I’m always picking apart movies and TV shows for subtext, deeper meaning, Jungian archetypes, revelation of social patterns, inner psychology, etc., but it seems like there are two related trends that make the traditional, scholarly approach of a close reading increasingly unpopular:
-
The work is about whatever the author says it is about or could have intended it to mean. Literature can have a multipilicity of meanings, some of them deeply personal to the reader, and many of them unintended. That the fun of thinking about a piece and breaking it down an examining scenes and dialogue and symbolism can all be replaced by doing a search on the author’s Twitter is deeply depressing and completely destroys the role of art–to be an ambiguous sounding board for our souls and unconscious reflection of our society.
-
A work is bad or good depending on the political messages it explicitly and implicitly communicates." and related: I’m more likely to agree with an interpretation if helps me politically. Stories with flawed characters are condemned in this system, because the point of literature isn’t to explore the human condition, but to create propaganda for ideologies, and your role isn’t too seriously examine the text but to create your own propaganda for your side online.
Examples:
-
“300 can’t have a gay subtext because that would mean Zach Snyder was woke!'”
-
“The Matrix is definitively a trans-allegory because The Wachowskis said it was. If you disagree, you are stupid, because they said so.” I love reading the Matrix as a trans-allegory, but it is not ever explicitly mentioned in the text so I chafe at it being definitively, or even obviously, a trans-allegory.
-
Sex and the City is bad because Carrie has an extremely fucked up relationship with Mr. Big (ie, only positive role models are “good”–I’m absolutely OK with people pointing that out, but the problem is building a world where only “safe messages” are propagated and treating all audiences as uncritical 3-year-olds in front YouTube Kids).
The only real pushback against art-by-tweet is against JKR declaring Dumbledore to be gay. But, really, that’s just politics taking precedence, because people don’t want her in the LGBT tent exlcuding trans people.
There also seems to be a knock-on effect in writing rooms, where complexity and ambiguity are being sacrificed for clear moralizing and political point-making.
And as a long-time Star Trek fan, I’m not saying art can’t be explicitly political! Of course it can! But I am saying it is increasingly not allowed to be anything else.
Is this a vibe anyone else is getting? My references are obviously seriously dated, but whenever they come up, I feel like I’m speaking Ancient Greek.
Bonus question: Who has a better story than Bran?
No.
Some media criticism I’ve seen has been as much a critique of the audience as it is of the text. Why do some conservatives like Star Trek? How can the Matrix be used both as a trans allegory and adopted by anti-trans alt-right people?
Other media criticism keeps the author alive, but looks into what made the author and how did media change because of it. How did the death of big budget music videos affect cinema? How does a career built on click bait YouTube videos affect how the author creates larger work?
It feels like you can have larger and more meta analysis because the audience is there for more meta analysis.
I mean more popular criticism of pop media. I know the academic types are still doing their thing,but it seems to be treated with hostility when it’s out in the opwn.
Define “popular”. None of the topics I mentioned came from traditional academic works.
Casual conversation among people who might not have taken critical theory and who do not create media criticism content. Lots of content creators are academic,even if they don’t get paid by a uni.
So you are looking for something atypical but found only where typical things are found?
I guess I’m wondering if it’s my perception that’s the problem; that nothing’s really changed except the people I really talk with… which is probably the case.
It is probably a difference between your perception versus the people you are talking to. This happens is someone is more into something than others.