JulieCMillay

JulieCMillay

Contributing writer for The Artifice.

Contributor I

  • Plebian Penman
  • Lurker
  • Pssst
  • Sharp-Eyed Citizen
  • ?
  • Articles
    4
  • Featured
    1
  • Comments
    18
  • Ext. Comments
    12
  • Processed
    12
  • Revisions
    8
  • Topics
    6
  • Topics Taken
    3
  • Notes
    9
  • Topics Proc.
    10
  • Topics Rev.
    0
  • Points
    578
  • Rank
    162
  • Score
    311

    Latest Articles

    Latest Topics

    8

    Why is Andy Warhol still so relevant?

    Even if you are not a huge art buff, you’ve probably heard the name Andy Warhol. Even if you have never heard his name you’ve probably seen his famous Marilyn or Campbell’s Soup masterpieces. He is a symbol of thinking outside the box, a symbol of creative energy, a symbol still idolized by some and relevant to many. What is it that makes this pop culture artist still so well known and influential to modern creatives and artisits?

    • As per Venus Echos' comment, since this topic has been previously written, how about looking into Warhol's continuing influence on contemporary artists and trace through-lines of his craft. – L Squared 2 months ago
      3
    • Warhol is indeed quite special. He is an intricate puzzle that only gets more confusing as you decipher him. It seems he is still so relevant today because of his self made character, and his seamless fusion with money. Warhol created a persona for himself that catapulted him to the top of the art world. His whole character can be seen as a performance art piece, bringing him more fame. Then the idea of money, often times the art world shuns the idea of money. Artists and critics like to think of artwork as being completely expressive or separate from money. Warhol's shameless branding and attitude towards money has to be inspiring to struggling artists. His phenomenal success as an artist combined with actually making good money, provides a framework that one can imagine most artists would like to pursue. – anton 1 month ago
      2
    • It seems you need more evidence and concrete examples here. What are some ways of illustrating that Warhol is "so well known and influential"? Without such evidence, it will be difficult to answer your question, because there is nothing specific to investigate. – PMGH 1 month ago
      1
    • If you want to write this article, there are a lot of helpful scholarly articles on JSTOR. But as an art student, Warhol is important to modern artists because he created a pathway for them. By changing images, using bold colors, making these out of the box things and using his background with what I believe is fashion or design, he made it possible for artists to do things they have never done before. They could re purpose images, change their color palettes to things that have never been used in the traditional sense and even look at using patterns and repetitious forms in their work. At least, that's what they teach us at school. – IAmToast 1 month ago
      1
    • Warhol is definitely still a huge presence in the history of modern art, but he's also widely reviled. I think it would be really interesting, maybe in an entirely separate essay, as Warhol's detractors. Who /doesn't/ like Warhol? And why? – JamesBKelley 1 month ago
      1
    7

    What is the greatest obstacle for feminist writer?

    Analyze what themes and challenges a feminist writer might endure when creating fiction or nonfiction. How do they skillfully educate the masses while still creating a story to win over even the most misogynistic in society?

    • Great topic. I wonder if writing with a male nom de plume/pseudonym is still helpful. – Munjeera 5 months ago
      3
    • "Educate the masses" implies that feminism is always 'correct'. Perhaps in its core tenants, but the term has been somewhat co-opted today... I don't know if it's logically coherent to assume one's ideology is of ultimate educational authority? Like, perhaps from another's point of view the so-called masses need no education, and to them this is the ultimate truth. Point being: ideologies can never logically be 'true,' because morally-based (unscientific) truth is essentially subjective. – m-cubed 5 months ago
      4
    • m-cubed, you're misunderstanding the topic proposal if you think it is about saying one side is right. It is about educating people on a subject that they may not have otherwise been subjected to because of previous idealogical belief. Your words:"from another's point of view the so-called masses need no education, and to them this is the ultimate truth." Translation: Some people believe the acquisition of new knowledge or points of view is unimportant so therefore it should be. I simply disagree and I'd assume many people who write for this online magazine would too. Your comment makes the point as to why it needs to be written about.We can debate the philosophical meaning of truth all day and night, but the bottom line is feminism exists and is an important topic. It remains contemporaneous and relevant to many, many social movements today. Unsurprisingly, it has found its way into the literature we read. – JulieCMillay 5 months ago
      4
    • One of the major challenges is to present a plausible, or at least imaginable, alternative to patriarchy. I think Ursula Le Guin is a great example of a feminist writer who does just this in a way that is engaging and not preachy. – SFG 5 months ago
      2
    • I think it depends on how they identify: female, WOC, LGBTQIA+ and disabled feminist writers are often met with abuse/threats and ignorance... however, when a male (typically cisgender and white) feminist writer conveys similar messages, he isn't met with abuse (at least not to the extent she does), and is hailed as a champion of women's rights/the greater good. Watching that unfold can be daunting and prevent a feminist writer from wanting to publish their work. – stephameye 5 months ago
      3
    • I think the problem m-cubed has articulated about "educate the masses" relates to the idea of truth. For many years, the canon of literature was dominated by White, male Eurocentric men. Having said that, there were women who were accepted under a male pseudonym which reinforces patriarchy. Patriarchy and novels that support androcentric protagonists were always valued and seen as the only voice. With online writing though, we really have no idea who the writer is unless revealed. I think one way barriers have been reduced is by online access which is one reason I love theArtifice so much. – Munjeera 5 months ago
      2
    • "How do they skillfully educate the masses while still creating a story to win over even the most misogynistic in society?" Include believable and well-rounded female characters in your fiction - whether as a protagonist or as an antagonist write them as real people, reveal their humanity and show that women in fiction can be just as cool, or cruel, as the male characters. Show the misogynists that we all have an inate humanity, we all have strengths and we all have weaknesses. Show them that men and women work better together as a team, that society can be farer and more equal - and that society will be all the better for it. – Peter Guy Blacklock 3 months ago
      2
    • 'Educating the masses' is a rather unfortunate choice of term, perhaps. No-one wants to read didactic literature in this day and age. – JudyPeters 3 months ago
      1
    • Ah, a highly interesting and timely topic! I can think of a few challenges right off the top of my head. It'll be fascinating to see what a writer comes up with. – Stephanie M. 3 months ago
      1
    1

    Why is the public enthralled by Christopher Nolan?

    He has directed some of the most popular movies known to the American public/around the world in the last decade; so what is it about his directing style that keeps raking in audiences by the millions?

    • Nolan's pretty strong on auteur theory, good choice! – m-cubed 6 months ago
      0
    • I think a key feature of his films is that he tends to focus on the psychology of the human mind; what are its extents and limitations, why and how it thinks certain ways. And to audiences, I think that many find it unique and refreshing that he is creating major Hollywood films that deal with something so cerebral ( which is not as common amongst the majority of big budget Hollywood pictures) That could be an angle to take – Yanni 6 months ago
      1
    • JulieCMiliay,Hello again.As you pointed out, Christopher Nolan is without a doubt one of the most financially successful directors working today, and in my opinion, he deserves the praise. While this is a bit of a cheap way to make suggestions, I think it's best to simply write some pros and cons about him in order to be fair in critiquing his work while also appreciating it.First the negative:1. He isn't all that original. While many say that his movies are different and break off from most movies, the bulk of his work isn't actually original material. He's made 10 movies thus far (I'm counting Dunkirk though it hasn't been released), and only 4 of them are original (Following, Inception, Interstellar, and Dunkirk). The others are as follows: Memento is an adaptation of his brother's short story Memento Mori; Insomnia is a remake of an Icelandic movie of the same name; The Dark Knight trilogy is, obviously, an adaptation of the Batman comics; and The Prestige is an adaptation of a novel of the same name by Christopher Priest. While he is definitely an exciting director, his material usually comes from someone else. 2. Sometimes he isn't much of a craftsman, especially when it comes to editing. I'd recommend watching some videos on Nolan's editing and see for yourself how it can get a bit confusing to tell what's going on, especially during action scenes.And that's about all I can think of, really. Now the positive:1. He's a classy director. His movies don't rely on swearing, graphic depictions of sex or violence, or controversial subjects in order to get an audience. 2. He's a spectacular director. His movies are often grand in scope and, more importantly, they rarely involve CGI. The majority of the effects in his movies are practical and as such make the scenery all the more vivid. 3. His movies are, as Yanni said, interested in making the audience think. More often than not (at least in my case), I find myself thinking about his movies long after I've seen them because of the ideas presented and because of how they were presented.I hope these observations help.Thanks for your time, August – August Merz 5 months ago
      1
    • It would be good to see 'Dunkirk' also included in this analysis. – Vishnu Unnithan 4 months ago
      1
    • They once asked Plautus how he so perfectly knew the culture and as an immigrant to Rome from southern Italay, read Jewish and Italian, how he has so many hits to a roman audience. Make Sure that the theatergoer is the same person at the epilogue as he is at the ovation, especially when writing for the upper crust, and He said 'Know thy audience'. a Latin line reechoed in Groucho at that machers funeral, give the people what they want. – Antonius865 4 months ago
      0
    2

    Are superhero movies being overdone?

    In the last few years there have been an influx of superhero movies and they have subsequently dominated the box office. The pro-comic book inspired attitude is fairly recent but not necessarily new in terms of fandom. Things like comic-con have been going on for years, but lately they taken taken on epic proportions. Why our society crave and eat up the classic comic hero’s journey again and again and again?

    • Yes, they are but I love them anyway. – Munjeera 5 months ago
      2
    • Yes, the are, but I mostly dislike them anyway. An exception is the new Wonder Woman movie, which my daughter and I enjoyed quite a bit. – Ben Hufbauer 5 months ago
      0
    • Hi Ben,What about Captain America: Winter Soldier? You can't hate Captain America can you? What about Black Panther? I am waiting with bated breath for BP. The music from the trailer sounds awesome. The best soundtrack yet I am guessing. – Munjeera 5 months ago
      0
    • Perhaps you could discuss history f superhero fandoms and the fandoms about the superhero franchises generally. – J.D. Jankowski 5 months ago
      0
    • They're the popular way to tell the heroes journey. They're importance varies from character to character, but at the very least they'll have a solid core emotional story to them. They can be pretty simple as well. Ant-man has a nice father daughter theme in it. The Sam Raimi Spider-man films have "with great power comes great responsibility" down to a t. Also, if you're just talking about their monetary success, it's pretty simple: kids. – KyleThomson 5 months ago
      1
    • Quite broad. As others have noted, the big-ticket superheroes today have disparate origins, purposes, and journeys. The "superhero" movie subgenre might deserve some questions, but whoever wanted to tackle the questions would need to establish the themes common to the superhero journey and the outliers to those themes. That is, do *Deadpool,* *Guardians of the Galazy Vol. 2,* and *Wonder Woman* offer parallel themes? If so, what are they? – Paul A. Crutcher 5 months ago
      1
    • I think we have become obsessed with superheroes because we lack real heroes. Heroes in the past have fallen and it seems as if there is a disappointed generation out there. Also, these are scary times. Is it any wonder we take solace in the idea that someone will rescue us from ourselves? – Munjeera 5 months ago
      3
    • Every new interpretation, every re watch and every new instalment brings with it excitement, apprehension and familiarity. whats wrong with craving a bit of hope, humour and strength? – miaraszewski 5 months ago
      0
    • Superhero movies can be considered to be over the top and overdone. But before applying a binary yes no response to this questions, I think it would be helpful to examine this from a different paradigm. If we look at the geo-political state of the world over the last 15-20 years, things have been rapidly declining. Superhero movies offer what the real world cannot - a form of escapism that is affordable, relatable and has generated a lot of buy-in from fandom the world over. Lets be honest, we have all wished for some type of supernatural ability or power at some point in our lives to help us deal with a real world issue we were dealing with in the hopes that it would solve the problem and we would emerge victorious. We have all fantasied and wished for it at some point. Superhero movies are an extension of that inherent wish/fantasy. It is appealing to us to see average people go through a transition of some kind (spider bite/gamma radiation exposure/ being born on another planet/ or a genius tech billionaire) and able to overcome adversity of all types. – mattcarlin 5 months ago
      1
    • Not at all! Movies such as superhero movies, activates our imagination to believe the most unimaginable scenarios. For the duration of that movie, we forget the rules of reality and get absorbed in another world, where we are not limited by our human potential. We are indeed able to explore feeling extraordinary. – poojanair 5 months ago
      1
    • Superhero movies to me do not activate the imagination. Rather they are are a reinforcement of everything that is wrong with the world (fictional or not). This is why most superhero movies are being set in the modern real world. Granted, movies like batman etc who make up their own dystopian world are the exception, but look at captain america and the fact it was set it WW2 their battle with hydra. This is drawing an abstract parallel to the political state of Germany and Europe at the time. Then fast forward to modern day, we are still fighting racists, biggots and other closed minded people. Superpower or no, this still has the ability to be subversive and abusive to people. – mattcarlin 5 months ago
      0
    • I gave up on superhero movies after CA:Civil War. Gone are the good old days of old where we had one Batman/Spidey film every 2-3 years. – Vishnu Unnithan 4 months ago
      0
    0

    Whitman and his Wit

    Speak to the impact Walt Whitman had on the poetry community and perhaps bring forth a discussion as to why he either does or does not remain relevant today in our fact-based, romance-lacking society.

    • Some clarification on what is meant here by "his Wit" would be nice. If you're using this term to discuss the use of humor/sharpness/jest in his poetry, then why does the below content of your topic make no reference to these traits? An argument can certainly be made that his wit has contributed to his continued relevance, but it would be nice to see that directly posited as a proper jumping-off point for the article. I get the appeal of wordplay, but it only works if you acknowledge its relation to the actual discussion at hand. Just my two cents. – ProtoCanon 5 months ago
      0
    1
    Pending

    Modern Day Films vs. Oldies?

    It can be said that modern day films are often paced much differently than films from older generations. Everything from the dialogue to plot controversy to conflict resolution; all these ingredients that make good story telling possible are often timed differently in newer films as opposed to older films.

    Why is that and how come most popular contemporary films adhere to this same, rather fast pace formula of storytelling?

    • I would create a stronger definition for "modern popular contemporary films," perhaps in a specific genre or by a particular director who worked in both eras? – m-cubed 6 months ago
      2
    • I would give an example to illustrate your point here. I think it is a good topic though. – birdienumnum17 6 months ago
      0
    • I like this topic and believe it has potential. Could you add a few examples? – Munjeera 6 months ago
      0
    • JulieCMiliay,I think if you were to write on this topic, you would have to explore what it was that each kind of movie had that other didn't. On the one hand, modern movies are with out a doubt more spectacular than old movies. The special effects involved in modern movies are absolutely breathtaking and imaginative. On the other hand, older movies tended to, in my opinion, have better storylines. Most movies nowadays are either sequels, remakes, or reboots; go back 40 years or so, and you'll see that while there were still a noticeable amount of adaptations, most of the movies were original. Go back even further, to the Golden Age which started at the tail end of the 30s and went into the 50s (or shoot, why not go all the way back to the 20s when guys like Chaplin and Keaton were big), and you'd see that all those movies are original.You could also argue that older movies didn't have to rely on cheap thrills, raunchy humor, and pornographic scenes in order to get an audience.Come to think of it, I would recommend that perhaps you shouldn't bundle up old movies and new movies; rather go genre by genre. So are older comedies/sci-fi/action movies/dramas better than newer ones? This way, I think you'd avoid making one huge blanket decision that obscures how modern movies could, in some ways, be better than others.Thanks for your time, August – August Merz 5 months ago
      0
    1

    Does the hero's journey ever fully encompass a true human experience?

    Since the beginning of language man has entertained himself with storytelling. These anecdotal stories and most popular chronicles at that usually follow the same exact ‘hero’s journey’ formula. But does this form ever truly encompass humanity? We are constantly exposed to the hero’s journey and the outcomes of the triumph of one side or another (good or evil, man vs. Nature ect), but does humanity exclude the reality of the accurate human experience for the sake of mass amusement? Analyze why the hero’s journey could possibly not truly represent the nature of humanity and why this particular set of storytelling guidelines translates so well to an mass audience who will most likely never amount to heroic status.

    • I think the hero's journey is flexible enough to encompass the human experience because a character doesn't necessarily have to make it full circle. There are many stories where the hero isn't able to overcome the tests he meets in the underworld - and he doesn't come back with a boon to society. A happy ending is not obligatory in the hero's journey - it's just that the hero *might* come back.Yet, at the same time, even with an unhappy ending, the cycle reminds us of what might have been or of what was possible, if that makes sense. – LisaDee 1 year ago
      0
    • I agree that cliche is such a damning critque. – sktthemes 1 year ago
      0

    Sorry, no tides are available. Please update the filter.

    Latest Comments

    JulieCMillay

    Very well written piece. I think I will just always adore the original show the best, but I loved your take on it as well! Great article!

    Star Trek: Discovery: Why We Shouldn't Start Panicking Just Yet
    JulieCMillay

    Such an interesting and fresh take on these pieces, thank you for all you explanations. I found your article very engaging and extremely educational.

    Picasso's Guernica: 80 Years Later
    JulieCMillay

    Thank you so much an thanks for the read! 🙂

    Christopher Nolan's Memento: A Philosophical Consciousness Debate
    JulieCMillay

    That seems like a cool idea to explore too! I always understood his killing/revenge as a continuance of self, diabolically speaking, that acts out because of the grief Lenny simply refuses to accept. I think it’s less about catharsis and more about him perpetually distracting himself from the one fact he never wants to have to face, even in his fleeting realities: that HE is the one who killed the wife he loved so much.

    Christopher Nolan's Memento: A Philosophical Consciousness Debate
    JulieCMillay

    Good one! 🙂 haha thanks for the read !

    Christopher Nolan's Memento: A Philosophical Consciousness Debate
    JulieCMillay

    I mean I wrote a whole article on it so obviously I love the movie, however I totally understand where you are coming from. I do think you should give the movie another watch, perhaps after reading this article once more, to get a fuller experience as Lenny himself and the truly psychological journey of his person. It is almost too easy to watch these scenes as chopped up, confusing scenarios that leave no resonating mark, but I really do think it’s all about exposure to the deeper meaning of this seemingly trivial story.

    To be honest, I did not love this movie after the first watch either. It was after the second viewing that it definitely became a favorite.

    Thanks for your comment and thanks for reading!!

    Christopher Nolan's Memento: A Philosophical Consciousness Debate
    JulieCMillay

    I loved Nancy Drew as a child as well. Great comparisons!! Really liked the overall message and writing style. Awesome job!

    Minds That Matter: Women Of Lore
    JulieCMillay

    This was such an insightful stance, I really enjoyed the article!! Great topic and great execution on your commentary.

    Can Homosexuals Save the Roman Epic From CGI?