Whether or not it’s "spooky season," the horror genre has hordes of devotees, and well it should. Horror gives us a safe outlet for facing our fears, exploring our inner demons, and pitting our inner heroes against some of the most frightening scenarios ever conceived in creators’ minds. Whether in books, in film, on the stage, or in some other medium, horror has earned its place as a revered genre.
However, the 21st century has exposed a particular underbelly of horror: ableism. Many if not most horror villains either have some sort of disfigurement or disability, or can be read or "coded" as such. Frankenstein’s monster is a reanimated, grotesque corpse who speaks and acts like a caricature of an intellectually disabled man. The impetus for Dracula and vampires came from sufferers of porphyria, a fairly rare disease still poorly understood. Several seasons of American Horror Story, notably Asylum and Freak Show, paint disabled characters as frightening or grotesque if not outright villainous; at best, these characters are pitiable. The recent TV series Changeling centers on a demonic being whose changeling status has been compared to autism for centuries. Stephen King’s disabled horror characters aren’t villains, but are stereotypes, and pop up in almost all his novels.
These examples might tempt us to "cancel" horror altogether, and certainly, the ableism within warrants serious discussion. But is there a way to stay true to the horror genre in coming years without sacrificing its conventions (e.g., updating classics to the point of unrecognizability)? Can a form of "new horror" decry ableism while bringing true dignity to coded disabled characters, or characters who are shunned or feared? Discuss.
I'm not sure I'd say that ableism is a problem in all horror genres, but it's definitely a reoccurring issue especially when it comes to monsters - though some also pull on other negative stereotypes, like Dracula as a European foreigner. I definitely think this is an interesting topic! – AnnieEM1 month ago
Do they follow similar patterns or is one typically more successful than the other? What have you noticed about the reception from fans for each type of adaptation? Why do you think these results have occurred?
Hmm... interesting subject, but I'd add more explanation as to why this topic is in need of an analysis and reflexion. – Beaucephalis7 months ago
This could be an interesting subject! Though I feel like the fact that anime is episodic and longer than a movie would make the comparison a little odd - in some ways, I feel manga to anime vs book to tv show could be a more apt comparison. While the latter isn't as common, I feel the differences in the length of a single movie vs a series makes comparing the two in a productive way a little harder. It the comparison being more about the mediums for their structural differences in length rather than being about adaption. There's also a lot of factors here that can influence the difference between manga to anime vs book to film/tv show - the strengths and limitations and costs of animation vs live action, the nature of prose vs manga/comics as a medium, and of course cultural differences between the places making these movies and anime. – AnnieEM5 months ago
I think this is an interesting topic. Though I'd argue that these are a very large categories to explore, which could make analysis challenging. – Sean Gadus2 months ago
Fascinating Topic! I feel that in terms of visual aesthetic Manga to Anime is more closely affiliated when compared to book adaptations. With Manga, one is clear as to how a character looks whereas with books oftentimes the cast is completely different from their on-page persona. That difference could be worth exploring within this topic. – Eeshita2 months ago
As a musician, composer, and producer, it is essential to explore the following aspects when delving into the multifaceted identity of Min Yoongi/Suga/Agust D:
Artistic Evolution: Trace the evolution of Min Yoongi’s musical journey, highlighting the growth and transformation of his artistic style and sound. Explore how his diverse musical influences and experimentation have contributed to the layers within his creative identity.
Genre Fluidity: Investigate Min Yoongi’s ability to navigate and excel in different musical genres. Explore how he seamlessly transitions between rap, hip-hop, R&B, and other genres, showcasing his versatility as a musician and pushing boundaries within the industry.
Personal Narrative: Unveil the personal narrative and introspective themes that Min Yoongi explores through his music. Examine how his lyrics and compositions reflect his own experiences, emotions, and perspectives. Explore themes such as self-reflection, vulnerability, and resilience.
Producer’s Perspective: Highlight Min Yoongi’s role as a producer and the impact he has on shaping the artistic direction of his music. Explore his creative process, collaborative efforts, and production techniques, shedding light on how he brings his vision to life.
Social Commentary: Investigate Min Yoongi’s ability to use his platform to address social issues and deliver impactful messages through his music. Examine how he tackles topics like mental health, societal pressures, and cultural identity, offering a voice to those who may feel unheard.
By exploring these aspects, you can delve into the rich and intricate layers of Min Yoongi/Suga/Agust D’s artistic identity. Emphasize the diverse range of skills, experiences, and perspectives that contribute to his multifaceted nature as a musician, composer, and producer.
Occasionally, a music artist will release a song that is deemed unsuitable for radio play in its current form. It might contain profanity or profane subject material, have undesired instrumentation, or simply be too long for the radio to play. A new version of the song will be created as a "radio edit" that alters the original to meet governmental standards. These changes can range from inconsequential, like replacing one profane word with a sound effect, to substantial, such as replacement lyrics that completely change the original meaning of the song. Famous radio edits include Cee Lo Green’s "Forget You," d-12’s "Purple Hills," and Everlast’s "What’s It Like."
Usually these edits are not made by the artists themselves but by their record labels, broadcasters at the corporate level, or even individual radio stations. Whether minor or major, these changes produce a product that is not what the artist envisioned without the artists’ input. Without these changes, these songs would not play on the radio or in spaces that must abide by government guidelines relating to content standards. Is the radio edit process a necessary evil to becoming a successful artist? Or is the act of altering art in order to conform to public sensibilities harmful to the role of art in our contemporary culture that constantly encourages us to "express yourself?" Especially in the era of the internet and the seemingly endless ways to create and distribute art outside traditional distribution institutions, should corporations compromising an artist’s intended vision to please the masses be considered a malicious act? Or should this new-found freedom provided by the internet encourage society to support art as the artist creates it, even if it offends?
This is a fascinating point in the process of musical production that not many people consider. Much like the Hayes code of early Hollywood, such censorship can seem extreme and archaic in a modern society that no longer requires major industries to support success. The examples you give are telling ones since it's easy to classify which genres are more censored compared to others, which could be an interesting aspect to explore. This practice of radio edits may be a hangover of a previous era since tiktok seems to be the predominant platform dominating the music market today. Exploring the alternatives (youtube, tiktok, instagram etc.), which genres or artists are targeted, and the origins for WHY such edits were made, could be a good division of the topic.
– LadyAcademia2 years ago
This is such an interesting thought! As a lifelong hater of radio edits, I’ve never thought of it this way - I would look into which artists get censored the most and their similarities (if any). – kelleykilgore2 years ago
It's also interesting to think of what music never lent itself to radio edits to begin with, and what music was particularly pushed into it. The metro area I'm from has a radio station which used to have a motto "All the best hits, without the rap." For the most part it was true, the station played pop music by all sorts of artists. But when Macklemore's Thrift Shop became big, the station played it, despite the song featuring rap... Race and politics clearly play a role in determining what music is deemed "appropriate", a role that for the most part likely goes unseen and unacknowledged, just as many people observe never thinking of the impact of radio edits.
On a somewhat different note, I only recently discovered the song "I Dig Rock and Roll" by Peter, Paul, and Mary. For those unfamiliar with it, it seems to celebrate Rock and Roll while actually mocking it. It has a lyric incredibly relevant to this topic - "I think I could say something if you know what I mean/But if I really say it, the radio won't play it/Unless I lay it between the lines!" Very interesting lyric, it's stuck with me! – ronannar1 year ago
I agree that this topic is fascinating. I have never really thought about it, but just reading through the idea and the comments has me thinking of different ways things are edited and how heavily (and how times we might not know it because at some point we'd only ever heard it on the radio). Could be arguments that it's helped in cases, as well? Something like Let's Get It Started? How would that have been played in so many places without an edit? (And I suppose, is that right or wrong?) – rieder211 year ago
Throughout the years following the publication of the novel, the character of Carmilla has influenced popular culture in a way that it’s been used a lot of times. Some writers have even written a sequel to the original novel, whilst others have included the iconic character in other forms of media; films, television, video games, comics.
Carmilla’s character seems iconic in the way that she seems to represent a symbol of Gothic literature and the Gothic genre in general, on the same level as Dracula. She is depicted differently in other forms of media, so much that her lore seems to evolve from one author to another. Even her personality varies, depending on how she’s meant to fit in the media that wishes to see her in another way. For example, the 2000 Japanese movie "Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust" has depicted Carmilla as a noble vampire that was known for her vain and gluttonous tyranny by bathing herself in the blood of virgins. She’d even been named the "Bloody Countess" as a result. Her acts had disgusted Dracula so much that he’d destroyed her himself.
It’s quite a far cry from Carmilla’s original depiction. But somehow, she fits the tone wanted by the author.
Why would other artists choose to depict Carmilla as differently as possible? Examine the reasons why her character has such a great influence in popular culture to the point that she needs to be modified to fit in the tone of another story.
The slogan "art for art’s sake" arose in the 19th century with the core ethos being that art, true art is divorced, separated, alien from function, any and all functions.
But with this philosophy, there is room for critique, after all nothing is created in a bubble and artists are influenced by their society and as such so are their works.
Does art always have a message? Should it?
Many Marxist thinkers would argue art must have a meaning and purpose but even non-Marxists have levied criticism at this school of thought.
Is Art for Art’s sake a philosophy that is unfairly maligned? Is it a cynical defense from critique?
I think it’s also interesting to explore when we define that someone is to be considered an artist. As we age it’s much more difficult to explore things separated from fiction but as children there is a much more free exploration of art that is disconnected from our adult analysis. Is this something we are only able to harness in childhood? If so, is “art for arts sake” something we are trying to reconnect with in adulthood? – Denise Zubizarreta9 months ago
If one were to write about this topic, I believe they would absolutely need to mention Oscar Wilde. In the preface to Picture of Dorian Gray, he writes that "all art is quite useless". By trying to give a spin to the word "useless" -- and make it a word that doesn't necessarily have a negative connotation -- he responds to the idea that art should have a purpose, and instead suggests that it can simply be purposeful for its aesthetic qualities. I therefore don't believe that "art fort art's sake" is merely a cynical defense from critique. It simply asks you to critique it under different criteria! – chloew9 months ago
When I hear the phrase 'Art for art's sake' I think of two people: James Hampton and Henry Darger--the former not to be confused with James Hampton the actor (who plays Dad Wolf in Teen Wolf), and the latter not to be confused with Jeffrey Dahmer. These two persued making art that they seemingly never intended to show to anyone; the art they constructed had no audience, no person in mind. James built religious inspired structures out of trash, the finished products of which he kept in a rented garage. No one else laid eyes on his creations until he passed away and his landlord found them. His works are now kept in the Smithsonian American Art Museum. Henry Darger wrote a 15,145-page novel accompanied by extremely detailed images and tracings he made himself. His works were not discovered until shortly before his death, oddly enough, ALSO by his landlords (there's no significance to the landlord thing, just coincidence... I hope). This all goes to say that this could be a pretty interesting avenue for an interpretation of 'Art for art's sake' to take a stroll down. I'm cringing DEEP into myself for what I'm about to type but, in a world where the ability to share everything we create is democratised so that audiences are readily available to consume it, stories about outliers such as these call into question the very purpose of art itself. So, that doesn't really answer the question 'can you really have art for art?'. But I think the question James and Henry tease out is 'without an audience can art even exist?' – JM7 months ago
Disney’s Frozen burst into our theaters and onto our small screens in 2013, and no one has "let it go" since. The film became a franchise, with rumors of a third installment coming in 2023 or later. But Frozen is not the only wintry tale media consumers love. "Winter tales" can be found across mediums, from TV series like Game of Thrones whose tagline is "Winter is Coming," to a plethora of books with titles like The Snow Child, WinterFrost, and Girls Made of Snow and Glass. Many of today’s super-powered or "chosen one" protagonists also have winter-related powers; Queen Elsa might be the most obvious, but there is also Jack Frost from Rise of the Guardians, as well as Freya from Snow White and the Huntsman.
Winter permeates the arts, no matter the season. Yet what is it about this season, out of four, that captures the imagination of writers, filmmakers, and other artists? Analyze a few prevalent winter tales across mediums, looking for commonalities among characters, character arcs, plot threads, powers, and more. Could the other three seasons garner this kind of attention, and if yes, what would it take to make that happen? Are artists, authors, and others who craft "winter tales" trying to make a statement about their art, themselves, or humanity through winter? If yes, what is it? Discuss.
Maybe write more about your thoughts? Answer some of the questions you ask? – Thorn9 months ago
The writings on winter here may include analysis of well-known as well as lesser known poems and songs on winter. Winter is an interesting topic for writing, even to those living in hotter places like mine. – Anvar Sadhath8 months ago
With the rise of virtual influencers like Lil Miquela and Bermuda, brands are increasingly turning to computer-generated characters to promote their products on social media. These virtual avatars are popular with younger generations who are more likely to trust and engage with them than traditional human influencers. However, there are ethical concerns surrounding the use of virtual influencers, such as transparency and authenticity. This article will explore the pros and cons of virtual influencers, and examine what their increasing popularity means for the future of advertising and influencer marketing.