Fanfare critical standards November 16, 2019 12:15 PM   Subscribe

The discussion of Joker on Fanfare includes a lot of comments that are flat-out negative. How much of that is allowed on fanfare? Has policy shifted to allow more of it?

My bone in this discussion is that elsewhere on fanfare is a book I loathe with the passion of many fiery suns. I would love to expound, at length, about how this book is an overrated piece of badly written meandering garbage with plenty of misogyny thrown in as a bonus (the author goes around loudly patting himself on the back for being a good feminist, too). I have refrained because I was under the impression fanfare is reserved for fans specifically, and it's not nice to go in and pick fights by yucking on other people's yum.

This seems to be explicitly contradicted by mod comments in the Joker thread.

(I have never seen (and don't intend to see) Joker, I just wandered into the thread because I'd heard some talk about it elsewhere on the interwebs and was curious how people here were responding to it.)
posted by Cozybee to Etiquette/Policy at 12:15 PM (125 comments total) 4 users marked this as a favorite

There's never been a mandate on having only positive comments in Fanfare.
posted by flatluigi at 12:22 PM on November 16, 2019 [19 favorites]


I don't think the "Fan" in "Fanfare" is supposed to be taken literally.
posted by brundlefly at 12:24 PM on November 16, 2019 [1 favorite]


Dude you can't tease us like that. What's the book? I am in such a state of curiosity now that I will literally die if you don't say what it is.
posted by Acheman at 12:28 PM on November 16, 2019 [31 favorites]


Seconding Acheman- I must know.
posted by Homo neanderthalensis at 12:32 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


My first thought was The Name of the Wind. YMMV.
posted by Wobbuffet at 12:37 PM on November 16, 2019 [13 favorites]


I'll talk a little about how I see this.

In general, I think Fanfare discussions are meant to be:
[a] for people who have actually seen/read/etc the work, not just seen the ads and decided the thing is bad, and
[b] for people who think it's worth discussing, not just "who cares" or "nobody should pay attention to this", and
[c] mostly about stuff internal to the work itself -- so for example, stuff about the real-world situation of a movie's production woes or why a director is a bad person isn't mainly what Fanfare's for - that's more for the blue. There end up being links to this kind of thing sometimes in a Fanfare discussion and a little of that is fine, but a huge digression about e.g. the director's legal problems unrelated to the movie isn't ideal.

Also in general, elaborating on point b, I think they're meant to mostly be on, if not necessarily the positive, at least critically-interested side. It's always ok to raise thoughtful/engaged criticisms, but being conscious that it's within a larger discussion. So, ideally criticisms would be raised in a way that allows them to coexist in a discussion with people who enjoyed the thing or liked some parts and disliked others, etc. Ideally people can avoid hyper-negative stuff that shames people who are having a discussion about things they liked/found interesting/etc; or that situation where someone has made their critical points and the other people are trying to continue their conversation about other aspects, but the critical person kind of won't let it go. I think this kind of thing is very rare on Fanfare, which is great. So it doesn't need to be only positive, but it should also kind of "read the room" a little.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 12:38 PM on November 16, 2019 [21 favorites]


I'm fine with negative comments in FanFare. It's a public service. Thoughtful criticism is usually more useful than hot takes, of course.
posted by chavenet at 12:42 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


I'm fine with people shitting eloquently on things in Fanfare. I'm less fine with comments in that thread saying they haven't seen the movie yet and are either asking questions or proffering opinions on media they haven't consumed yet.
posted by Burhanistan at 12:42 PM on November 16, 2019 [17 favorites]


TELL US THE BOOK
posted by poffin boffin at 12:47 PM on November 16, 2019 [31 favorites]


I participate in the SNL threads on FanFare and they are a mix of people who love and hate the show in a lot of ways. But the thing that seems to keep the comments on track is that they are there for the conversation and to talk about things. They don't just show up and say "Blarg, I hate this guy, fuck this show" but they're more like "There are some problems with this guy, I wonder how that's affecting the other parts of this show" and then we talk about it.

So I feel like if you want to talk and learn and interact with MeFites about media that you have experience with, go for it. If you're just mad and want to dump a Wall of Mad into a thread of people either talking about stuff, or having a "lighter" conversation (shorter comments, not as deep) it might be worth reading the room a little bit to find ways to sort of jump in and interact, kind of like double-dutch jump roping.

what is the book?
posted by jessamyn (retired) at 12:48 PM on November 16, 2019 [21 favorites]


I also need to read this critique.
posted by lilac girl at 12:48 PM on November 16, 2019 [4 favorites]


my $0.02 is that as long as you've seen/read the thing, it's fair game. i don't think criticism has to be constructive all the time, but i might be in the minority with that opinion.

more importantly WHAT IS THE BOOK?
posted by KTamas at 12:50 PM on November 16, 2019 [6 favorites]


I’ve always thought of FanFare as a place for both positive and negative comments. I don’t think the bar should be higher than having some knowledge of the work (not “this looks like garbage so I won’t waste my time”) and not using the work as a proxy to attack other users (not “you must be an idiot if you like this”). I’ve left negative comments that aren’t even particularly thoughtful, like “I disliked this film but I’m not sure why, oh well.”
posted by sallybrown at 12:52 PM on November 16, 2019 [2 favorites]


Lord knows I've done my share of dunking on shows on Fanfare (check the quarterly anime season posts), so I'm walking proof that it does not have to be a fount of positivity.

But like LobsterMitten says, when it's done in a thread full mostly of other people *not* thinking the thing is irredeemable trash, you kind of have to bring your criticism and rhetoric A games because your challenge isn't really to vent to a room of likeminded people about how bad it is, it's to fit in the flow of the conversation and convince the other participants that you have a contrary opinion that's as valid as theirs and deserves consideration.

I mean, if you can rant entertainingly, you might be able to get away with a Hunter S. Thompsonesque shotgun blast. But don't count on it. There are far fewer people who can do that than who think they can. The outrage part is easy, the persuasion part is difficult and easily drowned out.
posted by ardgedee at 12:53 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


in the past threads such as GoT have always been a combination of screamy love and shouty hate and everything in between and i don't really think it was too much of an issue? nothing even remotely close to the furious battles of grim attrition when we were discussing whether or not to have two separate GoT threads, at least.
posted by poffin boffin at 12:58 PM on November 16, 2019 [10 favorites]


The pen, is truly mightier than the sword!

-The Joker

What's the book?
posted by clavdivs at 1:09 PM on November 16, 2019 [3 favorites]


Quel est le livre?
posted by Splunge at 1:12 PM on November 16, 2019 [7 favorites]


I post negative comments fairly regularly on FF.

In fact, if you see my name on a FF post for a new streaming movie/show, you may safely assume that my initial comment will likely be my answer to the question, "Is this worth seeing or is it garbage?"

A lot of the time the movie is crap, and I say so.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 1:28 PM on November 16, 2019 [6 favorites]


DirtyOldTown, to be fair, you heroically take one for the team and regularly watch streaming movies that are >95% guaranteed to be crap. You are doing yeoman's work, my friend, and I salute you!
posted by smoke at 1:33 PM on November 16, 2019 [19 favorites]


Examples: [1] [2] [3] [4]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 1:33 PM on November 16, 2019 [2 favorites]


The Walking Dead threads got pretty negative (and not without good cause) before they pretty much dried out, but I felt bad about being part of the venting about a show that many people still liked. But what were we to do? It was a show that was once enjoyable and no longer was, we had to yell about it!
posted by skewed at 1:34 PM on November 16, 2019 [12 favorites]


I think 1-2 poops max for a show and then just bow out after that. enough to get your point across, not enough to be annoying. Walking dead may be the exception, for various (recurring) reasons.
posted by some loser at 1:43 PM on November 16, 2019 [2 favorites]


I have no problem with negative comments on FF.

But WHAT IS THE BOOOOOOK???
posted by sarcasticah at 1:45 PM on November 16, 2019 [3 favorites]


Some people (including myself on occasion) take a little peek at fanfare to ascertain whether or not they want to watch something (with the full understanding that spoilers abound, of course). In that case, negative critique is incredibly useful.

And of course in the case of television, there are very few (if any) shows that don't have a bad episode or storyline. Critical discussion is part of the fun.
posted by acidnova at 1:46 PM on November 16, 2019 [6 favorites]


In general, I think Fanfare discussions are meant to be... mostly about stuff internal to the work itself

I'll just be over here in the Fight Club thread... Nothing to see here, folks.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 1:51 PM on November 16, 2019 [2 favorites]


Now that there are 583934 streaming services competing to lure us to subscriptions with prestige tv offerings, informed negative comments might even save some of us $$$.
posted by sallybrown at 1:53 PM on November 16, 2019 [8 favorites]


FanFare: informed negative comments.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 2:07 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


The first rule about the Fight Club FF post is
posted by DirtyOldTown at 2:23 PM on November 16, 2019 [4 favorites]


brundlefly: "I don't think the "Fan" in "Fanfare" is supposed to be taken literally."

I always thought that it referred to you being a fan of movies or TV in general and not a specific movie or show (or episode).
posted by octothorpe at 2:24 PM on November 16, 2019 [3 favorites]


it's not nice to go in and pick fights by yucking on other people's yum

Sometimes we're harder on the art because we are fans

/s
posted by polymodus at 2:40 PM on November 16, 2019 [10 favorites]


Christ I hope it's okay to be critical on FanFare..
posted by fleacircus at 2:56 PM on November 16, 2019 [4 favorites]


One word/ fake hashtag: #boattruther.

Game of Thrones was an enjoyable mix of being fans of what was done well, and roasting the nonsense (and misogyny, and racism). If we only stuck to the positive things, the conversations would have been much quieter, and probably died out all together.
posted by filthy light thief at 3:06 PM on November 16, 2019 [16 favorites]


MetaFilter: a combination of screamy love and shouty hate
posted by Rash at 3:20 PM on November 16, 2019 [14 favorites]


My general rule across the site is that if I didn’t like something, or even am especially critical about it, I usually wait until there’s a dozen or more comments or a couple of days have passed before I wade in. I figured that’s just good manners.
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:25 PM on November 16, 2019 [10 favorites]


Lampooning can be part of criticism.
posted by clavdivs at 3:29 PM on November 16, 2019


If I agree with you will you tell me the book’s title?
posted by terrapin at 3:50 PM on November 16, 2019 [1 favorite]


Is it Outlander?!!!! (If it is, I agree)
posted by CMcG at 3:51 PM on November 16, 2019 [2 favorites]


what
posted by KleenexMakesaVeryGoodHat at 3:53 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


is
posted by KleenexMakesaVeryGoodHat at 3:53 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


the
posted by KleenexMakesaVeryGoodHat at 3:53 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


book
posted by KleenexMakesaVeryGoodHat at 3:53 PM on November 16, 2019 [6 favorites]


???
posted by KleenexMakesaVeryGoodHat at 3:53 PM on November 16, 2019 [12 favorites]


NAME THE BOOK! DON'T MAKE ME TURN THIS INTERNET AROUND!!!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:00 PM on November 16, 2019 [13 favorites]


Maybe it's an Ebert-esque "it's not what the work is about, it's how the work is about it."? If I go on to FanFare, I actively want to know if it's a Bad film like The Human Centipede: Final Sequence, but also if it's a bad film like Hostel: Part III. On the other hand it would obviously be irrelevant to me if someone was in that FanFare thread saying that all gory horror films were bad, or Bad. That's a MeFi comment or MeFi post, but in FanFare it would be like complaining that Walking Dead was too zombie-centric.

If someone comes into a thread about something I love and says "this is a piece of crap", that's rude, but within bounds if there's actual engagement with the specific thing. When Handmaid's Tale does a musical episode, slam it because it doesn't work for the show, not just because musical episodes are gimmicky.

Hwæt Boke?
posted by Wrinkled Stumpskin at 4:22 PM on November 16, 2019 [1 favorite]


I agree with what I think Wrinkled Stumpskin is saying. There are bad bad films and good bad films. It's useful to get some feedback on which is which.
posted by biffa at 4:37 PM on November 16, 2019 [1 favorite]


I agree with all the comments saying that the key is genuinely engaging with the movie/show/book. In the case of the Joker, me saying that I think comic book movies are terrible and not worth watching just isn't a good fit with the discussion, but someone talking about how they saw it and didn't like it because of X, Y, and Z things that are particular to the film would be a great addition to the discussion.
posted by Dip Flash at 4:47 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


I have very little time for negativity. Deconstruction, yes, criticism is acceptable, but why would I want to read page after page of people adding nothing to the conversation? That's what Twitter is for. I recently experienced this on the sense8 threads.
posted by rebent at 5:19 PM on November 16, 2019 [2 favorites]


I'm just going to assume the book is by Paulo Coelho.
posted by dobbs at 5:24 PM on November 16, 2019 [9 favorites]


Huh, I don't remember the Sense8 threads being particularly negative.
posted by oh yeah! at 5:29 PM on November 16, 2019


Another good general rule is: tell us the book!

OK, fine. I support your right to keep it secret. That’s only good manners.

The rest of this thread is going to be people posting the title of every book on FanFare, though.
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:29 PM on November 16, 2019 [3 favorites]


I'm definitely on team "engage with the material whether the criticism itself is positive or negative."

For me, all interpretations of the Joker are measured against the version with Cesar Romero refusing to shave his mustache so the show's people slathered makeup over it.
posted by rmd1023 at 6:00 PM on November 16, 2019 [16 favorites]


I'm fine with you not saying what the book is. Because it might be a book I like. And I don't want to have to destroy you!!! :-)

I think FanFare should stick to criticisms that are internal to the work and the product of someone who's chosen to engage with it. I kept watching Halt and Catch Fire and I kept picking at the stuff that didn't work (so much of it) on FanFare, but I'm completely uninterested in hearing "they should have made a totally different show, for such-and-such political/cultural reasons" critiques. I want to have the thread be a space for those of us who've watched the episodes to talk about them.
posted by Harvey Kilobit at 6:08 PM on November 16, 2019


I was thinking about posting this meta myself. I really hate it when people come into fanfare just to trash something especially if the whole thread is all the reasons why it's bad, actually. It makes it really hard for anyone who actually liked it to talk about this thing they liked. It creates a really negative and unpleasant experience. It makes me shy away from posting things at all because I'm sick of seeing everything I like just getting trashed. Thoughtful comments are one thing but a whole thread full of "This is soooooo bad, all the characters suck, this plot line is silly fan service blah blah blah" What's the point?

I also don't understand why the policy on the Blue is the opposite. I have had comments been deleted on the Blue as "If you don't like it skip the thread" which is like fine but it would make more sense for that to be the policy on FanFare than on the Blue which is more of a general discussion forum. I don't understand why that's not the Fanfare policy too.
posted by bleep at 6:26 PM on November 16, 2019 [8 favorites]


Oh yeah and also regarding "Negative comments let me know if I want to watch it" For me this never lines up. I guess I have the exact opposite taste of everyone on Metafilter.
posted by bleep at 6:29 PM on November 16, 2019 [1 favorite]


The context of an FPP is different than the context of a FF post. If a person posts on FPP a post that is essentially "Hey, here is a terrific thing!" and you reply, "No, actually this thing sucks" you are kind of being a dick. Whereas if a person posts about a thing on FF, they are essentially providing a prompt asking "What do people think about this thing?" and saying, "I think it sucks because reasons" is fair play.

A person still has to be careful to engage based on having an argument for why the thing doesn't work, as opposed to why they think it doesn't merit discussion or why people who would want to discuss it are garbage people.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 6:47 PM on November 16, 2019 [14 favorites]


I would like to add my voice to the many thoughtful people in this thread asking: what is the book?
posted by Greg Nog at 6:53 PM on November 16, 2019 [6 favorites]


I don't think that difference in context really exists that much or if it does the context clues that you'd need to figure that out weren't there for me to pick them up and I've been on fanfare since it came out.
posted by bleep at 6:53 PM on November 16, 2019


They don't just show up and say "Blarg, I hate this guy, fuck this show"

i'm sorry that i posted exactly this in an snl thread but i was fully prepared for it to be deleted, because i assumed that was past the line for fanfare, but apparently not? and a deep dive into why something is hateable seems like a way better comment than i made, so i fully support tearing whatever book this is apart
posted by gaybobbie at 7:00 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


I posted a Fanfare about my personal #1 favorite movie, even said it was my #1 favorite movie in the first comment. Folks not only showed up to say it was a bad movie, a couple of them pointed out that I was probably a bad person for liking it so much. So, yeah, critical comments in Fanfare are acceptable.

More importantly, tell us the book!
posted by Frayed Knot at 7:30 PM on November 16, 2019 [4 favorites]


I think the big thing would be avoiding "and only terrible people would possibly like this" sort of comments. I'm like... well aware that I like a lot of things that are not to everybody's tastes and that some people are going to really hate things that I love, and vice versa. Sometimes I'm really interested in specifically what other people dislike about something I like--if nothing else it helps to figure out what kinds of people I should or shouldn't recommend certain media to.

Even stuff that violates the first bit, I'm unlikely to say something about it unless someone doesn't seem to be participating generally in good faith--if you participate elsewhere on the site in a reasonable way and go "fuck this and fuck everybody who likes it" I'm going to be way more likely to assume that this is an emotional reaction and not a personal attack on me.
posted by Sequence at 7:39 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


I find FF offputting because it always seems that everyone is a fourth year cinema student performing a dissection. By the time I check in it's already all about the director or writing or actors or every other possible bad thing that has become the thing to critique. A "meh, I enjoyed it" turns you into Satan. Or the bit you liked is some horrendous evil. FF just seems to be so 'critic' that it turns into a minefield where you need a degree or lifelong knowledge of some particular media thing or you might as well just pack up your bags and go home because you just stumbled into a swarm of critics who care a lot more about every damn little detail than you do.

It's definitely a part of MF that to me at least seems to be wait long enough to see how things are going before jumping in or you may be eaten by sharks because you enjoyed something that is evidently horrible. Or vice-versa.
posted by zengargoyle at 7:49 PM on November 16, 2019 [3 favorites]


hannibal threads were the best thing to happen on fanfare to date because everyone participating was extremely and constantly aware that the person we were enthusiastically discussing with all of our giddy idiot hearts was a sociopath who ate people and we were fine with that aesthetically, as his main crime was not constantly making out with the twitchy sweaty guy who also sometimes ate people.
posted by poffin boffin at 7:52 PM on November 16, 2019 [20 favorites]


tell us the fucking book im going feral
posted by poffin boffin at 7:52 PM on November 16, 2019 [25 favorites]


Pong paq?
posted by Splunge at 8:11 PM on November 16, 2019


wow my efforts to keep the conversation focused on the question in general and not the specifics of the book I hate really backfired huh. my bad, in retrospect I should have seen that coming.

Wobbuffet's first thought was right, it's The Name of the Wind (and boy am I happy someone else's first thought for meandering pile of sexist garbage was TNotW, it makes me feel less alone!). Sorry for the unbearable suspense I really didn't and still don't want this conversation to be about The Book.
posted by Cozybee at 8:20 PM on November 16, 2019 [34 favorites]


OMG I was literally delivering a monologue about one particular aspect of how Kvothe is the worst character to my husband about half an hour ago
posted by bq at 8:31 PM on November 16, 2019 [9 favorites]


I think the big thing would be avoiding "and only terrible people would possibly like this" sort of comments.

Yeah, to me, that's a big part of what makes a comment (on any subsite) the kind of comment likely to create drama. Comments like "this episode is great!" or "this book stank" are opinions about a piece of media. Comments like "this episode is great, and I distrust anyone's taste who disagrees" or "this book stank, and anyone who likes it is problematic" are opinions that include critiques of other people's opinions, so people are more likely to respond personally to those kinds of opinions.
posted by 23skidoo at 8:47 PM on November 16, 2019 [5 favorites]


(but please feel free to talk about the book in its fanfare thread)
posted by Cozybee at 9:09 PM on November 16, 2019 [2 favorites]


I’m confused at the premise of this MeTa, since you did comment about how much you hate those books in the thread.
posted by Etrigan at 9:17 PM on November 16, 2019 [9 favorites]


FWIW I feel pretty sure I've never seen that Fanfare comment--I haven't read The Wise Man's Fear and I've avoided spoilers for it--so this thread remains among my personal favorite book IDs of all time. That said, memory is weird and unpredictable and fairly often at odds with itself, so who knows.
posted by Wobbuffet at 9:51 PM on November 16, 2019 [1 favorite]


Woooooow.

My memory is garbage. Thanks Etrigan.
posted by Cozybee at 10:35 PM on November 16, 2019 [9 favorites]


I think the very best criticism is from people who love [Thing] but are incensed that this book or movie really dropped the ball on that topic/trope/character and they're going to enumerate just how badly.

Which is the opposite of "this sucked".
posted by emjaybee at 11:26 PM on November 16, 2019 [1 favorite]


My memory is garbage.

I mean, if it makes you feel better, I was like, "The What of the What?", now? and then upon Googling realized that I have actually read it and apparently had completely forgotten the title.

(And then once I read the Wikpedia article about it I remembered this was the enormous tome where at the end of it you're like, "JFC ALL OF THAT AND WE'VE ONLY GOTTEN THROUGH A YEAR OF MAGIC SCHOOL ???!!!??? HOLY FUCK I DON'T HAVE TIME FOR THIS HURRY THE FUUUCK UP!" (besides all the other problems with the book and people are seriously claiming it's feminist? hahahahahaha.))
posted by soundguy99 at 12:19 AM on November 17, 2019 [7 favorites]


I'm just going to assume the book is by Paulo Coelho

I'm going to continue assuming this even though the mystery has been cleared up. never have I ever been so angry at a fucking book
posted by 5_13_23_42_69_666 at 3:19 AM on November 17, 2019 [11 favorites]


I actually gave up on FanFare because the comments on things I loved were so negative.
posted by hydropsyche at 5:06 AM on November 17, 2019 [5 favorites]


The context of an FPP is different than the context of a FF post. If a person posts on FPP a post that is essentially "Hey, here is a terrific thing!" and you reply, "No, actually this thing sucks" you are kind of being a dick. Whereas if a person posts about a thing on FF, they are essentially providing a prompt asking "What do people think about this thing?" and saying, "I think it sucks because reasons" is fair play.

This is interesting to me because I would have said the exact opposite. I think of the Blue as a place where we discuss a thing and FanFare as a place where we are fans of a thing.
posted by escabeche at 5:43 AM on November 17, 2019 [4 favorites]


Way late, but I think it's fine to be critical or negative about something in a Fanfare thread. Just don't be that person lobbying for other people to hate it, too. "I was disappointed in this movie/book/tv episode because..." is totally fine. Being a person who drops in the thread and keeps commenting to the tune of "but how could you like this garbage?" is not.

I seem to recall last year somebody kept joining discussions of some TV show (I forget which) to voice their disapproval, sometimes several times in a thread, and that was unpleasant. If you hate a TV show, maybe just stop watching and definitely don't get online to repeatedly take digs at it trying to convince others to hate it too.
posted by jzb at 6:10 AM on November 17, 2019 [8 favorites]


I would find a FanFare that only contained positive reviews to pretty darn boring and stultifying. I've learned things from people who had the opposite view from mine; sometimes it's good to be forced to confront why you like or dislike something rather than just give a hot take. Sometimes I've agreed with the points that other people have made but still disagree on the overall opinion of the work.

For instance, Intersteller, is a movie that I love while other people had wildly divergent opinions on but it's still one of my favorite FanFare threads. The fact that some people really disliked something I liked, just means that everyone comes to things from a different perspective. I agree with many of the criticisms of that film but for whatever reason, they don't break my appreciation of it the way that they do for other people in the thread.
posted by octothorpe at 6:58 AM on November 17, 2019 [5 favorites]


Wait... Is it time to dump on Interstellar again?

(Cracks knuckles, rolls neck)

No? (Sigh.) Okay, then. Let me know, because I stay ready.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:14 AM on November 17, 2019 [12 favorites]


Recently there was a thread for a show that I was really excited about when I saw the previews. But when I watched it, jeepers I was disappointed. There was still a lot to like though, and the OP said in their post that they were interested in hearing what other people thought. What followed read to my eyes as a thoughtful, measured discussion of a show that was admirable in many ways and also flawed. There were no drive-by "This totally sucks and you totally suck if you like it lolbutts!1!!" comments. Unfortunately, that didn't prevent people from reading that tone into the conversation.

It seems like it's easy for people to read a discussion in the worst possible light. Times are especially difficult now, and even a rough afternoon can throw things off. After awhile, though, it feels too much like my job: anything less than 100% enthusiasm will be read as negativity.

But some in some threads it's OK. Like GBBO, where it seems safe to discuss how the show has changed over the years, both good and bad. Or MST3K, where we celebrate terrible films with arsing around. (Join us!)

I don't know where I'm going with this, but I do know my FanFare participation has changed because of it.
posted by Orange Dinosaur Slide at 7:20 AM on November 17, 2019 [9 favorites]


I'd be interested in knowing how feelings about negative comments in FF and generation correlate, because I'm a Gen Xer and half-seriously/half-jokingly mocking the movies/shows/books/music that other people like is basically our love language.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:26 AM on November 17, 2019 [13 favorites]


The first rule about the Fight Club FF post is

... don't dis the Poäng?
posted by Mchelly at 7:28 AM on November 17, 2019 [2 favorites]


Hah, the actual Fight Club Fan Fare thread is wonderful even though I mostly hate Ikea furniture.
posted by octothorpe at 7:47 AM on November 17, 2019 [1 favorite]


A good example of doing it wrong... The new FF thread on Doctor Sleep seems to have a drive-by thread shit from someone who hasn't seen the movie in the first few comments.

It's possible that's someone who did see the movie and is just sticking their toe in before returning later with more complete thoughts, but it doesn't read that way. It comes off more as "this movie shouldn't exist/is too ridiculous to discuss" etc.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:54 AM on November 17, 2019 [1 favorite]


DirtyOldTown: "Wait... Is it time to dump on Interstellar again?

(Cracks knuckles, rolls neck)

No? (Sigh.) Okay, then. Let me know, because I stay ready.
"

I'm listening to Hans Zimmer's soundtrack at full volume right now in your honor.
posted by octothorpe at 8:04 AM on November 17, 2019 [2 favorites]


I love looking up my favourite shows and movies in Fanfare and see what other people think, and I'm actually downright disappointed when no-one has any gripes at all, because then there's usually not much of a discussion and that's boring to me. For me, dissecting and griping is half the fun of media consumption (born in 1984, for anyone who's interested in a generational statistic).

But I do realize that not everyone shares that characteristic, and that getting all critical can actually really ruin the fun for some people. Some of my favourite face-to-face friends are in that camp, so I really try to bite my tongue when I'm around them. There's no point in launching into a tirade about the myriad sins of the GOT showrunners when my interlocutor just isn't into that kind of thing. But at some point I have to get it out of my system, and metafilter fanfare has been an invalueable outlet in that regard.

Okay, I don't _have_ to get it out of my system; I guess I won't die, if I don't, and also, I do have some friends who I actually know to be fine with the criticial approach, and I could just save all my griping for them. So, should we decide to make fanfare a more "praise-only"-experience, I could survive. I would enjoy the space a lot less though.
posted by sohalt at 8:08 AM on November 17, 2019 [3 favorites]


Praise only would kill all the reality tv posted. Don't take my feels about Top Chef and Project Runway.
posted by kanata at 8:28 AM on November 17, 2019 [1 favorite]


*tries to imagine all-positive Eurovision thread, brain asplodes in flames and sequins*
posted by Orange Dinosaur Slide at 8:36 AM on November 17, 2019 [12 favorites]


I try to address the things I like and the things I don’t like in any given work, usually as a numbered list. I don’t think I’ve ever posted a whole negative comment to FanFsre, but I could be wrong. If I really hated a book or movie or something, i usually would rather not talk about it at all. Unless, I guess, there was some aspect that I found really repugnant, and that I thought should be brought up to see how others dealt with that issue.
posted by GenjiandProust at 8:55 AM on November 17, 2019 [1 favorite]


Fair play here: the comment o mentioned above about Doctor Sleep that I was sure was unfair, unless it was a precursor to a longer comment by someone who had actually seen the film... was a precursor to a longer comment by a person who has actually seen the film.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:20 AM on November 17, 2019 [1 favorite]


Just as another angle, I've personally decided to steer clear of FanFare threads that are mostly about (accurately) pointing out a show's flaws. With something like Halt and Catch Fire, or Westworld season 2, the flaws are very real, but I have more fun watching if I haven't had them all written down in a list for me. Whereas, say, the Westworld season 1 or Good Place threads are more often about enjoying the show, and that made the show more fun for me.

Both kinds of threads are totally valid! I'm glad there isn't a rule trying to create threads for me, because it wouldn't work. I've just realized that part of reading the room is realizing that some threads (and maybe threads for some kinds of shows in general) don't offer what I'm personally looking to get out of them.
posted by john hadron collider at 9:44 AM on November 17, 2019 [9 favorites]


I like my younger brother's attitude toward all of this:

"I always agree with the critics ... except when they're wrong."
posted by philip-random at 10:23 AM on November 17, 2019 [1 favorite]


My favourite FanFare threads are ones where people like flawed things and get into discussing what's good and not so good about them.

I don't think Drive-By Hating should be permitted a la "This sucks!" or worse "This sucks and you suck if you like it!" but well-supported, thoughtful comments about the problems with a given thing should be welcome. I really enjoyed the Umbrella Academy discussion, for example -- in retrospect, somewhat more than I enjoyed the Umbrella Academy itself.

There's a whole discussion in the Shawshank thread about the kind of men who really love Shawshank that gets awfully close to the line on "you suck if you like it" but is also fascinating and insightful. I can imagine that some feelings might have been hurt in that thread (if the men who like Shawshank are allowed to have those kinds of feelings, per the ex-boyfriend theory itself) but I also think the discussion of the movie would have been a lot poorer without that aspect of the discussion. I don't know where and how we can most effectively draw the line between what is and isn't acceptable in situations like that.
posted by jacquilynne at 11:14 AM on November 17, 2019 [6 favorites]


My general field rule for myself is that if I can muster enough “yay” to have a mixed review, I am allowed to comment on the thing, but if all I feel is displeasure, I should stay away from commenting and probably bail on the show/book/whatever. I err on the side of not yucking people’s yum, though.

(I have similar thoughts about Rothfuss’s writing.)
posted by tautological at 11:37 AM on November 17, 2019 [1 favorite]


Yeah, things would probably get less fraught if we could more reliably stick to discussion of the source material instead of discussion of the fans. In nine of ten cases I would absolutely support that as a general policy.

But I 'm not convinced talking about matters of reception should be entirely taboo always, because source material and fandom can be more or less dramatically different beasts (see bible vs prosperity gospel, Nietzsche vs Nazis, My Little Pony Friendship is Magic vs Bronies, etc.). I think it's occasionally illuminating to look at why a certain type of person might be drawn to a certain type of story and get a certain type of reading out of it.

Confession time: one of my most deeply personally resonating, formative reading experiences was Infinite Jest. That's a bit of a bitter sweet memory now considering all the things I found out about DFW afterwards, but I can't change the fact that this book really was very important for me at a particularly critical period in my life. I don't talk about it much, primarily because talking about it much is exactly what gave DFW fans their bad name, and they definitely do have a bad name, especially here on metafilter.

And honestly, I think that's okay. I mean there are tons of other books I enjoy talking about as well; ultimately I want to find a topic of conversation everyone enjoys. Even if you seperate the art from the artist, Infinite Jest is just not a particularly good topic of conversation for a party, for instance.

And as to various stereotypes about DFW-fans - sometimes the shoe fits a bit, and I flinch, but you know, useful feedback. (After I had finished the book, I tried to make all my friends and relatives read it as well - it's probably the sheer size and density of the book and the amount of time you need to invest in it; that can trigger a bit of Stockholm Syndrome, a tendency towards proselytizing - as with any type of cult. Of course cultists are socially unpleasant to non-cultists). In other regards the shoe doesn't fit (I'm not a guy, and I mostly read books by women nowadays and I'm just as likely to go cultist about those), so it doesn't faze me at all. So by all means, keep dunking on the DFW-fans.
posted by sohalt at 12:12 PM on November 17, 2019 [4 favorites]


Shawshank is so eclipsed by its reputation that it's hard to discuss the film itself without talking about the people who love it. If there'd been a FanFare in 1994, the discussion would have started off a lot differently.
posted by octothorpe at 12:26 PM on November 17, 2019


I actually gave up on FanFare because the comments on things I loved were so negative.

Just a kind of counterpoint to this - first of all I agree with others that drive-by shitposts like "this show sucks, who even cares about it?" are not good for Fanfare, but that said, a thoughtful negative opinion can often be a breath of fresh air for shows and movies where I JUST. DO. NOT. GET. why people like it so much. Like, I don't mean to gloat; I don't need to be proven right; I just need to know that I'm going crazy. There was one time (and I think it was actually on the blue or on MeTa, not Fanfare, but anyway) where someone casually said "if I never hear another Hamilton quote it will be too soon" or something and I was like OMG THANK YOU. I didn't follow up by bashing Hamilton or calling its fans stupid; it was enough to know someone else out there at least thought it was a bit overrated and/or done to death.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 12:41 PM on November 17, 2019 [11 favorites]


I think maybe if people could pull up on making a definitive list of why this thing/character/etc is *objectively bad*. Nothing and no one (well, fictional) is objectively bad.
posted by bleep at 12:44 PM on November 17, 2019 [5 favorites]


I don't think Drive-By Hating should be permitted a la "This sucks!" or worse "This sucks and you suck if you like it!" but well-supported, thoughtful comments about the problems with a given thing should be welcome.

Or at the very least channel your inner Dorothy Parker and go on and get baroque with your comments.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:07 PM on November 17, 2019 [4 favorites]


> I'm just going to assume the book is by Paulo Coelho

Oh my god, one of the younger Corpses has to read The Alchemist for school and has decided to just take the F instead, that's how much they hate it. I'm having a really tough time here trying to explain why the book has to be read and papers written on it when there are so many good books in the world.
posted by The corpse in the library at 6:18 PM on November 17, 2019 [7 favorites]


MetaFilter: people shitting eloquently on things.
posted by loquacious at 7:21 PM on November 17, 2019 [5 favorites]


Is this now the FanFare-substitute thread where we dunk on the The Alchemist? Because I picked it up when I was looking for a book in Portuguese to help me retain my second language skills and it was the only Portuguese book easily available to me. I spent so much of my time going "WTF? Is that just what happened?" that I also bought a copy in English -- because the library waitlist was insane -- so I could figure out if I was reading it wrong or if it was just inherently stupid and that is why I have, in my life, paid for two different copies of that dumbass book.
posted by jacquilynne at 8:58 PM on November 17, 2019 [10 favorites]


For me, I’m very tolerant of negative FanFare commentary when it is framed as a person’s own opinion and much less so when it comes across as telling other people how they should feel about things. Comments that contain things like “I thought” or “from my point of view” or “my perspective” are easy for me to read and virtually impossible for me to take personally. But statements without those indicators of “me” or “I” are things that I find much more irritating. It’s a subtle distinction, I guess, but one that makes a big difference to how I feel when reading a comment. Comments lacking these “I” statements seem to me to implicitly assert that someone’s telling me how I should think or feel.
posted by MoonOrb at 10:19 PM on November 17, 2019 [5 favorites]


Given that a number of MeFites have said that they no longer participate in FanFare because it's too negative for them, is there want or value in adding "Critical" and "Appreciation" tags, which could be in addition to the other show only/ books included categories?

I have family members who love Lifetime and Hallmark feel-good movies, though the rest of the family gently chides them for it, and lightly mocks the movies when they're watching them, but not to the point of ruining their experience with "soft and fuzzy" movies. And I'm not saying that the things people love here that are being slagged are such films, but I can see how something that someone finds comfort in could also be torn down, but people watch and read media for different reasons.

And with that, some may find more camaraderie in critical (and sometimes scathing) reviews, while others want to have a more comfortable conversation about much-loved media. I could see where trying to separate criticism and appreciation as separate categories might be hard, for problematic favorites, or dated material that is still cozy but has significant flaws, but I think an attempt to split discussions further could also create more welcoming spaces with a general idea of the types of discussion to follow.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:41 PM on November 17, 2019 [2 favorites]


I’d say generally that in choosing among barriers to people’s participation in FanFare, I would rank creating even more hard-to-intuit special site subculture rules like needing to tag your comments with whether you think they show appreciation or criticism (and what if it’s both, do we need a third tag?) as a greater problem than people disengaging because of feeling that the tone of criticism is too negative. I’d prefer people to flag threadshitty, drive-by type comments which arguably are the worst offenders when it comes to creating negativity. I would like to make FanFare a more welcoming and easy to use space; I also feel the barriers to participation are too high as it is and a technical solution to this problem of human interaction will make the barriers to entry higher and do little to resolve the issue of people feeling threads are too negative.

What I’d love is the ability to mute or hide individual comments, though—that is a technical solution I could get behind.
posted by MoonOrb at 11:22 PM on November 17, 2019 [9 favorites]


The Walking Dead threads were what noped me out of FanFare entirely. I spent time writing comments for them, enthusiastically, and then someone would say something like, "it was so stupid, they didn't even explain blank, this show is garbage now" (but I'm still watching it), and they would have completely missed a line of dialogue or a plot point or whatever. I know that people watch TV distracted and on their phones, etc, but it felt like engaging with a lot of people who didn't actually watch.

Now, I've stopped watching Walking Dead (it became untenable for me shortly before and definitely after Andrew Lincoln left, so I have no dog in this fight any more). But I don't care to repeat the process of talking in depth about something I like only to have low-engaged people come along and say it's trash with not much else to comment on. Shrug. It is what it is.
posted by agregoli at 5:41 AM on November 18, 2019 [4 favorites]


For me, I’m very tolerant of negative FanFare commentary when it is framed as a person’s own opinion and much less so when it comes across as telling other people how they should feel about things.

Seconded. "[Show] is not working for me anymore because [reasons]" is fair play. "It's time we all admit this show is bad because [reasons]" is obnoxious.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 6:51 AM on November 18, 2019 [8 favorites]


Cozybee: You are not alone. Ground my way through The Name of the Wind, decided there was no way I was reading part II. I would happily dunk on it at length, but it would seem unfair to those who liked it (plus the passage of time has aged out the worst of it from my memory).
posted by pharm at 6:55 AM on November 18, 2019


MoonOrb: I’d say generally that in choosing among barriers to people’s participation in FanFare, I would rank creating even more hard-to-intuit special site subculture rules like needing to tag your comments with whether you think they show appreciation or criticism (and what if it’s both, do we need a third tag?)

I wasn't thinking of tagging comments, but making new Criticism- and Appreciation-tagged threads, akin to the "Show Only," "Books Included," "First Watch," and "Rewatch" tags. But I recognize that the line between criticism and appreciation is much fuzzier than the other, existing categories.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:26 AM on November 18, 2019


One thing that turns me off when reading negative comments about TV shows is when the people show up in every episode thread to say how the new episode sucks because [bunch of reasons, mostly the same as for the last 100 episodes of the last n seasons] and how it's been the worst show ever since season 1. For people like me who have trouble finding time to watch the shows I enjoy, it's unnerving to see that others have unlimited time to hate stuff.
posted by elgilito at 8:34 AM on November 18, 2019 [5 favorites]


Fair play here: the comment o mentioned above about Doctor Sleep that I was sure was unfair, unless it was a precursor to a longer comment by someone who had actually seen the film... was a precursor to a longer comment by a person who has actually seen the film.

It's nice that you acknowledge this, but also I gotta be honest, I find your participation in that thread a lot more concerning than hand-wringing about drive-by negativity. Having the person who posted the thread about a movie comprise half the comments in the thread, including throwing a really gate-keeping comment implying heavily that someone else who didn't feel the same about the work as they did must not have actually watched it, is not good for FanFare.
posted by tocts at 9:32 AM on November 18, 2019 [3 favorites]



I wasn't thinking of tagging comments, but making new Criticism- and Appreciation-tagged threads, akin to the "Show Only," "Books Included," "First Watch," and "Rewatch" tags. But I recognize that the line between criticism and appreciation is much fuzzier than the other, existing categories.

I think that would really thin out the threads and make things too confusing. I don't want to have to read multiple threads about a single episode looking for good comments or discussion, and what happens when there's a book thread in which people both want to talk about their opinions and people also want only appreciation? I'm also opposed to the notion that "appreciation" means free from criticism.

I don't think a thread full of almost nothing but gushing is particularly enjoyable or interesting but some of the shows I watch tend to evoke that reaction in FanFare and that's fine. I just don't read about those shows anymore here. Nothing needs to change! Some discussions are better than others! All of that is okay.
posted by oneirodynia at 10:56 AM on November 18, 2019 [10 favorites]


The thing I have noticed is that threads that begin with enthusiasm and approval always find room for people who hate the work later, whereas threads that begin with people hating the work do not often recover to include much of anything else.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 12:24 PM on November 18, 2019 [10 favorites]


"Is it Outlander?!!!! (If it is, I agree)"

It's interesting that you say that because that is what immediately comes to my mind when this discussion comes up. I read the first few of those books with a growing discomfort that ended with me, finally, literally throwing the book at the wall. So when the TV series began, I was interested to see what people thought of the show. The thing is, almost all the people who participated in those early threads were avid fans of the book, in some way relating to identity that I couldn't quite parse.

Book vs show issues aside, I just sort of accepted that those threads were threads for fans, in the sentimental sense. The discussion, IIRC, wasn't very analytical in nature and so even negative opinions presented in the way I think we mostly agree are welcome here probably would have landed with an unpleasant thud in the thread. And, you know, I watched the first two seasons of the show and while I think it avoids most of the most egregious things I objected to from the books, the bottom line is that it's a comfort food show. Some shows just aren't that amenable to serious critique, so even politely argued, well-supported takedowns aren't welcome because it's sort of like shooting fish in a barrel and tends to suggest that the interlocutor doesn't have a sense of proportion or whatever.

The only other example of where I felt unwelcome in a FF thread were the Hannibal threads. Those were lively, beloved threads built around the thoughts of people for whom the show was a weekly delight in ways that made it seem to me that critical discussion was beside the point. I was very ambivalent about the show from the start -- my discussion of the show would necessarily involve engaging in a discourse between what I loved and what I hated about it which really wouldn't be "fun" -- the mood in those threads was exactly what you'd expect from poffin boffin + The Whelk, which is legit spectacular, like a lively party, where That Guy who gets Too Serious is a bummer. I've often been That Guy and I've learned to be more sensitive to reading the room.

All of this is to say that this is so MetaFilter. There isn't a unversal rule, there's just letting a thread become what it becomes and then participating accordingly. That doesn't require unamity of opinion, except in the rare case where it sort of does. Different works have different ways they're most appropriately approached, and then spontaneous groupings of people also form different discursive attitudes. That's the nature of discourse. I really don't see any rule of thumb that gets at this better than "don't be a dick".
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 12:27 PM on November 18, 2019 [3 favorites]


DirtyOldTown: The thing I have noticed is that threads that begin with enthusiasm and approval always find room for people who hate the work later, whereas threads that begin with people hating the work do not often recover to include much of anything else.

I think this is a perennial problem for MetaFilter, and likely all communities -- the first few comments set the tone of a discussion, because that's the first things people read when entering a discussion.
posted by filthy light thief at 12:29 PM on November 18, 2019 [3 favorites]


I will literally fight people in the street about the Outlander books. Probably better to do that in the threads specific to those books tho.
posted by Comrade Doll at 12:48 PM on November 18, 2019 [5 favorites]


She's not kidding.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 12:49 PM on November 18, 2019 [1 favorite]


The thing I have noticed is that threads that begin with enthusiasm and approval always find room for people who hate the work later, whereas threads that begin with people hating the work do not often recover to include much of anything else.

Yeah - and that's why I'll typically not make the first comment in a thread where I think I'm mostly going to be negative, especially if I suspect that are some people who really like the work. Like, I've been waffling on posting threads on The Sparrow and Fleishman is in Trouble, because they're fresh in my mind and I have thoughts and opinions on them, but I also recognize that there's a lot about The Sparrow that reads differently now than it did in 1996 and I am not the target audience for FiiT.

I don't mind negative comments, even on stuff that I do like, but I also realize that a lot of review spaces are skewed to be so positive nowadays that mixed feelings can seem a lot more negative than what people anticipate. I'm thinking of The Center Won't Hold post on the blue - which seemed evenly split to me, positive and negative, but a few of the commenters thought was overwhelmingly negative. The other thing is that oftentimes it's easier to articulate what a work does wrong than what it does right - so I'll end up saying something like 'I liked it! The words fit together good!' and then spend two paragraphs talking about why I didn't like the parts I didn't like.

But, as a personal decision, I've tried to stop spending my energy on stuff I don't enjoy. If it's bad, it's got to at least be redeemably bad or interestingly bad to be worth my time. Certain litfic novels that I've been assigned in a book club notwithstanding.
posted by dinty_moore at 2:39 PM on November 18, 2019 [1 favorite]


I think my experience with FanFare has been distorted by my tastes: cult films, little noticed streaming junk, unheralded international stuff. I am used to being one of the only people in the thread.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 3:03 PM on November 18, 2019 [1 favorite]


Mordax left metafilter for a few reasons but one was a few mefites refusing to engage with the extremely problematic material in the ST:Enterprise threads and enforcing relentless cheerleading. “I don’t see x as problematic at all here’s 400 words on why this extremely racist episode wasn’t racist at all” etc. So I’m seeing critical standards on fanfare in a separate light.
posted by Homo neanderthalensis at 3:30 PM on November 18, 2019 [16 favorites]


So something I don't fully understand is everyone's mental model of what "critical"means. In the OP the way Critical is used is more or less to mean Negative. But when we say "critical thinking" that's like something else entirely, it's a very positive thing to do.

To put it differently, the word "critical" has two dictionary meanings: 1 expressing adverse or disapproving comments or judgments: he was critical of many U.S. welfare programs.
2 expressing or involving an analysis of the merits and faults of a work of literature, music, or art: she never won the critical acclaim she sought.

The two meanings are very different but in the given context, both meanings are used, leading to the same word being used to mean two different things. You can disapprove of a movie or you can analyze the work, or both at the same time. I think in most cases you can tell which meaning is being intended, but are people even aware there are two baseline definitions at work here?
posted by polymodus at 12:14 AM on November 19, 2019


That seems implicit in most of the comments.
posted by Burhanistan at 12:35 AM on November 19, 2019


Yeah, I’m still nominally on MeFi, but I stopped hanging out on Fanfare because the not-always-unspoken racism (especially though far from exclusively towards black characters or actors) was exhausting, especially knowing that even the most gentle, roundabout pushback would make me the difficult one — while I am confident saying the comments I found most alienating would pass the criticism/civility metrics being offered in this thread.

I’m not saying I like it when the upbeat discussion I want to have gets derailed by negativity, but when you already have a site culture that’s skewed towards whiteness, participation norms that favor being less critical, or walling off criticism in their own special threads, are going to have the effect of silencing BIPOC members (and/or members from other marginalized groups) while letting white commenters just coast on with their unexamined biases.

By this I don’t only mean that BIPOC commenters pointing out racism are perceived by white members as more negative or hostile than they are, although that’s true. I also mean that it’s frustrating going into a thread hoping to get some good discussion going and being met by yet another iteration of, “I’m not racist, I just think the black love interest is the worst character, weird coincidence how many other shows there are where the black love interest is the Fanfare consensus worst character.” Or, “New Franchise Installment which centers women of color isn’t Really Franchise, let’s extensively pontificate on why this is in every single episode thread.” Plus the “this isn’t racism, you’re overreacting” that’s driven one of MeFi’s most thoughtful contributors right off the site, thanks y’all.

Honestly, this discussion feels like arguing over how to repaint the ceiling when there are termites in the joists. Priorities!
posted by bettafish at 1:25 AM on November 19, 2019 [20 favorites]


I'm very sad to hear Mordax has left. I hadn't been following the Enterprise rewatch threads (I really loved the TOS & DS9 Fanfare experience, but I never made it through the original broadcast runs of Voyager or Enterprise, and though I hoped maybe the Fanfare threads would make it a more fun/watchable experience, I gave up partway through Voyager and never tried Enterprise), but Mordax was a regular commenter in a lot of the same shows as me, including the CW-Arrowverse threads.

I feel like I should have weighed in somewhere earlier in this Metatalk, considering how many Fanfare threads I post, but I didn't have much to say that wasn't said already. I'm in the camp of 'of course we should feel free to post criticism' and also of noping out of a Fanfare tv show when I hit a 'this is not the thread for me' point. (I mean, I quit following "The Good Place" threads this season, as I realized that all the speculation on figuring out upcoming twists was ruining the show for me, as left to my own devices I wouldn't predict anything, and I'd get more enjoyment out of being surprised than out of being right.) But that's a different kind of 'not for me' than the more pernicious problem of racism in metafilter.
posted by oh yeah! at 5:46 AM on November 19, 2019 [10 favorites]


FFS, the value for me in being aware of racist elements in media I'm consuming is a hell of a lot higher than the value of not having to worry that I might have enjoyed media that has racist elements I hadn't noticed at the time.

Especially in Star Trek, which has always been explicitly trying to do better and it is fascinating to watch and think about how they've succeeded and how not and where and why. For those of you who commented in the DS9 rewatch some years back, I appreciate all your thoughts as I watch it for the first time.
posted by asperity at 3:26 PM on November 19, 2019 [9 favorites]


« Older FanFare New Post in My Fanfare   |   Metatalktail Hour: Back to basics Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments