How do the dominant cultural narratives in art and mass media affect our politics?

With stories discussing the Fascist But Efficient trope (such as Patterns of Force), I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt (in so much that their intentions were good)-it's one of the most common misconceptions that totalitarianism makes society more efficient. It's common even among staunch liberals.

However, the reality is that fascism is terribly inefficient, which makes any aesop that "efficiency isn't worth it" pretty mute in practice. And while their intentions were good, such narratives inadvertently make fascism sound more appealing than it should.

I am wondering about True Art Is Angsty. How dark should ideally being a story? And how many ideas can be shared depending of the genre?

The obvious answer is that All of them, but I'm asking for personal opinions. Which is everyone favorite tone? Dark and Grim? Optimist? Dark but optimist? Crapsack World or A World Half Full?

Dunno. Is interesting how that can tell you about a person.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Jul 17th 2018 at 11:43:17 AM

Realistic and optimistic or glass half full. But I can enjoy optimistic as long as it is handled well.

Edited by windleopard on Jul 17th 2018 at 10:46:30 AM

I used to like Crapsack World stuff, but as I've gotten older I've come to be less impressed by it.

I like Crapsack World settings. One story I'm working on is a Crapsack World.

On what Kazuya Prota had said about dark settings, personally, I go for a Earn Your Happy Ending route. Yes, you get suffering but it must all pay off in the end.

I'm more into "Realistic and optimistic" fiction these days. Stuff that doesn't gloss over conflicts and deals with consequences realistically, but still manages to avoid falling into overwhelming negativity.

I've never liked the notion that works that are dark and gritty and grim are somehow more realistic.

Edited by M84 on Jul 18th 2018 at 1:04:22 AM

I'm kinda just aiming for that too. The setting would actually be considered a massive Crapsack World at Multiversal scales but the fact is that most worlds seem to have problems without being in a constant suffering.

Not that they don't happens, there always a genocide somewhere or an apocalypse but...they're not really uber common. There always enough conflict to create a story that can end in a happy ending (or not).

It's like our world. There always someone suffering, but that's not the entire world.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Jul 17th 2018 at 12:14:34 PM

I love worlds where everyone is some kind of asshole, treachery is everywhere, and horrors are just under the corner.

But I have my limits.

Basically, I am a Warhammer 40K fan but I like Rogue Trader more than Space Nazi Horus Heresy.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 17th 2018 at 12:02:29 PM

Without all the extra brought by books and other stuff, I'd be pretty bummed.

About Warhammer 40000 and Grimdark in general. I've actually read a fun post on reddit about how different cultures have different approach to darkness. British Fiction being more brutal than American one (or just a Lawful Evil type of brutality instead of Chaotic Evil Post-social-collapse American apocalypse, equally bad, just in different ways).

I'm now legit wondering how our regional culture affects our fiction. What's -for example- the Latinoamerican ideal of Dystopia? We would probably joke saying "my normal day" but I'm sure that there some common fear through all our culture.

Personally. I'm "fond" of Societal Collapse stories, but ones where the enemy was someone that was there but uncontained. Not skin head gangs of neo nazis, but rather drug dealers becoming the new rulers, the previous goverment trying to survive and a overall all vs all. Add sobrenatural elements and create several strongmen and enjoy the new neo feudal mess.

That's my idea of dystopia.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Jul 17th 2018 at 2:19:21 PM

I'm not sure that's correct, or at least it's an overly reductive generalization. The US has historically been very fond of repressive government-style dystopia, due to our own cultural issues surrounding governance. Just look at the most popular works of dystopian fiction in the US, you'll see plenty of stuff like Hunger Games. Hell, the trope codifier for lawless post-apocalyptic wasteland (Mad Max) isn't even from the US.

Personally, I would argue that a Crapsack World caused by a lack of order shouldn't be called a "Dystopia" per se.

Indeed, I'd actually argue that Post-Apocalypytia is something of a spiritual antithesis to Dystopia. In Dystopia, society is the enemy, with the message being "society breeds cruelty". In Post-Apocalyptia, the message is usually along the lines that society was the only thing holding back our cruelty.

Of course, the two genres aren't mutually exclusive per se, though I would generally advise authors to be careful when combining the two. One of the better examples of the two being combined well would be Fallout.

This was on the last page, but the thing to understand about Rick is that despite his deeply heinous actions and him being kind of an asshole, he's an easy character for a lot of people to like because of his charisma and bragadoccio. I haven't seen season 3 yet but I never picked up on him being a mockery of sci-fi nerds or anything, but it is true that unfortunately some of the fanbase doesn't understand that Rick is supposed to be an asshole and not someone to be venerated.

Edited by Draghinazzo on Jul 17th 2018 at 5:18:59 AM

They actually think that he is a asshole. Is just that they also think that he is awesome.

Remember, average people really don't care much about morality.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Jul 17th 2018 at 4:28:24 AM

That is sadly true. They likely like him not despite being an asshole but because of it.

Edited by Antiteilchen on Jul 17th 2018 at 1:04:00 PM

What exactly is sad about that? Thinking that Rick is awesome does not need to mean that someone thinks that he's worthy of emulation or a good person. Admittedly it can and an annoying large part of the fandom doesn't seem to understand that.

Still all the same I think he's awesome and I understand that he's not someone worthy of emulation.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Jul 17th 2018 at 6:25:03 AM

Personally I find Rick entertaining and oddly likeable within the context of the show, but he's also very much not the kind of person I'd like to hang out with in real life. "Asshole" is a massive understatement. The guy destroys whole universes without second thought on a regular basis.

Yes he's a pretty good example of "love the character hate the person", I would despise Rick if I interacted with him personally but in a safe space beyond the 4th wall he's quite entertaining.

It's sad that most people don't care about morality, not that they're liking Rick.

That is sad but true, Rick is a strangely attractive protagonist despite being largely amoral and even something of a monster.

I think it might be safe to say most of us like our monsters under glass not in the seat next to us.

A well done antagonist character can be absolutely interesting and add a lot to a story. They can be pretty cool but even the ones I find interesting are not someone I would want anyone to meet in real life.

I've not watched Rick And Morty so I wouldn't know exactly much about how Rick is beyond that he's an alcoholic and supposedly an burn out genius.

I tend to not like Villain Protagonists or protagonists that are assholes unless they get really messed up over the course of the story and are not treated as heroes narrative wise. It's when they are treated as heroes and yet have done nothing to be less of an asshole is what bothers me.

From what I hear Bo Jack Horseman is an case of an asshole protag whom you can still manage to sympathize with yet not like as a person at the same time. He also doesn't get treated as an hero by the narrative.

Edited by Wispy on Jul 17th 2018 at 8:34:57 AM

Neither Rick, who would be considered a villain in literally every other Sci Fi series and is treated as a massively selfish Wild Card in his own.. The issue is that people have issues separating virtues from the person, which added at the fact that for most of the series, Rick is the only person that can claim victories over others don't help at all.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Jul 17th 2018 at 10:49:40 AM

I'm presently debating whether or not to watch the LEGEND OF THE GALACTIC HEROES because it seems to be very much about the Fascist But Efficient portrayal of government as well as the idea of the Emperor being the best at everything vs. a corrupt democracy.

I was ultimately offput on anime space opera by the CREST OF THE STARS series where we were all supposed to bow before our elven overlords.

Really, maybe I just need to stick to Cowboy Bebop and Outlaw Star.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 17th 2018 at 8:47:49 AM

That particular series has some interesting twists and the Emperor isn't exactly the greatest either. Its two overtly flawed governments who are shown being manipulative and corrupt fighting a war with some exceptional individuals clashing and meeting up as a result of it. That is really over simplified because there are elements of political intrigue and conspiracies that further flesh out the plots and neither government is painted in truly glowing pictures. I can't say much more without possibly spoiling it. I do recommend sitting down for the long haul as it is a bit of a long series.