Theorizing Narrative in Participatory Online Affinity Spaces

The Mangle Gender Debate:
A Case Study in Game Narrative Theory Construction
Shannon Grimme, Ph.D. student in Social Informatics
Case Study: The Mangle Gender Debate
This particular recurring topic of discussion was chosen for case study because the answer to this question is entirely
non-essential to completing the objectives of the game. Mangle, a remake of the animatronic character Foxy in Five Nights
at Freddy’s 2, is the only character who is not a clear representation of the original; and as such, the significant changes in
appearance have led to many discussions about whether this is the same character at all, and if not, if this new character
shares the same gender as the character it represents in the sequel game.
Sites of Cooperative Theory Crafting
Participatory cultures describe places where media consumers stop simply consuming media, and become active participants and
producers of their mediated experiences as well (Jenkins et al., 2009).
Lave and Wenger described something similar in communities of practice,
a virtual/digital space for the shared practice of
theory crafting (1991.) In 2004, Jim Gee outlined affinity spaces, virtual
spaces where: informal learning happens; people come together around
a shared interest; and they participate in or practice common activities
surrounding those interests. How do people collaborate both as individuals and as members of a community within these cultural spaces? What kind of practices are
taking place in these spaces, and how do we understand them within
their contextual conditions?
What is Five Nights at Freddy’s?
Five Nights at Freddy’s (FNAF) is a successful indy horror
series with simple gameplay mechanics, but a very
complicated hidden narrative, revealed through Easter Eggs
hidden in the background of the game as you play through the five
nights. As the series progresses, the narrative is teased out further,
but is never fully integrated into the game play
mechanism, and never affects your ability to win or lose. It can be
difficult to understand why this narrative is even here –
so what do we make of it?
Findings
Approaches to Theory Building
(a) Textual readings of the game using dialogue (Phone Guy/Phone
Dude), screenshots, characters’ appearances
(b) Outside research, i.e. using the pay check the security guard
receives at the end of the week to determine what year each game
took place by comparing real-life minimum wage and the hours they
worked in-game for the sum they netted
(c) Use of Occam’s Razor, where appropriate
(d) Outright speculative theories to stir conversation on boards to
generate new ideas and discussions
There are members of varying levels and frequency of activity and
collaboration where there are multiple points of entry and paths of
engagement. Many participants move fluidly between the different
rungs of HOMAGO, rendering it effectively useless as an effective
way of measuring participation. Particularly given how quickly the
nature of these communities can change, HOMAGO - at least, as we
presently know it - is not a useful theoretical tool to understand how
learning take place in these mediated spaces. It seems to fair to
extrapolate that we could find similar instances of collaboration
occurring in other affinity spaces and participatory cultures where
HOMAGO would also not be an effective theory.
www.shannongrimme.com
The discussion of this character, and the construction of a theory regarding this character’s gender within these participatory community spaces and practices, was examined through the lens of Mimi Ito’s HOMAGO (“hanging out, messing
around, geeking out”) (Ito et al., 2009.) This theory essentially ranks these three genres by level of participation. While
Ligalig clearly initiated this particular debate, and demonstrates “geeking out” by doing so, they also slip fluidly between
“hanging out” and “messing around” with friends at various intervals throughout the post.
Ligalig 960’s EVIDENCE:
Nail Polish
Pink accents
Red lipsticks
Long eyelashes
Pink tummy
PRE-EMPTIVE COUNTER ARGUMENTS:
Paw pads - Mangle is a fox
Why not Foxy’s old colors like other animatronics?
If supposed to be clownish, why not a red nose instead?
Longer and thicker than other animatronics’ eyelashes
Why not Foxy’s old colors like other animatronics?
While these are all problematically normative ideas of femininity
(something which other posters do point out in later replies on this discussion board), it does present an opportunity to see some of the ways
Ligalig has engaged in constructing their own theory. All of the physical
evidence they have presented could have come from visual analysis of
the game material itself, whether from actual game play or gameplay
footage, screenshots, etc. while the counterpoints they have attempted to pre-emptively argue suggest familiarity with this debate through
other discussion boards across the fan community, demonstrating a
line of practice (Azevedo, 2011) across the FNAF fan community, at
least specific to this topic.
Conclusion
The narrative of this particular game is extremely complicated, and well hidden by the designer. This means
that an approach like HOMAGO is even less appropriate, as there are multiple points of entry and various
paths of engagement within the game and the community to try and uncover these mysteries. Trying to
understand the activities of these community members as static positions within some hierarchy based
purely on present proficiency does an injustice to the collaborative and fluid nature of these sort of
participatory cultures.
inGame: The Informatics Game Research Group
References
Foxy (FNAF)
Mangle (FNAF 2)
1. Azevedo, F. (2011). Lines of Practice: A Practice-Centered Theory of Interest Relationships, Cognition and Instruction, 29:2, 147-184, DOI: 10.1080/07370008.2011.556834
2. Camo Rovak, www.youtube.com
3. Five Nights at Freddy’s Wiki. December 2015.
4. http://freddy-fazbears-pizza.wikia.com/wiki/Five_Nights_at_Freddy%27s_Wiki
5. Gee, J. (2004). Situated Language and Learning: A Critique of Traditional Schooling.
New York: Routledge.
6. Hunter, R. (2011). Erasing “Property Lines”: A Collaborative Notion of Authorship and
Textual Ownership on a Fan Wiki. Computers and Composition 28 (2011) 40–56
7. Ito, M. et al. (2009). Hanging Out, Messing Around, and Geeking Out: Kids Living and
Learning with New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press.
8. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation,
Cambridge University Press