Book 1 and to some extent 2, feel like they're setting up for the rest of the series. Book 3 When the desolation is now ongoing feels like what books 1 and 2 were building towards. They've got their cool base, a coalition is kinda there(though shakey AF), the The radiant orders are reforming and the true face of what's going on has been revealed somewhat.
I might put it this way. If you can tell an entire 70-year life autobiography or the 6-month-long battle of Stalingrad in a book a third the length of the Way Of Kings, then there's something wrong with the Way Of Kings.
I disagree with your assesment but you did a good job of justifiying your opinion.
Because all the things we dress up as during Halloween aren't also like that? Scream masks, Jason masks, Freddy Kruger outfits, the devil (It doesn't matter if you believe in the Bible or not, real being or just a character, not a good guy) . Add into all this things like cosplayers dressing up as villains, various getups rock bands dress in, this isn't special guys...
I have a problem with it because not everyone is able to differentiate fantasy from reality, and our media is informed by, and informs on, our real life. For example, the Thanos from the MCU's entire plan is a real world theory that some racist jackass proposed like...200 years ago? I forget precisely, but it's not something made up by Disney, it's a real societal policy someone came up with, and tried to make real. And the number of times I see "Thanos Was Right" shows that some people are hearing that line, and thinking "hmm, maybe he has a point." Yes, a lot of people are saying it ironically, but they were also ironically saying years ago, that the world was flat, and posting such shit online, and now we actually have people who think it's flat again, for real.
Which is their problem, not reality's.
Except Thanos is presented as the bad guy. He's such a bad guy that even his philosophy is built on "I say so." The evidence for his position comes from personal experience and...that's it. There's nothing in the MCU that suggests that overpopulation is some kind of universal issue. He's one of the better villains in the MCU with slightly more moral ambiguity than most, but when motives include "destroy the universe because I dislike light or something," that's a low bar to surpass.
I'm well aware they present Thanos as the bad guy, my point is that some people don't really stop at "it's just a show, I should really just relax", and they weaponize and politicize everything in our media. The polygon article this very thread is in response to is a great example of that. People take this shit too seriously. And if the stuff they are taking too seriously, is things like "philosophies of genocide and tyrannical rule, or homicidal vigilantism and police brutality", then I have a problem with selling that shit to kids yes. I don't care that they particularly wrote Thanos as a genocidal badguy, he's hardly the worst, its following that up with "and now here's a Thanos mask and glove for your 5 year old, so he can re-enact Thanos' policy of hate and murder when playing with his friends."
I'm not sure if the Polygon article and Thanos are really equivalents here.
What I meant in regards to this article, is the idea that a fictional franchise like Star Wars, is somehow supposed to tackle real world issues like racism, and if it doesn't, it's somehow a problem? At least that's the gist I've gleaned from people talking about the article in this thread. No it's not in the context of Thanos' genocide, but it IS in the context of my comment about our society taking our entertainment too seriously. When you are criticizing a series that's about space wizards with laser swords for not tackling current topics to your satisfaction, I think there's an issue. Now I don't have a problem with media wanting to tackle important stuff, that's fine. But to say a franchise has to address it the way you specifically want (you being polygon) is bullshit. Besides, it totally ignores the fact that the franchise HAS done that very thing, it just didn't specifically do black issues, since it makes no fucking sense to limit racism to a subset of one species in the entire galactic society. But it DOES make sense, to replace the issues of racism towards blacks with something like...oh I don't know, the DROIDS. Which they do address, at least in Solo. So it's a dumb article, but it is a symptom of an over-seriousification (yes I'm coining that damnit!) of our entertainment. It's just a fucking film about space wizards with laser swords and talking dog copilots. Don't lay the mantle of modern change and societal upheaval on it, because that's just unfair and silly.
I believe the gist of the article is "it's 3pm on a Friday and the boss wants an editorial done by tonight, lemme pull a college lit essay out of my ass so I can get paid and go home."
Reminds me of Retronauts talking about Bioshock and talking about how, for some reason, the fact that the creators expect you to be smart enough to look at Rapture as it is and understand that Andrew Ryan's philosophy doesn't work and not need the story to beat you over the head with it is bad. (And holy shit, if there's a show that went off the deep end when it comes to inserting politics where it's not needed, it's that one)
Wait, they were aruging Bioshock was being too subtle in it's themes of "Objectivism doesn't work" or way too heavy handed? I never watched Retronauts.
I know Star Wars tackles specism in its EU, but I don't think the droids in Solo are a good example. L3's attempt at a revolution are played for laughs more than anything else. And even if it was meant to be taken seriously, is it an analogy for slavery, or rallying the workers to unite against the meatbag bourgois? I dunno, but there's nothing particuarly "black" about any such droid revolution.
I think it's more in the spirit of what's going on in the US and around the world. It's why, in my initial comment, that I was reluctant to criticize it too much.
Too subtle. They said that it wasn't being hard enough on it, as if the destruction of an entire society was being easy.
Not sure how much harder they expected to hit the point. I mean, every other fucking audiolog hammers home the point of how a society where everyone is self interested above all else ends poorly.
Well, like it or not that's the face of contemporary pop culture and pop culture criticism. And that's where a lot of us externally-identified "racists", "alt-right", "homophobes", and "incels" draw ire -- because we're capable of understanding nuance, theme, allegory, and symbolism, and reject superficial, creatively-bankrupt, and disturbingly self-contradictory messaging, that bears more commonality with medieval Catholic morality play than any genre of modern fiction. And that we noticed which work says what correlates far more weakly to its level of critical acclaim, than who's cutting the biggest checks to whom.
Which is basically akin to stating a simple maxim upon which everyone would ideally agree, but at the same time will fight to the eyeteeth to deny the moment partisan politics enters the equation: the internet has a dumbass problem, not an exclusively left or right problem. Itself corollary to a higher-order maxim upon which all should agree: the internet has a capitalism (in this case, through the lens of rage and click baiting) problem. Those who view this through an exclusively "left" or "right" lens, do little but make of themselves useful idiots to capital.
