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:

  1. 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.

  2. 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?

  • sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz
    1·
    4 days ago

    That one was alright. Her video about Dyson Spheres was amazing though and explored that Relics(?) episode of TNG at length. This one about Picard(the show) is really long and kind of painstaking but basically she lines out what all Netflix originals do in their writing and why they’re such shallow creations.

    Nah, the painful thing about Picard is that it had such an amazing premise and so much good will you can see the bones of what could have been an amazing show.

    No problem! I hope you enjoy!

    • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.worksOP
      2·
      3 days ago

      Relics wasn’t as explored as deeply as I would have liked, but that was fun trip. I forgot how eat-the-rich she is. It’s not one of her more popular videos, but I remember her ragging on the Bezos Astronauts with a lot of, “We see you. We see what you’re doing.”

      I’m halfway through the Picard video, and I do have some sympathy for the desire to wreck the utopia in Trek, but I think you have to rebuild it. The reality is I thought I grew up in a Good Country that was constantly trying to improve and be better, be more fair and more just, and now we’re a just a few months away from becoming an authoritarian states and all the indications a genocide is perfectly possible (which might include me), so the utopian vision of Star Trek really does not speak to me in this moment, the way the competent leadership of The West Wing was actively painful for me to watch during the Bush administration.

      But Nu Trek and Star Wars also make me wonder if maybe what is happening in the world is also what’s happening in entertainment–that the whole system is so full of nepotism and wealth inequality that writing and directing talent do not necessarily rise to the top, that we have art created not by artists but by corporate apparatchiks and bootlickers.

      I think of the Lord of the Rings and all the PASSION that people had for that IP, all the decades of lore and art that built up around it, and how you couldn’t ever have made the Jackson trilogy without it–it is apparent in every stitch. Then I think of all the talent and passion there is for Trek, and wonder, where are those people in the creative process?

      Last SF show that really inspired me was The Orville, and that’s a show made possible because a Hollywood bigwig was a legitimate Trek fan.

      • sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz
        1·
        3 days ago

        The Orville is good then? I fell off it first attempt but would be open to a second try.

        Yeah I clicked on Angela for science but ended up staying because of her politics black-pills. She’s one of the few people who I would tentatively describe as “calling it what it is” and not just doing the usual stream-of-conscious vomit that phrase tends to merit from most people. Probably has something to do with being in science and not just a selfmade, aesthetical truth-teller.

        From what I saw of Picard, the thing that people are calling Nu Trek seems to be the natural result of legacy primetime TV tradition arriving in the internet age. Obviously I love TNG but it was shaped by broadcasting standards and trends like most things of it’s time. Through all the eras it existing in it was morphing to fit the zeitgeist, not really pioneering much (except maybe pretty admirable amount of criticism of apartheid from the highly Jewish workforce it was created by).

        If you enjoy the Morbid Zoo LOTR videos I linked, message me back when you see them. She does a lot of Tolkein videos where she’s examining his various monsters and the themes within

        • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.worksOP
          1·
          3 days ago

          What happened with you and the Orville? I picked up that it was a love letter to TNG by the third episode. The fourth episode is classic SF banger. Yes, give it a try, unless there’s a solid reason you dislike Macfarlane’s brand of (much muted) humor.

          There are things I can expect from internet streaming, like shorter seasons built around story arcs. What I can´t really accept as a consequence of streaming is bad writing that totally misunderstands the characters in the franchise the fans of whom the company is trying to hook into their platform. Though Angela mentions the 8-minute plot-explaining convos in every episode (“do they think we’re stupid?”) and that is a part of streaming philosophy–it’s called “second screen viewing”, that is to say they are expecting the audience to be on their phones and only half-paying attention, so characters have to announce what they will do, describe what they are doing when they are doing it, then talk about what they did after they did it. Yet, you can still have sensical plots and well drawn characters under that system.

          I’ll check out Morbid Zoo next.

          I sometimes think about never being able to see Guillermo del Toro’s Hobbit, and it makes me sad.

          • sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz
            1·
            3 days ago

            I think it was dry or the jokes weren’t just landing. I was way more picky and time constrained back then. Alright though, I’ll try it again tonight. My time is much way more open now

            Shorter seasons aren’t necessarily all bad. It’s more that every episode has to be written in specific ways to encourage people to binge-watch. That’s the form of consumption that Netflix has decided they prefer, since it increases the amount of time people decide they will spend on watching TV than if episodes were self-containes narratives like they more often used to be. But there’s also that second screen factor too, I cannot describe how insane that drives me. That has to be like a primal Art Sin to write anything like that. The time spent reiterating events doesn’t have to be filled with events, it could be just more contemplative or still and I would prefer it over ham fisted plot recaps. Maybe that’s just me though, if you don’t mind it that’s your business.

            Wow, finding out that there was going to be a Guillermo DT Hobbit and simultaneously that there never will be IS highly heartbreaking

            • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.worksOP
              2·
              3 days ago

              The pilot episode was, I think, mostly a sop to studio executives who greenlit the show as a comedy. But I think the second or third episode is a court procedural on human rights, so…

              I hate second screen and I don´t watch any show written for it expressly. Part of the fun of watching is, you know, watching, knowing what’s going on and why things are happening before you. It reminds me of when I would do an assignment, and the teacher would answer her own questions about it. Why did I do the homework if you’re just going to tell me the answer? Why hint at a character’s motivation with a pickle dish if they’re just going to announce why they’re doing the thing?

              I got away from episodic television in the past 10-or-so-years; the idea of sitting through 23-episode seasons of random stories is unbearable; but I appreciate the space it gives writers and actors (and audience) to get to know their setting and their characters. Thatś why I’m planning structured and selective re-watches, but, who knows.

              Sorry to drop that GdT factoid on you. I should be more selective in who I mention it to. It is a heavy burden not made lighter in the sharing.