Sfdebris.net

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/28/opin ... =url-share

This article seems relevant these days.

Problem with that is that it all too often tries to legitimise being offensive and provocotive for the sake of it. Whatever art is supposed to be, trying to p1ss people off isn't it. There's a line between making you think and just being a jerk.

And yes, are is supposed to make us comfortable at times. It can be there to arouse all emotions, and I've only disgust about anyone who rejects anything that enhances the positive ones.

Production and IP are always forward thinking and have a progressive anchor on the concern of influence. The righteousness is more of an effort to champion the modernist expectations of the audience because that's what had inevitably prevailed the character in their initial run.

There are two things that happen when a character is created with a show or movie. It either can become a classic in its own right and either stop or not develop for all intents and purposes, or go on and become a franchise or breakout character. In order for the latter outcome to be able to happen there needs to be resolution for any questionable things they do.