It's almost a cliche at this point that the central characters in any story are rarely the most interesting ones. More often than not they tend to be relatively bland, and the story grows out of their interactions with a cast of more interesting side characters. However, every so often a protagonist will end up being the most interesting character in their story. For instance, in Osamu Tezuka's "Buddha" manga, the Buddha is actually one of the more well-rounded and relatable characters, even given that the legends about him tend to paint him as an almost perfect, untouchable being. What are some other examples of this phenomenon, where the main protagonist really is the most interesting, or one of the most interesting, characters? What is it about them that makes them so interesting?
I believe this statement can be completely true. Sometimes the evil character is more relatable and evokes more emotion than the Plain Jane good person. For example, in The Vampire Diaries, everyone loves Damon. He's mysterious, alluring, and sexy. More than that, people want to believe in him. They want to see the whole "bad-boy turned good" phenomenon play out. Like in Maleficent or Wicked, entirely new stories are revealed. It shifts from delivering a story about monsters to explaining how they became this villain everyone believes them to be. I think that villains are important in literature and film, because sometimes they teach us more than the heroes. People can't relate to a perfect character. They can easily relate to the villain, because they see their flaws scattered in themselves. – nicolemadison5 years ago
what if we explored the possibility of "supporting characters" being the REAL "protagonists"? Or the possibility of multiple protagonists? – Dena Elerian5 years ago
From my experience, the most fetching leads out there tend to have an equally, or slightly more, fascinating and multi-layered antagonist who may mirror the protagonist in their values and goals (if not their means of attaining them). – Michel Sabbagh4 years ago
The early forms of comedy in mass entertainment (vaudeville, the Marx Brothers, the Three Stooges) were unapologetically absurd. They embraced silliness. We see that tradition in more modern British comedy (Monty Python, Peter Cook and Dudley Moore). And yet, American comedy seems to suffer from an unwillingness to be silly, as if silliness is somehow beneath us. There are notable exceptions of course (The Simpsons, Steve Martin's early standup), but, by and large, we seem to be mired in a bog of socially relevant comedy, or rigidly responsible satire. Where's the silliness? Is comedy allowed to be funny for funny's sake? And here, I'm referring mostly to film and sitcoms, not to stand up comedians who are as varied in their style as they have always been.
This would be a good topic for one to explore the evolution of comedy in the US; how we went from vaudeville & Marx to more contemporary comedic styles. From there, one could argue whether the decline of absurd comedy is just a sign of the times, or a result of something else. – majorlariviere5 years ago
I would be interested to discover if the rise of the United States and the decline of the British Empire as respective world powers had anything to do with a more collective trend toward silliness in comedy. Perhaps it’s a potential thesis, mere speculation or something else. – J.D. Jankowski5 years ago
Explore the nature of personal identity in Toni Morrison’s novel “Beloved.” This could include the nature of the character Beloved, notably in her relationships with other characters (most importantly Sethe) and her opaque origins. Additionally, the book can be examined for commentary on the dehumanizing effect of American slavery on African American identity, and how this effect lingers, thus making “Beloved” resonant.
I love this topic! There's an older (but still relevant) article that could be helpful for research. The author discusses identity but also "a desire for subjectivity." The author even summarizes other scholars' interpretations of Beloved's identity, as the dead daughter's spirit, as the reincarnation of the two-year-old, as both the daughter and Sethe's mother, as not a spirit but just a young woman, and others. Holden-Kirwan, Jennifer L. “Looking into the Self That Is No Self: An Examination of Subjectivity in Beloved.” African American Review, vol. 32, no. 3, 1998, pp. 415–426. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3042242. Accessed 26 Apr. 2020. – Morgan Dancy5 years ago
With The Mandalorian being so successful, what other examples of a protagonist concealing their identity have really struck a chord with audiences? Obviously, an intriguing trait in terms of mystery, are there any other reasons why this has been successful in The Mandalorian? Moreover, what's the purpose of using a masked hero? What changes when the main protagonist is unmasked? Is there a downside?
I think you may want to touch on what it is about a masked hero that makes audiences intrigued. What is necessary for them to have since one cannot see who (or what) they are. Great topic idea! – majorlariviere5 years ago
Off the top of my head the only character I can think of right now is 'V' from 'V for Vendetta' (2005). It's interesting how that Guy Fawkes mask even struck a chord with those who haven't seen the film or read the original graphic novel. – Amyus5 years ago
I think what draws us to the Mandalorian in particular is his willingness and really desperation to remain masked. Even when his remaining masked threatens his life, he is adamant to following the code. It would be interesting to examine how his strictness regarding his mask/suit plays against his rebellious nature (against the bounty hunter guild) throughout the first season – erinouye5 years ago
Demons are quite common in anime, whether it's the sexy Sebastian Michaelis from Black Butler or the lovable Inuyasha from the anime of the same name. In fact, demons are more common in mainstream anime than angels. And when they do interact, it's usually the demons that come out as the good guy. Why is that the case? What appeal do demons have? What are some other portrayals of demons?
Note: You can focus on just humanoid demons, like Sebastian and Rin Okumura from Blue Exorcist, or you can expand it to include Inuyasha and creatures like Kurama from the Naruto series. For an additional challenge, you can also include interactions between angels and demons, like Sebastian and Ash/Angela, and compare the characters.
I was also curious where the story of "the demon lord" came from? Is this a folklore thing? – Busyotaku5 years ago
Particularly following their purchase of 20th Century Fox and their gallery of successful IP, Disney now stand to own the primary market share of global box office. Many critics are decrying the ‘Disney-fication’ of culture as the death of diversity, a crushing blow to independent production, and the continuation of a soulless future of endless sequels and franchises.
Is this, however, a fair approximation? Are Disney simply representing what audiences have sought since the birth of the blockbuster in the mid-1970’s and the arrival of the high concept in the 1980’s? Is the jewel in their crown, the Marvel Cinematic Universe, not simply the ultimate expression of audiences’ desire for cinema to be the ultimate escapist entertainment? Are Disney destroying originality or simply reconfiguring the way we engage with culture and media?
This is a great topic. I run into many people who think that Disney is trying to monopolize the market, but I don't think it's an evil agenda. I think Disney, like all corporations and businesses, are trying to do their job and make money. If purchasing 20th Century Fox will help them do that then that's what they're going to do.
Disney has been creating entertainment for years and they are in some ways the standard for entertainment. Finally, if you really think Disney is destroying film and is a terrible corporation, stop seeing their movies. If you really believe that's a problem, you are contributing to that problem by watching their movies and buying their merchandise. – OliviaS5 years ago
This would be very interesting to explore. There's definitely something to be said about one company producing the majority of the content released in cinema, which has the side effect of controlling what we're exposed to, would could be harmful under the wrong studio heads. Yet, it could lead to the production of amazing films, as seen in some of their latest releases. What will the future of cinema look like? – BelletheBrave5 years ago
You could look at given historic eras of Disney history to see if there is a difference of quality. – J.D. Jankowski5 years ago
What do Western audiences (Canada and Europe as well as America) find so appealing in anime? Analyze and compare the more popular/recent series and see what conclusions you make with them. An additional challenge would be to compare the anime are more popular in the West with the anime that are more popular in Japan. Or, if that is too difficult, then compare the genres that are more popular/well-known in the East and West. e.g. Is My Hero Academia as big in Japan as it is in America? What about Death Note? You can also research less mainstream anime that is big in either Japan or the West.
I generally agree with the comments made by M.L.Flood, but please be a little less ameri-centric. The 'West' consists of more countries than just America and Canada. – Amyus5 years ago
I like the topic so much and I think that approaching why certain anime are more popular in the West and why others are more popular in Japan would be interesting as well. There may be cultural and social reasons for it. Other than that, great topic! – MC075 years ago
Many considered the encyclopaedic novels of the late '90s and early 2000's such as Mark Z. Danielewski's House of Leaves and most prominently, David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest to be, variously, postmodernist, or post-postmodernist – 'New Sincerity," being a label applied to the latter. In the case of DFW, the abandonment of irony in place of sincerity was defined as the source of the departure from the genre or movement, while Danielewski's act of essentially drawing out postmodern literature and all its tropes and threads to their logical conclusions was, essentially, concluding it there and then. I read House of Leaves in my first year of university, and some years later, it is now the subject of my doctoral thesis. As I studied my way through the university, and particularly in grad school, I found very few scholars wanting to discuss postmodern literature or philosophy. In classes I took on Modernism, postmodernism was included in a one-lecture session where it was deemed to have been subsumed into "New Modernist Studies," as essentially, a subgenre of modernism rather than (depending on who was writing it) an elaboration on or even ar reaction to Modernism. While there were stragglers throughout the '80s, '90s and naughties, many consider the heyday of postmodern literature to have taken place during the late sixties and throughout the seventies. Even Raymond Federman who wrote extensively on the self-reflexivity that defined these novels concluded during the '90s that this era of self-reflexive experimentation was essentially, over. It is worth noting that while these essays were collected, many were written at the time before the term "postmodernism," had even been applied to this kind of literature (a term that was first applied to architecture before carrying over into the other arts; many of the seminal writers like Vonnegut and DeLillo were often called black humorists in their present tense). While Federman perhaps made that call prematurely in 1992, given the popularity of the first two novels I mentioned for this topic, the fact remains that whether or not the movement is "dead," it has fallen terribly out of favour. A professor confessed to me once, that it was very trendy at a time before I'd been born, or perhaps even when I was very young and as a grad student in their 20's in the '10s I had missed out Is postmodernism dead because it's out of fashion? Or will it return, much like the mullet?
A good topic, but it may be better to try to frame the topic in third-person because too much personal experience when discussing the topic may feel more like opinion than media analysis. – Emily Deibler5 years ago
Oh certainly Emily; but I'm not the one who's going to write it. Here's a couple of contextual articles for whoever does; I shouldn't have perhaps leaned on an anecdotal example when essentially, my professor was just echoing what a lot of people have now been saying for decades. Here's a couple of recent takes: https://sydneyreviewofbooks.com/theoretical-cool/ https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/postmodernism-is-dead-va-exhibition-age-of-authenticism https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/postmodernism-dead-comes-next/ https://philosophynow.org/issues/58/The_Death_of_Postmodernism_And_Beyond (personally not a fan of this one; feel like it misses the point but it's valid to consider) https://areomagazine.com/2018/01/08/postmodernism-isnt-playing-around-anymore/ https://areomagazine.com/2018/02/07/no-postmodernism-is-not-dead-and-other-misconceptions/ – benjamindmuir5 years ago
Ooooo boy, this is one tasty topic (personally). I mean this might come down to how post modernism is defined (good luck to whomever takes that on!) and, also, how you measure the deadness-to-passéness of post modernism; if it's by reader popularity then probably deadish, if it's by author output then it's arguably very alive (Zadie Smith, Jim Gauer, George Saunders, Haruki Murakami, Marlon James...). My main thought is: Is an either/or framing of this piece the best approach to reflect a topic that might benefit from a more exploratory flavour?. There are SO many options with this piece. I approve. – JM5 years ago
Ah! Thank you for the article lists. I think that'll be very helpful for whoever writes this. :) It's a good topic. – Emily Deibler5 years ago
I think the postmodern novel will eventually be "in fashion" again. It's strange to think of something as timeless as literature being subjected to trends but there is an ebb and flow. It would be interesting to consider the impact of how we've become accustomed to absorbing information in soundbites--tweets, Instagram and Snapchat stories in relation to lengthier post-modern texts from David Foster Wallace and Haruki Marukami. – Loie895 years ago
Prequels are often seen as cash-ins that don't add much to the original text. For example, even Solo's fans tend to admit that the movie wasn't particularly necessary: it does not add much to the themes, ideas, or lore of Star Wars. But other prequels have offered deeper insight (or counterpoints) to the original text. For instance, Rise of the Planet of the Apes was used to deepen the apocalyptic themes of the main text.
So: what makes a valuable prequel? If a prequel isn't adding anything to the original, then should it be "re-skinned"?
I think there are a lot of really good and really important prequels especially in the superhero genre. X-Men is a really good example. Also I think its important to add spinoffs of tv shows that are meant to be prequels because I think you can see a strong difference in a film that is a prequel and a series that is a prequel. – tingittens5 years ago
"Re-skinning" a prequel is a waste of time and money, especially if we keep getting stuck in a rut (with some sequels I can mention).
I think a good prequel gives enough information without being stuffed while staying faithful to the original. Peter Jackson's The Hobbit series would be a good example of how that did NOT happen (at least in the second film). – OkaNaimo08195 years ago
A prequel can be useful in the case of Captain Marvel where it introduce a new character to a series.
Or it can give a character a back story
which is what they are doing with Black Widow, but It is useless to tell the back story when she is dead.
I think there can be a good prequel but it must be written well – Amelia Arrows5 years ago
As with sequels, adding substantive depth in a way that develops the plot and is stylistically pleasing is vital. It’s pretty much like writing a new story, but with a pre-made narrative to work with and to accommodate. – J.D. Jankowski5 years ago
I think it's worth examining the power dynamics in fantasy games and what makes each particular game feel satisfying. Games like "Monster Hunter" and "Skyrim" both offer the player a degree of power over the world, but the difference lies in degree. "Monster Hunter" empowers the player as an exceptional hunter, but only allows them to practice that power in particular ways. "Skyrim" allows players to kill people with only their words. Yet both these games prove to be immensely satisfying. My question is what common factors lie between them? How do each of these games (and others) feel satisfying despite the difference in how they allow their players to act in their worlds?
This is an interesting topic definitely, though a bit too broadly conceived right now -- the games are quite opposite genres, for example. A tighter article could, for example, compare the thematic import of player agency in an open-world game where players have lots of freedom (Skyrim) and players have comparatively little freedom (Monster World, as I understand it). In other words, but fixing the genre (open world) and fictional context (fantasy), a comparison can be made more clearly. Lovely idea. – Derek5 years ago
Aren't the Dragon Shouts in Skyrim just another way to package new abilities and weaponry for the playable character in the game? For me, they're much like having a new sword or new gear. As Derek suggests, the big difference among games may be based less on packaging and more on the degrees of openness (or: open worldness?) and player agency. In some games you can only follow specific storylines, only kill specific people and monsters, etc. In other games, such as Skyrim, you can approach most any destination from most any direction and can kill most anyone or anything (with or without using a Dragon Shout), with the exception of a few key figures that are essential to the main storyline. – JamesBKelley4 years ago
Analyze how gender issues in the writings of the past and present are similar to how things are now. For example, look at The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood, and explore something like The Golden Girls, or a play like A Raisin In The Sun. What do they say about womanhood? How have things changed? How is there still relevance from the past? What does this say about women's role in society today?
I LOVE THIS TOPIC SO MUCH. – Stephanie M.5 years ago
Since its technological and artistic breakthrough in the character of Gollum from Lord of the Rings, filmmakers have experimented with the possibilities and limits of the technology, with varying success. From single characters (like King Kong) to whole races and worlds (like Avatar and several Robert Zemekis films), motion capture elicits anything from wonder in the face of its breathtaking realism, to criticisms that overuse of the technology dumps the audience smack dab in the center of "Uncanny Valley." Why does motion capture draw from critics and audiences such polarizing responses? What films use the technology wisely, and which overuse it to the extent of alienating its audience? Look at both the original instances, like Gollum, and more recent instances, such as Alita in Alita: Battle Angel, and analyse how the different instances work and how they avoid or encapsulate "Uncanny Valley" in their films and characters.
I wonder if this is an issue with veracity, a sense of truth in what we're seeing. One of the most unerring examples I remember was 2001's Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, a film with such weirdly photo-realistic animation it made little sense that real actors were not simply used. It's different with physical creatures or aliens, or say Caesar in the Planet of the Apes trilogy, as they can benefit from strong motion capture, but humans? I suspect it feels like a blurred line. – A J. Black5 years ago
Interesting topic. It would be topical to tie it into the upcoming "Cats" adaptation. I suggest you check out Patrick Willems' recent YouTube video essay on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1nQoWnFBSw&t=1264s – Matt Hampton5 years ago
I think it's important to define a "wise" use of technology. How much is too much? Is it possible to draw a line applicable to all films or do we have to take it on a case by case basis? We rush to embrace technology for all of its spectacle and newness, but do how often do filmmakers ask themselves, "Is this really necessary?" I'm of the opinion (for what it's worth) that technology should be used as sparingly as possible. As an audience member, too much technology overwhelms me and creates an emotional distance from the narrative. – fspinelli5 years ago
Analyze the evolution of popular RTS games such as the Age of Empire series alongside others like Medieval and how they serve as education through entertainment by using historical battles and events as the crux of their gameplay material. Also analyze how well-sourced the relevant histories being represented in these genres of RTS games are.
A nice idea for a topic, there could be further exploration and balance involved by looking at intentionally educational games (good or bad), games that have the potential to be educative but aren't yet and those that are breaking new ground and providing engaging experiences that are both fun and educational. – CAntonyBaker5 years ago
That works well too. I guess RTS games may make the article limited in its discussion. Speaking of intentional education games one could also tackle the Learn Japanese visual novel games which are well known to get you familiar with japanese but not necessaroly all out educational tools. – ajaymanuel5 years ago
Call Me By Your Name – the book version, ends with Elio and Oliver's separation, but their longings for each other last for what seems like an eternity. Find Me – the sequel, picks up the storyline a few years later, and, spoiler alert, slowly leads the two star-crossed lovers back together in the end. However, the perspective has changed as the Find Me is in the POV of Elio's father, now divorced, and his journey of finding new love with a woman much younger than himself. If Call Me, under Elio's POV, was so successful critically and commercially, why did the author switch to his father's, whose outlook on life may not be on who was responsible for some of the most soul-touching, sentimental and inspiring dialogues in the prequel
Analyse the texts that surround the current royal fantasy trend within young adult books. Worth noting Sarah J. Maas's contribution and how texts such as Red Queen and others compare. Are there any archetypes concerning the female hero within?
Could also mention Amy Tintera's series. – Andi6 years ago
I have a game app on my phone that's basically reading different books, and a lot of them are royal fantasy fiction. I never thought about it before now, but that's a really cool observation! – csquie006 years ago
^ I believe you are talking about the app called Choices! They make visual novels, following various trends, such as royal fantasy. Specifically, one of the series is called The Royal Romance, which details a girl adventuring to the fictional kingdom of Cordonia with its prince. – EJSmall5 years ago
Boku no Hero Academia (BnHK) is an anime series that has been rising in popularity over the years in Japan as well as with the Western audience. Among the recent slew of movies and entertainment based around superheroes, Boku no Hero Academia is no different. This follows a current trend in the evolution and redesigning of superheroes' past and present. There are various similarities and identifiable inspirations that the author of BnHK has taken to flesh his characters, and yet there is a unique charm to one of the series' protagonists: All Might that carries forward to other characters in the series and makes it truly unique. All Might is very much the Superman of the series, and yet there is something about his character that makes him far more evolved and endearing than the big boy scout. How does this correlate to the current perspective and revision of the modern superhero?
At the end of the 19th century, a sociologist named Thorstein Veblen argued that privileged people flaunt their wealth in three ways: conspicuous consumption (showing that they can afford to buy products); conspicuous leisure (showing that they can afford to waste time); and conspicuous waste (showing that they can afford to throw things away). Recently, conspicuous consumption and conspicuous waste have lost a lot of their worth as status symbols because goods have become more affordable and both practices are associated with environmental destruction, but conspicuous leisure (which can entail anything from sitting around and doing nothing to lavish vacations to memorizing pointless social rules and regulations) doesn't seem to carry the same stigma. Classically, conspicuous leisure was embodied in an aristocrat who sits around in a large mansion and looks down on people who perform manual labor, but what are some modern equivalents, either in real life or in our media?
In my opinion, something that complicates the issue of what conspicuous leisure looks like nowadays is the idea of self-care. Individuals engage in activities that, in previous generations, would have been considered "leisure": video games, social media, even long bubble baths. Many of those who spend time practicing self-care would claim that such activities are not wasting time because it is helping them to relax and recharge in order to be rested enough to resume productivity. As someone who is a bit skeptical of many things labeled as "self-care," I have noticed that even people who claim their "self-care" is not wasting time still complain about not being energized enough for work or socialization, so is their leisure time really all that productive? I don't think so. I still would claim that the activities I mentioned, as well as other activities such as movie-watching and lazing around the house, are common types of conspicuous leisure nowadays. – rachelwitzig5 years ago
That's actually an interesting point; I hadn't thought about the connection between conspicuous leisure and self-care, but you might be right. People claim that self-care preserves their mental health, but the "self-care" they prefer tends to consist mostly of their favorite hobbies (some of which, like watching TV or playing video games, are neutral or even net negatives for mental health), and rarely something with any clear connection to improving mental health (i.e., CBT, religious services, joining a volunteer organization, etc.). – Debs5 years ago
I think in the modern world where we view everybody's lives through the lense of social media it's a persistent idea in many minds. The idea that everybody is living their best life and basking in the sun, strolling through cities and generally enjoying their time in a leisurely fashion is often a misconception for a lot of the social examples.
In a world rife with social media influencers it would be interesting to weigh up both sides of the digital frame and see it from the "consumer" perspective as well as those posting online and the work that goes into it. – CAntonyBaker5 years ago
Shounen manga and shoujo manga have both been perceived as opposite ends of the spectrum, with shounen being seen as 'for boys' and shoujo being seen as 'for girls'. Analyse how both demographics explore femininity and female empowerment, and how the stereotypes of both demographics can affect the way women are written or interpreted by the audience.
How are women often portrayed in shounen manga? How does this compare with shoujo? Where are the similarities, and to what extent are these similarities cultural? Is it fair to expect a shounen manga to emphasize female characters when the target audience is supposedly largely male? And are our stereotyped perceptions on these demographics even true anymore? Manga like Naruto, FMA, Sailor Moon and Akatsuki no Yona touch on these questions and may be good considerations
Numerous stories have featured plants in the role of villains. These plants range from minor nuisances (like the mandrakes in Harry Potter) to central antagonists (as in the musical Little Shop of Horrors). Why are people so fascinated by the idea of plants as villains? What are some examples of real-life dangerous plants? Are there any particular real-life plants that seem to get used as models for evil plants more often, and if so, why?
Maybe people get tired of pruning and they start blaming plants for their health problems? Or maybe get traumatized by them?
The Venus fly-trap and poison ivy are used a lot (from what I've seen).
Interesting topic. – OkaNaimo08195 years ago
I think to explore this as a use of flora in science-fiction and fantasy would be thought provoking considering the ongoing discussions surrounding climate change. Some of these stories have evolved from the "plants taking earth back" perspective and could be viewed as the motive. Others, in the case of The Last Of Us and the Cordyceps, are more of an inspirational note where ideas from nature have informed designs and creative solutions – CAntonyBaker5 years ago
Scott McCloud's graphic novel "The Sculptor" gained recognition for its art and plot. "It was the best graphic novel I've read in years" were Neil Gaiman's words to describe how much it is a good read. The events pivot around the protagonist David Smith who was granted the power to turn anything he imagines into reality through sculpture. That was, however, only made possible when Death manifested itself in the form of his uncle Harry to tell him that he will, in return, have just 200 days to live. As the comic book was published in 2015, it could be assumed that it questions the position of art in modern society. Considering the capitalist lifestyle in the American society, McCloud seeks to criticize how art cannot always be treated as a business and that we should not forget its primary purpose.