Despite a successful release in 2016, Milk and Honey garnered its fair share of negative attention from poetry fans who claimed that while Kaur's work was evidently intended as free verse, that it lacked the finesse and proper execution needed in order to differentiate itself from text posts found on teen Tumblr blogs. Similar criticisms have been made of Lang Leav, another Tumblr-based poet. Have these authors paved the way for this style of poetry, and can they be compared to the likes of E.E. Cummings? Discuss.
At the end of the day, poetry should be free verse - isn't it about expressing a universal theme or state of mind? It's a shared feeling. How could they possibly be compared to someone who's works were written nearly 100 years ago? The future is now. – lettersfromadreamgirl5 years ago
Rupi Kaur has lately gained so much attention from teenage for her thoughts and writing. She has written some books as well based on her real-life experiences. – arristarose5 years ago
I personally enjoy Rupi Kaur's work, but I can certainly understand why it is not everybody's cup of tea. I think that there is beauty in all types of poetry. In free verse, in poetry following strict formulas. In poetry which is complex and multifaceted and in poetry which is straightforward and simple to understand. Rupi Kaur's work is, in my eyes, certainly not "deep" and clearly she uses simple language and simple concepts. And there is something undeniably beautiful about poetry such as that of E.E. Cummings, which is flowery and complex and which rolls of the tongue beautifully. But I do not personally believe that certain types of poetry is better then other types of poetry. Rupi Kaur's poetry may not be traditional in the way that she presents it but it is poetry. Real poetry is material that makes people feel. And I think that the reason why Kaur has become a bestseller is because her poetry does just that:it makes people feel. It may not be complex or profound, but it addresses important topics in ways that people can relate to and in ways which make people feel what Kaur must have felt in order to write the poems that she has written. – NataliaNybida5 years ago
Rupi Kaur is responsible for re-lighting the fire for poetry in today's society. Without her work, much of today's youth would not look twice at a poem. Even if her work is not the poetry of the past, it is the work that we needed today. – brittanynieman5 years ago
While Rupi Kaur is a particularly egregious example, "Tumblr Poetry," or "Prosetry," as some have called it, regardless of its artistic merit is questionable in its status as poetry by definition. Poetry is defined, generally, by the usage of the aesthetic or rhymic qualities of literature to create a work of art, often utilising stable symbols and motifs to invoke the meaning without outrightly stating it. Kaur and her contemporaries take a more conversational style or even a confessional one. Now, while this is neither inherently good or bad, in its lack of the utilisation of poetic techniques as a whole it is questionable as to whether it is, indeed poetry. Again, while I'm certainly not a fan, I'm not here to pass judgement on the aesthetic or artistic qualities of this genre but in saying that, if we are to compare it to Cummings, the only commonality is that they're both writing. – benjamindmuir5 years ago
Most people nowadays are familiar with the concept of the "Mary Sue"–broadly, an unrealistically perfect or beloved character whose wants and needs are given an unrealistic level of focus and attention in the context of their story. It seems like there's a double standard regarding male and female Mary Sues, both from people who write them and who critique them. Although both male and female Mary Sues exist, the female Mary Sues like Bella Swan seem to receive nearly all the attention and scorn from the wider fan community, as do the (usually female) authors who write them. Some people will go so far as to imply that any female character of any worldly significance whatsoever is a Mary Sue, like Rey from the latest generation of Star Wars. Why do you think this double standard exists? What are some examples of male Mary Sues, and do you see them getting away with things that a female Mary Sue would be called out for?
I've had this thought for some time & it's nice to know I'm not the only one. hoping this topic gets written one day soon! – ees5 years ago
I've also had this thought too! After a little research, I found that a male Mary Sue is sometimes called a Mary Stu (which I find quite clever and funny). Examples include Superman and James Bond, but I also might throw out the male protagonist in a harem anime, as well. – EJSmall5 years ago
Love this! I would definitely be interested in reading an article that touches on this concept across genres. I would recommend looking into specific examples (Bella Swan, Rey), and then the broad reasons that may apply to why they are perceived this way, i.e. systemic issues that affect how we perceive women and our expectations of the roles they perform in society. – Eden5 years ago
I think it obviously exists due to the unfortunate misogynist climate experienced within much of nerd/geek culture. There are lots of men out there who default to auto gate-keeping such realms of interest by making baseless accusations, see the seething rage over the latest Star Wars film that has apparently been *overrun* by SJWs etc.. Star Wars is a good example of that double standard and its hypocrisy, as so many of the male protagonists within the franchise are examples of this very behavior. So, to not be a Mary Sue, I guess by definition the character in question has to really *work* to achieve the level of attention/power level/plot significance they receive. How does young Anakin in the Phantom Menace put in any effort beyond being the chosen one? He wins a pod race, wow! Conveniently, his skills at pod racing are sufficient to allow him to deftly pilot a N-1 Starfighter with no prior experience. "Let's try spinning, that's a good trick." Apparently his midi-chlorian is extremely high, despite NEVER (significantly) being mentioned again! Totally male Mary Sue-ism at work. – blissaidan5 years ago
This is a great topic. It would be cool to see a comparison between mary sues and Gary stu. – anniesaurus5 years ago
This would be a fantastic article. Personally I'd love to see one of The Shining
– danielemilioamato5 years ago
I think it points back to the misogyny and sexism we have in our society. Women are forced to fit inside a small box and even then they are constantly criticized. A "strong" female character is a boring Mary Sue; a "weak" female character is a terrible, boring character. This rarely applies to males, and I believe that's because male characters are allowed to be more dynamic. Female characters have to fit inside a certain category or they risk getting lumped as a "Mary Sue" or just a "bad" character in general – fhlloyd5 years ago
This seems like a really interesting and worthwhile topic. If you're going to get into what actually defines a Mary Sue or a Gary Stu (the male equivalent), I think it might be beneficial to distinguish between a Mary Sue character (who consciously doesn't do any wrong) and a character who is just incredibly lucky (who accomplishes things unconsciously through chance). Whether she actually is or not, Rey comes across as a Mary Sue for many because she decides "I'm going to accomplish this goal" and does it with seemingly no problem or pushback that she can't overcome with minimal effort (typical of a Mary Sue). Compare this to another Star Wars character, Anakin Skywalker, who even in The Phantom Menace (arguably at his most Gary Stu-est) mostly accomplishes things by being lucky; even with a midichlorian count higher than Yoda (presumably making him extremely powerful), he wins a very difficult race after not even finishing three times previously and he blows up a space station by randomly pushing buttons and saying "Oops" alot. It's not the same as Han Solo having trouble activating lightspeed on his ship he's flown for 30+ years and Rey stepping into the cockpit and immediately locating and fixing the problem, not due to luck but expertise.They're similar characterizations, but different enough to be distinct from each other, and it might factor into whether or not there is a double standard. – CulturallyOpinionated5 years ago
Every time a movie is adapted from a book, people complain about it. This is understandable; I've seen my favorite books butchered in film and it's never pleasant. However, I recently read the comment on a BuzzFeed article about this that a certain book's story didn't "translate" to film. Are there certain books that translate better than others to film, and if so, what are some? Does a book need certain elements to translate well to film, or are filmmakers simply stuck doing the best they can because, print and film being different mediums, certain things are bound to get lost in translation? Discuss.
As you have stated before, texts are analyzed ad infinitum. Yet in terms of this topic, I think you could argue slightly different, for a change of pace. All writing goes through drafting phases and all authors go through periods of productivity and delay or self-doubt. That said, how can we destroy an adaptation that is merely going through a rough phase, on its merry way to the final version? Doesn't sound fair to the artist, but then again, is life ever fair? As far as translation goes, an author that is true to his craft and steadfast to the theme will inevitably produce the elusive masterpiece. Another incumbent will fumble the narrative by second-guessing the motive and the medium, failing to strike a vital chord with the audience in the process. Nonetheless, you managed to rehash a contentious issue among art lovers. – L:Freire5 years ago
The two conversing sides of the argument perhaps both have a touch of truth. Most of the books that have failed after being adapted to films have departed so far from the themes and messages of the books that fans have been almost experiencing a different story altogether (e.g. Eragon). This departure from the known characters is such a removal for the audience that it is almost being incorrectly introduced to someone you already know.
On the other hand, writing a narrative in hundreds of pages cannot practically incorporate the waves of thoughts, senses, and minor details within a two hour film. While most including myself would gladly take a 12 hour Harry Potter film, to appeal to wider audiences, films cannot be realistically expected to cover all aspects of a book.
Certainly, some films have handled the transition better than others and remained true to the heart of the book, but unfortunately the realities of the economically driven film industry prevent the full transition that fans so ardently desire. Maybe the solution is in tv adaptation rather than film to allow for longer screen time, or maybe the magic of perspective and thought disclosure in books can never be truly replicated. – Huntforpurpose5 years ago
I'd be interested in hearing about living writers and their part in the production of the films. Should they be given authority over everything? Do they write the screenplay? if not, does the screenwriter get the say over the writer etc.
– sophiatarin5 years ago
It's a valid concern. There is a documentary on The Virgin Suicides that makes the case for inclusion of the writer within the film-making process. Of course, Sofia Coppola has the ultimate say over the characterization of the narrative. But the author of that novel, Jeffrey Eugenides, was a vital component behind the dialogue, the mood, and the setting. Also, I failed to mention earlier that the reverse can be surprisingly successful. For instance, the Star Trek episode "All the Yesterdays" made a seamless foray into a series of acclaimed novel tie-ins by A.C. Crispin. The onscreen romance between Spock and Zarabeth translated into two compelling novels of time travel and a supposed offspring between the pair. – L:Freire5 years ago
A compelling factor in this debate is circumstances. The ancient Greeks wrote dramatic recollections of events that moved audiences of the time and to this day in practically
every discipline that has emerged since then. But, there were no motion pictures to reclaim those texts. Then, Shakespeare entered the picture with an equal fervor for casting light on the matters of his day. Presently, we submit to the same appetite for literary escape with authors such as J.K. Rowling and Suzanne Collins, probably as eagerly as the Greeks and the British did in the early days of the art. In those times as it continues to be today, the stage was the medium for the written script. I venture to guess that audiences had their preferences for certain actors and theatres when reading the written play was not a viable option nor a preference. Perhaps, it may be that reading the plot in the comfort of a familiar setting with pleasant music or refreshment is the reason why some people opt for this method of entertainment. Indeed, the pace of a book or the flash of color and splash of sound in a film is what draws fans to each particular venue. So, an author's style or an actor's appeal may be the reasons why people turn to different sources of entertainment, including the online variety. I suppose radio producers had the same challenges in their respective field that could be incorporated into this topic. – L:Freire5 years ago
Adaptation theory says that a film can do anything a book can do - it just does it in different ways. For example, first-person narration in a book might be translated in film via sound editing to an internal monologue. I don't really understand this as a valid concern because books, despite what people commonly think, are also a visual medium (consider font, illustrations, formatting, inflection, quotes, etc.) – KateBowen5 years ago
Vicious can be summed up as two brilliant and ambitious college friends who get their own superhero origins by deliberately manufacturing near-death experiences that (if survived) will let them become "ExtraOrdinary." With their newfound powers, Victor and Eli find themselves on opposing sides, each now capable of doing inhuman things. As the story progresses, it becomes incredibly difficult to categorize either character as a complete hero or villain because their causes are a conflict of both right and wrong.
Analyze Eli and Victor's philosophies of morality (particularly after they become EOs) and why they believe they are each justified to act as they do. Eli's occupation with religion will be helpful here. Also look at how they involve and treat other people in their plans (like Angie, Sydney, or Serena).
Banned Books Week is coming up next month. If you went to public or private school, you probably ran into at least one book whose author endured censorship. If you were homeschooled, certain books may have been banned in your home. If not, your teachers and parents probably discussed literary censorship once or twice, minimum.
This writer has read her share of banned or questioned books, and she wants to know, what are some favorites in our community? The author should discuss some popular challenged books, especially favorites. Why are/were they challenged? If the challenge has died down, why–or why not? What particular literary value do these books have? Most importantly, what do we miss out on when we ban a particular book or author from our curricular or personal canon (s)?
Suggestions: -Judy Blume (Margaret, Blubber, Deenie, really almost any book) -J.K. Rowling (Harry Potter; witchcraft controversy not as hot but still present) -Any book, especially children's, featuring LGBT characters/situations -Anne Frank (yes, it was once banned for being a "downer" and because of Anne's discussions of marital relations/sex) -Shel Silverstein (any book) -John Green's Looking for Alaska
I actually read two on this list during middle school: Judy Blume and Anne Frank. I also read another book about a Jewish prisoner in Argentina and the sheer torture that he endured by his captors. But, this was during college and by that point I was mature enough to be exposed to it and to walk away from it a better person as a result. I feel that the Blume variety of distaste was mild in comparison. Further still, how is Anne Frank any different from 1984 by George Orwell in terms of social oppression and sexual deviance, looking back at it? Although I have never read any of Rowling's work, I have watch her televised speeches and interviews and feel that prose as vital and distinct must not be banned, it would be a disservice to art in general and literature in particular. – L:Freire5 years ago
I went to a Catholic K-8 school and many of these were banned. I actually learned how to read by following the release of the Harry Potter books as I grew up, so they were naturally my favorites. But a few other banned books not mentioned here were: Northern Lights/The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman, all of Scott Westerfeld's books, and The Picture of Dorian Gray (lol!). There were probably many more, but those were the ones I went out of my way to read. Thank you, public libraries! – Eden5 years ago
A long time ago I took a look at Frank's book and was absolutely shocked and devastated after watching the documentaries. This book shouldn't be banned whatsoever. IMHO. – tscosj5 years ago
No. No, it shouldn’t. In my opinion, Holocaust studies should be required starting in sixth grade up—full courses with supplements like trips to museums and resource centers. – Stephanie M.5 years ago
Though this has been a topic on the minds of filmmakers for a few years, consider the effect an environment non-dependent upon ratings has upon visual storytelling. How did media service providers like Netflix and Hulu change the film and television industry when, in addition to distribution, they began dabbling in production?
I think services like Netflix focus on number of new subscribers, rather than ratings to evaluate their platform, so this might play into the way film has evolved for them. – Andi5 years ago
Netflix, AmazonPrime, and Hulu provide people with TV shows and movies that remind them of the good old days! Rugrats, Doug, Hey Arnold, The Sixth Sense, Casper, The Twilight Zone, Charmed, and more! Yep! Those were the days! – autenarocks5 years ago
To me, Netflix and these other online media servers have created a space where non-mainstream stories are developed and aired; some examples include international film/TV and stories with POC, LGBT, and/or disabled people as protagonists. – Paula R.5 years ago
This is such an important thing to research and stay interested in. These streaming companies are only getting more popular and continue to see revenue increases. I attended Sundance this year and Hulu swept the sales- an unprecedented move by a streaming service. This is becoming the new normal. A positive to be found is one that is perhaps best stated by Alfonso Cuarón, when speaking about his film Roma being funded by Netflix. He believes Roma would've never been able to reach the audience the film was meant to (lower-class people around the globe) were it not for the accessibility of Netflix. An interesting take I'd say! – NellGeer5 years ago
What’s interesting about these platforms is that they are both a major studio *and* indie platform rolled into one. Theoretically Netflix could air a major 100m blockbuster on one day and a 1m iPhone shot drama the next, and their model stays the same. Because they’re revolutionised by the pay model, for the fact consumers directly subscribe, they have much more freedom to both appeal to the masses & niche interests than a studio worried about the bottom line, who need bankable projects with huge returns to survive. The only thing that threatens streaming platforms now is the replication of the Netflix model in too many places, leaving consumers unable to subscribe to all of them. Their proliferation could be their eventual undoing. – A J. Black5 years ago
Analyze how dystopian books, movies, or TV shows impact how people view society. When President Trump was elected in 2016, book sales of famous dystopian novels such as 1984 and Brave New World increased. Dystopian stories are almost meant to be cautionary tales but do they create a paranoia that they are coming to life today?
It might also be worth noting that people use dystopian stories to make sense of events happening in reality. Dystopian stories seem linked to politics and serve as a way to discuss complicated events in both life and politics. I also think it's interesting that you mention how these type of stories might be causing paranoia. An exploration of the pros and cons that dystopian stories have on people's perspectives of real life would also be fitting under this topic. – jay6 years ago
I think an essay that looked at this issue would need to show how certain events or developments in the present can connect to a future presented in, say, 1984 or Brave New World. Sometimes the future as presented in certain novels or even movies is just there, but where did it develop from? These two books are set in a future but the books start from their visions of a future not somethings that are developing now taking us down a certain path toward an almost gloomy future. But, maybe there should also be some cautionary notes included in an essay that looks at a future in more optimistic ways that would challenge those presented in dystopian novels? If only a gloomy, or worse, future is presented, that creates an impression of inevitability, as though there is no other future. There is this tendency with novels such as 1984 and Brave New World to see them as starting points and then work backwards. Maybe the direction needs to be reversed, start in the here and now and ponder where that can lead. The movie "Downsized" presents an odd mix of impending doom but also presents a strange way of looking at a hope for humans. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
Oh, wow, you could talk about this for days. Dozens if not hundreds of sub-topics exist. I say, narrow the topic some as above commenters have suggested but honestly? Don't be afraid to go a little nuts. – Stephanie M.5 years ago
We all know that experience of reading about some character who reminds us of someone who traumatised us. It's painful, but sometimes it's necessary to confront these feelings if we want to heal. If we confront these feelings and are able to empathise with perpetrators, we can learn what motivates them and avoid such motivations manifesting in ourselves. What psychological mechanisms are operating in this process?
A great book (object text) to look at/consider is the Cooking Gene by Michael W. Twitty – Pamela Maria5 years ago
Amy Tan's The Joy Luck Club comes to mind. She even confesses that one of the reasons she wrote this novel is to come to terms with familial trauma. – Michael J. Berntsen5 years ago
Why are so many of us fascinated by the though that the world could end? To some, it is an exciting possibility, and to others, it is a fearful, inevitable reality approaching sooner and sooner with each passing day. Films such as "I Am Legend", "The Book of Eli", "The Road" and the "Mad Max" franchise all depict a war-torn, destroyed and desolate landscape in a variety of forms, but with common undertones of insanity, deprivation, ruthlessness, and desperation. Why are we drawn to such themes? And on a side note, could our fascination, on a global scale, bring about that same apocalypse like some sort of self fulfilling prophecy, like the ending of the film "Tomorrowland"?
I think part of it is the curiosity and fascination with understanding the world (e.g., how it got to be so bad, how are the survivors coping on a day-to-day basis). Beyond this there's some sort of purpose or mission that is introduced. A common one is there's a child that is immune to the disease that has massacred the world and now the protagonist has to get that child from A to B so that they can be studied for a cure. This serves a glimmer of hope in an otherwise messed up world. On top of this, the barriers that get in the way set up an against-all-odds situation. Maybe they need to traverse a fast flowing river or maybe there are roaming groups of bandits out to rob and kill them. These struggles get you rooting for the characters to succeed. Lastly, there's usually a redemption arc in there. The protagonist has usually lost their family and has become jaded and cynical about life. While they are technically surviving, they have lost a lot of what makes us human. Once purpose is reintroduced into their life they start to become human again, learning to love, care, and hope once again. – CAPSlock5 years ago
Great topic! :) Is it to escape from our own reality? That people seek tragedy to begin to feel and let go of the numbness that many people feel in ther everyday life. People seek a new beginning a fresh start. – rghtin2be5 years ago
This is a very good topic. One potential reason just speaking from my peer groups fascination as young kids with the apocalyptic world was its depictions of near lawlessness, almost a return to primal instinct and its allowance of doing what you want when you want. Maybe that carries on into the modern age with watching movies depict the conversations we'd indulge in as children about "what you'd do in a ____ apocalypse" – RBoileau5 years ago
We live with many apocalyptic threats looming over our heads: resource depletion, environmental and ecological collapse, climate change, nuclear war, pollution, nanotechnology mishaps, the inevitability of a large asteroid or comet impacting the planet, and so on. It's understandable that people find some kind of catharsis in being able to visualize what an apocalypse or post-apocalypse may look like, and what to do in the event that such a thing occurs. – RyanVStewart5 years ago
Tokyo Ghoul is an anime which has managed to generate a cult following among anime fans having two successful seasons leaving audiences begging for more. Tokyo Ghoul has a rather unique subject matter concerning the nature of violence though it also can viewed as somewhat of an allegory of society itself with the interspecies war between humans and ghouls demonstrating the violence caused by segregation. More of an attribute to the anime's success however, would be its stunningly unique cinematic. The anime itself has no shame depicting violence in its rawest form yet does so with meaning and not just for shock value. Each an every violent exchange builds upon the overall moral of the story and also contributes to the development of each character- a prime example of this would be the 2 episode torture sequence where the antagonist modelled after western horror icon 'Jason Vorhees', grotesquely disfigured the vulnerable half human, half ghoul protagonist Ken Kaneki. This display was one of the most demented yet disturbingly well thought out scenes which makes the horror franchise 'SAW' look like a romantic comedy. The scene masterfully depicted the psychology behind the antagonist and his worldview on how the weak are overrun based on their lack of ability. This display is a very sufficient argument as to why violence can sometimes be necessary within media as it is an excellent instrument in storytelling. How much more effective would this iconic scene have been without the gruesome visuals and bone grinding SFX?
Should ghoul be written with a capital G? Is it because it is the name of a race in this anime? – Ceroca7 years ago
I feel that the violence is also partly due to the fact it is marketed as a Seinen so it's targeting adolescents and young adults. But the violent panels in the manga usually have very rough lines with plenty of monologues to depict the inner struggles of the characters. And this is one of the reasons why fans felt the anime didn't do justice to the series.
– Hann7 years ago
Love the question at the end--would the story be as effective if heavily censored for violence? Might be worth looking up a few other series that were censored when translated into anime or live action adaptations, and suffered for it, just for the sake of the comparison. – Eden6 years ago
A comparison between the original Doctor Who series and the new reboot of the series. What are the main differences between the audiences, the actors, the writing, and the story lines. Is the new version of Doctor Who more mainstream than the original or will the original forever be considered a classic.
I would say there is a definite difference between audiences, at least at the time the original aired. – nsnow9 years ago
Doctor Who used to be only a cult series that was mildly known in different countries with varying notoriety. Now it has become a world-wide phenomenon and has an audience of millions, a lot of whom are teens and 20 year-olds. Only 10 years ago, not many people really knew what Doctor Who was outside of die-hard fans who caught it periodically PBS here int he states. The writing is also far better in terms of consistency between individual episodes, and across seasons. The actors on the other hand, have always been good. Like so many people say, no one has ever played the Doctor wrong, and no one cast has ever been wrong for the part. People will have their favorites, and plenty will have their problems with the 6th Doctor, but he is nonetheless, personality-wise, a version of the Doctor that is warranted and believable in amongst all the other personalities he has had. It is also very clear that the sets and FX are far better, although some instances can still seem quite laughable and even a little rough on the CGI, especially in the original 9th Doctor season. – Jonathan Leiter9 years ago
I think it's more popular now because some of the doctors have been highly attractive haha. Totally just my opinion, but what the doctor represents in the newer ones (note that I haven't seen the older ones) to a single girl is worth touching on. Like Amy Pond waiting for him to save her, and all the girls got to experience new things and live outside of time. What girl wouldn't want the doctor to come scoop her up for such adventures. Again, no idea what the old ones were like, so it's possible this was a common theme throughout. – Tatijana9 years ago
I think the idea of the Doctor taking on a companion who is a woman was partly about that concept, but it wasn't nearly as "romantic" or romanticized as it has been with the 9th, 10th, and 11th Doctors. I suppose the closest comparison would be the 3rd Doctor, because he was quite the heroic, knight-in-shining-armor figure who could not only fight with his mind, but with his actual fists. He had a sense of the regal, but also of the Robin-Hood in him I think. So in terms of "attractive" doctors, he was the most similar to the 10th or 11th versions, even if he was far older and more rugged in the face. Also, a lot of the classic fans kind of hated the fact that the newer Doctors were so young and even baby-faced in terms of their attractiveness to younger audiences and women. I don't really mind that aspect at all, I just take issue with it when the women themselves are incredibly selfish and ego-centric about their relationship with the Doctor, and what they expect from him. It's makes them very unlikable as protagonists. But when they're more like Amy was after she married Rory, then the Doctor's companions were fun to ride along with. – Jonathan Leiter9 years ago
In "Day of the Doctor," the "War" Doctor seems shocked when he witnesses 10 marrying and kissing Queen Elizabeth I. When he asks, "Is there alot of this in the future?," 11 responds, "It does start to happen." I think this represents the most stark contrast between the classic and modern series. Rose and River (and even, to a lesser degree, Clara) show the romantic heart of The Doctor, making him easier for human audiences to relate to. For The Doctor to know love and loss, it connects him to us in a deeper and more meaningful way, making him more like the gods of old rather than the separate, isolated Christlike figure of the original series. – TheHall9 years ago
Analyse the growth and transformation of the anime industry in North America alongside the increasing accessibility of anime streaming. From disjointed episodes uploaded to YouTube in parts, to illegal fan-subbing websites, to today's officially licensed streaming sites like Crunchyroll and Netflix, how and where fans watch anime has drastically changed. Examine the ways this has impacted anime's popularity (and vice-versa) as well as the viewer experience. How has it affected shows that are not licensed to streaming services? What happens when a service fails (see: Amazon's Anime Strike)?
Anime streaming has been a contentious topic for a long time because in the early days, most if not all of it was illegal. Since watching the streaming videos was easier than buying the licensed product, the anime studios both in Japan and the US lost tons of money, and some people in the anime industry have even given whole panels at cons explaining about the perils of streaming. A lot of the policies of legal streaming sites like Crunchyroll--as well as the new technique of simuldubbing--were developed to deter illegal streaming or make it less profitable. – Debs5 years ago
Thanks @Debs! That makes a lot of sense. If you have any recommended sources that talk about this, let me know. I wonder if I can find any sources that talk about why some illegal sites have remained, despite the prevalence of legal streaming? – Eden5 years ago
Toys hold a special place in the heart of fans from all walks of life. From second-hand and bargain-bin action figures, retro toys making a comeback (original Transformers), Funko pops or legos, to unique hand-crafted statues or busts, all those products derived from popular culture have built new communities, connected collectors and reinforced the appreciation in the original works.
Has our consumption for toys changed in recent years thanks to better marketing or distribution? Has the perception of adults collecting action toys changed? Have action figures and statues now been elevated to similar statuses as work of arts (painting or sculpture)? It goes without saying that toys are getting more and more expensive and yet, the demands for some collector's items are growing.
It's an interesting idea. Perhaps just as relevant would be the question: when does a toy cease to be just a toy? For instance, 'collectables' are created to be exactly that and no doubt there are collectors who would thrown their hands up in horror at the very notion of 'playing' with their precious items, or letting a child get his or her grubby mitts on them! An equally valid question would be: have we lost sight of what a 'toy' should be? – Amyus5 years ago
I'm thinking about which category this would fall under on this site. I would suggest perhaps considering covering toys for a particular media genre, like comics or movies, and then you can include a broader discussion of toy consumption. For example, my brother grew up as an avid collector of Star Wars lego models. It would be interesting to see how movie franchises (or tv series, or comic series, etc.) are influencing and influenced by toy collectors. – Eden5 years ago
Amyus - as a parent of a toddler, I have definitely lost sight of what a toy should be! I look at those 'cheap' Marvel/DC movie-inspired toys and would gladly buy them for my kid, yet when I encounter the 6-inch scale premium articulation Marvel Legends figures (which is roughly more expensive), I automatically consider them as collectibles. Is it because they are more expensive? Is it because my kid would not appreciate them as much? Am I jealous that there are better toys of characters I love now? :) Eden - Completely agree with your point! If I were to narrow my search, I would focus on comics. I tried to incorporate toys based on Japanese franchises/manga/anime but got completely scared by the scale of popularity considering that there are live full-blown sculpting competitions of Gundam figures. – kpfong835 years ago
kpfong. You make some excellent points! Apologies, not being a parent, I can only draw from my own experiences as a child - though I do recall receiving a die cast metal Spitfire for my 10th birthday and I wouldn't let anyone touch it, let alone play with it! – Amyus5 years ago
Amyus - No worries and thanks for sharing your opinions!
– kpfong835 years ago
Cool topic! I'd love a discussion on technological toys and games or apps vs. more "traditional" ones such as dolls, stuffed animals, or action figures. Also, while statues and figurines like FunkoPop are called toys by some, I do think they have opened the door for adults to engage or reengage in fandom and toy culture. I'd love for the author to explore this, too. – Stephanie M.5 years ago
No matter what, toys will continue to attract kids (and perhaps even adults). Gone are the days when toys were made of simple everyday stuff, and yet stimulated the child's brain to be creative with them. – monolina5 years ago
Analyse how travel is important to the films' plot. For instance, it helps broaden the horizons for both viewer and characters. If one travels, one's mind is highly likely to broaden to what lifestyle someone can live in. In the case of the films' characters, it brings more interest to their story, they see new places, have constant change.
This is an interesting propostion. I would suggest defining the genre of what movies will be taken into account. There is, I believe, a very essential difference between realism and sci-fi for example which, in relation to travel, will entail diverse approaches and methods for analysis.
– Kaya5 years ago
Thank you, Kaya, for your feedback! I was not focusing on any genre specifically when I wrote this. If I had to choose, it'd be action, drama, comedy, and/or fantasy, since it is with those films that the setting has a tendency to change. – Yvonne T.5 years ago
I agree with Kaya. Focusing on a specific genre or even a specific film would make the topic very interesting to explore. I think you're right to focus on both the character and the viewer, as both experience the journey and are affected by it. – JamesBKelley5 years ago
A cursory glance at the names of contributors to The Artifice shows that many of us choose nom de plumes (pen names). My own pen name is a variant spelling of a character's name from an Agatha Christie novel, whilst other contributors have chosen pen names that either reflect their interests, their sense of humour or they serve as a personal statement. There are many reasons to use pen names. Some may be for political or cultural reasons. George Eliot (1819-1880), for example, was writing at a time when it was difficult for a female writer to be accepted simply as a writer and not be judged by her sex. Conversely, I recently met a male writer who writes romantic fiction under a female nom de plume; and very successfully too. Discuss how the invention of a 'literary double' might empower the writer and, just as importantly, have our nom de plumes become characters in their own right?
Recently I have witnessed an increase in the number of memes which feature nihilistic or dark humour themes. These memes seem to resonate especially well with people between the age of 20-27 years old (as of 2019). Is there a socio-cultural element which has resulted in the increased popularity of such content?
Would also be good to look at the 'acceptibility' of these memes. There appears to be some fluctuation in whether these memes are seen as harmful, or a means to cope. – Andi5 years ago
It shows a lack of imagination essentially in addition to the increased incidence of anti-social and narcissistic personality disorder among millenials. – youngmollflanders5 years ago
This is such a complicated subject that I genuinely believe deserves a great deal of attention. Some have argued that we are in late stage capitalism; a period of time characterized by the uncoupling of signifier and signified, depthlessness, alienation, absurdity, and meaningless. Life has been subordinated to capital, and capital is not bound to coherent chains of signification. As a result, our lives feel empty, deterritorialized, lacking a history or sensible temporal/cultural orientation. Add to that the war on terror, war on drugs, consequences of the 2008 financial crisis, and ecological devastation, there is a prevailing sense that the present and the future is merely chaos, that the promises we grew up on are empty fictions, and that there is very little hope in general. Nihilistic memes are a reaction to all this, and they are thoroughly implicated in the ironic and post-ironic cultural meta (a refusal to treat anything with sincerity as a reaction to the madness and alienation earlier described). – joshasoflate5 years ago
I think that maybe it's a way for this (our/my) generation to feel that they are not alone, when everyone seems to be offended at the slightest things. I think there is quite a gap between those who still enjoy dark humor and those who think it's mean and shouldn't be enjoyed. But I think that sometimes those memes can help people deal with the cruel reality of our world and the actual, real life rudeness and hate that we experience every day. However, this is a quite complicated topic. The question why humans enjoy dark humor and tragedy more than we do happy endings, to me seems to be hard to answer. – bulatovskayae5 years ago
I kind of see it as a combination of the overall nihilism of our pop culture (as a function of growing up, for the first time, without being taught that life has any intrinsic meaning or purpose) and the anonymity of the Internet, which leaves people freer to say things that they wouldn't dare attach their name to in real life. – Debs5 years ago
Explore the idea of apathy when it comes to engaging with certain TV series. This was something I particularly felt with the recent third season of Jessica Jones, a show I was only still watching out of a sense of loyalty and completion, having worked through the previous two seasons.
Do we now remain tethered too long to TV shows we otherwise would have apathetically abandoned due to a feeling of commitment? If we travel so far with a show, should we stick with it, come what may? Or if a show just isn't working or has lost its way, should we be prepared to abandon ship even close to the end, forsaking the cathartic feeling of completing a journey with a TV series?
This is a fascinating psychological question. It brings to mind series that have gone on for over ten seasons, like The X-Files and Supernatural. What keeps people watching--is it loyalty, or a more concrete sense of identity, like fandom and community? – Eden5 years ago
Nice topic. The advent of binge-watching certainly helps or hinders, depending on how you flip that pancake. I wonder what role that plays in apathy and TV. – Stephanie M.5 years ago
If one does not read extensively before starting to write, one runs the risk of doing what has already been done. What one might think is original might not be original at all (although there is nothing wrong with a new treatment of an old topic, as long as one is aware of this). Many of our basic story lines go back hundreds or even thousands of years (to the Greeks). One can also learn much about writing fiction by reading a lot of it. However, it is difficult to read all of the important fiction of one country, not to mention the literature of all the world's nations. How much fiction, then, should one read before embarking on doing it oneself?
There's no definite answer to that, keep reading and keep writing. Keep doing both, you'll know when you are ready, one can never stop learning. – iamdharmesh15 years ago
If one reads just extensively enough, which if it is not clear I am being cheeky, one can only hope to do what is already done. The literary achievements of an Aeschylus, for example, come from a mind of unparalleled attentive faculties as well as the creative brilliance to retell old stories which were fresh on the minds of audiences at the time. If you wish to be inspired by any school of literature that should not be too difficult. If you view things on a large enough scale you can find yourself lost in a textual wilderness. So, my advice is to take things one word at a time, one sentence at a time, one paragraph at a time. – jesheppard5 years ago
Reading is excellent for learning how to write. The issue comes when we, as writers, cease to read out of a desire to learn and start to read out of a fear that when we stop reading and put our own words into the world we will fail. – Sophie Bouey5 years ago
This depends on what the writer wants to write about. I think writers should read widely and indiscriminately as often as possible, but should also write every day. When starting out I think it’s good to write anything you feel like. Once you’ve written a lot, you start to know what genre you like to focus on. That’s when immersion in the genre comes in handy to identify any gaps and see what has already been done. It’s helpful to remember that everything is intertextual. No idea has sprung from nothing, and nothing is original. Everything is a reiteration or recombination of what already exists. – KiarnaAnne5 years ago
As much as you can I would say. & it depends.. For some people a couple of books is OK for other not.. I would consider that you folk is love Fiction & would count the number, just read as much as he or she can) – KatynOr5 years ago
I don't believe ones work would necessarily reflect whether or not you've written a great fiction story or not. Reading the works of others is great for learning how fiction, or any genre for that matter, is supposed to flow as well as the what works and what doesn't. It definitely gives the necessary guidelines to help lead you into a more successful path. However, the whole point of writing fiction is to let your mind run wild and get as creative as you can. By constricting yourself with previous pieces you have read, it defeats the purpose of the initial intentions. Overall, I believe you should take guidance from the common factors that make a successful piece but don't lose the personal touch that can help distinguish your work from the work of others. – janaibrahim5 years ago
Interesting question, although the topic seems rather broad considering as a writer, you never, ever stop reading (take it from somebody who knows). Maybe the question hiding under here is, what kind of fiction, or what titles, an author needs to read depending on the voice he or she wishes to create. – Stephanie M.5 years ago
A teen movie has to be one of the easiest go-to scripts to write. Whether it is about high school or finishing high school, there will always be the elements of love, family and finding yourself along the way (if you're really lucky *cue wink face at the camera*). But there are some that aren't just merely entertaining to watch and actually touch on original topics or come to original conclusions when faced with a typical 'teen' issue. For me, the ones that instantly came to mind are the Perks of Being a Wallflower and Clueless. What are some more? And what are some that don't fit this topic and why?
I feel that Perks of Being a Wallflower was groundbreaking film in several ways. It addresses questions of gender, sexuality, and mental illness in distinct and meaningful ways. For me, the book and film are both groundbreaking. – Sean Gadus5 years ago
For me The Breakfast Club is a great movie. – youngmollflanders5 years ago
It would be worth expanding this topic to include teen films from outside America. Take a look at some of the Japanese teen films for example - off the top of my head I'd suggest 'Hana and Alice' (2004). Regarding the idea that 'A teen movie has to be one of the easiest go-to scripts to write' - that's quite a generalisation. Even a film aimed at a teenage audience can handle some weighty issues, which require sensitive writing and directing. – Amyus5 years ago
I believe "Cruel Intentions" (1999) has a bit of originality. It takes the classical theme of high school, mean girl/good girl and a bad boy but turns it into a very sexually driven tragedy. For me, it's a teen movie that you shouldn't watch in your teen years. – bulatovskayae5 years ago
The recent film Ophelia (2018), starring Daisy Ridley, and the crowdfunded video game Elsinore (2019) marks the latest in an increasingly popular trend of adapting Hamlet by shifting its focus from its conflicted titular character to his doomed lady love. While adaptations focusing on supporting or minor characters in Hamlet are by no means uncommon (with Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead as the most notable example), the focus on Ophelia in particular is something new. Ask: why the especial focus on Ophelia, ever-popular in art, as a protagonist? What about Ophelia made it universally panned while Elsinore has been almost universally praised? Which version offers a more compelling take on the character and the story of Hamlet?
I'm not familiar with either of these particular works, but one reason why Ophelia in particular is a popular character might have something to do with the way her situation reflects those of girls in general, throughout history. For instance, there is a fairly well-known nonfiction book called Reviving Ophelia, which talks about the toxic messages that young girls receive in modern times. Simply put, there's something relatable about Ophelia to a girl living in a patriarchal society, where the men in her life try to use her as an object or a pawn. – Debs5 years ago
This is an excellent time to examine this question, as there seems to be renewed interest in the perspective of the character, as well as Ophelia's overall depiction within Hamlet. – Sean Gadus5 years ago