Forum: Story Discussion and Feedback

That's why I dropped my social media 6 months ago.

Social media is just a tool, and like all tools, mileage gained depends on how you use it. Twitter, I have no time for, it's of no use to me (too narcissistic), Facebook on the other hand, is really good for co-ordinating and keeping in touch with family members around the world and co-ordinating work projects. I do have visibility split into two though. Personal and work, and never the twain shall meet.

For instance, I can take a picture of a construction site, have visibility marked only for work contacts and they can say, "I'm putting services across yadda" and someone will come on and say "If you are doing that, then I need access at this point to do nadda..." And one picture everyone can see, will in effect, co-ordinate itself, removing the need for everyone to attend a meeting on site, and more importantly removing the need for (in reality) wasteful transit time to and from a site which for most, would be at least a day wasted.

Family wise, it allows me to keep tabs on older members who are many miles away via Facetime and I can see how they look, how they sound, how they are moving and make a more practical assessment as to how 'I'm fine, I'm good' they say they are. All without appearing too 'mothering'.

Well, I understand that Americans have a weird way of it, but even then I believe those who think they're not into politics are effectively self-delusional.

I have an MC who insists he is apolitical and is regularly schooled on the fact that EVERYTHING is political.

Yes, but... the original poster's point is a good one. There's screed/rant and there's art. One can lecture or one can show.

The rants get old fast and are not persuasive. Art can be.

One of the most influential books in my life is Orwell's 1984. Political? Hell, yeah. But done through showing rather than ranting.

Yes, but... the original poster's point is a good one. There's screed/rant and there's art. One can lecture or one can show.

I wasn't disputing that; I was commenting on the idea that anyone could actually be apolitical throughout their entire existence.

Wouldn't claiming to be apolitical be in itself a political statement?

Absolutely. He's called out on THAT, too! :-)

Absolutely anything and everything anyone is ever written or said is political propaganda in some way

Isn't that a literary version of anthropomorphic personification?

Yes, I agree with you that some works are deliberate political propaganda in some way, George Orwell's Animal Farm for instance. But to state that all written work is political? That the adventures of Blyton's Famous Five are political propaganda? That sounds to me like personification, where a reader is attributing something as being something else because that's how they perceive it, rather than how it actually is. A mixture of positive bias and perceivement (ie I like fish so everyone else must like fish as well).

One thing humans are good at, is overthinking. Ie, that girl really likes that man and likes being with him, so she must want to sleep with him, as opposed to, she just actually likes him platonically and likes being around him.

Of course, no spy movie/book would be seen dead without making some outrageous intellectual leap of faith over how some politician is going to vote in an upcoming vote because they had three eggs that morning. When most likely, that politician just fancied three eggs that morning.

EDIT:

A mixture of positive bias and perceivement

Correction. This is wrong, what I meant, and should have typed instead of 'positive', was 'conformational'.

Would you think of Rambo: first blood part 2, as a political movie?

It's an action movie with a political theme.

"First Blood," the novel not the movie, is about the generational conflict between the Korean War generation (the sheriff) and the Viet Nam generation (Rambo). In the book, the conflict was so great that both died at the end.

A good example of this is the film Star Wars, when you understand that Lucas wrote the Empire to be a representation of America's and it's Foreign Polices of the time.

Would you think of Rambo: first blood part 2, as a political movie?

I've never, ever, seen Star Wars as a representation of America's foreign policies. I have seen it as a Western copy of Hidden Fortress, manipulated so as to be understood by Western audiences, because a lot of the nuance of the original is lost on the majority of us. But that's it.

It's been so long since I have seen First Blood part 2, that I couldn't even tell you the plot.

I don't know. It's an interesting topic, as some writers and directors make films and books whose allegory, quite frankly, goes so far over the heads of those reading/watching that it's a hazard to commercial aircraft.

I also wonder how much is people seeing signs where signs do not exist. Like I mentioned earlier. I've heard and read that Bruce in the film Jaws is an allegory for capitalism. I don't see it myself. I see Bruce as simply a more controllable and safer version of using the real thing. But humans have been doing it since they could talk. "Oh look! Three geese flying overhead! That means there will be no commercials on TV tonight!"

The stars/director and some individuals will praise for hours the meaning of the film 'Mother!' I just see it as a really, really bad film with no redeeming qualities what-so-ever. But some love it, so, well, yeah...

You are probably right. Maybe I don't see any meaning in Blyton's books because I could be too close to the source material.

Just had a thought. I have seen many comedy programmes on TV over the years, where the sketch is a group of people waxing lyrical and long over the meaning of the object in front of them, and how it is the personification of X,Y and Z. Only for the punchline to be, that it's the security guards lunch, or the cleaners cart... The sketches are possibly a sly existential dig at the preposterousness of 'modern art' and the mentality of those who can create a whole societal methodology from the equivalent of a sparrows fart.

In fact, I think there was something in the news recently about builders deliberately leaving rubbish behind in a European art gallery after they had finished work and it was there for months because everyone (staff included) thought it was an exhibit.... Or was it a work-boot? I can't remember the exact details now. At least it makes a change from cleaners throwing out 'exhibits' because they thought they were, quite literally, trash.

I also wonder how much is people seeing signs where signs do not exist.

I have a real life example of that. I have a friend who is an artist. He mostly paints horses and people, but he also does abstracts. I was at a party in his backyard and went up to a bunch of people looking at one of his abstracts hanging on his patio wall. They were each explaining the "meaning" behind the abstract.

Well, when the artist came outside, I asked him. He said when the painting was inside the house it was hung landscape (wider than taller), but it fit better in the outside area by turning it 90 degrees (portrait). No meaning at all. Simply an abstract.

Exactly.

It's a weird thing that we all do, overcomplicating things. Like seeing a face in the moon etc etc. I sometimes wonder if that's how religion got started. That and the extreme difficulty we have as a race to take responsibility for our actions. "God told me to do it..." "It's the will of god", "I'm doing Gods will." It's always someone else's fault other than our own.