To Obscure is Not to Erase
Mar. 13th, 2023 02:25 pmBut violence thrives in silence and invisibility.
Just thinking about how certain aspects of my media tastes changed a lot over the course of my life, while others have been constant. My tastes have changed to the point where some of the things I used to enjoy I no longer do, and things that once would have been a major turn-off to me (eg. knowing the protagonist dies at the end), are no longer major factors in deciding whether or not I enjoy or appreciate a work.
There are definitely some things that have remained consistent, such as my interest in the science fiction and fantasy genres. I don't limit myself to only reading or watching media for a particular age group, but at this point in my life, I tend to enjoy adult media the most. Throughout my life, I've tended to prefer stories with fast pacing, though I always try to give things a chance in the beginning because getting through the first 50 pages of any novel is usually my least favorite part. This is why I still have more of a preference for longer works and long series, because I tend to enjoy a story a lot more once I understand the characters and world better.
At the same time I also still enjoy the more episodic elements of a series like Discworld, where your understanding of the story can be enriched by reading other novels in the series, but where the main story is largely self-contained. I definitely still enjoy action scenes a lot and prefer stories with a lot of fast-paced action. At the same time, worldbuilding and characterization have also always been things I value a lot.
There are a lot of things that have changed, though. I used to read stories primarily for the characters and plot, and didn't think about themes much or what the work might be trying to do at a deeper level. But now things like themes or symbolism in a work can be a big factor in whether I enjoy it or not.
Escapism used to be a big factor for why I read stories, but it's not anymore. I think part of it is that right now, my life is all right actually? The rest of the world seems like it's snowballing downhill, but my personal life does affect my mental health a lot, so I think that's one reason why escapism is less important to me at present. Another reason is because some escapism just doesn't feel as escapist to me as it used to, so even when I do want an escape of sorts from the real world, it might be more that I want my feelings about things to be validated than I want a contextless 'it's all going to be all right'.
There's a lot of other story elements I could talk about in terms of how my perspective has or hasn't changed on them, but these are a few of the major ones.
Parasite had such an immense emotional impact on me. It's given me much to think about. But I haven't been able to watch it again. Because watching it was like...ripping away the veil of tolerability to show society at its bleakest. I'll be thinking about it for a long time though, whether I have the courage to rewatch it again or not. One thing I find so fascinating about Parasite is that...
(under a cut because while there are no specifics the following could be considered mild spoilers about the protagonists of the film)
...it doesn't depend on the virtuousness of it's protagonists to convey its horror. In fact its protagonists all at various points engage in some pretty deplorable acts. I feel like some people completely miss the point of this because it doesn't fit into the narrative of virtuous impoverished victim who exists only to be pitied.
But I think it's much more real in conveying the desperation of existing at the margins and how suffering and loss doesn't necessarily make someone a better person. And I think it's also much more real about what 'pulling yourself up by your bootstraps' entails in a cutthroat world of dwindling opportunity.
Meanwhile I've already seen Jordan Peele's Us twice and even though it is a scary, scary film on more than one level it's also just...way more cheery while still going some bleak places.
Both films employ quite a bit of humor and deftly mix it with drama and horror. I also thought it was cool that Bong Joon-Ho namedropped Us in the interview I watched of him talking about Parasite, not long after I'd watched Us myself. The movies definitely have some overlapping themes and imagery, so I can see why he'd bring it up.
I probably sound like a film buff right now but in truth I usually don't watch many movies. It's just lately that I've been going back and watching some of the many movies I haven't seen before. Also, whenever I watch a film, I will then go read and watch a bunch of reviews on it so they can help me pick up on all the cool connections I missed.
While I do talk about many other topics, when I talk about fandom, I tend to focus. A lot. Right now I'm extremely focused on Star Wars, but my previous fandom which I'm still very fond of even if I don't talk about it as much is Legend of Zelda, and especially the character Ghirahim from that videogame series. So while I very much read books, watch tv and movies, and play games not in those categories, I just don't talk about them as much or am as familiar with minor details in those stories.
This very much doesn't mean that I think Star Wars or Legend of Zelda are the apex of media. I do think there is a lot of analysis that can be done on these stories, but they're very, hmmm, commercialized stories, with all the traits that come with that. Additionally, they're aimed first and foremost at children, a demographic I have not been part of for a long time. Due to this fact, I generally evaluate them on a different metric than I do stories more appropriate for my age. They also generally perpetuate a very simplistic, conventional sense of values that often clash with my own sense of ethics. Nevertheless, knowing about other literature and stories allows me to pick out things from these works I wouldn't have otherwise been able to notice. Sometimes, they do employ interesting literary techniques or references, or have something valuable to say.
Of course, I certainly do comment on other media, especially books that I've read, and I may even think about these stories a lot, I just generally don't write as many of my thoughts down as meta or make fanworks based on them. At the same time I will say that I think the quality of much of the media I've been exposed to outside of my fandom obsessions is, well, often a lot better, not only from a literary perspective, but even just from an entertainment perspective.
So uh, yeah. That's my observation. I guess with my particular fandom obsessions, I engage more closely because I want to generate things that pair what I enjoy in those fandoms with other things I enjoy, rather than the things in those fandoms that I very much do not enjoy. And sometimes I feel like I won't have as many problems if I gripe about them? There's no media or media creator that I think is remotely perfect (though they are very definately not all equal in that imperfection, either), but I feel like negative criticism for some media or media creators is more hazardous. Though that's definitely not to downplay the problems one can have critiquing stories like Star Wars or Legend of Zelda, either. I feel like both of those fandoms are quite large and have plenty of staunchly overzealous defenders, it's just there's also plenty of people who are willing to apply negative criticism of them from all sorts of different angles. Fandoms where most of the people involved are only willing to sing endless praises for it are kind of a downer for me.
Death of the Author is entirely about how the author's background and intentions are unnecessary to include in meaningful interpretation of a work. It's about an interpretation that draws purely on the text of the work itself.
Practicing death of the author neither does anything to let an author off the hook for their misdeeds as some critics of it seem to presume, nor does it somehow cleanse a work of any textual issues inherent in the work itself, as some who might claim to practice it seem to imply. It's simply the idea that one's interpretation of a work doesn't need to consider the author's background or intent to provide meaningful insight into that work.