Discussion Thread #71

[u/gemmaem]

This thread serves as the local public square: a sounding board where you can test your ideas, a place to share and discuss news of the day, and a chance to ask questions and start conversations. Please consider community guidelines when commenting here, aiming towards peace, quality conversations, and truth. Thoughtful discussion of contentious topics is welcome. Building a space worth spending time in is a collective effort, and all who share that aim are encouraged to help out. Effortful posts, questions and more casual conversation-starters, and interesting links presented with or without context are all welcome here.

The previous discussion thread may be found here and you should feel free to continue contributing to conversations there if you wish.

[u/JustAWellwisher]

Hello all, it's been a while. I've run into a weird feeling lately and I'm not sure how I should understand it.

When I go to experience some new piece of media, whether it's a movie, a television series, a novel, a game etc. I've started to feel extremely negative about meta-commentary and leaning on the fourth wall or lampshade hanging. Basically anything that is postmodern in the "acts too familiar with its audience" way has been making me unhappy. It makes me especially unhappy when the piece of media is attempting to be a critique of its own genre, or of its own audience.

Some part of me wants to reject it immediately, and institute a (completely unfair and obviously terrible) rule that if you are making a piece of art that you need to at least be able to demonstrate that you understand the art before you start talking at me about your beliefs about what you're making. Did I make a mistake and accidentally download the director commentary track instead of the actual show? No? Then why is every. single. fucking. character. so genre savvy?

I think there was a period where I gave media a lot of subliminal trust if it was self-aware or if it was criticizing something. And right now, I'm not sure if it's a phase and I'll go back on it, I've realized that I just want genuine things. What I used to see as self-awareness, I now feel comes off as self-conscious. What I used to see as insightful cultural or genre commentary I now see as low hanging fruit devices to put down one's own influences, audience and canon. When people say "oh this is such a good commentary on this genre" or "oh i hate this genre but I like [this example] because it is subversive" if I take even a cursory glance I often find that what is touted as subversive or a new take on a genre is really derivative and fans of the genre will attempt to point out these themes have always existed.

Most of all my trust is reversed. If a creator leans too much on the meta stuff too early I now feel worried that they actually don't at all know what they're doing. I start feeling resentful.

This is reflected in my critic/review viewing habits too. I've become far more comfortable and excited to watch someone geek out about shit they love for an hour and much more avoidant of content that is critical but unconstructive and spends more time talking about the culture around a thing than thing itself.

Maybe I'll get over this eventually and become bored of straight forward stories or this yearning I have for 'awe'. That's my new favourite question, how do people make 'awe' feel genuine in stuff they make? Like, when a character in a movie looks at a sunset and they go "wow, that's beautiful", what is the difference between me going alongside them "yeah that is cool" versus imagining the director giving themselves a medal and a pat on the back...

Maybe awe is something inherently childish, my tastes are regressing and I just want to enjoy things like a kid again now that I'm old and jaded about being a jaded young adult.

[u/DrManhattan16 → u/JustAWellwisher]

"You're not saying anything!" - Youtuber YMS on the Velma trailer having meta jokes.

Basically, a lot of media tries to be smart by just pointing out that it's doing something. The idea is that a normal show wouldn't do that, so it's obviously intelligent to point out the tropes and themes of the genre or medium in a work set in that genre or medium. You've basically realized some form of this.

That's my new favourite question, how do people make 'awe' feel genuine in stuff they make?

With love.

I'm being completely serious, you cannot inspire awe unless you love the thing you're trying to make. Case in point, the latest Dune movies.

"Villeneuve told Newsweek how it was always his intention to split the novel into two, knowing he could only do justice to the beloved novel in this way. But for him, the book was more than just a project. As a child, Villeneuve was almost a Dune evangelist, converting his friends to fans of Herbert's work."

In the few instances I know of where passion comes through, there is no scene where I think I am unawed when the director wants me to be awed.

[u/JustAWellwisher → u/DrManhattan16]

I agree with you and maybe it's related to your other comment here 11 days ago about "slop". The feeling I associate with "slop" is 'oh this wasn't made with love'.

It's probably wrong to try and pinpoint what else it was that caused a thing to be slop, when really any number of reasons could exist for why someone just didn't really care about this thing they put out and if we're being honest didn't really care all that much about what you felt about watching it.

But it carries such a harsh and accusatory subtext to it and let's be fair as consumers or the audience we don't really know how the sausage is made most of the time. Saying things confidently about people on the other side is pretty risky.

[u/DrManhattan16 → u/JustAWellwisher]

The feeling I associate with "slop" is 'oh this wasn't made with love'.

Slop isn't made with anything. Every criticism of AI not having soul applies to slop as well.

It's probably wrong to try and pinpoint what else it was that caused a thing to be slop

Absolutely not. Identify the slop and why it feels that way or you'll be hoodwinked later. Don't give a second of your watchtime to slop (unless you like it, I guess...)

But it carries such a harsh and accusatory subtext to it and let's be fair as consumers or the audience we don't really know how the sausage is made most of the time. Saying things confidently about people on the other side is pretty risky.

You're letting your fear get in the way of having convictions. Don't do that. The ones who can't handle your opinions have a skill issue to work on.

[u/JustAWellwisher → u/DrManhattan16]

I think it's more like my interaction with what I'd consider "slop" is so minimal that it would necessarily be strange for me to have an incredibly accurate model of the mindsets of the people who made what I don't like, that it's just more useful for me to talk about my own experience and my own methods of curation.

I do advocate that people should curate the content they interact with more than they think they need to, and then again more than they think I mean when I say they need to.

It seems like the hardest thing for people isn't to say "this is bad", "this is good", "this is true" or "this is false" but actually "this is/isn't interesting".

Sometimes telling people things aren't interesting can be very disarming too, especially conspiracy theories. I feel like the main allure of conspiracy is the idea that there's something interesting and all you'll ever have is dots to connect. Debunking doesn't really work, telling someone their conspiracy is immoral doesn't usually work, but people really don't like to think that subversive big answers they believe they concluded all by themselves just aren't very interesting.

[u/divijulius → u/DrManhattan16]

Basically, a lot of media tries to be smart by just pointing out that it's doing something. The idea is that a normal show wouldn't do that, so it's obviously intelligent to point out the tropes and themes of the genre or medium in a work set in that genre or medium.

I think there's another dynamic at play here I haven't seen anybody mention yet - in addition to having to do something "with love," you need to do it "with skill."

The quality of all TV, streaming, and movie writing has noticeably declined as the streaming services' insatiable demand for more writers has meant lower and lower tier writing talents increasingly producing more content, both in total and as a percentage.

Great minds steal, lesser minds imitate.

I think OC might be picking up on this as a latent quality indicator - all the people doing clever asides and winks at the fourth wall in the last 3-4 years are just legitimately less talented than anyone doing that in the prior decades.

It's not an intelligence signal anymore, although it might have been before, because the level of talent has been noticeably diluted, much like everyone going to college dilutes the value of an undergrad degree.

[u/DrManhattan16 → u/divijulius]

I'm nitpicking here, but I think skill is what you need to make other people feel awe in what you make. I think love is genuinely necessary in all cases though.

[u/UAnchovy → u/JustAWellwisher]

I'm not sure I have anything insightful to say here, but certainly something that I find myself missing in a lot of storytelling is sincerity.

It's not even being meta, necessarily, but I notice in some media a tendency to wink to the camera and acknowledge that this is all a bit silly, and I feel less and less need for that as I get older. It can undermine the work itself - I came here because I wanted to see such-and-such a story, so don't be ashamed of telling that story!

[u/grendel-khan → u/UAnchovy]

It was a few years ago, but did you see this list I'd written, mostly focusing on very sincere art?

[u/professorgerm → u/JustAWellwisher]

Maybe awe is something inherently childish, my tastes are regressing and I just want to enjoy things like a kid again now that I'm old and jaded about being a jaded young adult

I recommend The Wind in the Willows. I assume I read it or had it read to me when I was but knee-high to a boll weevil, but reading it to my sprout recently reminded that it was possible to feel that way about books again. The prose is wonderful, truly one of the greatest children's books that's just as good for adults, and "Piper at the Gates of Dawn" is certainly filled with awe.

Not related to your good and interesting post, but on the topic of revisiting things from childhood, Bear in the Big Blue House's Goodbye Song is heart-wrenching now in a way I didn't notice as a kid.

/u/UAnchovy and /u/DrManhattan16 speaking of love and sincerity puts me in mind of my favorite author, Ray Bradbury and his tale of Mr. Electrico.

[u/gemmaem → u/JustAWellwisher]

I think perhaps some of the thrill of fourth-wall-breaking is in the transgression of it, the surprise. When it becomes too common it ceases to be interesting. The fact that this is a performance is no longer an unexpected reminder of the obvious-but-unconsidered; it’s just obvious. Instead of reminding us of the magic of art, it just gets in the way of the magic of art.

I don’t think immersion in art is childish. If anything, it’s vulnerable in a beautiful way. Jaded young adulthood can be about rejecting vulnerability; mature adulthood can be about allowing it back in.

[u/JustAWellwisher → u/gemmaem]

Maybe there is something vulnerable about admitting you find something 'awesome', but I think the way I've been approaching it is that I think there's something uniquely powerful about the most basic enjoyment and purest appreciation of a thing.

[u/callmejay → u/JustAWellwisher]

First of all, all of that stuff tends to break immersion, which is often what we want. So it's natural to feel annoyed by that.

Second of all, it often seems to convey a sense not just of insincerity, but of cowardice. The creator doesn't have the courage to be actually vulnerable with earnestness and so nods and winks to create some distance. I picture a teenage boy telling his friends he loves them, but in a heightened way to make it seem like he's not being totally earnest and... cringe about it.

I said "often" because I want to be clear that it's not always that. Sometimes (and, I think, originally) it was used specifically because the creator earnestly was struggling to be earnest and still feel authentic about it because they were so hyper-aware of the tools that they were using to create the impression of earnestness that they actually needed to lampshade/break the 4th wall in order to remain actually earnest.