It's in the story whether or not you want it to be.CrashGordon94 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:32 pm Except statements like "I see the thing. I accept that it's in the story." betray what you're really pushing, no amount of pretending otherwise is gonna put the genie back in the bottle. I see right through it.
You have to make these arguments case-by-case. I've never made the claim that all representation is equal, only that it's mere presence doesn't ruin a story.CrashGordon94 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:32 pmNope, not even close. Telling a sloppy and badly-done story accomplishes nothing except telling a coppy and badly-done story. And perhaps drag down the "cause" and sabotage people actually willing to do it right.
And if sabotaging your story to shove it in where it doesn't belong, you're not even close to doing it right.
The actual claim is that the way real people are affected by the story matters more than some platonic ideal of story-telling.
There's nothing pretentious about it. Stories are art. Art is subjective. Subjective things are open to interpretation. It's very simple.CrashGordon94 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:32 pmSeems like a pretentious way to hand-wave away blatant, obvious contradictions.
A blatant, obvious contradiction in a story has some sort of context, right? It doesn't exist in a vacuum, there's a whole story surrounding it. How can you possibly claim to be on the side of critical thinking if you're not willing to consider the entire story when determining whether or not something in that story is fitting or not?
Stop lying to me about the things I, myself, believe.CrashGordon94 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:32 pmYou say this because of your approach, you're bound and determined to just accept whatever's on screen (no matter how much you claim otherwise).
Perhaps you'll have those who don't notice or overlook it, but a fault is a fault and you shouldn't have to bank on people not noticing your mistakes.
Because you've admitted to doing so.
You're clinging to a particular word choice. Again, I ask that you stop lying. I know what I believe, and if you can't accept that my position is the one that I'm arguing for, then I'm going to have to accept that you're arguing in bad faith. Please, talk to me, and not the imaginary version of me you've constructed in your head.CrashGordon94 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:32 pmSure, but that's not the method you've been pushing, otherwise you wouldn't bee-line straight to "accept it" like I've quoted you on.Freeverse wrote: ↑Mon Nov 02, 2020 6:48 pm However, it is possible to temporarily think about things as if they are true, whether or not you really believe in them. And then after you've done this, you are actually more empowered to come to your own conclusions than you would be by going with your first instinct.
It's hilarious that you think criticizing capitalism is disturbingly far-left. Seriously, even liberal wine moms don't uncritically accept everything about capitalism. Like, oh my god, what if I told you that I believe in healthcare for all? Would your head explode?CrashGordon94 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:32 pmI'm not even going to entertain these word games. especially with this disturbing far-left slant (bashing on "Capitalism"? Seriously?).
But seriously, it's not a word game. We may use different terms to describe it, but the main point should be obvious. There's nothing wrong with including your personal beliefs in your writing, in fact, I would argue that's kind of what makes an author interesting. The problem is that when a writer does this, it's pretty common for someone in marketing to decide that they should broadcast even the slimmest amount of representation as being revolutionary.
People on the left don't think that representation is a big deal. It's only a big deal because of how difficult people on the right have been making it for, well.. probably since the dawn of time. So, naturally, when someone manages to get through the resistance that's put up, naturally they get excited. But the level of excitement is much the same way that people get excited about there being dragons in a fantasy setting. It's just normal excitement for something you want to see. Except that dragons are actually way more common than, for example, gay people.
So, like I guessed, you answer is based on how good you think it is. Maybe that's not the best method?CrashGordon94 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:32 pmI don't, I only think that when they're shoehorning it in where it doesn't fit or doesn't work. That shows they're clearly just doing it to score points and look good, if not then they'd make sure to have a story or setting that fits.
If you think that virtue-signaling is this big problem that's been plaguing modern writing, it sounds to me someone has been lying to you. I'm half tempted to make a few predictions about who it might be. But honestly, It's just weird that you're so concerned with people having ethics they believe in.CrashGordon94 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:32 pmI've seen you trying to do that to me, but thankfully I didn't "swallow".
Bottom line, though? This whole time I've just been trying to get you to understand my point of view. But it's becoming increasingly clear you aren't all that interested in hearing me out. You know that you can understand things you disagree with, right? Well, regardless, I'm starting to lose hope that you'll even try.