I think you are on to something. When you think about it, humans are different enough that it’s hard to create a work that everyone thinks is great. You might be able to create a work that nobody profoundly dislikes, but such a work is likely to be so bland, watered-down, and lacking in risks that nobody is profoundly thrilled with it, either. Creating a work that resonates with the worldview and experience of a certain group to a high magnitude can make it inaccessible or laughable to other groups of people with different values.
There may be a “Conversation of Fandom” of some sort going on: for every enthusiastic fan you produce with a work, you must also produce someone who hates it.
Contra Bond, it’s not badness that produce fandom. Rather, elements with a high variance of appeal produce both fans in some groups of people, and badness from the perspective of other groups of people. These groups can even overlap, in the case of So Bad It’s Good.
There may be a “Conversation of Fandom” of some sort going on: for every enthusiastic fan you produce with a work, you must also produce someone who hates it.
I was going to say that the ratio needn’t be 1:1, but then I tried googling “easy_install sucks” and “easy_install rocks” and found the same number of hits either way. ;-)
(This is sort of an in-joke for Python programmers: easy_install is an installation tool for Python libraries that I wrote a few years back. It’s widely used in the Python open source community, and almost as widely reviled. The hate is mainly inspired by the fact that its use is widespread enough that it’s hard for the people who don’t like its defaults to avoid any contact with it. If those people could avoid it, they’d probably not bother disliking it much… which seems to support the idea that it’s fans that create/support criticism as much as the other way around.)
ETA: I mean, useful as a general heuristic when thinking about whether something should be done or not for a product. Of course especially in software some things that gain undying love can be added in a fashion that does not distract those who don’t want it.
I think the element of badness itself can push a craft to cult status. When something is bad, it creates a barrier of entry for non-committed fans of the cult. Normal people won’t “get it” which adds to the cult’s exclusiveness. The best example of this is The Rocky Horror Picture Show—an awfully bad musical. Sure there may be some legitimate fans, but what really push’s the show’s popularity is its badness.
I think the element of badness itself can push a craft to cult status. When something is bad, it creates a barrier of entry for non-committed fans of the cult. Normal people won’t “get it” which adds to the cult’s exclusiveness.
In the case of cult status, there is usually something amusing, ironic, or redeeming along with the badness: something to “get” that normal people don’t.
The best example of this is The Rocky Horror Picture Show—an awfully bad musical.
As a Rocky Horror Picture Show fan, I have to say that you just don’t “get it”! ;)
Rocky Horror Picture Show is an excellent example of So Bad It’s Good. It has some very funny characters, catchy tunes, a hedonistic subtext (edit: and yes, text too), and a parody of contemporary scifi and horror tropes.
I think you are on to something. When you think about it, humans are different enough that it’s hard to create a work that everyone thinks is great. You might be able to create a work that nobody profoundly dislikes, but such a work is likely to be so bland, watered-down, and lacking in risks that nobody is profoundly thrilled with it, either. Creating a work that resonates with the worldview and experience of a certain group to a high magnitude can make it inaccessible or laughable to other groups of people with different values.
There may be a “Conversation of Fandom” of some sort going on: for every enthusiastic fan you produce with a work, you must also produce someone who hates it.
Contra Bond, it’s not badness that produce fandom. Rather, elements with a high variance of appeal produce both fans in some groups of people, and badness from the perspective of other groups of people. These groups can even overlap, in the case of So Bad It’s Good.
I was going to say that the ratio needn’t be 1:1, but then I tried googling “easy_install sucks” and “easy_install rocks” and found the same number of hits either way. ;-)
(This is sort of an in-joke for Python programmers: easy_install is an installation tool for Python libraries that I wrote a few years back. It’s widely used in the Python open source community, and almost as widely reviled. The hate is mainly inspired by the fact that its use is widespread enough that it’s hard for the people who don’t like its defaults to avoid any contact with it. If those people could avoid it, they’d probably not bother disliking it much… which seems to support the idea that it’s fans that create/support criticism as much as the other way around.)
Kathy Sierra arguing along those lines, with emphasis on software expanding on Scott Adams on the subject. Sounds plausible.
ETA: I mean, useful as a general heuristic when thinking about whether something should be done or not for a product. Of course especially in software some things that gain undying love can be added in a fashion that does not distract those who don’t want it.
I think the element of badness itself can push a craft to cult status. When something is bad, it creates a barrier of entry for non-committed fans of the cult. Normal people won’t “get it” which adds to the cult’s exclusiveness. The best example of this is The Rocky Horror Picture Show—an awfully bad musical. Sure there may be some legitimate fans, but what really push’s the show’s popularity is its badness.
In the case of cult status, there is usually something amusing, ironic, or redeeming along with the badness: something to “get” that normal people don’t.
As a Rocky Horror Picture Show fan, I have to say that you just don’t “get it”! ;)
Rocky Horror Picture Show is an excellent example of So Bad It’s Good. It has some very funny characters, catchy tunes, a hedonistic subtext (edit: and yes, text too), and a parody of contemporary scifi and horror tropes.
Hedonistic subtext?!