I’d figure that an analysis on ambiguous ends in literature seems to warrant some serious thought.I’d like somebody to write about the psychology related to an open-ended plot..Movies could do as well.Anime is also an option
Do you have specific works in mind? Choosing some might help anchor the topic. – Stephanie M.4 years ago
Before We Go is a great movie with an ambiguous ending. – Munjeera4 years ago
Like the ending in Kidnapped or David Copperfield? – RedFlame20004 years ago
Looks good under the topic of writing as the discussion could be the value of an ambiguous ending using various examples of how it works in various mediums. – Munjeera4 years ago
Before We Go is a Chris Evans movie about two people who meet in New York. He is on his way to connect us with the love of his life who has become an old flame and she is deciding to end her marriage. I can't say the ending because it will be a spoiler but the ending is ambiguous. Unusual for a romantic comedy. – Munjeera4 years ago
An ambiguous ending to a novel will undoubtedly leave open the window to future renditions. Even in a happy-ending scenario, there is potential for reversal of fortune (leading to another compilation). There is always the possibility that the reader massaged the original plot into a flavor consistent to their unique palate; one the author could conceivably exploit into several more chapters, or sequels. An unresolved ending builds the kind of tension and momentum that brings loyal readership back to the watering hole, so to speak. That is not to say that critics won't take notice either, for ambiguity fuels their ire as well. – lofreire4 years ago
Damn! You beat me to it. I was going to suggest a very similar topic. On a personal note, I rather enjoy ambiguous endings or those that credit the audience with enough intelligence to work things out for themselves. We are all too often given spoon-fed answers that discourage us from thinking...and we are a thinking species after all! – Amyus4 years ago
Are ambiguous endings sometimes done so as to leave the way open for a sequel? Or it can be a sci-fi device... – JudyPeters4 years ago
Consider why YouTube channels discussing "tea" have become so popular nowadays. Are they the modern-day version of gossip magazines? What does this say about the viewers, who watch these daily videos speculating on people’s lives and actions? Why do these videos get so many views?
This would be a fantastic article. I've been thinking about this recently too. I think it pertains to the idea that we are all now 'journalists' and 'media outlets' in our own right. I think it's also rooted in celebrity culture and the rise of the 'reality TV star'. Which gets complicated when the 'TV' show is actually hosted on a Youtube channel and the director is also the star of the show. I think they're so popular because we love to build people up and then tear them down. And it's kind of like high school x 10000. We get to watch the popular kids self-destruct and the cliques we're not allowed into fall to pieces. – LottieWoods1 year ago
The idea of YouTube drama channels as the modern-day version of gossip magazines is quite a useful way of describing the phenomenon. I think it helps explain their popularity in terms of their turn-over rates when it comes to addressing stories/rumours. Viewers are able to consume content at a faster rate and the YouTube drama channels are able to address 'tea' more instantaneously, unlike tabloids, which have a far less flexible publishing schedule. However, the consequence is that content creators are much more incentivised to go looking for drama and 'tea to spill' in order to churn out as much content as possible in order to maintain an audience for their channel. – KatieR1 year ago
As someone who likes tea videos, i find it's popular simply because of the drama.
Although I think all Tea videos should start adding a message for the reason of making the video not just because it's a cool story to tell. Natalia Taylor does this the best. Her videos always have some moral or some warnings for the benefits of her audience. Either to warn us about the red flags she missed or spreading the word about a certain issue. – Amelia Arrows1 year ago
This is a really cool topic! I have definitely fallen victim to this cycle, where you end up watching three separate videos on a beauty guru you don't know, and they all say the same things. It is almost like a FOMO (fear-of-missing-out) effect where you want to know what's going on and pick your side based on the 10-minute video. – Sammy1011 year ago
I think to understand this aspect of modern day culture we have to look at the circumstances surrounding this time. We live in a age where everyone can see what everyone else is doing most of the day. Some social media apps such as snapchat even allow for location tracking. When you are a fan of a particular you tuber and so often this youtube "tea spilling" involves creators who you are a fan of there is also a aspect of tribalism involved. – Aidan1 month ago
Family sitcoms, also known as domestic comedies or dom coms, have existed since Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best, and My Three Sons, which aired around the 1950s. In the ensuing 70 years, the family sitcom underwent plenty of growth and change. Simple domestic problems that could be solved in 22 minutes with commercials gave way to edgier and more realistic family-centered plotlines. Traditional nuclear families made room for single, adoptive, LGBTQ , and other "non-traditional" parents (ex.: Henry Warnamont of Punky Brewster, a bachelor senior citizen, or the grown-up incarnations of Stephanie Tanner and Kimmy Gibbler, who raise their kids while raising others’ in the same house as their patriarchs did before them.
Examine the evolution of the family sitcom using a few of your favorites. You can discuss changes in family dynamics or plotlines (e.g., plotlines about keeping virginity vs. plotlines about teen pregnancy, plotlines about avoiding racism vs. ones about becoming inclusive). You could discuss race, religion, disability, or other minority statuses as topics that are getting more attention. Other topics might include the parenting styles presented on different shows, how the humor has evolved, the expectations placed on adults and children, and so on.
An analysis of various representations of transgender women found in Anime. What worked, what didn’t, and what made people go "eh, good enough."
The article might specifically bring up the prevalence of characters who are addressed with he/him pronouns by other characters but still refer to themselves as women (IE: Hibari Ōzora from "Stop!!! Hibari-Kun!" or Grell Sutcliff from "Black Butler"), or characters who are referred to as ‘crossdressers’ (Ryoji Fujioka from "Ouran Host Club" or Chihiro Fujisaki from "Danganronpa"). It can discuss where these characters are harmful or helpful.
It could also discuss characters who are canonically, unambiguously trans women (such as Lily Hoshikawa from "Zombieland Saga") and how well or poorly that representation is handled.
Other discussion points might be the context of which these characters are included, how impactful they are on the plot, whether their portrayal is sympathetic or predatory, and why these portrayals occur.
How do you define "what worked, what didn't, and what made people go "eh, good enough.""? Do you think this would be the same as stereotyping transgender women in Anime? – Ka Man Chung2 months ago
Grell is a very strange character in a very strange series.
By any chance, are you going to bring up Nitori from Wandering Son? – OkaNaimo08192 months ago
I haven't watched Wonder Egg Priority (and don't plan on doing so), but I've heard there's a bit of good representation for trans characters. I know there's a canon trans boy, and I believe Momoe is a gender-nonconforming trans girl? I think there's something to be said about trans representation that doesn't adhere to strict gendered fashion or dress (all good things). I believe Momoe is regarded as good trans girl representation but I could be wrong. – Alyss1 month ago
In many sitcoms, characters often suffer the consequences of job precariousness. This includes being underpaid, taking jobs they hate, or losing their jobs altogether. Almost the entire cast of Friends, Jess from New Girl, Britta or Jeff from Community, or the Roses from Schitt’s Creek are just some examples.
An article looking at how these scenarios play out in T.V. could be an insightful read. Are they accurate depictions of real life, or do they diminish the real-world anxiety of this aspect of life? Is it enough to simply allude to homelessness or not being able to make rent, or should a show force its characters to endure this? You could offer a comparison of shows that do this well and shows that, perhaps, do not do this so well.
You could offer an assessment regarding the impact this has on viewers, and contextualise the shows within both their setting and time of release.
It would be worth expanding this topic to examine and analyse similar scenarios in sitcoms from around the world. In this way, a comparison could be made between varying cultural values and institutional attitudes towards low paid workers. – Amyus7 months ago
I think contextualizing the shows based on time of release is a good idea. Specifically, comparing the perception of unemployment in shows through every decade or during periods of financial downturn could be particularly interesting. – huiwong6 months ago
It is interesting how you pay attention to this specific feature in sitcoms. Writers might also look into how job precariousness help to develop the plot, to make the plot fitting to sitcoms. – Heather Ka Man Chung2 months ago
I have noticed that it seems far more of an element where the characters are if a grittier sort of Everyman: someone more working class. This would not be so much in The Fresh Prince of Bel Air (for example). – J.D. Jankowski2 months ago
Good one! I just submitted a topic about how sitcoms evolve in general, and this could be part of that or an article on its own. – Stephanie M.2 months ago
This is so interesting. I think building off of Amyus and Huiwong's comment, it is really interesting to think of in the context of the working class. You could go at this through a lens of the levels of realism in character being fine without jobs, getting jobs easily, or living at a comfort level well of the range of their job. These are all obvious but it would be interesting to look at the way unemployment in the times of covid have given higher stakes for viewers watching this sitcom. – skruse3 weeks ago
This article explores the life and writings of a reclusive giant in twentieth century literature, Juan Rulfo. While authoring only one novel, _Pedro Páramo_, and one short story collection , _El llano en llamas_, Rulfo achieved extreme fame and admiration from other writers such as Jorge Luis Borges and established himself as a pivotal influence on Gabriel García Márquez. This text will address and analyze the basic plot and themes of Rulfo’s work, and educate readers on a lesser known great Mexican author.
Aspects of Rulflo’s Pedro Paramo to consider, The:
1.)environment where the story takes place. A brief overview of Mexican geography, culture, literary history, Catholicism/purgatory, and the Day of the Dead.
2.)disjointed and fragmentary nature of time which adds to the dreamlike quality of the novel.
3.) lack of chapters and signifiers of who is speaking, forcing the reader to fill in the missing information on their own.
While reading the novel, you will probably see how all of these themes intersect and amplify each other.
Regarding the influence of Rulfo on García Márquez, it would be good to look into what García Márquez himself said about Rulfo and his writings. There are also parallels that can be drawn between Rulfo’s town of Comala and Marquez’ town Mercado. These are just recommendations and are by no means definitive guidelines. It would be best for you to use your own discretion and aesthetic discrimination while exploring and contemplating these great texts.
Hi, J.D. thank you for the feedback. I think MLA style guide says to use _ in digital environments where italics are unavailable. I attached a link as an example of this advice:
https://style.mla.org/underscore-instead-of-italics/ – kurtz3 months ago
TV show ‘Resident Alien’ is new this year from Sci-fi. The premise concerns an alien who crashes to Earth in a remote Colorado mountain town and assumes the identity of the town doctor.
The TV show on the surface is a wacky comedy-drama about an alien trying to pass as human and engaging in a variety of ridiculous endeavours, including a war with a 9 year old who sees through his from. However, beneath the surface are a number of discussions about adoption, Native American experiences, toxic relationships and abuse, drug and alcohol abuse, and the damage of lost dreams. All of this seems to fit within the scope of a small town and a dramedy, but the depth of consequence is sustained and examined in a very thought provoking manner.
BIG SPOILERS: The other massive story plot point is "Harry’s" (the alien) original intention, which is to destroy Earth. The first half of the series centers around his need to find the item that will allow him to do this. An expectation is set forward that perhaps he will change his mind due to his relationships with the people of the town. However, it is revealed that Harry’s people have visited Earth for thousands of years, and the decision to wipe out humanity is in response to the degradation they have caused the Earth and the potential consequences of our refusal to make the changes the Earth needs. This framing poses the question about the right of life, the impact of choices and the issue that humankind will eventually need to face the consequences of inaction (although maybe not from alien threats!).
QUESTION (Safe to read again): The moral questions being raised in the show are not simple, and the show is not offering easy, quick solutions, but rather examining the deeper impact of being trapped in toxic cycles and the roll on effect of consequences from choices. Once the show has finished I think it would be an interesting case study to explore the use of dramedy genres to raise important questions, and to evaluate the complexity of the moral decisions being raised that face humankind today (and with this the consequences of continued inaction).
Just to address the suggested Revision - I think it is important to not only look at texts from a structural (functional) perspective - this indeed has value, but I don't believe Resident Alien is actually innovating in the approaches to TV elements. Rather it is the choice of a very traditional approach to tropes and concepts but is actually addressing the issues rather than the usual "just a joke" approach of sit-coms.
However, if someone wanted to delve into the stylistic choices they could but that would be a different topic. – Sarai Mannolini-Winwood3 months ago
Oooh, I love a good moral dilemma! Nice topic! – Stephanie M.2 months ago
When online publications release a video or an article that covers a controversial topic or expresses a provocative opinion, more and more frequently the moderators of the website decide to preemptively disable the comments section. Is this a smart idea, given that some topics on more popular websites will inevitably draw internet trolls or similar undesirables to flood comment sections with useless vitriol that overpowers legitimate discussion? Or is this an idiotic action that stifles any chance of legitimate discussion for fear of having to deal with hateful or useless material? Are moderators afraid of being accused of fostering a hateful environment if they allow this material to be presented in their forums? This is especially relevant given that many websites feature a voting system for their comment sections which allow audiences to give relevant comments more visibility based on the opinions of the people actually reading the article or watching the video, thereby allowing audiences to self-regulate what material they choose to engage with.
I would suggest being wary of using qualitative terms like "brave" or "idiotic" without strong supporting data (statistics, news headlines, polls, website usage data, etc.). What defines "brave" or "idiotic" is subjective. This feels like it could include a bigger discussion about freedom of speech, censorship, cyber bullying, and hate speech. I would be very interested if this focused on one platform like a case study (YouTube, Twitter, Twitch, 4chan, etc.) because it might be a lot of work to do a broader examination of online commenting. – Eden2 years ago
If the comments are very/all negative, then you absolutely must disable them. Of course, if the content is disturbing or shouldn't be seen and it causes public outrage, then disabling them seems redundant. However, for something innocent or religious, disabling comments would definitely be necessary. – OkaNaimo08191 year ago
Interesting topic! You could possibly explore reasons why disabling comments would be appropriate or argue that it is never appropriate depending on your stance. – Dena Elerian1 year ago
This is such a relevant, yet interesting topic! Especially with today's internet culture and the prevalence of "cancel culture", it would be interesting to discuss how social accountability versus an intolerant space with no room for growth extends into the realm of hate comments and the action of disabling them. – miagracen5 months ago
Great topic. I have to wonder, though, how often "legitimate discussion" actually occurs in those online comment sections. – JamesBKelley2 months ago
If approaching it from the angle of qualitative terms like brave vs. something else, I encourage veering away from "idiotic," as that is an ableist term. – the.liquid.kid2 months ago
WandaVision seems to be one of the most unique TV shows ever, yet it pays homage to sitcoms throughout the decades. An analysis could include the aspect ratios, the laugh tracks, the archetypical characters, the wardrobe and set design, the special effects, and much more. Do these comparisons add extra depth or meaning to the show, or are they just fun references for older viewers who remember these classic shows?
Fun topic! WandaVision has a lot to analyze! While I was never a big sitcom fan, a lot can be said about the fact that it builds on a lot of tropes and plots from older shows like Bewitched.
Another interesting analysis could be how it falls into the "Abnormal person trying to live a normal life" type of sitcoms and why those types of shows relate so well to audiences. – alittle2 months ago
The Equalizer is a new to TV series from CBS starring Queen Latifah. The show is a reboot from an original TV show in the 1980s, which was rebooted in film in 2014. It is not a hugely new concept – ex-CIA agent who felt politics constrained the ability to provide justice, but it is a concept audiences respond well to. What the new version brings is an older female lead who is also a Black American and the accompanying cast reflects a move to greater diversity. The plots of the first four episodes tend to focus on racial injustices as well as wider political discussions, such as wealth/white privilege, kidnapping, sex trafficking, financing terrorism and corrupt judges.
The choice made in the lead and the messages within the stories tend to focus on racial experiences in USA are really important conversations to be had. However, there needs to be an exploration of the balance present: how well is the show representing equality and experience in America? How is gender and race explored? How does the show add to the conversations around Black Lives Matter and racial tensions in the USA?
A discussion could also be made to examine how this genre of spy/crime tropes have been developed since the original and if this is contributing to wider concepts of new storytelling.
Christopher Nolan’s Tenet (2020) is said to employ many physics theories. Compared with historical drama films, sci-fi movies tend to receive less attention on accuracy – critics and viewers alike often note historical inaccuracies in Braveheart (1995) or Gladiator (2000), but much less so do we discuss scientific inaccuracies. We all know movies to a certain extent are worlds of make-believe, but why such difference? Is it because history and most films are narratives but scientific concepts and theories are not?
I think scientific inaccuracies have been discussed in YouTube videos. I think that a simple examination of scientific inaccuracies in science fiction movies would suffice. If anyone had one particular one in mind, that’s fine too. – J.D. Jankowski3 months ago
I agree that scientific in/accuracies are discussed over YouTube videos, but my question is why is there a bigger general disregard than accuracies in historical dramas. – KM3 months ago
Interesting topic. I would wager that it has a lot to do with history being significantly more accessible to laymen than the hard sciences typically are. Anyone who's done as little "research" as skimming William Wallace's Wikipedia page can boast a relatively firm grasp on the inaccuracies plaguing Braveheart, but the same can rarely be said about doing minimal research on quantum mechanics to know if/where Tenet errs. In light of the average spectator's inability to recognize scientific inaccuracies, they'd likely have an easier time taking the film's claims at face value. Neil deGrasse Tyson owes much of his early reputation as a public intellectual to some series of tweets he made about the inaccuracies in various science fiction films; it's noteworthy that the one-two punch of his scientific credentials paired with the easily consumable quips (in 280 characters or less) made the flaws comprehensible enough for a largely scientifically illiterate general audience to suddenly feel intellectually superior to Hollywood screenwriters. – ProtoCanon3 months ago
Great topic, but I have to quibble with the idea that science doesn't rely on narrative. I'm pretty sure it does, in fact. Natural selection and global warming seem to me like good examples of scientifically-grounded narrative. Scientists can complete small, controlled experiments or analyze big data for years, but in the end their findings -- if those findings are to have any larger significance -- have to be related through narrative and ultimately woven into the much larger narrative of what we call "science." – JamesBKelley2 months ago
Ones ‘dreams’ is a central idea in Eiichiro Oda’s ‘One Piece’. Every Strawhat Crew member joins Luffy in pursuit of their individual ‘dreams’. The One Piece story ultimately revolves around Luffy and his dream of becoming pirate king. However, in doing so, Oda includes the varying dreams of the other members as well as that of the villains. Throughout One Piece the idea of dreams is conveyed over and over and the important question of "what makes a dream or goal good or bad?" arises. There is clearly a noticeable discrepancy between the portrayal of say, Crocodiles dream of creating a utopia versus Luffy’sdream of becoming pirate king. What makes them so different? How does the way in which characters in One piece pursue their dreams differ? Should one have a seemingly unattainable dream?
I think this is a really good point, however I feel that Oda gives these characters dreams is simply for plot and character development. I do not believe that the question "what makes a dream bad or good?" really arises but rather who is going to fight for their dreams the most. The crew members join Luffy to fight for their dreams and they collaborate until they reach Raftel or complete each of their dreams. – MazerBlade1 week ago
The film industry is always changing and innovating the essence of storytelling.
For example, "Malcolm & Marie" is one of the latest Netflix films to be released. Focusing on only two characters, as the title suggests, has a vastly unique way to present how it is not like most films that are released for millions to see in these current times. The almost two-hour film explores the character’s emotional complications within the intensity and fragility of a very passionate relationship. Between the woes of their pain, pasts, insecurities and the powerful love they have for each other, the film being a back and forth conversation highlights the lack of communication about their real emotions. Whether these emotions are justified or not, this noir film does provide drastically distant perspectives of their relationship and who they are not only as an individual, but as a couple. This conversation centres around a range of topics. An example of the "distant perspectives" is when Malcolm passionately challenges how the filmmaking industry seeks validation from millions of people that try to generalise the reasoning of every little detail in films, specifically the one he made. Malcolm suggests through this comment that like the film industry, Marie seeks validation from him constantly as her way to give a concrete confirmation that she is appreciated and loved by the man that supposedly saved her life multiple times, as he suggests in their chaotic debate-like talk.
The question of whether Malcolm and Marie are ultimately compatible with each other will be continuously debated. However, I want to address if Netflix and the filmmaking industry will make more films in this matter. The concept of turning films where one of the goals is to convince the audience of a fictionalised world being humanly possible and appealing into films where the characters have a conversation driving the story doesn’t sound strongly convincing. Let me put it into perspective with one of the most instantaneous grabs of relevance of shows of all time, "13 Reasons Why". Imagine the show condensed into a movie with Clay and Hannah as the two main characters having a conversation where she reveals the whole truth, even the truth that she wants to kill herself instead of having 4 seasons of a show that first begun with tapes to find. The potential for this hypothetical film has a higher ceiling than the show in its entirety. Does it not?
Given how skittish the cinematographic (and most artistic industries in general) are about risk in terms of these kind of things, my bet would be that you don’t see much in the way of film-making form innovations unless you have someone already well-established. – J.D. Jankowski1 month ago
In a reaction video, someone watches something – a music video, a movie, a TV episode, a meme compilation, etc. – and records their reaction. This genre was popularized for the mainstream by YouTube channels like The Fine Bros., but there are many, many other channels that do it. Videos like "Real Doctor Reacts to Medical Dramas," "Real Lawyer Reacts to Crime in Movies," and "Vocal Coach Reacts to Music Video" have the advantage of being educational. What is it about this genre that we find so appealing? Is it just the relatability of people feeling the same feelings we have? Do we feel a connection to these people, across time and space?
Good topic, one I often wonder about myself. It would be especially interesting to note the difference in modern reaction videos towards reaction videos from the early days of YouTube, back when it still had a reply function; plenty of content creators made their name on just reacting to others. Yet in the modern day, people seem to be more interested in watching professionals or experts' take on certain videos, as made popular by channels like Legal Eagle or the Conde Nast family. Ever since those videos started becoming more popular, you don't really see the regular reaction videos anymore. If anything, you see people trying to emulate the new style with connections that are often flimsy (ex. "Person Who Lives In NYC Reacts To Seinfeld"). Did the audience realize they can do better? What could be the next 'phase' of the reaction videos' evolution? – semroolvink2 months ago
I think part of the allure is that we as humans want to see others amused and entertained. – J.D. Jankowski1 month ago
Reaction videos represent one's opinion or how many ever people are reviewing it and their individual opinions. We may agree or disagree but there is always space to know how others think about certain things especially if any of your favorite videos are being reviewed. – Sujayweaves1 month ago
With so many different anime and manga available in the world, there are bound to be many that grow in popularity much more than others. For instance, series like Demon Slayer/Kimetsu no Yaiba absolutely blew up in popularity in late 2019. Other series like One Piece and Naruto have stayed relevant ever since they began in the late 1990s, and it seems just about everyone knows what Attack on Titan is even if they never watched/read anime/manga. But what is it that makes these series so popular? The characters, themes, accessibility, plot, or something else completely?
A degree of familiarity within innovation and a high-quality storyline tend to be the two main variables. – J.D. Jankowski1 month ago
Inspired by the resurgence of Avatar: the Last Airbender (and soon the Legend of Korra), there seems to be a pretty big subset of adults/teenagers watching more and more children’s TV (particularly animation) entirely of their own accord. What is the benefit of this, and why do we keep coming back to them? What do these shows have to offer us as adults vs as children? Who are they made for, really? And what, if anything, are the downsides?
As an adult who watches animation, let me say this is a great topic. For me, it's about nostalgia and relaxation, mostly. I do notice though, that as an adult, I think more deeply about certain characters and themes than I did as a kid. Hey Arnold is a great example; it's a kids' show on the surface, but wasn't afraid to go dark and deep several times. – Stephanie M.10 months ago
I think this a great subject. I've written on this topic while in College. And while cartoons in the western countries are typically targeted at children, animation originally wasn't intened for kids. It was often used for satire or comedy. Often talking about mature subjects like race, war, and class struggles. But Cartoons were really expsenvie to make. So talking about politics wasn't popular, due to it alienating a portion of the cartoonist audience. It wasn't until Hanana Barbera and Walt Disney built their cartoon empires around using their cartoon character's as marketing pieces to sell merchandise. That's when we started seeing a shift in how cartoons were used/viewed. It became popular to target kids cause you could sell toys, cerals and other products. Cartoons studio's often partnered with advertising/toy compannies. I think you consider looking at markerting for this topic as it completely changed the landscape of cartoons, for better and worse. As cartoons couldn't survive without it, but this is also the reason we don't see many cartoons marketed at adults. (Looking at the Simpsons as well would be a good idea, since it was one of the few adult cartoons to see success.) – Blackcat1308 months ago
First off I love this subject, and secondly I feel if art is great it shouldn't matter who watches it. There is some very obvious entertainment made for children out there, but I believe "Avatar" has something to offer everyone. The series has dialogue that children will find amusing, but the animation, creativity, stories, and character development are still a wonder today. It's great that these can inspire people and they should want to come back to it, as well as show them to people who didn't gain the same experience they had. The only downsides to this (at least to myself) is what do you hope to get out of the show? If you watch these shows or movies simply because you are afraid of change, then I suggest it's high time to cleanse your pallet and experience something new, but if this is simply your source for creative vision than I see no issue with wanting to return to find something you never noticed before. – thepriceofpayne8 months ago
I'm as fascinated and absorbed as anyone else by the so-called "dark" stories (whether in literature, TV, film or games), with complex characters, complicated moral dilemmas, and lots of grey morality. However, I still find myself most strongly and instinctually drawn to those stories which carry a note of hope. This is not to say that animation (or any media in general) targeted at children can be devoid of complex characters, of course. But media that is not specifically targeted at children can fall into the trap of showcasing explicit violence (esp. physical/sexual) just for the sake of it/ for cementing the "darkness" of the atmosphere. There is a very thin line where this is necessary for the storytelling/genre or just plain distasteful/ for shock value. In my opinion, children's animation can depict a lot of these same themes, without the gratuitous violence. Implications of the grand scheme of things can be powerful enough. Not only that, animation as a medium has so much storytelling potential in how the medium itself can be manipulated as per needs of the story to be told: everything from the colour to the artstyle to the fluidity and versatility of animation. Maybe this is why I personally am averse to the rather off-putting/bland art and character design of certain popular adult-targeted cartoons. Yes, there is an element of escapism to me watching the lighter-hearted yet meaningful stories. But real life is gritty enough, and while I welcome the complexity that comes with experience of the world, so different from the black-and-white views of our childhood, it doesn't hurt to watch media that appeals to the purest parts of us, untouched by cynicism. – Malavika5 months ago
I don't think there's anything wrong with adults watching animated films. Adults need just as much, if not more, a break from the real world – CoastalUndertoe5 months ago
You could examine the My Little Pony Fandom with the Bronies. – J.D. Jankowski1 month ago
In Jordan Peele’s psychological thriller, wealthy, homogenous individuals congregate to buy and possess other humans. Motives vary, between desire to live past one’s own ‘natural’ lifespan, to replacing physical function that one has lost. The hosts relinquish control of their body, retaining limited consciousness as they become slaves to whoever won the bid. This concept feels far-fetched, but is it plausible? The movie presents this ‘new’ form of slavery directly, as all hosts shown in the movie are Black, whereas all known possessors are White. The master-slave duality is certainly present, with White characters navigating delicately (and awkwardly) around unpossessed Black characters; however, what current systems are in place to enable this conspiracy? Does this movie accurately display the race relations in America by enabling this new-age slavery to exist? How does it comment on current forms of slavery in America, such as the prison-industrial complex? I’d argue that this movie could easily take place in other countries, such as Canada, by substituting Black characters with First Nations–Canada’s got a brutal current and historical reputation with the treatment of First Nations. Nonetheless, is it plausible for groups of elite, wealthy, aging individuals to meet at an undisclosed location to auction a living body to possess? Disregarding the scientific plausibility, what might compel such a conspiracy to form and crystalize? Could this film be metaphorically commenting on the appropriation of Black culture and art by White-owned corporations? How so? Is this conspiracy already in motion, present in a form that treats culture as hosts, and elites as slaveowners?
Upon rewatching "Alien Covenant" for the third time recently, the discovery of just how deep the influence of Peter Weyland and his company, Weyland Yutani, have drastically impacted the known universe which the Alien films take place came into full view. Weyland funded the mission to discover the engineers in "Prometheus," he created David, the self aware and free-willed Android that is ultimately responsible for creating what we know as the xenomorph, his company is responsible for discovering them on LV-426, for returning there to capture them and use them as bioweapons, his company returns in the next film to take Ripley in order to extract the queen inside of her, and even Alien Resurrection" could be tangentially tied to Weyland’s company as who else in this future hellscape of interplanetary discovery would have the resources to fund studies into cloning and making a xenomorph queen/human hybrid? The article I propose is taking a deep dive into how Weyland was far more integral to the creation and manipulation of ever single person and android connected to the Alien films (we’re going to disregard AVP as those two films break cannon) like a spider knows everything that occurs within its web. Weyland had the resources and capability to look out into the known universe/galaxy and see how interconnected everything is and how he could control events even past the death of his physical body (spoiler alert, I think he also created an AI that is himself that continued to manipulate everything still even beyond his death). I would like to conclude on the theory of what the next film would then have to accomplish in order to complete the new trilogy and tie all six canonical films together.
‘Charmed’ a reboot of the late 90s show was released in 2019 with a new cast, new plot lines but also a lot of overlap in narrative, mythos and setting. The story is of three sisters who are witches with the special "power of three." The first big difference is the move from three visually "white" American actors to three mixed-heritage women representing Hispanic and Black American culture. The show also introduces the white-lighter as head of Women’s Studies (a controversial cis-male), a lesbian relationship, a 28 year old virgin and a stereotypical teen wanting to join the Greek systems at her college. From the start the line up is unusual and (from my perspective) wonderful. The new ‘Charmed’ is also engaging in some interesting, and timely conversations, around women’s rights, identity, gender, white privilege, rape culture, race identity, transhumanism and more.
But is this a deep engagement with the important conversations that need to be happening, or is this simply a response to popular culture and trending? A deep analysis of the new show would be beneficial to help examine if this TV show is moving towards culturally responsible storytelling or cashing in on hashtags.
The emphasis today is on getting through the day and we forget to romanticize life. Why have human beings lost connections with nature and self?
Discussing literary critic John Ruskin's ideas of the pathetic fallacy could work when building an argument around the emotional connection between nature and self. He noticed that the people in art (including poetry) had disappeared. As in, people were less frequently being depicted in art during this time. And so instead, human emotions were being assigned to aspects of nature. More than this though, he proffered that it was the emotional state of the human reflected into the natural aspects of the artwork. You can find this practice in the poetry of Keats, Wordsworth, and most of the big six. (This is a very rough summary of his argument, of course, Ruskin's book Modern Painters would be the text to refer to for the far more eloquent expression of his idea). – Samantha Leersen3 months ago
Romanticism isn’t necessarily dead, but rather it’s bland and not as interesting anymore. – kyeferreira3 months ago
The contemporary man is rejecting romanticism objectively. Emerson, Whitman, Thoreau has not emphasized that there would be a day when we lose our connection with naturalism, but they have glorified romanticism enough to imply that. – metamorphicrock3 months ago
This is a particular kind of Romanticism called Naturalist Romanticism. This narrows this topic somewhat in its own right but whoever decides to write this may benefit from further narrowing. I would recommend looking at a particular nation’s naturalist literature of the Era. The richest would be the United States (c. 1820-1900), the United Kingdom (1798-1837), and France (1789-1914). – J.D. Jankowski3 months ago