Values Dissonance/Resonance Cleanup

The thing that somewhat irks me about the entry is that it implies/reads like the special's moral being taken from the Bible is somehow uncomfortable and warranting of dissonance when again it's been pointed out that time and time again that the special's lesson that Charlie himself and audiences who actually understand the message beyond its surface religious presentation show, takes is that it's actually a universal message that can apply to both a religious and a secular person.

Like you don't need to be religious to celebrate peace and love amongst each other or appreciate the beauty of simplicity or still be happy in despite unglamorous aesthetics and circumstances (which Charlie does at the end with the tree)

Edited by AudioSpeaks2 on Dec 25th 2023 at 1:24:45 AM

It also ignores how Linus' quoting of the story of Jesus' birth is meant to connect to the special's plot thematically.

Because let's remember what happened. Joseph and the then-pregnant Mary were constantly denied by others a home and she was nearing labor. So they settled in a manger: a very unhygienic place to give birth. It was a truly abysmal situation, yet at the end it was worth it and the savior was born. They managed to find happiness in a truly awful situation.

Much like Charlie's ordeal in this special. His attempt at planning a Christmas play turned out horribly, yet by the end he managed to find happiness anyway.

Would it be as much of a dissonance or uncomfortable if Linus quoted a paralleling story from Greek Mythology instead? If not, then I don't see how this would be dissonance.

Edited by AudioSpeaks2 on Dec 26th 2023 at 4:32:25 AM

I'm well aware that the themes being presented go beyond just Christianity and can be taken to heart by anyone, but Values Dissonance indeed still applies in that it's extremely unlikely any mainstream Christmas special would make any overt references to spirituality. That's why I argued that Values Dissonance and Values Resonance can both apply here: Values Dissonance in that Christmas specials completely avoid references to Christianity nowadays to avoid alienating audiences, Values Resonance in that the themes, despite being delivered through the Bible, can still be valued by anyone regardless of faith and remain relevant today.

How about this for a rewrite?

• Values Dissonance: While the themes regarding the True Meaning of Christmas may be universal and remain relevant, the overt references to Christianity may throw off modern audiences, as no mainstream Christmas special today would dare remain anything but secular in its presentation. Notably, Christmas was already largely secularized by 1965—so there were some concerns prior to the original airing—but America has only grown increasingly secular since then.

I'm with AudioSpeaks2 on this. Just because something is uncommon today doesn't necessarily mean it is considered reprehensible.

A show airing a Christian Christmas episode today would certainly be odd, but not on the same level as airing a pro-segregation episode. It wouldn't cause a boycotts, just low ratings. That's a marketing problem, not a value problem.

Edited by SoyValdo7 on Dec 24th 2023 at 1:03:26 PM

Edited by AudioSpeaks2 on Dec 26th 2023 at 4:33:33 AM

To me, that only means different levels of dissonance. From something that is just a bit uncomfortable for many in the audience, to something that is outrageously offensive. Like an unreconstructed Dogged Nice Guy that you can still see in some shows, that people complain about but don't tune out immediately, versus something like a wife beater getting sympathy or something that would generate justified howls.

I also would add that, while many examples of Values Dissonance are indeed stuff that I (and I suppose most of you) would find reprehensible, this isn't necessary for it to be dissonant. The almost disappearance of moderate Protestants in the US did cause changes in what is deemed appropriate for a "mainstream" audience.

The idea that broadcast networks would be less willing to have a Bible verse in a Christmas special would make it a valid example, but I'm not sure how true it is because I feel like even modern family shows are still willing to do Nativity retellings and such.

I think it CAN fit since it IS true people ARE more wary of Religion nowadays but I think most people dont really mind. So I am not sure.

That's what makes it not count for me, because people don't mind. Secular Christmas is not thought to be the "best" or the "correct" Christmas. There are not rights and wrongs here.

Edited by SoyValdo7 on Dec 26th 2023 at 7:28:04 AM

The thing is, the Charlie Brown Christmas Special is largely viewed as a Christmas classic. I haven't really heard that many people complaining about its overt Christian themes.

I was about to add a Values Dissonance example to 40 Days and 40 Nights when I saw someone beat me to it:

• Values Dissonance: The movie was controversial in it's original release for downplaying a woman blatantly raping a man, but the post-#MeToo world might as well consider it a hate crime. Rob Perez getting into fights with Reddit users during an AMA session only further killed the movie's credibility.

However, the entry mentions that the film was controversial when it came out for that very reason. If the film was controversial even back then, doesn't that disqualify it as Values Dissonance? Plus the reference to the script writer getting into fights with Reddit users seems unnecessary. Maybe this would be better under Overshadowed by Controversy?

Edited by SharkToast on Jan 7th 2024 at 1:15:18 AM

The rape is in the story, so I wouldn't really call it a "controversy". And the twitter stuff seems much less serious in comparison.

On a semi-related note, the pages for this work are so bashy.

It's my understanding that the Reddit stuff was in relation to the rape scene.

Edit: Here's the link to the incident.

Edited by SharkToast on Jan 7th 2024 at 1:43:41 AM

Reddit, right, my bad.

But yeah, it's sort of just a plot point in the movie. A controversial one, but we don't really do cases where the work overshadows itself.

If the example mentions that it was controversial upon its initial release, does that mean that the example isn't really a case of Values Dissonance?

If it was considered wrong at the time, it's not Values Dissonance.

The script writer going on Dear Negative Reader rants may count as Overshadowed by Controversy, if it is something that actually overshadows the movie, but I'm not certain about that.

I'd like your guys' take on this entry before I add it:

• Gurren Lagann: Part of why Rossiu is a Scrappy to the western audience revolves around the concept of bushido and suicide. To the Japanese audience, Rossiu attempting to commit suicide after playing into the Anti-Spirals' hands and nearly condemning Simon to death is a noble, but ultimately flawed act that Simon punches him out of. To a Western perspective, his attempted suicide is seen as Rossiu cowardly running away from the consequences of his actions and only added to the already negative sentiment about him.

Edited by PhiSat on Jan 8th 2024 at 12:40:57 PM

I don't know the work or the fandom so it could be entirely legit, but I don't think western audiences are completely unlikely to sympathize with that. Suicide isn't seen as some noble move most of the time, but not everyone sees it as outright cowardly either — sometimes it's just tragic. Often selfish, but tragic.

I feel the entry on Bonanza S 08 E 16 is more so Deliberate Values Dissonance but I'm not sure how to reword it so it fits that trope instead.

from YMMV.The Andy Griffith Show, under Values Dissonance

• The episode with Rafe Hollister refusing his tetanus shot probably wouldn’t be received quite as well in today’s world. He’s eventually convinced to take it but today, people would be angry about them not respecting his right not to take it.

vaccination is (wrongly, imo) controversial in today's world, but I doubt people would get too worked up about a pro-vaccine message, outside the extreme anti-vax fringe.

I mean, yeah. Some people certainly would disagree with the message — others, if anything, would take an even harsher stance against his right to reject the shot. In a post-COVID world, it's hard to imagine a large number of viewers actually taking the guy's side.

Sounds more like proof that people have always had fights over vaccines. If anything, the fact vaccinations are still so controversial would make this seem more like Values Resonance, depending on why he doesn't want to take it.

Spotted this on On Her Majesty's Secret Service:

• Values Dissonance: Pretty much everything related to Draco's treatment of his daughter. When he and Bond meet for the first time, Draco tells Bond that his daughter "needs a man to dominate her;" the line is arguably intended to show how Draco was old-fashioned and behind the times, but today it would be a downright Moral Event Horizon, and no trait an ally would have. Even Bond gives him an "uh, what?" reaction. Draco later slaps Tracy unconscious when she refuses to leave without Bond at Piz Gloria, and commments "Spare the rod and spoil the child, eh?" to the man helping him; this one is at least has the justification that Piz Gloria was due to explode in mere seconds and she was insistent on going back for James, so it was the only way to get her to "cooperate" without her rushing off into danger. Finally, after the wedding ceremony, Draco tells Tracy to obey her husband and do whatever he tells her to, though Tracy cheekily implies she'll do her own thing as always.

Draco is a mafia boss who clearly isn't meant to be seen as a model parent. That is precisely why, as this entry explains, Bond doesn't endorse his parenting and Tracy has a rebellious streak against her father. Characters are allowed to be flawed, this isn't an example of Values Dissonance.

Curiously this was deleted from Harsher in Hindsight on YMMV.The Andy Griffith Show by a different troper without an edit reason, a couple of months before the values dissonance example about vaccines was added:

The episode "The County Nurse", in which Andy needed to convince a farmer to get his tetanus shot, said farmer was convinced that he didn't need it because he was already healthy and knew how to avoid cutting himself on metal. It was a silly plotline until the rise of the anti-vax movement in The New '10s, moreso when the COVID-19 pandemic pulled people refusing to get a COVID shot into the movement.

I think that could be reworked as a valid Values Resonance example about the modern vaccine conflict in general, not just COVID specifically.