What do you think of Victor Frankenstein and his monster? I have always believed that the death of his mother caused him to go mad. His creation of the monster was his ill attempt at trying to resurrect a being so that the same method may be used on his mother. I have heard that he may have been mad since childhood and the death of his mother catapulted him into his obsession with creation.
I just re-read Frankenstein in my English class this semester and I must say, the connection you made between the monster and his mother is something that has shooketh my perspective on the book. I never looked at the experiment this way but it makes sense and gives Frankenstein some purpose. It is clear to me that the monster is more Victor, less his creation. – Kiranpreet Sandhu7 years ago
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein has always been a book I over examine. I made the same connection with the death of Victor's mother and his growing insanity, however I usually took an extra step further. The monster would open a door of possibilities for Victory. As you pointed out, he could use the same for his mother. I think that Victor also wanted to make something he could maintain, control and have as a companion for ever. He could replace body parts as they decay and he could keep it living for all time. His mother died and that made Victor realize that everyone, including his love, will eventually die. A manufactured monster? Could be his friend, companion even a lover for ages to come. – MoonKat7 years ago
WWE recently collaborated with HBO to make a documentary, and you don’t need to care one iota about wrestling to find the whole movie enthralling. The documentary, called Andre the Giant, examines the life of the titular wrestler. Analyzing how the documentary humanizes a man who was often portrayed as a monster could lead to an interesting article.
Discuss the show 'Crazy Ex-Girlfriend'. Rebecca Bunch is not your typical heroine or female role model protagonist in a series. The title of the show literally refers to her as ‘crazy’ and the show starts off with her moving across the country to stalk her ex-boyfriend to play tricks and games in hopes to make him fall in love with her. Yeah sure, she behaves crazy and insane and is completely delusional but is there something profoundly powerful in her character as well? Is she a positive and strong female character for viewers? In this past season she was diagnosed with borderline personality disorder and the last few episodes dealt with her trying to understand and work through her new diagnosis. Often women have been labelled as ‘crazy’ by ex-boyfriends or men in general to excuse their own behaviour or to diminish the validity of women’s claims. What is this show tackling in using the word ‘crazy’ and what is the importance of Rebecca Bunch’s role on television?
In Victorian literature, many of the women within the pages of novels and poems fall under the wings of the 'angel in the house'. Meaning, they are submissive and devoted to their husband/father/some sort of male figure. But, do you think the angel in the house is gone? Has she returned in modern day texts? Subconsciously, is she still apart of many women in literature today?
Love this topic. I hadn't heard of the "angel in the house" before, so thanks for that, too. I do believe she still exists in literature, but has had to modernize herself for the sake of readers who have different views of devotion and submission. Jane Eyre is one such angel that comes to mind. She's from a "classic," and becomes devoted to Rochester. At the same time, she makes it quite clear to him that she has an independent will, expects to be treated as a person, and will take no crap. – Stephanie M.7 years ago
Throughout the years, young-adult fiction has been a fascinating sub-genre of novels, ranging from sparkling vampires to dystopian worlds. In particular, the growing popularity of these books, and the recent trend of books-turned-movies has shot YA fiction into the spotlight. With popular series’ like “Twilight” and the “The Hunger Games,” there has been a surge of ‘copycat’ themes and styles arising, which has influenced the genre in many ways.
Starting from the origins of young, coming-of-age novels, like S.E. Hinton’s “The Outsiders,” where has the genre shifted, changed, and grown? How has the content of these novels altered and does that reflect a difference of perspective in modern times?
Oh, there's so much you can do with this topic... :) – Stephanie M.7 years ago
I think it's important to talk about how the popularity of the movie adaptions of these books in turn also changed the focus of these works. (How the changes made in the production of the movie have since perpetuated similar shifts in the writing of new YA books based on the good reception of the movies) – PfD7 years ago
Great topic. You can mention how the trends in YA Books influence in different generations: pre-teens, teenagers, young adults, and their parents. – sterlinajames7 years ago
As an avid reader of YA, I would love to read something like this! Something that I think would be really interesting to discuss is the increasing popularisation of subgenres within YA, most notably Fantasy and dystopian Science Fiction. For some reason, I see people talk more about these kinds of books than the more realistic ones. I personally think that both of these kinds of YA novels have their merits but it'd be really interesting to see the author's take in this. – PhoebeLupton7 years ago
Bioshock and objectivism. Braid and determinism. Senua's sacrifice and free will. Videogames frequently borrow concepts and tropes and sometimes are based entirely around philosophies. In what is eventually a limited medium – as one has to 'win' the game – is this a misguided attempt to elevate an ultimately flawed art form? Or can videogames be an entry point towards encouraging philosophical thought in others?
While this topic would be very interesting, it would be very broad to apply philosophy to 'video games' generally, but could be very interesting if written as specific articles focusing on a certain game or genre of game and relating a philosophical theory or thought to it in that way. Although this area is something I would definitely like to see more of at The Artifice. – Nodgnal7 years ago
I think "one has to 'progress through' the game" is fairer because maybe getting stuck is the point of some games. Or other games like The Stanley Parable or Until Dawn finish no matter what you do.
I think this is a good topic though and l suspect the case will be that philosophy can absolutely be explored through video games. I look forward to seeing some obvious and less obvious examples about video games that do this. – CallMeMaybe7 years ago
Acheivements have been available for quite some time in the form of PC gaming on Steam. However, with the addition of these starting the XBox 360/PS3 era, I think there has been a shift in how many people perceive playing games. For myself, I research video game literary studies, so I have seen my own perceptions in playing games. When I was younger, I played simply to enjoy a game, play a story, do a little grinding, but when it moved to this acheivement system, I found myself playing game differently. No matter what, the trophies are in the back of my mind. I am constantly thinking about what I need to get the Platinum. Also, when I play as a researcher, I am looking for more story moments, so games that are combat heavy (BioShock Infinite) that have a great story tend to feel like a slog. How can we, as gamers and researchers, keep these different gaming "personalities" in check so that gaming doesn't feel like a job or chore, and what does it mean for gaming in the future? Looking at somthing like a David Cage game (I'm looking at you, Detroit: Become Human) is obviously great for the research, but playing to get the Platinum is an entirely new beast altogether, and they tend to meld when playing.
To boil it down, how has the advent of achievements/trophies changed the way gamers look at, and subsequently, enjoy video games? Do the trophies make them more fun or more of a chore after so long?
I think this is an interesting topic. I have found that chasing platinum trophies keeps me playing a game well past the point of it being fun. The competitiveness of a given game reaches into a kind of meta-realm where the achievements of gamers are comparable through an achievement/trophy system. The desire to escape this phenomena could possibly be linked to the resurgence in retro gaming. No recorded achievements, simply gaming for gaming's sake. – Kormax7 years ago
Has the over sexualization of teenage characters in tv shows gone to far? The argument of whether it's glamorizing unacceptable behaviour and provocative themes for the young fans? Or trying to show the reality of what the lives could be for children at such a young age?
As the tag you have used Riverdale, which is an interesting choice, as it is not necessarily on the top of the list I would consider for sexualisation of teenagers. I would have perhaps put something like Gossip Girl, Skins, or The OC, etc.
I think, however, that this is an interesting topic and would require a good discussion of what is sexualisation and what is sexual-representation of teenage behaviour. I think a good part of this discussion is in the look at the relevant viewer ages of such shows, the target demographic, etc. But also then a necessary part of the conversation needs to be that now with internet streaming and Netflixs, why does it matter if teenagers are presented in a sexualised manner when it seems most teens are actually watching shows such as Game of Thrones? – SaraiMW7 years ago
It might be a completely different ball-park at this point, but you should check out some of the controversy surrounding the currently airing anime: "My Hero Academia" and it's representing of it's central teenage characters. Here is a good brief write-up of one person's frustrations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke1YKF3tNCE I know Japan is an entirely different culture and it may not be exactly what you're looking for, but considering how often the 15-year-olds on the show end up being top-less or in swimsuits it is troubling and could serve as an interesting alternate example for you to present. It's definitely an interesting topic though, as Riverdale does have some troubling tendencies as a series. I can't wait to see whatever you come up with! – BioLizard7 years ago
The newly released first-person, open world RPG "Kingdom Come: Deliverance" has been criticized in some quarters (perhaps unfairly) for not including black people in the game. Vocal defenders have emphasized the game's commitment to historical accuracy (after all, there would likely have been no black people in a small village in medieval Bohemia, where the game begins) and have frequently mocked the criticism as further evidence of the ridiculousness of the social justice warrior.
What does historical accuracy even mean when it comes to this RPG? Is it historically accurate to exclude black people yet to include the possibility of becoming a "bard" or a "knight"? The term "bard" wouldn't apply to medieval Bohemia, either, and lowly blacksmiths of that time simply didn't climb the social ladder; they pretty much lived and died in the same lower class that they were born into. Is it historically accurate to not have fantastical creatures to battle yet still to allow the player character to craft potions using a skill called "alchemy"? Those potions create short-term buffs that don't look at all the different from the buffs created by magic potions in medieval fantasy RPGs such as The Witcher or Baldur's Gate.
Though slightly tangential, this might shed some light on the matter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxV8gAGmbtk – ProtoCanon7 years ago
The video is really good and very relevant to the discussion. Thanks for the link! – JamesBKelley7 years ago
An interesting factor to consider is how 'historical realism' affects the look and feel of the game itself. In some games the inclusion of a small number of historically realistic elements conflicts with a fantastical game setting, and can have a negative effect on the player experience (dependent on their awareness of the relevant historical culture). A colleague of mine, Gareth Wild https://jamescook.academia.edu/GarethWild has commented on this regarding the 'Imperials' in Morrowind, who are the only faction clearly derived from a historical culture - ancient Rome - and in appearance are almost identical to Roman soldiers of the period. This interpolates the impression of a well known 'real' culture into a fantasy setting which does not include that history, which conflicts with the 'imaginary' history of the game environment... – Menadue7 years ago
Menadue, the very same sort of thing occurs in Fallout: New Vegas, with Caesar's Legion. For some reasons, ancient Rome is commonly resurrected in our fantasy RPG games. That would make a great essay topic in itself: Ancient Rome and Modern Fantasy. – JamesBKelley7 years ago
The Greatest Showman is a movie-musical that explores the (partially fictionalized) life of P.T. Barnum and the development of the circus. It hasn’t been widely criticized for the erroneous portrayals of certain characters and the way in which it manipulated the story.
This topic would explore the historical accuracy and inaccuracies of the movie and work to illuminate the historical elements that the movie worked to cover up through its narrative.
Nice, but you could go well beyond The Greatest Showman if you wanted. If a movie is historical, you can pretty much bet it will be riddled with inaccuracies. Thirteen Days is the movie that comes to mind, but even historical fiction has this problem (Pocahontas, anyone)? I think it would be beneficial to explore historical inaccuracies in movies, in general. Which inaccuracies are we more apt to accept? Why? Which historical events are glossed over or ignored, or changed? I see a wealth of possibilities here. – Stephanie M.7 years ago
I like this topic, expecially when it is considered in broader terms like: should art strive for historical accuracy, and how accurate must i be? One could also consider whether an artist is ever obliged to represent history inaccurately. I could see this being the case for purposes of racial or gender representation in art. – alexbolano927 years ago
I would love to read this topic. After watching the movie, I was wondering about its historical background, and how accurate it was. The movie is excellent (I'm not saying it's not), and I love the songs, and everything, but I know people wouldn't have danced to pop music back in the 1800s (was it?). – sterlinajames7 years ago
My dad actually made this comment after watching the film. He wanted to know how much of the film was actually accurate, and I believe this would be an interesting read! – snlfilm7 years ago
PT Barnum definitely came across better in the film than he did in reality. It would be interesting to look at not only what historical inaccuracies there are, but why. For example, Barnum's first "freak" was an 80 year old woman who he claimed was much older than that. When she died, he sold tickets to her autopsy. In the movie, there is a relationship between Barnum and Jenny Lind even though that never actually happened. I do love the songs in this film, but there were many historical inaccuracies that erased Barnum's racism and abilism. – banne7 years ago
I agree with alexbolano92. I think this is a good topic. And it deserves a close look at how accurate a historical movie could be and should be. – Jingyi7 years ago
Typically the nationality of bad guys in film and television storylines is Russian, and more recently North Korean (or an un-named Asian nation such as in Tomorrow When the War Began). Is this selection merely a historical choice due to past conflict?
How does this play in to real world perceptions of these nations today?
Very interesting topic that I think could turn into an excellent article. It could chronologically follow the trends of how the antagonist other is represented in media throughout history and examine how they reflect the contemporary zeitgeist; Russia during the Cold War, terrorism post-9/11, North Korea more recently, etc. Going for a broader and more nuanced perspective, you could also compare this to non-Western examples. One film that comes to mind is Ip-Man 2, which has a pretty blatantly antagonistic depiction of British imperialism, reflecting Hong Kong's complicated (post-)colonial history and present. I'm sure there are other great examples as well if you dig into it. – blautoothdmand7 years ago
I am accepting this in the spirit of it rather than the letter and assuming the discussion is in relation to Western representations of villains.
I think there is a strong connection to the perception of the villains in film/TV and those in the culture that produced them, which is normal. What would be interesting to look at is when particular nations are represented as villains at different times and what incited change. – SaraiMW7 years ago
There's definitely a culture of finding and portraying the villains where you want them to be- similarly to how gender-diverse people are often the villains in TV and movies, in an effort to subtly portray them as deviants and demonise them (literally, in the case of characters like Him from PPG)- for decades people have portrayed Nazis, Russians, and more recently people in the Middle East as a sort of uniform evil without much need (or desire) to dig deeper into it. If you refer to the beginning of Black Panther you also see an example of a slightly vague fictional Boko Haram or similar African Muslim extremist group taken down by T'Challa in a style reminiscent of shooter game missions with the objective of 'take down these villains, save the hostages, shoot first ask questions later'. In the rise of neo-nazism there is sometimes objection to these uniform representations of their predecessors as evil- and certainly there are muslims I know who were bothered by the way black muslims were represented as faceless villains. I feel this topic is most interesting in regards to how and why people fight against stereotypes and perceptions, rather than simply cultural shifts. – GRandall7 years ago
There are several components that must be present in writing in order for literature to become – well, literature. Once such component that isn't a necessity, but nevertheless, occurs frequently in novels, poetry, historical documents, and even political texts is religion. While we know such classics like Charlotte Bronte's _Jane Eyre_ and Shakespeare's _Rome and Juliet_ are teeming with religious allusions, can we say that religion, or religious undertones, in some form are present in nearly everything we read? This also requires us to ask if we have a common idea of what religion really is. Does it simply mean any set of principles or beliefs by which we choose to live, or must religion involve a higher power or entity? To culturally define religion and ask ourselves if we are being fed religious ideas while we read whatever we read is something about which I have often wondered. Discussion?
Love this topic, especially since there are literally dozens of options to write about. – Stephanie M.7 years ago
I love the emphasis on questioning what exactly IS religion. Because explicit, traditional religions may not be present in every piece of literature, but religious patterns almost certainly can be found. Life of Pi may be a really good one to analyze! – Heather Lambert7 years ago
Religion does play a huge part in literature. Though religion is a touchy subject to many, I do believe that many of the religious beliefs branch off of one another and certain authors will do their best to have their reader follow the specific principles. – JasonDangTellem7 years ago
Many of today's most popular stories require some suspension of disbelief to be enjoyed, and yet there are some who believe there is a line that suspension of disbelief shouldn't cross. I'm not sure where that line is, but I have found my suspension "breaking" and disrupting the story sometimes. This is especially true for children's and YA novels. For example, I love A Little Princess but as an adult, I find myself questioning, "Isn't Sara's rescue extremely contrived? Am I, a modern reader, supposed to believe this to any extent?" Same for Harry Potter–the adult side of me continually says, "Deep cover or not, how did Severus Snape ever manage to keep his job? Has Hogwarts never heard of ethical hiring practices or HR?" Same for Narnia–"You're telling me these four children maintained what is essentially a double life for years, and then just died/disappeared at the end of The Last Battle, and no one said a word?"
Of course, many of these books, and adult books too, are fantasies and can play by looser rules in terms of disbelief suspension. But even in those cases, questions remain. Even today's children are reluctant to suspend disbelief because they know more than ever about how the world around them operates. My big question is, has the amount of information and analysis we're privy to in the modern world made us too cynical to enjoy a story that demands we suspend disbelief? Have we suspended it too much or too little? How can an author do suspension of disbelief well? Discuss.
The concept of suspended belief I think also needs to be considered from the intended audience, for example the children's literature you outlined I think only needs to meet the suspended belief of its age group. However, I would also add that both Tolkien and Lewis had a lot to say about the importance of accepting the genre as part of suspending disbelief - as in that by accepting it is a fantasy genre means that real life concerns should be overlooked.
Yet I too agree that I struggle with this at times, yet less often in literature where I am more likely to allow an author "literary license," but rather in film I struggle with this when I feel they are stretching beyond the "realistic." I think too with the visual we are so aware of what visually something looks like in real life, or should fit the parameters of, that it is harder to suspend disbelief. Added to this is most people's understanding of costuming, make-up and CGI.
In regards to the second point it is worth acknowledging that different genres have different levels of suspension, and then target audience may influence this. However, at the end of the day I think most of the time it is good writing and an amazing narrative that carries you through. – SaraiMW7 years ago
Suspension of disbelief is also a core theatrical convention that implies a level of cognitive dissonance from the audience; they know there are lighting rigs and stage doors and one space within which the action occurs, but leave this knowledge at the door. Conversely, actors imagine a "fourth wall" between themselves and the audience who subsequently become flies on the wall. That is true of realism. Other non-realistic styles of drama shatter this convention and want the constructed elements to be made as overt as possible to achieve the desired audience effect. In this way, suspension of disbelief may be seen to be a function of specific genres. Didactic, "Brechtian" theatre does this well through direct audience address, placards, non-linear narratives and costume changes on stage. Such conventions work to enhance the experience of the story and can also apply to novels. In Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughter House, the convention of a linear narrative is shattered. The audience embrace this as fundamental in conveying the disenfranchised, mentally ill central character. Can audiences of movies and readers of literature rather embrace the "gaps" in suspension of disbelief? – danielleraffaele7 years ago
The reality television show, Rupaul's Drag Race, has unquestionably brought the art of drag into mainstream culture. The show has particularly been praised for its inclusion of gay and transgender voices, yet feminists seem to disagree about what the popularisation of drag means for women. Do Rupaul and the drag queens on his show represent femininity and womanhood in a positive light, or encourage feminine stereotypes and rigid beauty standards? By dressing up "as women", are the queens showing an appreciation of femininity and reclaiming stereotypes of gay men? Or are they simply reinforcing harmful ideas about how women should look and behave? Would love to read people's views on this topic!
A discussion of Trans rights (Rupaul has come under fire from the Trans community many a time) as well as the ambiguity and contestation of gender/"womanhood" as such would be prudent to explore here, too. – ees7 years ago
I have binge watch Rupaul's show all week and although it is highly entertaining I have also been trouble by some of the dated definitions of gender on the show. I like the fact that clearly biological males are referred to repeatedly as women/girls because it does disturb our visual concepts of what is defined as 'womanhood'. But I am often troubled with the fact that 'womanhood' is then further described as pink, 'glittery', feminine, etc. etc... also, the beauty standards are definitely set at glamour and that further isolates not just the expectation of women but also men. – imaenad7 years ago
These queens are encouraging feminism an womanhood. Their goal is to look and act like confident women. RuPaul refers to the anatomically correct males and women, girls and queens. By doing this he is throwing out the typical genre roles and treating these people the way they fee and want to be treated. Feminism is making women equal to men and if these men feel like women then they should be treated equally. They encourage men who feel like queens to stand up and own themselves, they encourage women be true to their femininity while breaking the classic view of women having to be proper, pink and perfect. RuPaul's show portrays real life and real people. Nothing harmful towards women come from that show. – princessmia7 years ago
I am a fan of the show too and agree that it is positive in many ways. It definitely encourages tolerance which is fantastic. I also agree that lots of the queens subvert feminine stereotypes by being crude and “unladylike” and I think that this should be included in the discussion. But if I were to give an example of something harmful towards women which has come from the show, I would direct you to the championing of Violet Chachki’s thinness in season 7. She even did a runway where she happily joked about being dangerously thin by wearing a fake life support machine and an extremely tight corset. I definitely think this is harmful to women’s body image, and insensitive to eating disorder survivors (who are mostly women). – Indigo7 years ago
It would be interesting to explore the problematic nature of Rupaul's comments at various times throughout the running of Rupaul's Drag Race. It seems that every once in a while, Rupaul says something terrible about trans people, or her comments seem to imply a disrespect for trans individuals. So incorporation of that into something like this topic would be interesting! – nathanl7 years ago
John Wayne was seen as the epitome of the American Hero during the age of the Western film. He was beloved by many, even with his strong conservative politics and often brash language. However, in the 60s, America's view shifted. They no longer looked to Westerns for inspiration and John Wayne, while still beloved, faded to the background (as symbolically seen in "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance". I would like to see an analysis of John Wayne's connection to American culture further, and his impact on American culture long after America turned away from him.
Something interesting one could pursue while contemplating this topic is James Baldwin's discussion of John Wayne in his unfinished book- now a film- "I am Not Your Negro." In it he discusses heroes, in particular figures like John Wayne; a perspective like this I think could be an interesting frame of reference for a topic like this. In particular, I find this quote of Baldwin's to be very powerful: “A Black man who sees the world in the way John Wayne sees it would not be an eccentric patriot, but a raving maniac…The truth is that this country does not know what to do with its Black population.” – ees7 years ago
This is an interesting topic, especially because westerns seem to be having a comeback after a long dry spell. Between the Magnificent 7 reboot, Hostless, Godless, and Westworld, westerns are back in fashion. Are these new westerns evidence that audiences wish to rekindle themes of John Wayne movies? – Ben Lashar7 years ago
I believe the word "art" is becoming a broader term as time goes on. "Art" no longer solely refers to paintings and sculptures. Art has expanded to include photography, graffiti, abstract sketches, and more. But now it's 2018, and digital media, the evolving monster, continues to grow. Now, things like Instagram profiles and blogs on Tumblr are becoming somewhat reminiscent of works of art, at least in the world of the internet. Many internet-lovers refer to these "artistic" accounts as having an "aesthetic."
I do think these aesthetically pleasing accounts have artistic qualities about them, but is it right to consider this art? Does the internet and social media change the ways in which we perceive art? Does social media create limitations or opportunities for art and the definition of art itself?
a great place to start for whoever may choose this topic is Roger Scruton's "Why Beauty Matters." In it Scruton argues that there are certain parameters that have been and should be set on what is considered "art," as well as who can and should be considered an artist. He discusses what he sees as the breaking points in the artistic world which lead to art deviating from what he considers to be the true purpose of art. Since this topic asks to consider what should and should not fall into the category of art, as well as changes in artistic perception, it seems like Scruton's work would be an ideal place to start when considering the issues presented in this topic. – ees7 years ago
I think there can be and often is a distinction between Art and something that is simply aesthetically pleasing. Patterns on carpets, cushions and neckties can be aesthetically pleasing, but I think we'd seldom call them Art. Although ultimately whether something is Art is in the eye/ear of the beholder, for me Art has to convey something of the human condition, however abstract. It should resonate personally with the beholder at some deeper level. The Scruton documentary is interesting. I have a bit of a connection with it in that it uses some of my music (the music that starts at around 48:55 is mine, you can hear the full track here: https://soundcloud.com/broomoid/annotations-iii-closing ). Ironically, I fairly strongly disagree with his central premise that contemporary Art is not concerned with beauty. I think Scruton presents an idea of beauty which is very narrow in scope indeed, and anything that falls outside it is discounted as not worthy of consideration. But the idea that contemporary artists by and large do not concern themselves with balance, with composition, with tone, line, weight, texture and with the same artistic rigour as earlier artists, albeit applied in markedly different ways, is simply not true. I believe the best sort of discussion about Art ideally opens some additional doors to those that partake, but I believe that in his documentary Scruton is closing more doors than he is opening, and that's a missed opportunity. – Broomoid7 years ago
A common argument I see regarding certain anime is that "people love to hate" popular anime. I've seen this geared towards Your Name., Sword Art Online, Haikyuu, and many more. On one hand, I can see this as a way for people to be playing devil's advocate so that people don't blindly jump into a show without being aware of its faults. This is especially true of Sword Art Online. I can't say I'm a fan of the show at all, but I can see why people are drawn to it, and the same things that I may dislike, other people might not mind. However, I'm sure there are people who label an anime as overrated and boring simply because the show is popular. What are everyone else's thoughts on the argument that people like to hate popular anime? Why do you think that is people try to tout this particular argument?
There are quite a few topic suggestions already concerning anime at The Artifice, so perhaps it would be worth combining a few of these into an overall analysis regarding the pros and cons of anime and what, in particular, people find displeasing or enjoyable. I think a lot of the hatred boils down to personal taste and that eternally ridiculous question of what's the 'best' or 'greatest'; highly subjective at best, which I've made comments about regarding another anime topic suggestion. Having said that, perhaps the simple fact that a popular anime series or film is just that, i.e. 'popular' automatically triggers the hate response in those who feel a burning need to hate popular culture, for whatever reason. Going slightly off topic a moment, but still (sort of) relevant, being a loyal fan of the original Sherlock Holmes stories I resisted the new BBC 'Sherlock' series because I didn't think it would work in a modern day setting...and how wrong I was! Hmph, lesson learned. Regarding anime, we also have to consider the blind preconceptions many in the West still have about 'cartoon' entertainment being only for children, but I'm in danger of repeating myself here so I'll stop. Anyway, a good topic suggestion in my opinion and you get my vote. – Amyus7 years ago
An analysis of the appeal behind modern movies that attempt to re-create the aesthetics and storytelling elements of grindhouse and b-movies from the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s. This analysis could explore themes of nostalgia, kitsch, and DIY film-making. Some examples could include "Black Dynamite," Kung Fury," "Italian Spiderman," "Hobo with a Shotgun," and "Planet Terror/Death Proof."
Let's not forget the Turkish 'Star Wars' - a classic! – Amyus7 years ago
This would not only be a great synthesis of the history of b-movies and how past b-movie themes are being seen in today's movies. I also think that this is a fascinating topic to explore. – FrankWebb7 years ago
I think that a lot of Tarantino's work could actually be considered B-grade yet to the highest of calibre. Whilst his work is very much commercial and critically renowned, his writing, cinematography and overall direction is influenced by past B-grade films and influences many B-grade films to this day (like Kung Fury). – aarondiplacido7 years ago
The star system was the method of creating, promoting and exploiting stars in Hollywood films. Movie studios would select promising young actors and glamorize and create personas for them. They would go so far as to give them stage names and Cary Grant's real name was Archie Leach. Now, the phenomenon of the movie star is still used to lure audiences to the cinema. It leads to multi-million dollar paychecks, TMZ, and outrageous staking behavior from crazed fans. Is it time for this to end? Should there be caps on actor paychecks? Should we end tabloid news circuits? Should we stop televising award shows? Would it benefit society? Would it bankrupt Hollywood?
Yes. It's about time that this crazy star system should end and more reasonable salaries or fees introduced. When it gets to the point whereby an actor can command a multi-million dollar contract and yet a struggling British nurse cannot even receive a decent pay rise, despite working a 60 hour week, then something has gone seriously wrong with the world (excuse the politics). So, yes to capping actors earnings, yes to ending the tabloid news circus. Awards ceremonies are shams and as to wether it would bankrupt Hollywood - who really cares? – Amyus7 years ago
I have all sorts of questions about fairness and legality:
Who would have the authority to put caps on actor paychecks? Who would have the authority to end tabloid news circuits?
Can we reasonably cap the paychecks in one industry but not in others? What about company CEOs? Or big sports players? What makes the entertainment industry so in need of (selective) regulation? – JamesBKelley7 years ago
In a capitalist system, money is often diverted towards that which society perceives as requiring greatest demand. If a doctor makes one person healthier in a day, but a movie star makes 10,000 people happier in an hour, how else should one expect the remuneration to be allocated? – Psiwrite7 years ago
It seems all of my favourite writers, actors, poets, artists, painters, etc… have had some guiding pain in their life that really came out in their work. Take Van Gogh or Elliot Smith, these guys expressed their pain through art, and beautifully. But what about those happy artists, or the artists completely content with life? Are there any? One that comes to mind is Bob Marley. What are your guys' thoughts on the matter?
Creativity does appear to be produced by angst. – Munjeera7 years ago
Good topic suggestion! It might be worthwhile expanding this idea to take a broader look at the artist/writer's background and upbringing as well, in order to gain some understanding of the origin of that 'pain'. For instance, you mention Van Gogh (who happens to be my favourite painter) - not many know that he was named Vincent, after an earlier sibling who died before he was born, so try to imagine how a sensitive soul like Vincent would feel, growing up, knowing he had been named almost as a replacement for his dead brother. – Amyus7 years ago
I think everyone in life has had their share of pain. Pain is different for different people, but all lives have ups and downs, no matter how steep. people draw from their human experience to create art, which I personally think includes pain. I don't think you have to be depressed to create something special, but pain is often inspiration for innovative creations. – alyssabrown57 years ago
Edmund Wilson certainly saw a connection between suffering and art. He was a famous critic who wrote about that connection in a series of essays under the collection title Wound And The Bow: Seven Studies In Literature. – JamesBKelley7 years ago
I think the important thing to remember in these cases is that art is often known for imitating life, or as a way to relate and provide insight into aspects of our life. Of course there's also the obvious - art is an escape from ourselves. With this in mind, wouldn't it be a fair assumption that life goes through a series of ups and downs, joy and pain? I personally think it's important to have a balance of the two to get a whole artistic image; I mean without knowing the great happiness we're missing out on, we can't purely work with pain. But why is it easier to create and relate to pain - is it because it gives us the freedom to be dramatic or feeling heard in an attempt to get back to reality and appreciate everything else? I don't know if anything I just wrote makes any sense, it's very late at night, but I find the topic idea very interesting! – GabB7 years ago
I think in order to create truly great, memorable art, the artist, of any kind needs to be in touch with a deep emotion that they are sensing and feeling. Art of any type, whether it is music, literature, poetry, painting, or sketching, derives from deep inspiration and in order to be counted as memorable the creator needs to feel that inspiration deeply. I don't believe the artist needs solely to be in pain to create a great piece of work. Extreme love, happiness, bliss, and admiration have also created great pieces of art as well. However, pain, suffering, are simply avenues that help people connect to deep emotional roots and serve as excellent sources of inspiration for artistic creativity. – TimothyCSvenson7 years ago
I believe the idea that suffering leads to great art is a myth - and an incredibly harmful one! The association of creativity with pain seems to lead to the romanticisation of mental illnesses. If people see mental illness as having an artistic and therefore economic value, then there is less motivation for mentally ill people to be treated.
The trope of the mentally ill artist also further stigmatises mentally ill people by suggesting they need to "redeem" themselves by having certain skills. I do think this is a very interesting topic and it would be great for someone to keep the stigma of mental illness in mind when discussing the pain of artists such as Van Gogh and Elliot Smith! – Indigo7 years ago
I do not believe that in order to create great art you must feel immense pain but I do believe that the great artists we know of had the ability to detail their pain in such a way that their consumers could do nothing but hold on to their work. We are aware of these artists because of their extreme behavior. After-all, our society is obsessed with pain and death. For some reason it interests us. Those attitudes keep us grounded. – Chelsiah7 years ago
Tennesse Williams was a tortured playwright- some of his best work stemmed from the worst moments in his life. Art often reflects reality and so ones reality (if troubled, optimistic or otherwise) is inherently embedded in the art. Art is subjective. However, the question may be if this is conscious (an overt statement) or perhaps simply a coincidence. An artist might produce beautiful, melancholic work and be totally at peace with the world. – danielleraffaele7 years ago
Often it's the pain of love or loss that leads artists to write such emotionally intense stories or poems.
James Joyce's autobiographical 'The Portrait of an Artist as a young man' shows how the painful experience of finding his true identity shaped him as an artist. Yeats in 'Meditations in Time of Civil war' stated that 'only an aching heart conceives a changeless work of art.'
– SarahPhilip7 years ago
Nice topic! Maybe, to be more specific, you could question why consumers are drawn to artists who are more "in pain" as you said, rather than the ones who seem to be"happy". – Gabby7 years ago
Well what can happiness create? An involvement of bright colors perhaps. Although, pain and misfortune experiences create this cataclysmic still among a storm, a blooming flower embracing the sun whilst its roots are mangled in jagged rocks.It is beauty! If one is happy then they are content, if they are not then chances are they will explore more as to why, immerse within the feeling. Some enjoy their demons, and let them takeover but those are just my two cents. – Febrilflor7 years ago