Parasocial Relationships Fuel some of the Best Guerrilla Content.
Parasocial relationships can feel quite uncanny, but they can play a positive role in generating sensational guerrilla-design content.
Let’s face it. Some of the best pieces of media that revolves around pop-culture and cause sensational discourse have sprung out of faceless social media accounts, dedicating their time to creating fan edits and moderating (fan)fiction based discussions—it’s a full time job for some.
In modern day society, most of us have a neutral reaction to fan edits — some of us even having a few that we would consider as favorites. In this article, I want to discuss the cause and effects of this modern day guerrilla content.
Today, some may even go to the extent of calling them “think-pieces” or “alternate cuts”, leading them to avenues; where they are discussed with the same height of importance as any other well-produced form of media, where earlier they would have never even graced past the doorstep. But I can’t help but wonder how a piece of media, like the fan-edit, would survive in a society when journalism and production had such a high barrier of entry and standard for acceptance into mainstream. It all narrows down to one particular aspect of media production and distribution: Accessibility.
Not only has accessibility to share and repost pieces of media improved infinitely over the past decade, but so has the accessibility to the tools required to make them in the first place. Back in the day, editing and production was a highly “exclusive” process; something that was reserved for the well-off, who could quite literally, “afford” to be eccentric without consequences. The crazier the concept behind a piece of work or production process, the more famous or well acclaimed it came to be. This can be attributed to the high cost of film, cameras and other props (set-design), not to mention the cost of paying a film and editing crew.
The Rise (and fall) of the Faceless Artist
There was a period of time where artists and producers liked to leverage their anonymity to draw focus onto their craft, rather than spending efforts enhancing their personal branding to draw attention. Initially popularized by artist/producers like Banksi, MF Doom and Daft Punk, there seemed to be a wave of copies, who used mystery as a marketing tactic or gimmick; that capitalized on the audience’s curiosity to find the face behind the figure, rather than actually pay attention to the nuanced production processes or craftsmanship of the artist. But low and behold, society soon became desensitized to this trend as well. Today, people rarely know the face behind their favorite pieces of art and more importantly, people don’t care.
When there’s an abundance of great art and media available so easily to anyone, why would anybody spend time getting to know more about an artist? Or perhaps it’s the ease at which one can search up information about the artist, ultimately making it less valuable information.
And what about those artists or social media individuals who willingly intertwine their personal life (brand) with their professional work? — they unknowingly cultivate parasocial relationships.
Parasocial Relationships can be both productive and destructive.
Parasocial relationships can provide a sense of comfort and relief to individuals who may be experiencing social isolation. This is perhaps why we witnessed a greater number of individuals turn into successful “influencers” during the pandemic. It can help individuals narrate their story and build a community or viewership that relates to this narrative, while guiding them to buy into their desires and goals.
The problem arrises when boundaries are not placed; this loyal viewership and general relatability, can quickly turn into a concerning case of dependance or pseudo sense of ‘right of passage’. Fans begin feeling entitled to personal access, interpreting every public statement or behavior shift as a personal betrayal or validation — caused by the illusion of intimacy, that viewers gets from repetitive and reciprocal interactions between content creators and viewers.
To turn parasocial relationships into productive outcomes, boundaries need to be placed. The boundaries are still not quite set in stone yet. Some believe that it is acceptable to make fan edits of existing art works that are widely popular—because it would take way the consequences or allegations of ‘copying’ or mocking, directed at the creator of the fan-edit. Others may argue that any sort of engagement with parasocial behavior is unacceptable and to be treated as a form of psychological illness.
Fan edits are a marker of the rise of parasocial dependency
Fan edits exemplify the growing acceptance of parasocial behaviours, particularly one-sided dependency, in modern society. Social media has not only made it easier for public figure to share their private lives with the everyday person, but has made it abundantly accessible for them to pry into their lives as though they are a personally involved. In this context, fan edits reinforce a cycle of attachment—that can either manifest as harmless appreciation or can quickly spiral into unhealthy fixation, depending on what and how much the public figure decides to share to the masses. It’s common to see people online claim that a public figure is behaving “out of character” or “evolving” as if they know them personally. This phenomenon blurs the line between admiration and obsession, but that’s a conversation for another day.
Yet beyond their role in indicating parasocial behaviors, fan edits also challenge the traditional notion of guerrilla content making, content ownership and distribution. Let’s explore what makes fan edits guerrilla—Is it their controversial nature or perhaps something more?
Fan Edits allow for exploration of unconventional and alternate storylines in an authentic manner
The formula to crafting a great fan edit lies in the strength of its 3 foundational motives:
- Its ability to deconstruct a piece of media into smaller fragments, that can be juxtaposed—to make alternate compositions , which are unlikely to ever be reproduced independently, but remaining coherent at the same time. This is where the creativity of the maker and the viewer work in conjunction; the fan edit only makes sense so long as the viewer empathizes with or enjoys it.
- Its ability to be created without permission or fear of facing legal repercussions for skewing the original work : Usually original trailers and promotional content goes through layers and layers of screening—to ensure that it is ready for the masses and generates revenue from the time it hits screens. But when factors like monetization, viewership and content ownership are thrown out, makers have the freedom to create without bounds, further supporting the first motive.
- Their ability to generate and engage with a whole new and separate fanbase : Their subversive nature has the power to build new worlds, expanding hypothetical timelines in the narrative of the original piece. This often pursuades audiences to latch onto imaginative narratives and take the story further down the line from where it originated. This motive is also what production houses have started leveraging. Terms like “fandom” and “fan-fiction”, were coined to promote this parasocial behavior among viewers—which in turn generates revenue and profits for producers, without directly being involved. Online platforms like Wattpad, Reddit and TikTok are great examples of User-generated content (UGC) that has successfully managed to create several fandoms or pieces of fan-fiction, that people avidly follow and engage with.
Guerrilla works have never left society
In the 80s and 90s guerrilla initiatives and content were analogous in nature, being created and distributed secretly, so as to avoid leaving clues which can be traced back to the individuals who created it. They were hidden in zines, street art, clothing patches (worn by working class or union members), etc, indicating that their tactile nature, designed to exist and make a statement in the physical world. Today this has been turned around.
Guerrilla works now exist almost completely digitally. With stricter enforcement of intellectual property and copyrights, Guerrilla initiatives and content now rely on being distributed in an inorganic manner; often relying on reposts, shares and bots to spread the word. This ultimately makes guerrilla works more accessible today than it was ever in the past.
Final thoughts,
Ultimately, this article is a huge “Thanks!” to faceless artists who make and distribute amazing pieces of guerrilla content being and moderate discussions online, effectively serving the same purpose as guerrilla initiatives of the past.
The End
-Aparna Krishnan Reshmy (15 March, 2025)
(All image credits go to respective owners.)
