Topics

Discuss how the use of graphic novel may be appropriate to assist in crossing language or cultural barriers either online or in a classroom setting.

Ed Brubaker said, "If you look at the generation now in power in the entertainment industry, they grew up with comics as serious stuff. The Geeks have won." Discuss how elements of nerd culture have become part of every day life. Technology, media, the vanishing stigma of coding. Comic books and the rise of alternative fiction. Have the Geeks won?

Our current culture has it's fair share of 'strong female characters', but Veronica Mars is one who stands out. That's not because she makes speeches about making her own decisions, it's because she's the one getting stuff done. Rather than just reacting to what happens to her, she is the one making moves. Not just for one climatic moment- she is ALWAYS chasing down a case, getting a favour, asking the first question. She is the one people go to for help, she is the one you want on your side, because she is really good at what she does. The point is, female characters saying 'this is my choice' while deciding between love interests is not nearly as empowering as watching Veronica seeking out her own cases and succeeding by her own skill.

Discussion doesn't need to be limited to Veronica Mars. Other characters like Jessica Jones, and (sometimes) Emma Swan (OUAT) show proactive competence. There should definitely be comparisons to characters like Elena Gilbert (Vampire Diaries) who, while brave and occasionally proactive, still lapses into long periods of being rescued and only choosing between other people's plans.

Analyse how the use of silence in "A Quiet Place" makes the sparse *spoken dialogue more meaningful. In addition, how the use of silence heightens the tension during "monster" scenes in a new way than other similar movies in the thriller genre. Another question to ask would be the following: does the use of silence make the visuals in the movie even more powerful because *spoken dialogue is not a distraction? Or would more dialogue be helpful in the movie?
*One part I overlooked and which was pointed out to me is that ASL importantly figures into the plot as dialogue. This is another aspect of analysis.

I think it would be really interesting to compare the following: how female protagonists who are going through some sort of dating/relationship crisis when they are older are treated in comparison to movies about males going through the same thing. For instance, how This is 40 or The Other Woman compares to films like That Awkward Moment. The representation of how the female is 'supposed' to handle it according to the plot line vs. how a male in the same position is 'supposed' to handle it would be a key emphasis here.

It is not news to anyone who has been paying attention that the current era of television programming, on the legacy broadcast networks, cable channels and streaming services, is a golden age. But an exploration is warranted of how long this creativity can be sustained. At some point, the bubble has to burst, and a reduction in the number of high quality shows will have to decline as a result. Particularly relevant in a year when numerous critical and audience favourites like House of Cards, Veep and Game of Thrones are all ending.

I was inspired by "The Song of Achilles" by Madeline Miller that explores the love between Achilles and Patroclus that was erased or ignored by many historians and adaptations of the story of Troy. It could be a very productive idea to discuss how reclamation of our erased stories can be empowering. Could also make an intersection with race and gender for parallel.

Even casual fans of Zelda have heard of the triforce. The mystic golden triangles, left behind by the 3 goddesses after their divine act of creation, each represent a particular character trait, power, wisdom, and courage. The bearer of each piece of the triforce is said to personify the character traits that each piece represent. In addition, complete balance and mastery of the triforce requires one to have all three pieces at the same time. Without all three pieces at the same time, a person's soul is out of balance.

In a lot of ways, this characterization of the triforce shares similarities with Aristotle's virtue ethics. Aristotle wrote that in order for a person to reach eudaimonia (sometimes translated as 'flourishing' or 'happiness') they must have the proper balance of the different virtues, such as courage, wisdom, temperance, and justice. Aristotles ethics would provide a unique lens to analyze the different character in the Legend of Zelda and how the embody their respective virtues . Link obviously embodies courage, and its easy to see why. Link consistently takes on monsters 3 times his size, is motivated solely by justice, and is steadfast in his duty. An article examining the major characters of the series through the view of virtue ethics would be a neat take on the series.

Romance novel are often looked down on and seen as somehow inferior. Chick lit is a name that has negative connotations. It suggests something trashy or throwaway. Even Jane Austen, whose books are considered classics, is criticised for not concentrating on weightier issues. But why are romance novels so easily dismissed? Is it because it's mainly a genre written by women? Is it literary snobbery for something that is so popular? Romance, after all, is an important part of everyone's life. Most people either get married or live together. Obviously not all romance novels can be of the same calibre but many are well written and engaging. So there does seem to be an unfair tendency to criticise romance novels.

Look at this idea in terms of classic authors like Jane Austen and modern day authors like Diana Gabaldon or Nicholas Sparks.

Directors like David Lynch mislead audiences with dialogue. Going as far to create distorted backwards voices in Twin Peaks. Alfred Hitchcock once said a film only works if you can understand the story with no sound/dialogue. Explain the effect of dialogue and how it can be used to change the audience's perspective to intensify the visual elements of the storytelling process.

Those who have harassed and sexually assaulted others are finally coming to light. The skeletons are being flung out of many guilty people's closets and those who have suffered are speaking out. While it is not cleaning out everything, there is progress.

We have become familiar with publically "outing" abusers in the movie business. However, what do viewers, outside of the film industry, do to show their support for those who have suffered while protesting the offenders? Are we able to avoid a film because a director, producer or actor has harassed someone? Do we ignore the rest of the hard-working men and women attached to the set?

Are we able to appreciate the art of someone who is an offender?

John Belushi was a comedic talent above and beyond the ever constant flow of aspiring young actors. His antics were delivered with masterful ability in both television and film. His contribution to comedy, acting, and singing set the image for future actors to emulate. So, is it safe to say that Chris Farley was merely following the mold set by others or that he added his own specific brand of skill to a familiar venue? Consider the factors that play into developing the unique performer, while simultaneously pointing out the distinctive traits of the personality. Does comedic talent necessitate a lesser or more pronounced counterpart, much like Laurel and Hardy in order to cultivate the creative juices? How much of an effect does audience have on delivery and captivating tension? Are props, musical score, setting, and dialogue vital to the production or simple accessories of the process? Does the climactic spectacle require a "Who's on first?" dialogue as the one coined by Abbott and Costello, or is it merely the chemistry between the characters?

With a focus on the tentative new Prison Break reboot, this article would discuss the effective and ineffective aspects of television reboots and when and where the line should be drawn and the show should be over.

Rubber necking is the macabre desire people have to slow down near car-wrecks to see what happened. No desire to actually stop and help, but a twisted urge to see the gore and horror of an accident. I think shows such as 'UnReal,' 'You're The Worst' and 'Flesh and Bone' rely on the same instinct. They include trying terrible things perpetrated by truly terrible characters, and not in a genre way such as horror or fantasy, but in a real life manner. The psychological damage these characters constantly present in their real lives is so disturbing to watch, and it is of course inevitable that their lives are a series of car-wrecks. The question I have is why are we so engrossed by this? What is it about seeing truly terrible acts of people acting in completely psychologically unhealthy ways that means we can't look away from the screen?

This article seeks to pinpoint and discuss re-used/well-worn tropes in literature surrounding the issue of family and the background/ongoing story of a fantasy literary protagonist! What exactly is it about the tropes that fuels a protagonist's backstory – that makes it interesting? Why are these tropes used time and again (i.e. Dead Parents, Wicked Stepmother, Death by Childbirth); and in your opinion, are they useful, or too well-worn? Are there any notable exceptions where family either doesn't play a huge role (i.e. they're not mentioned), or they do, and are treated much as part of the protagonist's current story line as their past reason for doing things/giving them angst and trauma?

(It could be worth looking at TV Tropes and other websites for names of particular 'tropes' to discuss and explore).

A little bit of a silly topic this one, but I have been pondering the power of the cliche. For a long while in film, television and literature a lot of discussion was engaging in creating original art – to the extent of pushing away from the cliche. Ensuring that regardless of what would or would not work for the narrative, the most important factor was ensuring that it was not a cliche. Have we now pushed far enough out that the cliche has become nostalgic? What I thought might be interesting is having a look at what cliches still have juice to squeeze (star crossed lovers) and what others need to remain in the dead and buried (man of the house).

For the past few years, the phrase 'going viral' has been shown, to a increasingly greater extent, to shape what we might see and hear in the media – for better, or worse. Snapchat stories, vines, Youtube videos, memes, etc. gain attention and become news, earning their 'stars' perhaps longer than five minutes of fame, and instead spawning television appearances, or merchandise, for example.

How much is this a sign of the ongoing pace of what we consume as media on the internet, and how much of it can be controlled? Does this have any good, or detrimental effects (e.g. using examples, is there anything very good, or very bad, that has happened from a particular video/article/picture, going viral?)?

A look at the prevalence and effects of sexism in tabletop RPGs, such as DandD. How are female players and their characters treated by their male counterparts during a game session? How does this differ from a female character played by a male player, if at all? Some women who play RPGs have gone to certain lengths to avoid sexism during game play, such as forming all-female leagues. How is extreme sexism that wouldn't otherwise be tolerated in everyday life by male players justified during a game? There are many routes this could go, but it is, I feel, a fascinating subject with many points that could be taken away by various audiences.

Does physical presence primarily carry the screen character, or does the dialogue and script or director and cast influence the dramatic effect behind entertainment? In the process of this consideration, explore classic one-liners instituted by Mae West burlesque sketches in film and song. Among the other possible directions to elaborate, television greats such Jackie Gleason of The Honeymooners fame and his nonstop banter against his wife, his neighbor, and the slew of supporting roles displayed in a variety of episodes. This point can be expanded to other genres or periods such as: the Clint Eastwood 1970s role of Dirty Harry or the snide remarks of Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Terminator series.

The topic so far is merely a question in my head, and there are things too that I am uncertain about, such as whether this fits under writing or literature…

But what I hope for someone to explore is precisely what does the attainment or possession of the coveted position bode for the future of the writer? For many authors, the Nobel Prize in Literature is the ultimate, if not the most significant and most revered, position one can attain. It is a validation of one's place in history, a literal title that translates into the opposite of oblivion, instead, it is the acknowledgment that one has made great contributions to the development of literature, whose legacy will be set in stone and whose name will not be so easily forgotten.

In many of our minds, the awarding of the Nobel Prize comes late in the author's life: it is the crowning achievement of decades of hard, continuous work, the culmination and recognition of multiple published books, and the result of authorial evolution, progress, and contribution.

My question then is, what happens after?
Has this recognition amplified their prior productivity? Or stunted it? Does winning the prize make the writer take a step back from their typewriter and say, "this is it, there is no more need for anything else", or does it motivate them to continue the work they have begun, only stopping when they finally pass?

Jean-Paul Sartre, who famously declined the Prize in 1964, continued working tirelessly on his "Critique of Dialectical Reason" until his passing. William Faulkner (who also hated the fame that the Prize brought), after winning it in 1949, wrote two landmark works after, A Fable (1954) and The Reivers (1962).

There aren't many examples of writers who have continued their intensity of producing works after the awarding of the Prize, but anyone who takes up this topic could look at those who did, the nature of the works after the winning of the Prize, and whether the attainment of this revered position has positively or negatively influenced the legacy of the writers.