I think the university's role within movements such as #blacklivesmatter and other social justice movements is really important. The backing or support of a movement as well as the silence to one speaks volumes and there are, of course, going to be different reaction to it. However things need to be done carefully as well, especially when there are so many different outcomes to them and repercussions there can be on scholars.
The use of the term Eudemonia is a very improtant one, especially with the passion that is seen within these movements on social media and other platforms. However it can be attributed to 'real life' practices within social justice as well.
I really like your observation about the academy letting others take the lead if we are to ethically create and circulate knowledge. In doing so, I believe we acknowledge the university's role in the production and protection of the problematic ideologies social movements challenge, and ultimately, seek to undo. As you also suggest, this fraught history has led underrepresented groups to distrust the academy, especially when it comes to scholars' involvement in social movements. However, I think re-purposing a rhetorical term like eudemenia as a means to create a relationship of collaboration as opposed to co-option between the academy and social activists is a good way to start healing the wounds of oppression and injustice the institution is guilty of inflicting. I am also curious to see how eudemenia could help scholars who do not represent the majority be more included into the academy; I think if we take some of our cues from social movements, the academy would become more welcoming of the broad public AND scholars who are not white, male, and heterosexual.
I'm having a bit of trouble with your separation of paratext and paraspace. Specifically, there are two questions: why bother with creating paraspace apart from the paratext, and what is the "space" that paraspace is outside of, or above?
As I understand his work, Genette writes of palimpsests and paratexts to talk about the stuff surrounding the text, to extend the object to its surroundings. This allows him to talk about headers, footnotes, dust covers, prefaces, and all the other bits that surround the text. Genette's move allows us to go not only from work to text (following Barthes), but from text to something even larger still. A more recent version of this is, perhaps, Fred Turner's current work on the "Democratic Surround" in which we live not in front of a single screen, but are instead "surrounded" by media. To the text we add the paratext, but also the context.
So, to get back to my question, why "paraspace" and is it simply the "contexts" in which a text is created, consumed, rehashed, repeated, and recreated? And, if so, how is it different from "space" itself? What is space and what is paraspace?
Very true. The desire for access and to better translate leads many to join the industry, but I'd also point out the less romantic reasoning of money. Need to make a living, and fan translation does not really provide it. So much stems from economic imperatives: individual incomes and industry decisions alike.
Video game translation hacking and localisation are really interesting areas of practice to consider. The technology is so integral, and the skills required so specialised, as you note. I guess this is why so many fan translators end up crossing over into the professional realm - while often still doing free, voluntary translation/localisation on the side, as a type of social service.
This discussion of paratexts and paraspaces reminds me of the extra layers/levels of discussion opened up by fansub headnotes, glosses and pop-ups - where translation operations seep beyond the frame of the text, word or image. One difference with paratextual memes of course is the level of agency they afford users/consumers, enabling feedback on processes of translation, transformation and cross-cultural circulation. This is interesting to relate back to Jamie Henthorn's comment (see her post) regarding imbalances in levels of participation that often characterise 'participatory culture'. Do paratextual memes provide a means of countering such imbalances?
I am interested in the idea you raise of fans 'moving between' international and local/regional fan spaces. How do fans negotiate this type of movement, and how is it affected by cultural and language difference? Also, its interesting to think about how translation 'proper' also often involve non-linguistic transformation - relating to character names and ethnicity - and how fans respond to such changes.
I'm caught in the technology itself as I read through your text. Tumblr, Instagram, and Facebook are privatized technologies that individuals access more and more from encapsulated devices, like their phones. In many ways this mirrors the reading of manga, but also how taboo the Western world sees the viewing and sharing of erotic images in public places. So, while I'm interested in your construction of paraspaces, I'm equally invested in the intersection of paraspace and material space.
Your post reminds me of several things. One is Luca Barra's observations that fan produced translations can happen after a professional translation as stripped too much culture from the original. He looks at Italian translations of Lost, but I can see the ways in which a fan is going to do this translation in a very different way because, while they work to increase access, they don't need the audience that a show translated for another network does.
I was re-watching a fan-translation episde of Rurouni Kenshin last night and was taken out of the world when one character thanked another for speaking English. My assumption was that all the characters were speaking Japanese, and probably are in the original, but the translators changed it to English because I was listening the show in English translation. Finally I wonder about our awareness of the translation. Translation is best when we don't recognize it, but as a the Harry Potter example makes clear, while I know of obvious changes like calling the American version of Harry Potter and the Philosophers' Stone to Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, I've never had a British version of the books to compare and think of the other translations that were done between English versions.