HULK ESSAY YOUR ASS: TANGIBLE DETAILS AND THE NATURE OF CRITICISM.
Some people will not like the written style of the essay, some may not enjoy reading it, due to said style. I've done my best to c/p the parts I find most relevant to the dynamic I see often between readers, authors and book critics, especially the divide between readers and 'professional' book critics. And most especially between authors, professional book critics and readers with a particular perspective and the language to express it aka social justice readers.
I am aware of the words just before I start c/ping that discuss bias involved in opinions. I believe having a bias towards social justice and non invisibility of minorities is NOT actually a bad thing and counters the bias against paying attention to these matters as all, as if the world were a contextless, historyless rainbow farting magic bunny land.
Bold and italics (strong and emphasis) as originally posted. Things in colour are my emphasis.
YET HULK DESPERATE KNOW WHY PEOPLE RESPOND TO MOVIES WAY THEY DO. AND MORE IMPORTANTLY HOW THEY THEN PROCESS AND EXPLAIN THOSE RESPONSES. THE ANSWER NOT JUST RELATE MOVIE CRITICISM, BUT UNIVERSAL CRITICISM. HULK BELIEVE CENTER AROUND ONE THING:
TANGIBLE DETAILS....
OK. HULK KNOW YOU THINKING “TANGIBLE DETAILS? DUH, OF COURSE! WHAT YOU IDIOT? OF COURSE THE FREAKIN’ DETAILS MATTER!”...
OUR ABILITY PROCESS THINGS INHERENTLY LINKED TO AMOUNT OF INFORMATION WE UNDERSTAND...
IT OKAY IF NOT KNOW LOT ABOUT CERTAIN SUBJECT. THERE ACTUALLY SUBCONSCIOUS WAY IN WHICH MOST OF US ABLE PROCESS SIMPLE GOOD OR BADNESS OF JUST ABOUT ANYTHING: MOVIES WORK ON LARGELY VISCERAL LEVEL. FOOD CAN TASTE GOOD OR NO TASTE GOOD. SPORTS TEAMS HAVE WINS AND LOSSES. PRODUCTS CAN SIMPLY WORK OR NO WORK. THERE WAY WE UNDERSTAND SOME FORM RELATIVE VALUE OF ALL THESE THINGS.
BUT WHEN COME TIME ACTUALLY EXPLAIN THEM, NOT EVERYONE HAVE LANGUAGE/VERNACULAR TO BEST EXPRESS WHAT AT PLAY. SO ONLY WAY CAN EXPLAIN ANYTHING BY PRESENTING EVIDENCE. AND EVIDENCE 100% DEPENDENT ON THINGS WE NOTICE. AND THOSE THE TANGIBLE DETAILS.
… and FOR MOST PEOPLE, IT NOT ALWAYS THE RIGHT DETAILS PER SAY, BUT INSTEAD THE ONES THAT SIMPLY STICK OUT MOST....
BEING “EXPERT” JUST MEAN YOU ABLE MAKE THE LESS TANGIBLE DETAILS, WELL, TANGIBLE...
THIS MEAN FILM CRITICISM MORE DEPENDENT ON WHAT OTHER FILMS SEEN AND PROCESSED BEFORE IT AND HOW FAMILIAR CRITIC WITH FILMMAKERS. WHICH JUST MEAN ANY INTANGIBLE DETAILS IN MOVIE SEEM EVEN MORE IRRELEVANT TO CASUAL OUTSIDER. BUT OF COURSE SEEING TONS MOVIES = CRITICAL. IT ALLOW CONSTRUCT PERSPECTIVE. A SENSE OF FILMIC TRENDS. NARRATIVE. UNDERSTANDING. ALL THAT GOOD STUFF...
BUT EVEN IF THE “EXPERTS” = THE QUALIFIED ONES, EVERYONE STILL HAVE RIGHT THEIR OPINION ON MOVIES. IT ULTIMATELY JUST A CONVERSATION AFTER ALL....
IT HARD LEARN HOW DIGEST WHAT OFTEN EMOTIONAL REACTIONS.
BUT EVERY YEAR HULK GET SHARPER IN ABILITY TO EXPLAIN IDEAS, THE VISCERAL REACTIONS, AND THE SUBCONSCIOUS FEELINGS THAT MOVIES ALWAYS ELICIT. THE EDUCATION NEVER STOP.
Do note, I will laugh at anyone who comes away from this thinking I'm describing activist reactions to exclusion as purely emotional, and thus untrained and in need of processing. Emotions aren't separated from the insult of invisibility, no. But people capable of having an actual conversation (however highly peppered with cussing) have long since processed all that they can bear, and then some.
I will also laugh at anyone walking away from this thinking the only reason these things are seen, is because people are looking for them, with some kind of 'Playing The Race Card Super Cool Spectacles'. You don't look for invisibility, invisibility slaps you in the face - which oddly enough makes me think of that so and so who was all 'Straight White Male Gamers Are Being Oppressed' at the Bioware Dragon Age 2 people. Not being specifically catered to - nay, exclusively catered to, felt like invisibility to him, and thus like a slap in the face.
