• papalonian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I genuinely have zero idea how you came to any of the conclusions you did based on what I said. Maybe there’s more context to the comment you were originally talking about, but nowhere did I ever even imply that artists should “aim for” or pander to the common denominator. I’m saying that, no matter the artists intentions, no matter how obvious or on the nose the messaging is, there are going to be cops with Punisher tattoos, and teenagers with stolen cars and guns listening to Kendrick Lamar. If you make a movie about how the Nazis were psychopathic fascists who eventually get destroyed, there will be people who can’t get over how cool their aesthetic was. None of this is to say that this art should not exist, I’m not detracting from the artists. I’m pointing out a flaw in society. Messaging in art, no matter how well crafted, will never say the same thing to everyone, for better or worse.

    • [object Object]@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Ah, so you’re saying that some portion, perhaps very minuscule, of the audience, would be enamoured with the bad guys as role models.

      But, you see, that’s quite different from what I quoted originally as: “[these artists] romanticize the mafia and army nonetheless, and in general media glorifies its subject matter regardless of the author’s intent“.

      You seem to agree with me that a small share of especially stupid people would derive their own messaging from the art. This doesn’t change the fact that this media, in general, does the critique quite alright, as opposed to what the above quote says.