patronage, transactional relationships and fandom

[rm]

When I worked as a dominatrix, clients were only memorable for any of three possible reasons: particularly specific or unusual fetishes (i.e., the guy who insisted I wear a back-button blouse and gave me scripts to read about "red sunsets and red asses"); the financially and socially troublesome (i.e., men who tried to bargain for more time or less expense and/or were rude to me to achieve it); and people I genuinely liked.

While the other stories are, inevitably, a lot more amusing, today I want to talk about the people I liked, because when you're friendly and cordial and even social with someone who pays you a great deal of money for a service, that is an interesting thing, isn't it? It's certainly a tricky thing.

Relationships of this ilk used to be quite common and their frequency of existence well-acknowledged. And, while today they don't particularly pervade our world any less, we're so much more hesitant to call them as they are and so largely ill-informed about how to navigate them deftly.

Interactions of this nature litter my life in various ways. My former profession quite aside, it's worth noting that I also live on the other side of the equation. I spend a great deal of money with my tailor and, as you know from the photos, when she's about in town, we're also social. Is that socializing and fondness genuine? Of course. But is it also somewhat dictated by the mutual benefits of mutual enthusiasm because of the financial transaction that is central between us? Oh yes.

These transactional friendships and acquaintanceships exist in other parts of my life as well: the chocolate store owner who gives Patty and I free chocolates because she talks with him about the chocolate shop she worked at and I about my childhood in New York. He enjoys us and our love of what he does. He also enjoys our money, and we, the free samples.

Relationships of this type exist in all of our lives to varying degrees, and in the modern world where we know so little of patronage we often mistake them, to problematic end, for interactions without boundaries or for moments wherein we are the exception some sort of rule.

One of the places where I see it the most keenly -- and with the most personal discomfort -- is, of course, fandom. For those of you who don't necessarily play in the sandboxes in which I play, I will note that there was a con in the Torchwood fandom this past weekend that was a for-profit meet-the-celebrities con, which, for the purposes of this discussion, is something I need to make a point of differentiating from fan-run cons, that, in addition to celebrity guests, also have fan and/or academic programming.

Cons of the ilk that took place this weekend often cost a good deal of money to attend (usually much moreso than fan-run cons) and have levels of membership (uncommon at fan-run cons), wherein the more you pay, the more access you get to the celebrities in question.

I do not, for the record, find this gauche (which is what I think some people think I think). But I do find it personally something I can't quite bring myself to engage in (however occasionally tempting) because of where I exist on the fan-pro continuum and the degree to which I'm a little too hyper-aware of the politics of these things, but that is no one's problem or concern but my own.

I do, however, find myself in a frequent state of surprise over how much people just don't get things about the transactional friendships and acquaintances they have with the celebrity guests at these types of events.

Historically, patronage of the arts was used (and as we'll see, continues to be used) to convey and experience many things, which you can break down, more or less, into the three P's: pleasure, prestige and piety. And whether we're talking about Renaissance religious art or going to a media con like Torchwood, the three P's are consistent.

Pleasure speaks for itself simply ("it is fun to be here") and also not so simply ("I am enjoying participating in this fantasy").

Prestige works on a few levels ("I can afford to go to this event," "I can afford this status at this event," "This guest told me xyz," "That guest and I had drinks," "So-and-so complimented my dress").

Piety, of course, becomes about being a true believer ("I'm a real fan," "I go to everything so-and-so appears at," "I always defend this guest's actions").

Yet, even as historical patronage is enacted in these situations, the modern world is not equipped to acknowledge it for what it is, which is a transactional relationship. When you pay for that ticket to that event with the smart party with the celebrity guests or what have you, you are not paying for that celebrity to be your friend or to give you special access -- whether to themselves, their private sphere, or information about their work.

But you are, most certainly, paying for their company, their cordiality in a certain setting. And as happy as you are to experience this, that you will gladly fork over your money for their time (and their time is worth money, as much as the status, piety and pleasure you consciously or subconsciously are buying via participation is worth the fee you choose to pay), they are happy that you want to. It validates their art; it helps pay their bills; it elevates their own status. It is a symbiotic transactional relationship, that is not in any way based on lies, unless we start telling ourselves them.

Now, sometimes real and genuine friendships do come out of these transactional social moments: just as my tailor and I have drinks, just as an old client and I called to check in on each other after 9/11, just as the man who owns the chocolate store likes to discuss walnut buttercreams with Patty.

But my point in this isn't that the interactions of patronage can become "real," like some eventual Pinocchio of affection. Rather, my point is that they are real and sincere and pleasant and a perfectly reasonable investment for many people for a variety of different reasons.

But in lacking a good word for them in the modern world, we must not, I feel, use other words for them in intentionally misleading ways (as I feel many in fandom, and other situations in which these types of relationships exist, do), because it diminishes the loveliness of the tradition the patrons (and in the point of this post, fans) are paying into, as surely as it diminishes the high-wire art of the access and -- dare I say it (with a wink and a nod considering my own former profession) -- services, the creator provides.

Because people are social animals, it is in our nature to enact social ritual, and ritual, in particular, is a high-value thing. In transactional friendships and acquaintances the ritual is central, and to ignore it in favor of a story of organic interaction, not only gives lie to the nature of an event still personal for all its financial component, but also makes the very things paid for and so gently delivered -- pleasure, piety and position -- less intricate, less lovely, and less valuable for our insistence on turning our heads away from this ever so peculiar balancing act of mutual benefit and symbiotic need.

Comments

[themaskmaker.livejournal.com]

This is superb. Thank you for articulating this so cogently.

[newsbean.livejournal.com]

Several years ago, I had a patron. She paid for school and dinner out a couple times a week. At the time, it didn't exactly make me uncomfortable, but I wasn't sure how to interact with the relationship emotionally.

Thank you for making a frame on which to build some understanding.

[ladyaelfwynn.livejournal.com]

Again, you are ever so eloquent and timely. ;-p

There were aspects of this weekend's Fangoria I liked better than the celebrity event in Feb. because I could escape those around me that had disquieting views of their relationship with the celebrity.

If you haven't already read it, I highly recommend Sharyn McCrumb's "Once Around the Track." It has a very interesting, drawn out, multi-faceted discussion of celebrity and fandom that had me pausing and thinking throughout the read. Don't let the fact that the celebrity is a NASCAR driver put you off, it's well written enough that all you need to know about NASCAR is either in the book.

There's more here I want to contemplate as I navigate my own way and motives behind following the celebrity I do but as I'm at work, it'll have to wait.

[mamadar.livejournal.com]

My husband often says, perhaps jokingly or perhaps not, that the decline of an aristocracy to patronize the arts has contributed directly to the decline of the arts. Perhaps that needn't be the case, if the relation you describe here were more widely recognized and applied. Thanks for this thought-provoking analysis!

[lawsontl.livejournal.com]

Wow...patronage. I never thought of cons like this at that level, but you're right. It is so important, always, to keep lessons of the past in mind when thinking of the present. We lose things (like the appropriate use of the word genteel), and we forget, and I think we cheapen the experience for everyone by doing so.

[qthelights.livejournal.com]

Brilliant exploration of patronage, really brilliant.

Here's my question, in this equation what is the king/celeb/the arts' role? Given the events of the weekend, I wonder. See a lot of of this is based on a transactional relationship, yes? Which should therefore be a professional relationship for it to be a fair trade. In your capacity as dominatrix, for example, you surely had a duty to perform as the role required within certain boundaries. But if you transgressed that professional boundary, does that then change the boundaries that your patrons have too? If you went above what was expected of you, or were below what was expected of you.. does that change the nature of the transaction.

I guess when I apply the patronage of celebs to this weekends issues I wonder whether it still applies. If a certain celeb transgresses the boundaries, then... what happens to the three p's. For a transaction to be fair shouldn't both sides play to the rules...

... Which is mostly me musing as I type, so forgive me if the questions i've ended up with make little sense *g*

[abnormal-apathy.livejournal.com]

This came at a perfect time for me as I re-evaluate who are 'friends' versus 'acquaintances' and I was searching for how to define them...

[rm.livejournal.com]

I think -- hrmmm, more on this later, and this is complicated for me to say -- I think some of the things people think are boundary transgressing aren't, but rather are performative representations of private life designed to create an illusion, but people don't get that and then shit goes to hell. There are other things, wherein the boundary is actually broken (and I've seen this in action, but these are truly private interactions I'm not comfortable going into detail on as the best example I can think of is not my story to tell and I'll have to construct my response in the abstract) where I do think the rules shift for the parties involved, and things do fall down rather easily then. More later, as I won't have time today, but this whole thing is going to be a theme around here for a while, so I will get to it!

[wordweaverlynn.livejournal.com]

Fascinating, and it does indeed apply to a number of types of relationship.

For the patrons, mingling with authors, actors, royalty, or politicians at $500-a-plate dinners is a way to get close to people who carry a certain level of magic -- to touch their mana, so to speak. (No Bill Clinton jokes, please.)

That's why people stand in line to have books or photos autographed. It's piety, as you say -- like relics of a saint. There is also a hope that the gifted one will validate the patron with attention, friendship, love.

It can be disconcerting to suddenly *acquire* that mana and be treated as the source of something magical. Probably harder for writers than for actors, because actors are generally so damned beautiful they're already treated as magic-bearers. Unless a writer also has a great deal of social charm and/or good looks, zie is generally unused to people wanting to line up to be friends.

I didn't realize you'd been a pro Domme. My scene LJ is mslorelei. Which is a little embarrassing and weird to mention now, because that's how I know about being treated as a source of magic. But you, very clearly, have your own.

[brewsternorth.livejournal.com]

This. (Not to mention articulating some of the ookiness I've had philosophically over the whole reaction to the Torchsong palaver.)

I think some of the problem is that the whole language of patronage has been diverted into the pejorative - we speak of being "patronized" negatively, never positively. Where patronage persists, it's all in coded covert language. Maybe?

[rm.livejournal.com]

While this doesn't tell the whole story, it's probably most relevant to this post as it puts me on like every side of the equation possible: http://rm.livejournal.com/1233112.html

And it is very weird for writers, I think -- they are less trained to deal with it. It can be very hard for actors too though. Some of us are introverts and feel very weird without a script or the shield of camera or costume.

[random-girl.livejournal.com]

The only nit I have to pick is that it is my belief (and some psychologists) that all communication/interaction is transactional in nature.

[rm.livejournal.com]

Also it is, in the case of fandom truly the patrons who are being "patronized" in that usage, which is ridiculous, but we bring it on ourselves with this willful unknowingness and misdirection.

[qthelights.livejournal.com]

Good to hear, 'cause there's so many layers to unpack!

I agree on the illusion, I suppose I wonder about the words that go with the act, at what point does it become fraud (to continue the transactional theme)and therefore an unfair transaction.

But yes, more when you have time :)

[rm.livejournal.com]

I think it is only fraud when we stop choosing to be deceived and are authentically deceived. The problem, why none of it works, why there is drama about Torchsong is how many people know what they are paying for and understand the 3 P's and understand the difference in true deception and mutually assured and pleasant chosen deception?

The next one of these (it's the summer con season how we interact with celebrity theme) I think is going to be about the weird advantage the professions that care for the flesh give us in understanding these nuances. Doctors, whores and tailors. Really.

[rm.livejournal.com]

Since I'm pre-occupied with the financial aspect of this (which is the partial source of the inevitable fandom drama that precipitated this), I should perhaps focus more on coin in the naming of things if I ever try to do something with this particular topic beyond LJ (which I'm considering).

[rednwhiterose.livejournal.com]

You pose some very interesting points that have got me thinking.

I was mostly wondering how someone (like myself) would apply. I don't attend cons (mostly due to monetary issues and location of the cons), however I do consider myself a fan in that I follow several different communities on livejournal, I read updates on websites, and I follow various people's livejournals who are established in the fandom (i.e. yourself) and might occasionally through in my two cents on a given topic (like now).

I wasn't sure if you had given this aspect of being a fan some thought or if you were going to address it later when you had an opportunity. I look forward to reading your thoughts.

[misch.livejournal.com]

That reminds me of a growing trend in my fandom, indie singer-songwriters are increasingly turning to having albums funded directly by their fans.
Singer-songwriter Ellis Paul
has been one of the most prominent performers to do this. To date, he claims that he has raised $100K to fund the making of the new album. Some of that money has been in the form of pre-orders for the new album, but a lot of the funding has gone far beyond that, in which Ellis Paul is trading other services and items to his fan for larger support (free admission to shows, free house concerts, custom songwriting, autographed instruments, in-studio visits, maybe even his next-born child.)

I guess that this model is more explicitly calling out the patronage/services rendered (flash required).

CBS Sunday Morning is going to air a segment on this next week (recheduled June 14th) featuring Amy Correia and Jill Sobule.

[schpahky.livejournal.com]

Fascinating. Lots of thoughts on this and little present articulateness, but -- organizer ladies, and yesterday's Salon article about nannying and exactly this transactional complexity, and arts patronage, and etc.

And of course I do shows where we hang out with the audience and then ask them for tips for our performances, then hang out again.

One of my great grievances about the death of small business is this loss of friendly transaction. Sure, I can get anything on the internet now, but the sharp decline of face-to-face interaction is not a good trade.

[ladyaelfwynn.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the link to the other post.

Being both a belly dancer (which many think of no better than a stripper) and a nude art model, I've had to deal with a fair share of being suspected of behaviours I've never done. I've been expected to keep them quiet and been told my performances are disquieting (male friends of the family watching me dance).

It's frustrating for numerous reasons not all of which I can even write about as I don't have the words for why I'm frustrated, I just am.

[newsbean.livejournal.com]

That is very interesting to think about. Coded language is particularly tricky because the code is so often a mystery to both parties. The attempt to skirt the edges even within our own minds. I was "hired" as a personal assistant. It soon became clear to me that I would have nothing to do with organizing files. Rather, my patron desired someone to appreciate her gifts of rare antiquities and fine wine. Someone to be pleased with her presence. I wonder if "personal assistant" is a common code for such an arrangement.

[rm.livejournal.com]

Well the belly dancer thing is extra complicated I'd imagine as it goes through a shitload of cultural filters and all sorts of craziness to get to now and you and your life.

I do art modeling too, and when people think that's the scandal I have to laugh. But historically, it has a certain basis in terms of what women would take off their clothes in such a context for what reason.

[chiara7.livejournal.com]

As someone who works on the history of patronage (and is married to an arts professional), I find this fascinating. I'd largely agree with your take on the "three p's," although I'd add a fourth -- power, as distinct from the experience of position as you've described it. Patron-client relationships, historically, have a large role in constructing and maintaining unequal social and economic relations; indeed, they're an important way those relations are transacted and performed. How this plays out tends to be rather period- and culture-specific, with greater or lesser degrees of mystification. Fandom "patronage" certainly adds a complex chapter to the phenomenon; it's both subversive and reinforcing of assumed power relationships. No wonder the "patrons" get confused.

Am also intrigued by your comment above re: services to the flesh, because these certainly have a special role in constructions of self-knowledge and identity, and their links to the economic and social. Will look forward to further writing on the subject.

[catbear.livejournal.com]

I agree. Interaction commingling with palm crossing blends society with transaction. Like an orange creme, neither is the same without the abetting. Any failure to treat it so is the preeminent source of customer relationship grief / fannish douchebaggery.

Semi-related: noblesse oblige is almost dead, and the world is poorer for it.

[ladyaelfwynn.livejournal.com]

My MIL threw the closest thing to a hissy fit that she does (pulling me aside and politely asking if it was appropriate for a woman of my age (39, then) with a child to do something like that) when I took up art modeling. The dancing, not so much, as my husband drums.

And the dancer thing is so complicated that I have to think about it in tiny chunks or else it's overwhelming. (It's why, even though I don't count myself a professional belly dancer (as in not regularly paid to perform), I went out and spent $200+ on good make-up and make myself good costumes to show my respect for the art.)