Politics in fiction

[Kel-chan]

What do u guys think of political or societal commentary in things like movies, games and comic books.

I think it depends on how it is approached.

It its some dogmatic propaganda I think its an instant turn off. If its done well it can really enhance a story or movie or comic and make the world come alive. I think the trick is to not be cheesy.

I'm thinking about this because in alot of Marvel's comic books they used alot of social issues for underlying tones. In spiderman and ofcourse the x-men series was basically all about 60s civil rights crap.

[Kel-chan]

I should also add Marvel's Civil War comic series was really about the growing police state and rise of fascism.

I guess alot of people hated that series but if you look beyond the action its kind of interesting

[Phobotech]

I think often-times its a necessary narrative that encapsulates the tone the author endured at the time...a little snap-shot of general moods and mind-sets that were happening that made that era special, a glimpse to how society had morphed.

Just look at Godzilla. He was birthed in the 50's(?) out of the commentary about nuclear weapons, and later still in the 90s, nuclear energy when 'Zilla was melting down to the point where he would have undergone China Syndrome.

Watchmen's political commentary served as a spine to the whole theme. Back to the Future's political commentary served as a plot point and nothing more...I think whether its light like a spice or if its a heavy handed general focus of the plot (V for Vendetta), that its A-Okay...thats the creative direction the author wanted to take it? I'm in for the ride. "Teach me something...word it in a way that makes me sympathetic to your perspective."

[Kel-chan]

At 5/13/14 01:06 AM, Phobotech wrote: I think often-times its a necessary narrative that encapsulates the tone the author endured at the time...a little snap-shot of general moods and mind-sets that were happening that made that era special, a glimpse to how society had morphed.

Just look at Godzilla. He was birthed in the 50's(?) out of the commentary about nuclear weapons, and later still in the 90s, nuclear energy when 'Zilla was melting down to the point where he would have undergone China Syndrome.

Watchmen's political commentary served as a spine to the whole theme. Back to the Future's political commentary served as a plot point and nothing more...I think whether its light like a spice or if its a heavy handed general focus of the plot (V for Vendetta), that its A-Okay...thats the creative direction the author wanted to take it? I'm in for the ride. "Teach me something...word it in a way that makes me sympathetic to your perspective."

Thats a good way to think of it. If its used as a plot device then it's not really as much of a soapbox or whatever. It can also just create a good background dynamic or setting for an awesome movie or game or something. Like half-life 2 used the neo-fascism of the combine but the game really wasn't really about that. It was just the dystopian world to put the characters in

[VicariousE]

I'm not saying there's a conspiracy or anything, but it seems like social engineering at times. Despite all those cautionary movies from the 80's, about how bad America can get if we welch on our values, the fiction became the truth. Junk science, junk movie plots... either way, 'reforming' public opinion costs dough, and both (US) parties and their lunatic fringes are at it |:

The problem is the more you tell a lie/story, the more real it becomes.... like old ladies gossiping on foursquare, if the lies are talked about often enough, others begin to accept it as fact. So I guess Hollywood doesn't have a corner on sedition, slander, defamation of character.... they just have corporate management aiming the way.

[NeonSpider]

Politics in fiction, and you neglect to mention the one medium that started it all? You know, those things you find in libraries? Books!

When I think of politics in fiction the first things that come to mind are books like 1984, Fahrenheit 451, Animal Farm, and so forth. It's generally to warn about the dangers of excesses of government power (if dystopian) or perhaps pushes an agenda, or even is just a pure mockery of politics or politicians of the day.

[satanbrain]

A cliche totalitarian regime that never develops is boring. Politics that affect more than actions of individuals are interesting.

[CresIsis]

I demand a trial by combat!!

[NuScarab]

While I don't mean to sound too much like the intro to an academic thesis, it might come down to what you mean by the term political itself. Cinema historians will be familiar with the line that all cinema is political, a philosophy stemming from Cahiers du cinema during a particularly Maoist period in the late '60s. That's a line I can fall in line with, though it is a solidly leftist argument to claim that stories are inherently borne out of social, cultural or political feeling. You might say that a film (or book, or whatever) needs to be totally, explicitly, 100% open about it all to be truly "political", but I don't really buy that. I mean... I'm struggling to put this in a way that doesn't make look like a stereotype of myself, but look at the oft-mentioned pairing of High Noon and Rio Bravo, two fictional (American) films just brimming with political intent; they're still entries in one of the most popular (and American) genres of all time, but their political ideologies in story, characterisation, imagery and so on are pretty undeniable. Alternatively, you have satire. A lot of good satire doesn't necessarily advocate one view or the other... but satire is still, in its modern format, pretty political by default.

I feel like the idea of merit in propaganda is a slightly different beast, and it might be one that comes down to personal taste in today's informed, cynical, politically correct climate. As for me, I love the work of the Soviet Montagists, but their films follow a very obvious political line and were attached to their radical government in numerous ways (though - an aside - the idea that any nationally-funded film is propaganda is, really, a bit silly to say the least). For filmmakers like those today, their reputation often comes to just how effectively and innovatively they communicate their ideas... though the usual filmic elements are all sound too (not literally; most of them in this case are silent...).

[Dr-Worm]

At 5/13/14 01:48 PM, NuScarab wrote: That's a line I can fall in line with

Me too. I think it's essentially impossible to make art that's completely apolitical. I mean, first of all obviously anything an artist creates is going to be informed by their worldview whether they're aware of it or not, there's no getting around that. But also even if a work has no social consciousness or commentary whatsoever, then doesn't that just make it a tacit endorsement of whatever the dominant social order is?

Look at the recent kerfuffle over Tomodachi Life. Nintendo claimed that they didn't include same-sex relationship options in their game because they didn't want to make any "social commentary," but that very statement is social commentary. In fact, it's a far more aggressive form of social commentary than simply including same-sex couples in their game would have been, seeing as that would have elicited virtually no noteworthy public response whereas their supposedly apolitical inaction has sparked an enormous shitstorm.

[orangebomb]

All mediums of arts and entertainment has some sort of political and social commentary to them, even if it wasn't necessarily the creator's intention. Depending of the creator and the message, it can be used to subtly inform people of the issues and how they feel on said issue, or they can be so heavy-handed and even be preachy about it, it ends up becoming polarizing.

Pop culture in general is a reflection of the zeitgeist of people, and it's no surprise that people take some of those ideas from movies, games and what have you and try to implement them in real life, or at the very least have noted influence in politics and beliefs, for good or for ill. Of course, not all of it is a positive, most notably when it becomes polarizing, insulting or even tasteless, though that may be the intentions of the creator themselves, and all entertainment is subjective at the end of the day. Also, there are always a segment of the people, (the ignorant minority who happen to be pretty vocal) that will take it the wrong way and either condemn them and others for enjoying it, or try to warp their message into something that isn't true or at the very least misunderstood.

There is an art to writing any type of fiction, and doubly so for political/social satire. The good ones can entertain us while getting their message across, whereas the mediocre/bad ones would come off as either smug, arrogant or naive and basically would be justifiably ignored by all but the fringe crowds.

[Kel-chan]

I think the key might be to make the setting interesting as a plot device and world in which the characters have to respond without really getting into dogma/ideologies etc.

I mean what would the original Indiana Jones be without the nazis?

But then again they made a cartoonish enemy that everybody could hate without really getting in too deep.

Its really interesting when you get into revisionist or alternate history things like Wolfenstien and stuff.

As long as its not too head or preachy I think it can turn out well.