fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3147 ]

[ SECRET POST #3147 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3147 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 052 secrets from Secret Submission Post #450.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Everyone's relationship with a piece of media is their own. If it works for them, it can be artistic. If it doesn't, it'll come across as pretentious.

I'm uncomfortable with assigning "pretentious" that kind of subjective, perceptual basis, because the concept of pretension inherently involves an assumption about the character and motives of the people who made and who enjoy the work in question.

Like, if you call something pretentious, it's essentially impossible for me not to hear that as a criticism of the creator and the audience, not just of the work. Really, almost as an insult to the creator and the audience. Inherently, in the meaning of the word. I don't think you get out of that by saying "Hey, man, it's just the subjective perception that I had of the work." It's like saying, "Hey, man, I know I called you a fucking idiot retard, but that's just my opinion, and everyone's entitled to their opinion." Well, no.

Out if curiosity, if you say a work is shallow, does it mean you think the creator is shallow?

Is there something wrong with thinking the creator/work/audience is shallow? Not all of our opinions about other people are positive.

I would agree with what I think ayrt is getting at that pretentious implies motives about the person who made it in a way that shallow and a lot of other criticisms don't.

I guess I don't agree with that necessarily. What sets pretentiousness apart?

A movie can be shallow no matter what the intent of the creator. Maybe they tried for something deep and failed or maybe the final result is exactly as shallow as it was supposed to be. But pretentiousness is predicated on the creator trying to come across a certain way. People are disagreeing with me on this by saying that the movie itself is what's trying to seem deep but isn't, but movies aren't trying to do anything. They have no will of their own. Any motive goes back to the creators.

I guess I'm just inconsistent about when I nitpick over personifying this sort of thing and when I don't. I'm sure there are similar arguments where I'd be on the other side. I'm not offended or anything. It's really a semantic argument, but I happen to enjoy semantics so here I am.

I see what you're saying. I do feel like a person can make a pretentious movie without always being pretentious. Maybe they were pretentious in the making of that movie.

For what it's worth, I don't consume very much art which I then turn around and say "well that was pretentious". I think if anything struck me that way I would not bother finishing it. But I'm much more likely to think of a person as pretentious, or a person's actions/words as pretentious, than art. I'm not sure why. I guess my assessment of art isn't as nuanced as a lot of others', as made evident by the fact that I tend to get really excited about things that other people find mediocre, and that could have something to do with it.

Nah, I'm not mad about criticism in general. "Pretentiousness" is different to me because it seems to assign a motive to it - like people are being insincere, and doing so on purpose. That's what bothers me about it. If you say my taste is shallow, well, I disagree with you, but you're not saying anything except that I have shitty taste. If you say that I'm pretentious, to me, that means that you're saying that I'm basically lying about what I like. And I'm not. The things I like might be shitty, but I like them.

I guess other people just use "pretentious" as a synonym for "bad" so *shrug*. But, like, the word is what the word is.

That's not what pretentious means. It doesn't mean "insincere on purpose". It means:

"characterized by assumption of dignity or importance, especially when exaggerated or undeserved" (dictionary.com)

The idea is that something or someone believes themselves to be more dignified and important than it actually is. In the case of movies, if someone called it pretentious, it would mean it felt like the movie thought it was deeper and more profound than it was in actuality.

2.
making an exaggerated outward show; ostentatious.
3.
full of pretense or pretension; having no factual basis; false.

attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.

: having or showing the unpleasant quality of people who want to be regarded as more impressive, successful, or important than they really are

making claim to distinction or importance, esp undeservedly
having or creating a deceptive outer appearance of great worth; ostentatious

trying to give the appearance of great importance, esp. in a way that is obvious

Yes, exactly. Which is generally how I would describe a bad artistic film.

My point is, most of those definitions impute motive and/or imply insincerity

I don't get anything about active insincerity in the word. It's not necessarily by definition some conscious choice, but rather just acting more important than is deserved. It's acting falsely, sure. But because it's pretending to be something its not, whether or not it is actually aware of it. It's acting ostentatiously important, or deep, or profound, to the point of pissing everyone else off.

If you need a comparison, it's the difference between saying you're a fake girl or that your fandom's canon is shit.

No... that would be the difference between saying a movie is pretentious, and that someone who likes it is pretentious. In other words, completely different sentences with completely different meanings.

This, thank you.

This is how I've basically always seen the word used.

To be honest, I think you're getting pretty defensive here. If I think a movie is shit, I will say it's shit. Is that criticism of the creator and audience (who enjoyed it)? If someone said so, I say they were taking it way too personally. Not everyone is going to like the things you enjoy, or find the things you think are artistic, artistic.

Saying that a movie is bad and that people who like it have bad taste is categorically different to me from saying that people are pretending about liking something so they can seem higher-status than they actually are

Call it bad, I don't give a shit. If you don't think it's artistic, and say instead that it's bad, that's one thing. The part that bothers me is specifically the part where you say it's pretentious. And that whole mode of thought, where you're talking about this weird motive.

And, like, I honestly don't see how you could interpret it any other way.

There's an enormous difference in saying a film is pretentious - in which it is trying to be deeper and more artistic than it actually is - and saying that people are pretentious. I'm not sure why you are equating a judgment about a film with a judgment about a viewer who enjoyed that film, if me substituting "shit" for "pretentious" is fine by you.

Well, for one thing, because the way the term is used does not clearly distinguish between those kinds of judgments. Look at that post about Christopher Nolan's movies below - the post first says that the movies are pretentious, and then says that people like them because they make people feel intelligent even though they're not. And that is pretty typical of the way people use the word IMO. The way the word is used about a film is just an indicator of a deeper attitude about pretentiousness where the quality gets assigned not just to things but to the people who make and like those things.

nayrt

That's because it actually is pretty hard to make certain judgments about a movie (or any creative work) without an implied judgment about the people who like it or claim to like it. When we say that a film others think deep and artistic is pretentious, we are indeed saying that those who thought it deep and artistic were taken in by fakery and gimmicks--and maybe by the claim that it was deep and artistic. There can also be an implication that they were posturing as well--that they were determined to like it because they thought that liking it would mark them as people of sophistication and discernment.

nayrt

It's less that they're pretending to like something to seem higher-status than they actually are--more that they've been taken in by something mediocre whose creator is trying to make his work seem deeper than it is. Though I suppose there's an element of posturing in the people who like and praise it--they're glad they like it, and they're happy to rave about it because they feel that liking it demonstrates their fine taste.

the tone argument? really? you're missing the point

what are you even talking about? the comment called it like it saw it.

I agree, although I wish you wouldn't have said retard.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3147 ]

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

^this

Re: ^this

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?

+1