his work, but I am not ashamed of the object I am admiring.
[I.e., (judith) I am wondering what factors are necessary for the particular synergy of actor and observer.]
I agree that Mr. Armitage is both subject and object in these encounters, and part of what we object to in Beatlemania/Armitagemania is the sort of discourse that constructs him mainly as object. We note him saying things that suggest his extreme discomfort with his objectification. We want him to be a subject, his performances invite that, and our better selves want to treat him that way, but we can’t quite manage it given our relationship with him. He wants the freedom to be a subject, and we definitely want to give him that status, but no sensible person would take sort of step. He’d be immediately overwhelmed. He thus is at least plausibly readable as simultaneously accessible and inaccessible. That always not being quite able to be touched thing may be especially seductive for the same demographic of women who enjoy nineteenth-century novels. (But that doesn’t explain the fandom of those who came to him via Spooks or Robin Hood.)
A last query re the fandom: I wonder if any explanatory force can be attributed to the genealogy of the fandom. That is, he came out of nowhere and appeared first to a group of people likely to watch period dramas, i.e., women with literary or theatrical interests. He was an insider’s secret. Those women set the fundamental tone for being an Armitage fan, and though they may no longer exercise the control that they once did, they have substantially influenced the nature of the interactions around him such that anyone who finds herself suddenly a fan and encounters the established fandom doesn’t have to feel ashamed of/annoyed about the sort of interactions she has in the fandom itself. So he provokes the initial reaction, and even though he can’t support the subject-subject relationship that everyone seeks, the nature of the fandom supports it in his place?
Thanks again for the thoughtprovoking post. I assume this discussion is not over, and we will all probably have a lot more to say about it. I just had the strangest physical reaction to the looking at the picture of him on the cover of SB magazine. It’s troubling. I’m grateful that I have y’all to talk to.
I have to admit that this is one of those pieces I wrote on auto pilot, so even I was not clear about the implications and interpretations of what I had written. Sometimes my “higher self” takes over the writing process and I’m left to try and process it later (come to think of it, the higher self in my case is sometimes the near manic bipolar self, but I’ll leave that for discussion at another time!)
The question of why RA in particular is one I don’t really address. I am curious about it but are also reluctant to examine it too much for reasons I mention in some of the comments above. I guess it is folks (like yourself) with little or no fan fervor history that are most fascinating to me. When looking at fandom in a broader sense, RA seems to attract a lot of “outliers”, to use a statistical term! The most interesting thing is that RA has inspired/provoked behaviour outside of the norm for these people, and this is a profound thing! As my scholarly interests tend to focus on “the self”, I enjoy reading narratives from “outliers” attempting to process and understand why they have succumbed to fan fervor (incidentally, is anyone tired of my use of the phrase ‘fan fervor’ yet?!). I find intelligent introspection to be compelling reading (I tend to use auto-ethnographic narratives more often than not as a “data source” in my research).
The only comparison I have for fandom is one that is from a completely different world with an entirely different kind of fanbase (see my other blog Hello Henry if curious). HR’s fans are a particularly passionate bunch and very dedicated. So I guess there are some similarities there, but that’s where comparisons might end.
Yes, the question of demographics is definitely of interest. What is the typical age of an RA fan, particularly as it may tie in with the issue of denial/desire. Women of all ages are increasingly being encouraged to get in touch with that side of themselves these days. Yet for many women, they were raised in environments that encouraged denial. If others have had similar experiences to RAFrenzy, RA Fan forums may be “safehouses” for “working out” denial/desire (this is just speculation on my part, of course). Acknowledging desire, letting go of denial = fervor! (oh, the mathematics of RA fandom!)
Very interesting point you raise about the demographic who enjoy 19th c. novels. That’s a demographic I definitely don’t count myself in! The allure of that which is desired but out of reach? Although I am not particularly familiar with this type of literature, I imagine the theme of desire/denial is not uncommon. Margaret in N&S is an obvious example – serious denial going on there! The denial & desire hypothesis I proposed in the post makes even more sense to me when one thinks about it from the perspective you raised.
Quite interesting also, what you mention about the genealogy of RA fandom and the circumstances in which the tone for it was set. It makes me wonder what might have happened if period fans had been on the internet in 1995 when when Pride and Prejudice was released. Firth fervor, perhaps? ;)
servetus, I think you have hit the mark with your observation on the kind of women who defined the tone of RAfandom early on. North and South was a rare movie, in that the classic had never been filmed, few knew about it (unlike Jane Austen or Brontes etc), the hero & heroine were relatable even 150 later, and very importantly, admirable and inspirational. Especially John Thornton. Reams and reams of web pages have been devoted to understanding the journey this character takes, not just with Margaret, but from the the time of his father’s suicide. There is nobility in this character that is inspirational. Richard became John Thornton. Finally, the chemsitry between Richard and Daniela was breath-taking.
This combination was lethal, as witnessed by BBC board crashing. There was so much to talk about – social history, industrial history, sexual tension, Richard Armitage’s good looks etc. At that time, no one knew about RA other than he was John Thornton.
After BBC board shut down, these very same women moved to C19 and the rest is history (proliferation of fanboards, sites, blogs etc). But the nature and tone of discussions have continued to this day.
If Robin Hood had been the first introduction to Richard Armitage, I have serious doubts that the nature of fandom would have been the same. Personally, I like him in Spooks but would not have been driven to do something I have never done – have a huge crush on an actor, join the fandom, engage in discussions etc. I mean I like Rupert Penry Jones and Mathew McFadden but it does not even cross my mind to look them up on the net.
I am one of those classic females who isn’t even into movies, doesn’t watch TV, ABHORS entertainment shows which follow celebs. Yet here I am, an avid RA fan, learning photoshop, creating fan art etc. For me, it is both the actor as well as the fan activity that hold my attention. Actor because he APPEARS to be very unlike the personality/character profile I have of actors/actresses. He is someone I would have has a friend in real life, I could admire etc. Fan activity because of its depth and breadth. I mean where else would I be able to have discussions on such esoteric subject as “levels of humidity required for spinning cotton thread” to silliness of “grown women taking Guy of Gisborne’s toy figure to all sorts of locations and adventures”. I cannot even admit to myself that I have enjoyed watching “Little Guy’s” pics.
Final point is being a part of Richard’s journey to heights of success. It brings great satisfaction when he bags a role, is interviewed, recognized etc. As the fandom started with N&S, it has invested a lot of emotional energy in his career. Hence his success is like fandom’s success (vicarious pleasure). Each leg of the journey reveals his talent as well as his own personality. So far he has not disappointed in either.
Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to bring a personal perspective into this discussion
rafan: I like the point about investment/vicarious pleasure. People feel like they are investing energy in making him a success — he’s a bit like an especially successful child, maybe?
And I think the point about N&S being first is also right on. If I had seen Armitage in Robin Hood first, I’d have thought he was eye candy. The scripts are not that great, and he gets everything he can out of them, but I’d probably have stopped watching at 1.3, I hated the episode that much. And Spooks is not the type of thing I watch generally. I’ve never seen a single episode of 24, either.
Great comment.
I love Richard Armitage fandom. It’s wonderful and quite unique, I feel. It has so many levels. I think that it was possibly created by a unique set of circumstances that occurred when N@S first was broadcast in the UK whereby Richard’s fanbase went from a standing start and many people knew each other and kept in touch via the various forums etc and it has continued from there. Name me another actor with such an active web presence (perhaps there are many but I haven’t found them yet). I don’t mean to say that there are not actors who are much more famous than Richard and with many more casual fans, only that for some reason Richard’s fans are particularly dedicated and enthusiastic. Anyway I love it. Shallow though it may be the reason I think that we all come to him initially is because he is so handsome (and I use that word carefully – it’s quite old fashioned I suppose – but it is so appropriate for Richard – I also call him beautiful, another word I would hesitate to use for any other man). But I stay a fan of him because he is also such a talented actor and wonderful person – the complete package. (swoon)!!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Gruffalo! Indeed, RA fandom seems to have many levels. I’m having a hard time thinking of another actor who attracts the same brand of fandom that RA does. I’m not particularly familiar with other fan forums, but I don’t read interviews with other actors in which they are asked about their army of fans!
In regards to your comment on his physical appeal, maybe that’s one of the attractions of RA, that he is handsome in the old fashioned sense (personally he reminds me of actors of the classic Hollywood era). Perhaps he embodies what TV viewers have been missing from their screens.
[...] was really grateful for the discussions about “why Armitage” started by RAFrenzy and Skully. I’m sure these will continue. I am adding a new tag called “why Armitage” to [...]
[...] I speculate that Mr. Armitage draws such a peculiar reaction from his fans due to the “can almost touch but not quite” dynamic evident in some of his oeuvre, especially North and South, and in his interactions [...]
Well written post Skully and great commentary from everybody. I can add I have lurked at another fandom i dare not mention but didn’t feel the need to participate in. It’s the sense of community and the thoughtfullness that encouraged me and keeps me here. I am one of those people who are riddled by insecurities although I’m definitely not quiet. Actually honestly intimidated by the level of education. I also realize that sometimes my commentary gets “lost in translation” as I’m still learning that tone not necesarilly translates into written word. Frankly when I first became a fangirl which happened to me last spring, i thought it was because of midlife crisis or hormones but that would not apply to you. LOL :) There is a tone to this fandom that is uniek, no doubt about it. But a fandom wouldn’t be one if it did not perpetuate itself. So Mr.A set things in motion but its everybody’s contribution that makes it what it is.
Thanks iz4spunk! I think all of us find it difficult at times to communicate clear and effectively online, tone and getting ‘lost in translation’ probably occurs more often then we realise. But the good will and kindly ‘spirit’ of the community helps a great deal, so I don’t think it matters too much at the end of the day. Personally I find communicating and interpreting others online without the aid of verbal cues and body language a challenge, as I’m a highly visual person and normally rely on verbal & visual information to “read” a person.
It’s so true what you say about fandom perpetuating itself, and everyone’s contributions making it what it is. As for the hormones.. my body is somewhat in a state of hormonal anarchy so I’m not sure I’m a good point of reference there LOL!
Hi,
I just discovered your blog and am very late in finding this very thought-provoking post.
My background is in psychology and I, too, am fascinated by the phenomenon. I’ve been through this before with a couple of other actors over the decades, so I’m no longer astounded by my experiences.
I think that making this about desire is missing a big point. What kind of desire are we talking about here, anyway? I don’t particularly care for this thing called PHWOAR either (no offense intended) as the essence of this event, though I guess I can understand a possible sense of liberation. I think the liberation is in being able to express the intensity of experience- not desire, but experience in relation to Richard Armitage. It is unspeakable and that makes it that much more mysterious and puzzling for people who are naturally overwhelmed by the intensity.
It can even seem a bit like being in love. But, again, that misses the point. I think that many intelligent, thoughtful, quite mature women are having a peak experience and it’s like living in an alternate universe, one that includes a sensuous apprehension. It’s rare to have a peak experience in life. Perhaps the birth of the child is like that- suddenly finding oneself in an acute sea of thought and emotion and very focused. In trying to express the experience, in thinking of him, Richard Armitage becomes a Muse.
Well, it’s very late here and I have a few more thoughts about blessing beauty, life-changing experiences, euphoria, resonance and the notion of how one is affected coming face to face with a fellow who as someone so eloquently put it, looks “like he fell from heaven” and is blessed with a surfeit of talent, and why this happens to some and not others, but I guess I’ll have to make a post in response as others have done.
I do know this much, apart from the fanatical fringe, the experience is life affirming in the best possible sense and is another way to self-knowledge. The worst one can do is dismiss it or deny it. Perhaps in that sense, the purpose of PHWOAR is not entirely unfounded. A peak experience, IMO, should be celebrated. I’m personally grateful for it. It certainly can’t be quantified or truly categorized, I do agree. It’s so very late here!
I loved the varied comments, but especially the expressed experiences of some of the commenters. Thank you.
[...] of wonderful roles – why all the fuss? In the past I’ve mused on the possible awakening of desire in RA’s female fans, lately it’s occurred to me that there is another aspect of the [...]