[ SECRET POST #4052 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4052 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 23 secrets from Secret Submission Post #580.
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.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that opinion tbh.

And honestly, a lot of the things that I enjoy most and like to talk about most are things that I think definitely aren't objectively good. That shouldn't be a barrier to fandom at all.

[(Anonymous)]

I wish more people in fandom would admit/accept that the things they like aren't perfect, and that they can enjoy imperfect things just fine. All of my favorite movies are garbage, but I love them.

[were_lemur]

Didn't you know? If you don't love something completely and absolutely, with no reservations, you're a hater. *rolleyes*

Except, apparently, in the Supernatural fandom, where people will talk at length about how much they hate the most recent episode, hate the show, hate whichever one of the three major characters they don't ship Dean with ... but will still call themselves a fan of the show.

[mrs_don_draper]

It's not flawless, but I do think it's objectively good.

[(Anonymous)]

That's a strong line to take.

[(Anonymous)]

How do you define a piece of media as "objectively good," though?

[(Anonymous)]

There are objective metrics to measure the quality of things like acting, writing, directing and cinematography. It’s how you can have graded classes on those subjects. Whether or not something is enjoyable is subjective. Whether or not it’s good, as in a well-crafted example of its genre, is objective.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, no. Um. Not at all, in point of fact. We can create metrics and rubrics and standards to judge the component parts of a film (in the same way that we can do for films as a whole). But that doesn't address the significant question. The significant question is not whether standards exist, it's whether those standards are objective - whether or not they're necessarily valid. Just having a metric does not mean that the metric is objective. And claims about the objective quality of acting are vulnerable to all the same criticisms as claims about the objective quality of films, or any other form of art. And it's very much an open question whether any of those things are objective.

Also, pointing to graded classes as evidence for the existence of objective standards for things seems like... really not a great argument. I mean, just, like, not fantastic. I don't see any reason that graded classes would be expected to be objective, and it certainly doesn't match my personal experience of the education system.