[ SECRET POST #5238 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5238 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.







Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 37 secrets from Secret Submission Post #750.
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

[meadowphoenix]

there's no symbol that cannot be re-interpreated or is static, and most have multiple meanings but it's naive to believe that the popular incarnation isn't how the majority of people derive meaning from a symbol. in communication, a symbol can absolutely be reduced. that's especially true when the audience rapidly expands in growth between mediums. sucks, but that's why say, Synder's Superman/Clark Kent is angering. and a lot of why cultural appropriation, for instance, is upsetting.

And I'm also pretty dubious that just ceding the interpretation of American culture, identity, belonging and ideals to the far right is a good course to pursue that's going to lead to good results over the long term.
Well, eye never said anything like this, and I can't respond to what you're getting from other people. But I don't think CA and who wears his merch is where I'd start as resistance, lmao. Also, don't know if this part of the response was good faith misunderstanding over what I said, or bad faith shifting because you don't have a response what I said, but hey, if you think I somehow implied this, show me where!

[(Anonymous)]

I admit that I framed my point in a way that was grouchier than necessary. But if I'm misunderstanding anything, it's in good faith. And I do stand by the point, for two reasons.

First, I think the kind of critique that you want to make in regard to Captain America can be made across a wide range of American symbols. I think it's hard to conceive of a form of American symbolism that is drawn from American history and inclusive of white America which doesn't have a similarly complex relationship to the history of American misdeeds. So while your point was obviously specific to Captain America, I think the general considerations apply much more broadly. And second, I do think that the practical effect of not contesting a symbol like Captain America basically is to cede it to the interpretation favored by right-nationalists. So, given those two considerations, it seems to me the logical conclusion is that any comparable interpretation and symbolism of American identity, culture, ideals or belonging which has been used by the right and which has a relationship to the misdeeds of America should not be contested, which in practice will meaning ceding it to the far right. So, whether I am right or whether I am wrong, that's the point that I was trying to make.

Also I do still just disagree that the MCU version of the character is definitive to the extent that specific lines of dialogue in MCU movies can be taken as indicative of the symbolic meaning of Captain America in general. I accept that meanings change across time, but I don't think it's naive to believe that the meaning of a symbol is still more multivalent and open to legitimate interpretation than that. Especially when there are multiple textual versions of the character that preceded the movie version.

[meadowphoenix]

So while your point was obviously specific to Captain America, I think the general considerations apply much more broadly.
I mean I'm making two points re: MCU through CA. 1) It constructs politics in a way that perpetuates propaganda and 2) its politics were constructed in a way that leaves its engagement with American sovereignty broadly appealing for marketing purposes. Symbols constructed with the former only have value to those who value the propaganda to begin with (which for the most part was white supremacy if not the right-wing anyway), which...is of questionable value to all those Americans who are victims of that propaganda. I think we need to far more discussion on what is actually valuable about those symbols which do that.

The latter is going to feel personally relevant to assholes of all political values because that's the point. Saying "there is an issue with watering down political philosophy for marketing purposes because the broad appeal easily validates assholes" isn't ceding anything to anyone, because there are plenty of assholes who simply aren't right-wing and there are plenty of ways to like...not do that, lmao. As an issue of construction you can construct it differently, right? Fanfic authors do it all the time. You also don't have to contest it that way.

Do not understand what you mean by "inclusive of white america" you'll have to explain.

Also I do still just disagree that the MCU version of the character is definitive to the extent that specific lines of dialogue in MCU movies can be taken as indicative of the symbolic meaning of Captain America in general.
when it comes to symbol construction the public doesn't need to remember the specifics of construction to have successfully constructed a symbol to those specifics. But yes, it's entirely naive to believe that mass symbols don't communicate a limited meaning which overwhelms other meanings. I actually think it's dangerous to ignore the power of corporations to put out simple effective messaging to overwhelm and then reduce more complex symbols to a simplistic state even in this context of entertainment.