[006]
DannyM
Current Version
Changed line(s) 8 from:
n
And I propose this: The ANaziByAnyOtherName trope has made it impossible! ANY attempt to normalize this and say \
to:
And I propose this: The ANaziByAnyOtherName trope has made it impossible! ANY attempt to normalize this and say \\\"no, this is not fascism, it\\\'s just the way the US did things\\\" is a TEXTBOOK execution of ANaziByAnyOtherName, and the audience will interpret it as such and the characters are in foolish denial of the situation, which will probably cock up the way the movie\\\'s supposed to be watched and then confuse everyone.
Consider the paradox here: any attempt to explain \\\"no, this is not a Nazi thing\\\" will always be interpreted as \\\"normalized fascism\\\" subtext. No matter how you do it. Any way you try to write it and say \\\"there is no subtext here\\\" will only reinforce the audience\\\'s belief that there IS supposed to be a fascist subtext here.
Furthermore, it\\\'d be difficult to work in an explanation of such an everyday thing without being anviliciously, insufferably didactic. This salute would raise no question in pre-1942 drama, so there\\\'s no explanation of why a character would talk about it. The actor would have to go BreakingTheFourthWall and talk completely out-of-character to explain how it only became fascist in ~1940!
You\\\'d have to set a plot in the ~1940 window where it was controversial, or in the short window in post-1942 where some people hadn\\\'t gotten the memo and still tried to Bellamy-salute the flag and someone explains how that\\\'s no longer cool.
That\\\'s hard to make \\\"interesting\\\" to viewers proportional to how much of a plot setup it would require to explain. So, essentially, the Bellamy salute has been forever wiped (actually, it\\\'s a Retcon of real-life history!) from fiction and even historical films/biopics, as an inadvertent consequence of the ANaziByAnyOtherName trope.
Consider the paradox here: any attempt to explain \\\"no, this is not a Nazi thing\\\" will always be interpreted as \\\"normalized fascism\\\" subtext. No matter how you do it. Any way you try to write it and say \\\"there is no subtext here\\\" will only reinforce the audience\\\'s belief that there IS supposed to be a fascist subtext here.
Furthermore, it\\\'d be difficult to work in an explanation of such an everyday thing without being anviliciously, insufferably didactic. This salute would raise no question in pre-1942 drama, so there\\\'s no explanation of why a character would talk about it. The actor would have to go BreakingTheFourthWall and talk completely out-of-character to explain how it only became fascist in ~1940!
You\\\'d have to set a plot in the ~1940 window where it was controversial, or in the short window in post-1942 where some people hadn\\\'t gotten the memo and still tried to Bellamy-salute the flag and someone explains how that\\\'s no longer cool.
That\\\'s hard to make \\\"interesting\\\" to viewers proportional to how much of a plot setup it would require to explain. So, essentially, the Bellamy salute has been forever wiped (actually, it\\\'s a Retcon of real-life history!) from fiction and even historical films/biopics, as an inadvertent consequence of the ANaziByAnyOtherName trope.
Changed line(s) 8 from:
n
And I propose this: The ANaziByAnyOtherName trope has made it impossible! ANY attempt to normalize this and say \
to:
And I propose this: The ANaziByAnyOtherName trope has made it impossible! ANY attempt to normalize this and say \\\"no, this is not fascism, it\\\'s just the way the US did things\\\" is a TEXTBOOK execution of ANaziByAnyOtherName, and the audience will interpret it as such, which will probably cock up the way the movie\\\'s supposed to be watched and then confuse everyone.
Consider the paradox here: any attempt to explain \\\"no, this is not a Nazi thing\\\" will always be interpreted as \\\"normalized fascism\\\" subtext. No matter how you do it. Any way you try to write it and say \\\"there is no subtext here\\\" will only reinforce the audience\\\'s belief that there IS supposed to be a fascist subtext here.
Furthermore, it\\\'d be difficult to work in an explanation of such an everyday thing without being anviliciously, insufferably didactic. This salute would raise no question in pre-1942 drama, so there\\\'s no explanation of why a character would talk about it. The actor would have to go BreakingTheFourthWall and talk completely out-of-character to explain how it only became fascist in ~1940!
You\\\'d have to set a plot in the ~1940 window where it was controversial, or in the short window in post-1942 where some people hadn\\\'t gotten the memo and still tried to Bellamy-salute the flag and someone explains how that\\\'s no longer cool.
That\\\'s hard to make \\\"interesting\\\" to viewers proportional to how much of a plot setup it would require to explain. So, essentially, the Bellamy salute has been forever wiped (actually, it\\\'s a Retcon of real-life history!) from fiction and even historical films/biopics, as an inadvertent consequence of the ANaziByAnyOtherName trope.
Consider the paradox here: any attempt to explain \\\"no, this is not a Nazi thing\\\" will always be interpreted as \\\"normalized fascism\\\" subtext. No matter how you do it. Any way you try to write it and say \\\"there is no subtext here\\\" will only reinforce the audience\\\'s belief that there IS supposed to be a fascist subtext here.
Furthermore, it\\\'d be difficult to work in an explanation of such an everyday thing without being anviliciously, insufferably didactic. This salute would raise no question in pre-1942 drama, so there\\\'s no explanation of why a character would talk about it. The actor would have to go BreakingTheFourthWall and talk completely out-of-character to explain how it only became fascist in ~1940!
You\\\'d have to set a plot in the ~1940 window where it was controversial, or in the short window in post-1942 where some people hadn\\\'t gotten the memo and still tried to Bellamy-salute the flag and someone explains how that\\\'s no longer cool.
That\\\'s hard to make \\\"interesting\\\" to viewers proportional to how much of a plot setup it would require to explain. So, essentially, the Bellamy salute has been forever wiped (actually, it\\\'s a Retcon of real-life history!) from fiction and even historical films/biopics, as an inadvertent consequence of the ANaziByAnyOtherName trope.
Changed line(s) 8 from:
n
And I propose this: The ANaziByAnyOtherName trope has made it impossible! ANY attempt to normalize this and say \
to:
And I propose this: The ANaziByAnyOtherName trope has made it impossible! ANY attempt to normalize this and say \\\"no, this is not fascism, it\\\'s just the way the US did things\\\" is a TEXTBOOK execution of ANaziByAnyOtherName, and the audience will interpret it as such, which will probably cock up the way the movie\\\'s supposed to be watched and then confuse everyone.
Consider the paradox here: any attempt to explain \\\"no, this is not a Nazi thing\\\" will always be interpreted as \\\"normalized fascism\\\" subtext. No matter how you do it. Any way you try to write it and say \\\"there is no subtext here\\\" will only reinforce the audience\\\'s belief that there IS supposed to be a fascist subtext here.
Furthermore, it\\\'d be difficult to work in an explanation of such an everyday thing without being anviliciously, insufferably didactic. This salute would raise no question in pre-1942 drama, so there\\\'s no explanation of why a character would talk about it. The actor would have to go BreakingTheFourthWall and talk completely out-of-character to explain how it only became fascist in ~1940!
You\\\'d have to set a plot in the ~1940 window where it was controversial, or in the short window in post-1942 where some people hadn\\\'t gotten the memo and still tried to Bellamy-salute the flag and someone explains how that\\\'s no longer cool.
That\\\'s hard to make \\\"interesting\\\" to viewers proportional to how much of a plot setup it would require to explain. So, essentially, the Bellamy salute has been forever wiped (actually, it\\\'s a [[Retcon]]!!) from fiction and even historical films/biopics, as an inadvertent consequence of the ANaziByAnyOtherName trope.
Consider the paradox here: any attempt to explain \\\"no, this is not a Nazi thing\\\" will always be interpreted as \\\"normalized fascism\\\" subtext. No matter how you do it. Any way you try to write it and say \\\"there is no subtext here\\\" will only reinforce the audience\\\'s belief that there IS supposed to be a fascist subtext here.
Furthermore, it\\\'d be difficult to work in an explanation of such an everyday thing without being anviliciously, insufferably didactic. This salute would raise no question in pre-1942 drama, so there\\\'s no explanation of why a character would talk about it. The actor would have to go BreakingTheFourthWall and talk completely out-of-character to explain how it only became fascist in ~1940!
You\\\'d have to set a plot in the ~1940 window where it was controversial, or in the short window in post-1942 where some people hadn\\\'t gotten the memo and still tried to Bellamy-salute the flag and someone explains how that\\\'s no longer cool.
That\\\'s hard to make \\\"interesting\\\" to viewers proportional to how much of a plot setup it would require to explain. So, essentially, the Bellamy salute has been forever wiped (actually, it\\\'s a [[Retcon]]!!) from fiction and even historical films/biopics, as an inadvertent consequence of the ANaziByAnyOtherName trope.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
to:
[[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Students_pledging_allegiance_to_the_American_flag_with_the_Bellamy_salute.jpg]]
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
And I propose this: The ANaziByAnyOtherName trope has made it impossible! ANY attempt to normalize this and say \
to:
And I propose this: The ANaziByAnyOtherName trope has made it impossible! ANY attempt to normalize this and say \\\"no, this is not fascism, it\\\'s just the way the US did things\\\" is a TEXTBOOK execution of ANaziByAnyOtherName, and the audience will interpret it as such, which will probably cock up the way the movie\\\'s supposed to be watched and then confuse everyone.
Consider the paradox here: any attempt to explain \\\"no, this is not a Nazi thing\\\" will always be interpreted as \\\"normalized fascism\\\" subtext. No matter how you do it. Any way you try to write it and say \\\"there is no subtext here\\\" will only reinforce the audience\\\'s belief that there IS supposed to be a fascist subtext here.
Furthermore, it\\\'d be difficult to work in an explanation of such an everyday thing without being anviliciously, insufferably didactic. This salute would raise no question in pre-1942 drama, so there\\\'s no explanation of why a character would talk about it. The actor would have to go BreakingTheFourthWall and talk completely out-of-character to explain how it only became fascist in ~1940!
You\\\'d have to set a plot in the ~1940 window where it was controversial, or in the short window in post-1942 where some people hadn\\\'t gotten the memo and still tried to Bellamy-salute the flag and someone explains how that\\\'s no longer cool.
That\\\'s hard to make \\\"interesting\\\" to viewers proportional to how much of a plot setup it would require to explain. So, essentially, the Bellamy salute has been forever wiped (retconned??) from fiction and even historical films/biopics, as an inadvertent consequence of the ANaziByAnyOtherName trope.
Consider the paradox here: any attempt to explain \\\"no, this is not a Nazi thing\\\" will always be interpreted as \\\"normalized fascism\\\" subtext. No matter how you do it. Any way you try to write it and say \\\"there is no subtext here\\\" will only reinforce the audience\\\'s belief that there IS supposed to be a fascist subtext here.
Furthermore, it\\\'d be difficult to work in an explanation of such an everyday thing without being anviliciously, insufferably didactic. This salute would raise no question in pre-1942 drama, so there\\\'s no explanation of why a character would talk about it. The actor would have to go BreakingTheFourthWall and talk completely out-of-character to explain how it only became fascist in ~1940!
You\\\'d have to set a plot in the ~1940 window where it was controversial, or in the short window in post-1942 where some people hadn\\\'t gotten the memo and still tried to Bellamy-salute the flag and someone explains how that\\\'s no longer cool.
That\\\'s hard to make \\\"interesting\\\" to viewers proportional to how much of a plot setup it would require to explain. So, essentially, the Bellamy salute has been forever wiped (retconned??) from fiction and even historical films/biopics, as an inadvertent consequence of the ANaziByAnyOtherName trope.
