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

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.

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?

^this

Re: ^this

Re: Artistic or pretentious media?