Customer Reviews

The Invisible Revolution: Clay Aiken and the Fans Who Made Him a Star

5 star:		(18)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(12)

 

 

As one of the 'fans' whose words were included in this 'carefully researched' book without my permission, I ask that anyone who does read it understand that Ms. Piper speaks with many tongues---some not her own, and others that actually are but which she doesn't claim as such. I find that suspect. I also find it disappointing that a fan took a great concept and opportunity---the unique relationship between this remarkably talented and genuine man and his diverse and loyal fanbase---and gave it a less-than-fair or thorough treatment. Just because words are printed and published does not make them worth reading. I suggest you read instead Clay's own words and story---his own discussion of his fans and his relationship with them---by choosing "Learning to Sing: Hearing the Music in Your Life", written by Clay Aiken with Allison Glock (an established and respected writer). It speaks with only one 'tongue': Clay's.

I am a fan of Clay Aiken.

I am embarrassed to think people are reading this book and coming away with such a ridiculous and pathetic view of his fans. I am embarrassed that people like Ms. Piper take it upon themselves to think they "know" who Mr. Aiken's fans are only by taking the opinions of a few "friends". I'm embarrassed that people who read this book will know that not only does Ms. Piper take quotes and comments from others out of context but that she quotes herself, even though she never claims these identities as her own.

I believe she has done a great disservice to Mr. Aiken when she lumps all of Clay fans under one umbrella: "old, bitter denizens". Had she looked past the nose on her face (hard to do when so incredibly egocentric, I realize) she would have seen how outlandish that suppostion is. "Research" is only as good as the person doing that research. If Ms Piper started her research with *her* answer, what is the point of the research? It will be biased, unscientific and invalid.

I will never claim the title of "Claymate"...I am a fan of Clay Aiken, I wish I could say the same for Ms. Piper.

I find this puzzling. The title smacks of inaccuracy. Clay Aiken's
talent and hard work, his charisma, charm, sharp wit and intelligence
made him a star. Not fans. As I tell students, look at the source. Is
it a known source? A source of authority? Do you know the publisher?
When choosing a book, you need to choose based on more than the picture
on the cover.

This one would not be high on my recommendation list.

I purchased this book mainly out of curiosity because I had heard negative comments about it and wanted to find out for myself if they were true. What I had heard is that the author overstated what most of Clay's fans think; that the analysis was faulty; that in order to justify some of her points the author quoted herself while making it appear that she was quoting other people and, lastly, that she betrayed the trust of her fellow Clay fans by quoting them out of context and without permission.

Let me just say up-front that I'm a devoted Clay Aiken fan who began to lurk on claytonaiken.com (one of the Clay Aiken fan message boards) in May of 2003. I can relate to the following comment which appears at the beginning of Chapter Three:
"...Aiken's loss increased the size of the internet fan base. Fans who had previously followed him only on television went to the Net as a way of staying in contact with the singer they were afraid might drop out of sight. They wanted to look for information about him..."

On page 116 she hit the nail on the head and supplied ample evidence that she is correct when she wrote about Clay's appearances on shows (the opening of the World Series; the MTV New Year's Eve Special; Nick at Night, etc.) that many of his fans would never have watched were it not for his appearance:
"...(Aiken) fills a musical void by reminding (his older fans) of what popular music used to be, what it used to mean in their lives, and it makes them willing to follow him places they would normally never go."

An example of the author quoting her own experience while implying that the experience happened to someone else appears on page 187. She writes "One dancer recalls the experience:" (followed by a quote of what that person said on a message board). Anyone who has watched videos of the concerts will recognize that it is Ms. Piper herself who is describing the experience of dancing on stage with Clay. I cannot imagine why she didn't just say "I danced on stage with Clay and this was my experience." It does seem odd to say the least that she chose to write it this way and it makes all the comments that are followed by "Posted at RHT" and "Posted at OMC" etc. suspect. If my memory serves me, the letter on page 299 which is attributed to "Posted at RHT" was actually written by Ms. Piper under her screen name: Spikeabella. My question is: Could ALL of the comments that are not attributed to someone else - and even some which are - have been posted by the author herself? If so, why is she trying to hide that fact?

The bottom line is: The book is written in a style that is easy to read with a hypothesis by the author followed with quotes from the message boards to back up that hypothesis and then sometimes there is a further conclusion. The book is both interesting and entertaining. However, none of the conclusions in the book can be applied across the board to all of Clay's fans. I recommend that you take what Ms. Piper wrote with a grain of salt (on second-thought, maybe you should take it with a block of salt!).

Clay Aiken's fans are recognized by many music industry professionals as a phenomenon in their own right -- reminiscent of Sinatra's 'bobby soxers' as Jerry Lewis once said -- and I was hoping for an affectionate and analytical look at the group as a whole.

Unfortunately, Dr. Piper's research is less than comprehensive -- she paints the Clay fan community with an astonishingly wide brush, discounting one of the most compelling characteristics of the 'Clay Nation' -- that thousands of people of different backgrounds, ages, musical tastes, and motivations came together to support and celebrate one man's music and create real communities, online.

After reading through the book a couple of times, I think it would be more appropriately described as 'one fan's view of the Clay craze,' as Dr. Piper illustrates many points with her own experiences and posts from friends at the message board she helps run.

It isn't noted in the initial disclaimer, but Piper's first-hand impressions can also be found in the comments attributed to her message board identities, "The Dancing Poet" and "Spikeabella," and to her fictional character, "Marjorie Wakin-Aiken.

Others have mentioned the low-grade photographs and materials, but all those things could be overlooked if the book contained a compelling story. The 'Clay Nation' might someday be the subject of a fascinating book about internet communities, musical 'netroots' and what makes the Aiken fans 'tick' -- unfortunately, that book has yet to be written.

This title warrants two stars because I think it will be interesting to the members of Dr. Piper's own message board, and to fans who enjoy her stories of the fandom and of her experiences dancing on stage with Clay.

There's a lot of bright and fun amateur writing on the Net. I regularly read several blogs and pop culture boards that make me laugh and introduce me to new books, ideas, people, and music.

Unfortunately, this book doesn't compare to my favourite online sources. Piper's writing, occasionally well constructed and mildly amusing, too often turns florid and coy. There are a few good pieces of writing in the book, but most of these are straight from various fan boards. Anyone who finds a Clay fan board via Google can find people to direct them to various collections of the best of fan writing, freely available online.

I'm sure that the subgroup of Clay fans who have participated on boards with the author are thrilled that a lot of their shared reality has been brought to print. But I think that without that shared background and sense of community, casual fans or fans from different boards are going to find the book a weak reflection of their experiences.

If you're looking for an insightful and funny book about fandom, I highly recommend "Starstruck : When a Fan Gets Close to Fame" by Michael Joseph Gross (available here at Amazon). This is a book from a major publisher, written by a writer with an extensive knowledge of pop culture, who talks openly about his own experiences as a fan in an intelligent, honest and self-deprecating way.

This book seemed to be full of assumptions and a single point of view. Who's to say that the sole reason Clay Aiken is a star today is because of the fans? The fans are certainly a component, but without his talents and personality, the love that the fans have for him would not exist. Certainly, without without Clay Aiken's voice and personality there would be nothing for Dr. Terry Piper to be writing about would there?

If one wishes to get a broad point of view of who and what the Claynation is, they only must search the internet. Hundreds of informative sites may pop up at the click of a mouse. Not to mention, if you stumble upon a mediocre site, it's comforting to know that you didn't have to pay in order to read their drivel. Anyone can come across a message board to have a more comprehensive outlook on the Claynation than they would if they had read this book...not to mention it would be in the words of MANY fans with different opinions on recent Clay-related topics.

For the average fan (a "Clayfan" rather than a "Claymate", if one can decifer the difference in the level of enthusiasm), digging up the past will be a bore without the proper writing technique (Which this author is clearly lacking).

It concerns me that some may take the author's views as fact. When reading what Ms. Piper credits as the reasons "we" are such huge fans, my jaw dropped. These may be the reasons she is a fan, but in no way reflect my feelings nor are they representational of Clay fans as a whole. They should have been presented as opinion but were instead presented as fact.

In addition, to credit 15,000 (a generous estimate) internet fans with Clay's degree of success when his cd went double platinum the first week and eventually triple platinum is arrogant. Even if each internet Clay fan bought ten cd's, that still leaves 2,850,000 cd's bought by non internet Clay fans. The statement is an insult to Clay's talent and to Clay.

If you want to buy the book, so be it, but please do not lose sight of the fact that this is one person's opinion. Question every sentence.

Physically, this book is poor quality. This paperback has out of focus pictures, larger-than-normal print, and seems very flimsy.

That's just the outside. On the inside, the book is not only poorly written, it is poorly researched and begins with the faulty premise that Clay Aiken is only a star because his fans made him one. That's just dumb.

I say poorly researched because she did not really look into what the fanboard culture is like at all. She left out huge chunks of fan history by only focusing on a few small boards, which aren't indicative of the larger groups. (Small boards may have 100 members or less, while other boards range from 1000 to over 10,000.) If this is supposed to be a sociological study of Clay's internet fanbase... it fails completely on so many levels.

Considering everything, I would say this book is a waste of money to purchase. My copy is going out by way of the trash bin.

I see my earlier review was conveniently deleted. I would hope that the reason was NOT that it was not all gushing praise. Things that make you go hmmmmm. No matter. I will re-do it.

This book is a rambling, disorganized mess with many poor quality photos (focus, people!) dropped in at random with no association to the text at hand. I was disappointed - having expected/hoped for a snarky, perhaps irreverent/tongue-in-cheek look at this fandom... and instead found much pontificating and patting oneself on the back. At times professorial tones dissolved into fangirly banter - and the effect was jarring. The author quotes herself under pseudonyms and un-attributed passages/poetry at length, without admitting that she is doing so. Piper relates experiences of her own - as those of an anonymous "fan".... which will be easy for anyone to figure out who has read her numerous internet accounts. Why the intrigue?

Oh well. This tome fell far short of expectations. And proved to be merely a self-affected, inaccurate and rambling example of vanity press at its best - or worst, depending on your point of view.

Oh - and the poor binding split down the spine after only one "gentle" reading...