Interest has been shown and the thought won’t leave my brain so I’m putting this on the table for discussion.
First let me be transparent: if allowed I will talk for ages about how people aren’t taught critical thinking and media analysis and if they are that they aren’t applying those tools where it counts. It’s something I see so frequently and I’ll get so driven up the wall about and I’ll lament for ages the way that educational systems have failed to teach these tools or how little push there actually is on a widespread scale to learn and implement them.
But over the last 24 hours with instances on several fronts and in several fandoms, an additional thought has repeatedly been popping up that I think needs to coexist with this discussion.
And that is that there is a human being behind every take you disagree with.
It’s easy to focus on the frustration and the issue and wanting to push for ways to improve the situation to the point I think sometimes it’s easy to forget the individual people.
While I don’t intend to point fingers to any one example (because again, I’ve been seeing this sort of issue in multiple fandom spaces on multiple platforms over the past day,) I feel like it’s still something to bring up. Just hear me out on this. Fandom isn’t necessarily a space where the intent is to always analyze and think critically about what we consume, but utilizing those tools can provide a more enriching experience with the source material, open up new discussions with other fans, and allow for a greater understanding of the source material and its creators and its impact(s).
But just as much as that, fandom isn’t necessarily intended for that level of engagement, at least not as a mandatory requirement. Many fans don’t consume a thing they enjoy for the sake of deeper thought and analysis, and this means that many times their opinions, headcanons, elements they enjoy, and understanding of the source material is going to differ drastically from that of a person who does those deeper dives.
And that’s fine.*
There is a caveat there and I’ll get to it, but I really would like to see this point as the main one for consideration in this discussion. Not everyone consumes movies, shows, books, podcasts, games, etc. with an automatic need or desire to analyze the media on a deeper level. Heck, even people who DO have that tendency are going to encounter things that they just engage with on a level of trying to simply enjoy it.
And that’s okay. Not everyone has had the opportunity to learn those things. Not everyone wants to always dissect everything they engage with, and trying to do that anyway is exhausting. (And if you’re trying to do that with the intent of seeking media purity, it’s doubly exhausting because you’re chasing something that cannot exist, and I would like to suggest that you reevaluate this because it WILL rob you of your ability to enjoy ANYTHING.)
And I think it’s important to remember that when we hit that point. That there’s another person. That no matter how much it may cause us frustration when we encounter people who show signs of not knowing or understanding the same things we do about something we’ve taken the time to really break down and understand, there’s still another person and we don’t know the circumstances behind why their experience is different nor are we entitled to know. I mean, YEAH, it’s frustrating when prevailing ideas about the source material within a fandom become commonplace and are either blatantly wrong/ignorant or don’t show enough analysis. But I feel like we also need to remember to be mindful of individual people even when expressing our frustrations and dislikes of ideas or attitudes that lack understanding.
Now. Here’s that *caveat.
When someone’s lack of understanding, lack of thinking, lack of being willing to go beyond the surface and understand the impacts of themes and ideas in media, lead to that someone causing harm to themselves and others, then there is a greater issue that I think should be addressed.
I’m not talking about “this person has a headcanon about this character that is ignorant of character history and I don’t like it so I’m going to get on their case about it”. I’m talking about, someone isn’t taking the time to listen and think about and do some sleuthing on any media that they’re engaging with that has real life negative consequences and impacts on other people, and they’re unlikely to stop and reevaluate their engagement and behavior unless someone who does have a better understanding of those issues says something. Additionally, do they have individual opinions of their own in their lack of understanding that they’re causing harm with, whether intentionally or unintentionally? Because I see that happen too, where something gets misconstrued or misunderstood in a harmful way and the person with that misunderstanding can go on to harm others with it.
For many, a positive change can be made by asking the question(s) “are you aware that this thing contains harmful ideas that have real-world impacts?” “Are you aware that your engagement with this material supports a creator(s) who is weaponizing their platform?” “These harmful opinions and thought processes are baked into the source of the media you’re consuming and they have real life impacts; have you been taking the time to see if it is also working its way into your opinions and treatment of others?”
When those questions get asked, it can lead to changes that are positive or it can lead to an understanding that that individual may willfully choose not to reevaluate how they may be causing harm because they won’t let go of whatever caused those harmful ideas to take root in them. And that is a different discussion entirely, but it’s important to remember that this is a caveat to consider.
But ultimately, TL;DR— I think the complaint of “none of these people are using critical thinking or analyzing media is frustrating and it needs to change” can and does need to begin coexisting with the idea “an individual person may not know how or choose to engage critically with the media they consume some or all of the time and that’s okay and I can respect and consider them even if I disagree with their takes on it.”
A post about my donkey’s intelligence in relation to food
Required background knowledge:
Pirlouit likes when I sing to him. He has a specific way of poking my shoulder with his nose that means “Sing, human” and if I stop singing too soon for his liking he will poke and poke until I resume singing.
He is v good at logic when food is at stake. When my little cousins were here for Christmas they enjoyed giving the animals treats, but following their mum’s household rule of “we don’t start to eat until everyone’s sitting at the table” they wouldn’t give any treats unless all of the animals were there. Pirlouit immediately inferred “IF llamas THEN treats” and instead of trotting to us when he saw the kids and their treats, he would go in the other direction to fetch the llamas and herd them towards us, like come on guys the food distribution doesn’t start until you’re here for some reason
Which brings us to:
I’ve got some leftover hay from last year, which is slightly less nutritious than this year’s fresh hay. I would like Pirlouit to be the one who eats the older hay, as he is and remains a little too plump
I tried giving fresh hay to the llamas in one spot and old hay to the donkey in another, but it took him ten seconds to suspect that their hay was nicer than his. He proceeded to ignore his spot and go squat theirs, but he eats faster than a llama and ended up eating more fresh hay than they did (so the llamas would then go eat some old hay)
New strategy: I put both fresh and old hay in the same spot (less effort). The llamas ignore the old hay and eat the fresh hay. A few metres away I distract Pirlouit by scratching his nose and singing a song to him in order to give the llamas a head start and let them eat most of the fresh hay. When the song is finished, Pirlouit can go eat; he gets some fresh hay but most of what’s left is the old hay the llamas didn’t eat.
After a few days I realised that while Pirlouit patiently waits as I sing, he starts fidgeting when the song is about to end, knowing fully well what comes next. The second I stop singing, he turns around and dashes towards the hay.
I tried to stop mid-song, to see if his logic was “When she stops singing, I can eat.” Nope. He knows this song and his understanding is “When the song is finished, I can eat.” Instead of hurrying towards the hay when I stopped in the middle of the song, he started insistently poking my shoulder in various places like I was a malfunctioning radio he couldn’t find the right button for, and his behaviour clearly spelled out Come on, finish the damn song already so I can go have lunch
I don’t know what’s in the air in Brazil that makes Brazilian people genuinely batshit. We’re just built different
I don’t know how to explain to gringos the concept of gambiarra without making it sound like the entire country of Brazil is set to creative mode
Please try anyways, bestie ❤
So gambiarra is the art of finding solutions with what you have. The art of improv. Not always the best solution, but the solution you’re capable of. I’ll get some examples
These are some amazing Brazilian gambiarras
Are these the best solutions? Probably not. But the important part is that the problem is solved
