I have a question about Gamergate

[Kalyx triaD]

Originally Posted by El Capitano Gatisto No, it's not. It's saying that you have to bear in mind that media shapes society.

Art imitates life.

I'm gonna guess we won't meet halfway here.

Of course it has everything to do with me. Why are my priorities any less valid than yours?

My priorities make it so you can have the entertainment you want. Your priorities, at its logical conclusion, eventually limits art.

Film critics regularly excoriate films like The Human Centipede and other torture porn films for being exploitative and crass, as well as just bad films. Do you have a problem with this?

I don't like the movie and sub-genre so I would be in agreement with those critics. What I didn't see is them ascribing themes to those movies where they knew wasn't intended. Imagine making an observation in Saw 5 pertaining to how hospitals should widen admissions to mental health patients. Not a bad thought per se, but ridiculous when your subject is fucking Saw 5.

[El Capitano Gatisto]

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD I don't like the movie and sub-genre so I would be in agreement with those critics. What I didn't see is them ascribing themes to those movies where they knew wasn't intended. Imagine making an observation in Saw 5 pertaining to how hospitals should widen admissions to mental health patients. Not a bad thought per se, but ridiculous when your subject is fucking Saw 5.

Funny that you mention that, I did a course on mental illness in film. It analysed depictions of the mentally ill and mental health professions in film. That sort of thing is actually what I'm talking about, the idea being that films (and other media) reinforcing the same themes, stereotypes, tropes and cliches over and over again informs how people see reality. The implication being that films contribute to a fear of the mentally ill and to an out-dated view of the mental health profession.

Which is all very interesting and I like to hear people talk about it. If a reviewer feels subjects like that are important then they should talk about it. The artistic value of the work they talk about is largely irrelevant if people watch it.

[Kalyx triaD]

Originally Posted by El Capitano Gatisto Funny that you mention that, I did a course on mental illness in film. It analysed depictions of the mentally ill and mental health professions in film. That sort of thing is actually what I'm talking about, the idea being that films (and other media) reinforcing the same themes, stereotypes, tropes and cliches over and over again informs how people see reality. The implication being that films contribute to a fear of the mentally ill and to an out-dated view of the mental health profession.

So who better to write a great script that challenges the public perception of the mentally ill than you. I would honestly 100% support you on that. I'm not being pandemic, either. You see an issue, you wanna see change, in a capitalistic entertainment market that's how you do it.

My nephew was recently concluded to have autism. We've never had an autistic family member, and I admit a great many things I didn't think seriously about came front and center. How hard is education going to be, how will he interact with other kids, where is he on the spectrum, etc.

If you think the mentally ill/handicapped can be better served in media, point me to the project and I'm yours - but I still don't agree that we should put any pressure on creators to do anything other what they wanna do.

If a reviewer feels subjects like that are important then they should talk about it.

Agreed.

The artistic value of the work they talk about is largely irrelevant if people watch it.

Care to rephrase this?

[El Capitano Gatisto]

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD So who better to write a great script that challenges the public perception of the mentally ill than you. I would honestly 100% support you on that. I'm not being pandemic, either. You see an issue, you wanna see change, in a capitalistic entertainment market that's how you do it. My nephew was recently concluded to have autism. We've never had an autistic family member, and I admit a great many things I didn't think seriously about came front and center. How hard is education going to be, how will he interact with other kids, where is he on the spectrum, etc. If you think the mentally ill/handicapped can be better served in media, point me to the project and I'm yours - but I still don't agree that we should put any pressure on creators to do anything other what they wanna do.

Who better would be someone who can write good scripts. I'm not a script-writer or a film producer. I watch films and can appreciate good stories.

There is nothing wrong with highlighting the effect of art and media on society so that artists understand the potential consequences of their work. In this instance, for example, does your piece possibly further stigmatise the mentally ill? This is how criticism works, has always worked. It has never been just about saying "this is good, 8/10". Which is to say that games should be ready for that kind of criticism if the medium is to develop.

This is also how the free market/capitalism works. An amateur with no talent trying to make an issue piece is less helpful than informed criticism suggest artists consider the consequences of their work for people who may identify or be identified with the characters there-in. No one is forcing them to even listen, indeed, most don't unless the market they're marginalising is large enough to dent profits.

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD Care to rephrase this?

It's the same point said 3 different ways now. If people consume your work then you are influencing them, be it positively or negatively, so it still matters what you say with that work.