Catastrophic Future(S) Counter-Narratives of the Heroic and Catastrophes in the Animated Television Show Futurama

DOI 10.6094/helden.heroes.heros./2017/01/09 Jochen Antoni 81 Catastrophic Future(s) Counter-Narratives of the Heroic and Catastrophes in the Animated Television Show Futurama Introduction heroic. Thus, these concepts and models and the (genre) conventions they represent and re- Within the context of this special issue, the fol- iterate can be repurposed within the new coun- lowing paper intends to examine the distinct way ter-narratives. It is here that catastrophes come in which animated television shows1 negotiate into play as one of the most salient and arguably heroisms in situations of catastrophe. More spe- conventionalised elements of the science fiction cifically, I have chosen two examples from the genre. Consequently, and by the means of this science fiction show Futurama (1999–2013), (meta-)heroic discourse, Futurama rejects pop- whose very genre is strongly associated with ular culture notions of heroism in favour of its depictions of catastrophes or disasters. This counter-narratives of the heroic as an artificial choice seems prudent, because the negotiation device. of heroism in animated television shows in gen- eral is not necessarily tied to one mode or one trope, as will become clear. My claim is, there- 1. Mapping the Theoretical fore, that Futurama, as an example of animated Foundation television shows, creates counter-narratives of the heroic, based on an evoked popular culture formula (usually differentiated and diversified To begin with the question of what actually con- along genre demarcations) which is defamil- stitutes the heroic as a category of inquiry, this iarised and repurposed to challenge its master paper is to be guided by the programmatic art- narrative status. The respective formula for the icle of von den Hoff et al. in this very journal. science fiction genre includes catastrophe as a The authors state that heroic figures, beyond major trope, which the show attempts to reveal their ‘normal’ human traits, are generally defined as artificial and therefore inappropriate for the by their “agonal, exceptional and often times 3 negotiation of heroism. To achieve this, Futu r transgressive” features and have “charismati c ama follows a certain modus operandi which I impact” as well as a community of admirers (von describe as a (meta-)heroic discourse. With- den Hoff et al. 8). Furthermore, these traits are in this discourse, it adapts and appropriates inherently relational and to be understood as genre conventions as well as specific texts which ascriptions, which are mediatised and subject to perpetuate (varieties of) the pop culture formul a change (ibid.). Ulrich Bröckling’s suggestion of a for heroisms in catastrophes, thus essentially typology of negations of the heroic may help add forming an ‘adaptation collage’. Examples in my to this rather broad understanding. He defines two case studies include franchises such as Star four major “dimensions of the heroic” (Bröckling Trek (1966–date) and Star Wars (1977–date) 10) which are important in assessing the heroic and films such asIndependence Day (1996) and quality of a figure or person: “morally regulated Armageddon (1998) among many others. The deviation, worship, (agonal) agency and a readi- 4 show thus collects and converges narratives ness to make sacrifices” (ibid. 11). As much as from different media within its own (television) these dimensions overlap with the aforemen- adaptation collage.2 That is, through this overt tioned definition, they add depth and differentia- process of adaptation, it makes offers to activate tion, especially with respect to the “force field of 5 knowledge of other (hypo-)texts and, hence, to the heroic” (ibid. 9), within which they become participate in the negotiation of the heroic. In ad- relevant. Understood not unlike a magnetic or dition, the show’s distinct animation aesthetics, a gravitational field, it is generated by a call to in conjunction with other techniques, serve to heroic action and forces all people or figures defamiliarise the adapted texts and, by exten- within its reach to position themselves and sion, the evoked concepts and models of the to have their actions interpreted and judged helden. heroes. héros. Jochen Antoni 82 against the standards it imposes (cf. Bröckling form and mode of representation. What is more, 9). Consequently, the four dimensions form the “[k]nown adaptations obviously function similarly metaphorical coordinate system for these stand- to genres: they set up audience expectations […] ards. The catastrophe as an extraordinary event through a set of norms that guide our encounter or process, then, is one instance of such a call, with the adapting work” (ibid. 121). Rendering or at least a catalyst, establishing a force field such expectations visible, as well as frustrating which in turn creates correlations with the hero- them, may then create a strong defamiliarisation ic for all the persons or figures concerned. This effect which enables meta-fictional negotiations. broad framework establishes the categories of What determines the precise nature of what I the heroic with which I want to analyse the shows’ call ‘adaptation collages’ in animated television characters and their actions. Besides that, a shows is, on the one hand, the fact that they al- workable definition of catastrophes is needed. ways draw on several texts, and, on the other The call for papers for this special issue includes hand, their salient use of fandom language. “natural disasters, war and terror, economic cri- Although various theories of adaptation have ses or nuclear melt-downs” and defines them all insisted on the exclusion of so-called ‘vernacu- as “events of an extraordinary nature [which] can lar’ production, i.e. fan texts,6 it has recently bring about change in the established societal become more accepted to think of fan texts as order, are perceived as a break from the norm ‘proper’ adaptations as well.7 Thus, distinctions and enter the collective memory as a traumatic between industry products and fan texts are experience.” In this vein and for the purpose of more and more understood as an issue of critical this paper, I propose to broadly define catastro- reception, rather than inherent differences. Con- phe as a large-scale, disruptive event or process sequently, the fact that these animated television which threatens the order and lives of a group of shows exist as vernacular yet standardised me- people or a whole society. The focus in my pa- dia products is in itself another transgression of per is thereby on the way catastrophes are pre- the amateur vs. professional dichotomy of me- sented in narratives, which includes the different dia creativity (Constandinides 145). Thus, these perspectives of characters within the narrative shows blur the boundaries and essentially reveal as well as potential reception from an audience. the arbitrariness of such a binary understanding. In this sense, the question of whether an event is Costas Constandinides attests a similar devel- a catastrophe depends on the perception of the opment for new “cinephilic discourse”, in which event, which is constructed through narrative. “[t]here is a blurring between fan creativity and Having developed a framework of the heroic creativity since it may be argued that directors and catastrophes, it is now necessary to expand like Tarantino, Peter Jackson, Guillermo Del on the workings of the (meta-)heroic discourse Toro project a fan persona and their filmicevents as I intend to trace it through the two episodes. often perform moments of paratextual nature, Firstly, I want to argue that Futurama (or at least which underline or highlight texts they were in- some of its episodes) is a type of adaptation, spired from” (ibid. 146). In the case of animated using techniques of collage and repurposing television shows, this kind of discourse is less to create their counter-narratives. In her sem- tied to personalities and conveyed more via inal work, A Theory of Adaptation, Linda Hutch- characters within the narratives. In Futurama, eon defines adaptations as both product and for example, its protagonist, Philip J. Fry, con- process, in that they are “an announced and stantly frames events around him in terms of his extensive transposition of a particular work or own science fiction and television fandom; for works,” as well as “(re-)interpretation and then instance, the pilot episode shows Fry exclaim- (re-)creation” (Hutcheon 7-8). Additionally, from ing that a door moving upward looks “just like the perspective of the audience’s reception, they in Star Trek” (“Space Pilot 3000”, 04:00-04:04). are “a form of intertextuality [which] we experi- Overtly opening up certain texts to participatory ence […] as palimpsests through our memory of meaning-making processes, the animated tele- other works” (ibid. 8). Here, Hutcheon also lo- vision shows as adaptations, therefore, locate cates the appeal or pleasure of adaptations: the themselves at the intermediary position of fan audience may find a “mixture of repetition and texts from within media conglomerates. In usin g difference” (ibid. 114), and therefore a “doubled fandom language, however, the shows do not pleasure of the palimpsest: more than one text only openly invite participation, but also add is experienced” (ibid. 116). While texts, under- an interesting inflection of a hero’s community stood and received as adaptations, therefore of admirers. The characters, voicing and acting create a framework of meaning which extends attitudes of fandom, mirror the audience’s rela- beyond themselves, they also focus or channel tion to texts and, by extension, to their heroes. a range of narrative strands from across differ- As the shows break the fourth wall in this way, ent media within one, assimilating them to their they blur the boundaries of fictional and real fans helden. heroes. héros. Counter-Narratives of the Heroic and Catastrophes in the Animated Television Show Futurama and admirers.

Load more