American Gods...How is this good?

[Breakdown]

I wasn't that familiar with Anansi, but wikipedia states that he was a symbol of slave survival and resistance, turning the table on oppressors through cunning and trickery. That would have been a more authentic approach to take, rather than a god who just gets his followers to kill themselves and then feeds on their death.

The term politically correct is more relevant than ever. It's particularly relevant in American Gods, where you have multiple examples of political correctness interfering in storytelling, structure and characterisation. I guess you don't feel comfortable talking about politics in popular culture, which is fine, I'm not judging.

Except that the whole point of American Gods is how authenticity is abandoned, gods had to adapt living in a new world with new believes. The fertility goddess spreading her 'religion' through Tinder, Vulcan harnessing the power of fire in guns, all that jazz. The Anansi in the show knows about how his people was suppressed. And believe me, even in the real world slavery resistance was often quite violent, so if Anansi was a symbol for that he was often a symbol for violence as he is in the show.

The statement from wikipedia refers to Anansi in the new world though, in the Carribbean. Already adapted. The gods don't change their innate characteristics either. Vulcan is still a smith. Bilquis is about sex. Anansi should be about cunning and trickery, not blunt force and death.

For crying out out conservatism is dominating politics and the public debate all throughout the West. You know what's being 'politically correct'? Shouting that things are politically correct and that that's bad. That's the new normal. Congratulations, you're the devil you seem to loathe. See how that goes? Two can play that game. Throwing around 'political correct' as if it's some kind of twitchy reflex has no point other than labeling something as bad. It doesn't bring anything to a conversation regarding politics and culture.

Conservatism doesn't dominate politics and public debate in the UK, in Europe. And it absolutely doesn't dominate popular media, quite the opposite in fact. By comparing the original book with the 2017 series, it's obvious that changes have been made. I am suggesting that these changes have been made to make this product more politically acceptable in the new context (liberal popular culture). I am also suggesting that these changes have come at the expense of narrative and characterisation. So in this case the process of making this product more politically correct and acceptable in this new culture, has also been detrimental to the story, and is worthy of criticism.

Of course, it would have been possible to make the series more politically correct while also maintaining the narrative and characterisation.

 

[Silvanus]

By comparing the original book with the 2017 series, it's obvious that changes have been made. I am suggesting that these changes have been made to make this product more politically acceptable in the new context (liberal popular culture). I am also suggesting that these changes have come at the expense of narrative and characterisation. So in this case the process of making this product more politically correct and acceptable in this new culture, has also been detrimental to the story, and is worthy of criticism.

Approaching social/political themes is incredibly common, borderline integral, to a healthy artistic landscape. Gaiman himself uses his work to discuss social themes and issues, including in American Gods.

Somehow, discussing social themes only becomes a problem when it comes from a liberal perspective. Truly, though, this is a tiresome complaint, and speaks only to your own taste, not to artistic integrity in the piece. It is entirely relevant to connect the religious experience to the social travails of the gods' followers. There's no good reason to shy away from that, and protecting the sensibilities of people who don't want their art to be too liberal is not a good reason.

 

[Breakdown]

By comparing the original book with the 2017 series, it's obvious that changes have been made. I am suggesting that these changes have been made to make this product more politically acceptable in the new context (liberal popular culture). I am also suggesting that these changes have come at the expense of narrative and characterisation. So in this case the process of making this product more politically correct and acceptable in this new culture, has also been detrimental to the story, and is worthy of criticism.

Approaching social/political themes is incredibly common, borderline integral, to a healthy artistic landscape. Gaiman himself uses his work to discuss social themes and issues, including in American Gods.

Somehow, discussing social themes only becomes a problem when it comes from a liberal perspective. Truly, though, this is a tiresome complaint, and speaks only to your own taste, not to artistic integrity in the piece. It is entirely relevant to connect the religious experience to the social travails of the gods' followers. There's no good reason to shy away from that, and protecting the sensibilities of people who don't want their art to be too liberal is not a good reason.

Your post is a blatant straw man argument. As always. Oh no, people don't want their art to be too liberal!

Look, I'm discussing the storytelling, structure and characterisation of the series, and how the crude and heavy handed politically inspired changes are detrimental to these elements of the story. Approaching social themes is fine, but that shouldn't come at the expense of narrative and characters, and also shouldn't be beyond criticism.

 

[Silvanus]

Your post is a blatant straw man argument. As always. Oh no, people don't want their art to be too liberal!

Well, let's take a quick look at the elements you've spotlighted: Vulcan's town and Mr. Nancy's uprising aboard the slave ship [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.966139-American-Gods-How-is-this-good?page=2#24018041]. What makes these scenes "politically correct"?

The phrase has become a shorthand for socially liberal themes in art.

Look, I'm discussing the storytelling, structure and characterisation of the series, and how the crude and heavy handed politically inspired changes are detrimental to these elements of the story. Approaching social themes is fine, but that shouldn't come at the expense of narrative and characters, and also shouldn't be beyond criticism.

The book is dark as all hell at times, and frequently takes forays away from the "affectionate road trip" you described above to delve into darker waters. It is not a betrayal to do so here.

 

[Breakdown]

Your post is a blatant straw man argument. As always. Oh no, people don't want their art to be too liberal!

Well, let's take a quick look at the elements you've spotlighted: Vulcan's town and Mr. Nancy's uprising aboard the slave ship [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.966139-American-Gods-How-is-this-good?page=2#24018041]. What makes these scenes "politically correct"?

The phrase has become a shorthand for socially liberal themes in art.

Look, I'm discussing the storytelling, structure and characterisation of the series, and how the crude and heavy handed politically inspired changes are detrimental to these elements of the story. Approaching social themes is fine, but that shouldn't come at the expense of narrative and characters, and also shouldn't be beyond criticism.

The book is dark as all hell at times, and frequently takes forays away from the "affectionate road trip" you described above to delve into darker waters. It is not a betrayal to do so here.

In the post you've linked to I mentioned the changes were motivated by a desire to be politically correct AND politically relevant. The slave ship is obviously a link to BLM, Vulcan's town is like the stereotypical idea of a Trump voting NRA town. There's a bit in the books where Shadow does visit a small town under the control of a god, that geographically is probably in Trump country, and also features a fairly dark plot development. Book town inhabitants are shown as good people who care about each other. TV town inhabitants have dead eyes, frowning faces, nazi arm bands, are obsessed with guns and have a hanging tree in the centre of town. It's totally dehumanising, a liberal's nightmarish vision of what Trump supporters are like.

In terms of political correctness, it's more about how the writers have placed more of an emphasis and screen time of some of the characters, without considering their place within the structure of the story. So you have Salim, who is the protagonist in a short but complete story in one of the earlier episodes. But then he turns up again later in the series. He serves no actual purpose to the plot since his narrative arc has already been completed. On the other hand he's a Muslim, so you need to show that he's a nice guy and have scenes of him praying, because the series is called American Gods and Muslims are American and Islam is an American religion. And then he just disappears again.

It's why the series is so slow, because you have characters with expanded roles but no actual purpose to the plot, just hanging around killing screen time.

 

[Silvanus]

In the post you've linked to I mentioned the changes were motivated by a desire to be politically correct AND politically relevant. The slave ship is obviously a link to BLM [...]

No, not "obviously". BLM is in the news now, but race and racism (and the history of the US with regards to it) have been significant issues of discussion since time immemorial. There have been countless artistic explorations of those themes, and this is one more. This is not somehow linking it to BLM, or passing any statement on that group. It is discussing the US history with slavery, which is also entirely relevant to the religious experience of people in the US.

Vulcan's town is like the stereotypical idea of a Trump voting NRA town. There's a bit in the books where Shadow does visit a small town under the control of a god, that geographically is probably in Trump country, and also features a fairly dark plot development. Book town inhabitants are shown as good people who care about each other. TV town inhabitants have dead eyes, frowning faces, nazi arm bands, are obsessed with guns and have a hanging tree in the centre of town. It's totally dehumanising, a liberal's nightmarish vision of what Trump supporters are like.

Vulcan's town is a political statement of sorts, sure-- not only about gun culture, but also about poor safety regulation (recall how Vulcan's factory allows its workers to die). The sequence also came from Neil Gaiman himself [http://ew.com/tv/2016/12/22/meet-american-gods-vulcan/], so complaints about showrunners unduly influencing his work are baseless.

Social and political issues do factor into the religious experience. There's no reason other than taste to shy away from those topics; they're relevant.

In terms of political correctness, it's more about how the writers have placed more of an emphasis and screen time of some of the characters, without considering their place within the structure of the story. So you have Salim, who is the protagonist in a short but complete story in one of the earlier episodes. But then he turns up again later in the series. He serves no actual purpose to the plot since his narrative arc has already been completed. On the other hand he's a Muslim, so you need to show that he's a nice guy and have scenes of him praying, because the series is called American Gods and Muslims are American and Islam is an American religion. And then he just disappears again.

It's why the series is so slow, because you have characters with expanded roles but no actual purpose to the plot, just hanging around killing screen time.

Scenes of somebody praying are rather showing the personal side of religious belief, are they not? That is what the book and show are about. And, yes, people of different faiths exist within America-- you cannot shy away from that fact and be authentic, and you cannot depict it without being accused of political correctness. You see the dilemma?

 

[Breakdown]

In the post you've linked to I mentioned the changes were motivated by a desire to be politically correct AND politically relevant. The slave ship is obviously a link to BLM [...]

No, not "obviously". BLM is in the news now, but race and racism (and the history of the US with regards to it) have been significant issues of discussion since time immemorial. There have been countless artistic explorations of those themes, and this is one more. This is not somehow linking it to BLM, or passing any statement on that group. It is discussing the US history with slavery, which is also entirely relevant to the religious experience of people in the US.

Vulcan's town is like the stereotypical idea of a Trump voting NRA town. There's a bit in the books where Shadow does visit a small town under the control of a god, that geographically is probably in Trump country, and also features a fairly dark plot development. Book town inhabitants are shown as good people who care about each other. TV town inhabitants have dead eyes, frowning faces, nazi arm bands, are obsessed with guns and have a hanging tree in the centre of town. It's totally dehumanising, a liberal's nightmarish vision of what Trump supporters are like.

Vulcan's town is a political statement of sorts, sure-- not only about gun culture, but also about poor safety regulation (recall how Vulcan's factory allows its workers to die). The sequence also came from Neil Gaiman himself [http://ew.com/tv/2016/12/22/meet-american-gods-vulcan/], so complaints about showrunners unduly influencing his work are baseless.

Social and political issues do factor into the religious experience. There's no reason other than taste to shy away from those topics; they're relevant.

In terms of political correctness, it's more about how the writers have placed more of an emphasis and screen time of some of the characters, without considering their place within the structure of the story. So you have Salim, who is the protagonist in a short but complete story in one of the earlier episodes. But then he turns up again later in the series. He serves no actual purpose to the plot since his narrative arc has already been completed. On the other hand he's a Muslim, so you need to show that he's a nice guy and have scenes of him praying, because the series is called American Gods and Muslims are American and Islam is an American religion. And then he just disappears again.

It's why the series is so slow, because you have characters with expanded roles but no actual purpose to the plot, just hanging around killing screen time.

Scenes of somebody praying are rather showing the personal side of religious belief, are they not? That is what the book and show are about. And, yes, people of different faiths exist within America-- you cannot shy away from that fact and be authentic, and you cannot depict it without being accused of political correctness. You see the dilemma?

The book isn't about people of different faiths existing together. it's about the old forgotten gods, and the new things that might become gods. The new and the old, and neither have any actual faith. How do they survive with an absence of religion? So Islam has no place in American Gods, just like Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and the rest. Because they are current, established religions.

This is the point I'm making over and over again - the political changes from book to series have been implemented badly, to the detriment of the storytelling, the structure, the characters. But you haven't addressed any of those elements, so it's pointless to continue this discussion.

 

[gorfias]

Listened to the audible and loved it.

I've heard the concept before: that classical characters like elves and fairies and dragons exist in reality and, shifting shapes, engage in real world activity like commerce (See "Mage" from the 80s, about King Arthur driving a modern day taxi cab). This does it really, really well, at least in the audible.

I hope to catch it on a streaming service (or start renting DVDs again from Netflix to catch up). If they did it 1/2 justice, it must have been way better than 90% of the TV otherwise out there.

 

[happyninja42]

Spoiler

Green explains the genesis of the character: ?He?s a brand-new addition who came from an experience Neil had. He was going through a small town in Alabama where he saw a statue of Vulcan. It was a steel town and, as he told the story, there was a factory that had a series of accidents where people were killed on the job and they kept happening because an actuarial had done the numbers and realized that it was cheaper to pay out the damages to the families of people who lost people, rather than to shut down the factory long enough to repair, and that occurred to him as modern a definition of sacrifice as there might be.?

Interesting, as the only place in Alabama that I know of (seeing as I live in the state), that has a statue of Vulcan, is Birminham. And while it's not as big of a city as places in the Northeast, or London for example, I'd hardly call it a "small town". I mean, I guess there could be some smaller town out there that's got one, but I doubt it. And Birmingham used to be very much a steel town.