Certain binaries have dominated scholarly approaches to research on digital video creation. The first is concerned with comparing videos made by professionals versus amateurs. The second is the binary contrasting the use of images for memory preservation versus sharing experiences and negotiating identities. The present case study of teen video makers on YouTube illustrates how youth in the United States may approach their video making in more fluid ways that do not fit comfortably within these analytical binaries. The study draws on a range of ethnographic evidence such as interviews, text comments posted to videos, and visual analyses of two videos that are live-action instantiations of a video game. The study suggests that investigating the interaction between aesthetics and technical knowledge in video-mediated, parodic forms of nostalgia may be a rich and productive area to explore. These constructs are particularly fruitful when trying to understand meanings behind video creation and communication. They also lend insight into how youth communicate aspects of the self through video.
Andrejevic, Mark ( 2004) Reality TV: The Work of Being Watched. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
2.
Arnheim, Rudolf ( 1957) Film as Art. Berkeley: University of California Press.
3.
Barthes, Roland ( 1981[1980]) Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography , trans. Richard Howard. New York: Hill and Wang.
4.
Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristin ( 1997[1979]) Film Art: An Introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill.
5.
Boym, Svetlana ( 2001) The Future of Nostalgia. New York: Basic.
6.
Brusberg-Kiermeier, Stefani ( 2004) ‘Stormy Novel, Thorny Adaptation: Recent Appropriations of Wuthering Heights’, in Eckart Voigts-Virchow (ed.) Janespotting and Beyond: British Heritage Retrovisions Since the Mid-1990s, pp. 149-66. Tübingen: Gunter Narr VerlagTübingen.
7.
Buckingham, David, Pini, Maria and Willett, Rebekah ( 2007) ‘"Take Back the Tube!": The Discursive Construction of Amateur Film and Video Making’, Journal of Media Practice8(2): 183-201.
8.
Burgess, Jean ( 2008) ‘All Your Chocolate Rain Are Belong to Us? Viral Video, YouTube and the Dynamics of Participatory Culture’, in Geert Lovink and Sabine Niederer (eds) Video Vortex Reader: Responses to YouTube, pp. 101-10. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.
9.
Burgess, Jean and Green, Joshua ( 2009a) YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.
10.
Burgess, Jean and Green, Joshua ( 2009b) ‘The Entrepreneurial Vlogger: Participatory Culture Beyond the Professional-Amateur Divide’, in Pelle Snickars and Patrick Vonderau (eds) The YouTube Reader, pp. 89-107. Stockholm: National Library of Sweden.
11.
Chalfen, Richard ( 1987) Snapshot Versions of Life. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press .
12.
Cobley, Paul and Haeffner, Nick (2009) ‘Digital Cameras and Domestic Photography: Communication, Agency and Structure’ , Visual Communication8(2): 123-46.
13.
Gee, James P. ( 1996) Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses . New York: RoutledgeFarmer.
14.
Gehring, Wes D. ( 1999) Parody as Film Genre: Never Give a Saga an Even Break . Westport, CT: Greenwood Press .
15.
Greene, Thomas M. ( 1982) The Light in Troy: Imitation and Discovery in Renaissance Poetry. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
16.
Harrison, Barbara ( 2002) ‘Photographic Visions and Narrative Inquiry’ , Narrative Inquiry12(1): 87-111.
17.
Hutcheon, Linda ( 2000[1985]) A Theory of Parody: The Teachings of Twentieth-Century Art Forms. New York: Methuen.
18.
Ito, Mizuko et al. (2010) Hanging Out, Messing Around, Geeking Out: Living and Learning with New Media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19.
Jenkins, Henry ( 1992) Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture . New York: Routledge.
20.
Jenkins, Henry et al. (2006) ‘Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century’. URL (consulted 20 October 2008): http://digitallearning.macfound.org/atf/cf/%7B7E45C7E0-A3E0-4B89-AC9C-E807E1B0AE4E%7D/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF
21.
Kinder, Marsha ( 2008) ‘The Conceptual Power of Online Video: 5 Easy Pieces’ , in Geert Lovink and Sabine Niederer (eds) Videovortex Reader: Responses to YouTube, pp. 53-62. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.
22.
Lange, Patricia G. ( 2003) ‘Virtual Trouble: Negotiating Access in Online Communities’ , PhD dissertation, University of Michigan.
23.
Lange, Patricia G. ( 2007a) ‘Fostering Friendship through Video Production: How Youth Use YouTube to Enrich Local Interaction’, presented at the International Communication Association Conference, 27 May, San Francisco. URL (consulted 13 Jan. 2010): http://www.patriciaglange.org/page4/assets/Lange%20ICA%202007%20Paper.pdf
24.
Lange, Patricia G. ( 2007b) ‘Publicly Private and Privately Public’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13(1). URL (consulted 13 Jan. 2010): http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/lange.html
25.
Lange, Patricia G. ( 2009) ‘Videos of Affinity on YouTube’, in Pelle Snickars and Patrick Vonderau (eds) The YouTube Reader, pp. 228-47. Stockholm : National Library of Sweden.
26.
Lange, Patricia G. and Ito, Mizuko ( 2010) ‘Creative Production’, in Mizuko Ito et al. (eds) Hanging Out, Messing Around, Geeking Out: Living and Learning with New Media, pp. 243-94. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27.
Milligan, Melinda J. ( 2003) ‘Displacement and Identity Discontinuity: The Role of Nostalgia in Establishing New Identity Categories’, Symbolic Interaction26(3): 381-403.
28.
Moran, James M. ( 2002) There’s No Place Like Home Video. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
29.
Raymond, Eric S. ( 1996) The Hacker’s Dictionary. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30.
Senft, Theresa M. ( 2008) Camgirls: Celebrity and Community in the Age of Social Networks. New York: Peter Lang.
31.
Sherman, Tom ( 2008) ‘Vernacular Video’, in Geert Lovink and Sabine Niederer (eds) Videovortex Reader: Responses to YouTube, pp. 161-8. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.
32.
Slater, Don ( 1995) ‘Domestic Photography and Digital Culture’ , in Martin Lister (ed.) The Photographic Image in Digital Culture, pp. 129-46. London: Routledge.
33.
Slattery, Brennon ( 2008) ‘Hands on: Streaming TV Shows with YouTube’ , PC World, 13 October. URL (consulted 15 Oct. 2008): http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/007918.html
34.
Stebbins, Robert A. ( 1977) ‘The Amateur: Two Sociological Definitions’ , Pacific Sociological Review20(4): 582-606.
35.
Toffler, Alvin ( 1980) The Third Wave. New York: Bantam.
36.
Van Dijck, José ( 2008) ‘Digital Photography: Communication, Identity, Memory’, Visual Communication7(1): 57-76.
37.
Willett, Rebekah ( 2009) ‘Parodic Practices: Amateur Spoofs on Video-Sharing Sites’, in David Buckingham and Rebekah Willett (eds) Video Cultures: Media Technology and Everyday Creativity, pp. 115-32. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
38.
Zettl, Herbert ( 1998) ‘Contextual Media Aesthetics as the Basis for Media Literacy’, Journal of Communication, March: 81-95.
39.
Zimmerman, Patricia R. ( 1995) ‘Good-bye Hollywood: Introductory Filmmaking and Difference’, in Diane Carson and Lester D. Friedman (eds) Shared Differences: Multicultural Media and Practical Pedagogy, pp. 259-80. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
40.
Zimmerman, Patricia R. ( 1988) ‘Hollywood, Home Movies, and Common Sense: Amateur Film as Aesthetic Dissemination and Social Control, 1950-1962’, Cinema Journal27(4): 23-44.
