Why do so many people think that in order to be mature, art has to be dark and depressing?

[catalyst8]

Why do so many people think that in order to be mature, art has to be dark and depressing?

Your title, & therefore premise, is inaccurate; you specify 'art' yet only talk about comics not art or, more correctly in the context of your argument, literature. In that context & for that reason I'll presume to bracket comics in the same artistic branch as literary narrative:

Regardless of who you read, the inevitable consensus amongst academics, philosophers, & authors alike is that there are certain essential elements of a narrative. The specific number of these elements stated may vary depending on whose view you're paying attention to e.g. Aristotle's Poetics agrees in principle with Sternberg's Universals of Narrative, but Aristotle sub-divides these features & elements differently, but their qualities are identical - the mechanics of the narrative's delivery remain the same. Essentially the main narrative components are:
1. Plot (the events which occur in the story).
2. Setting.
3. Characterisation (typically physical & ethical, as well as behavioural).
4. Narrative style (typically third or first person).
5. Conflict (the reason for the story).
6. Denouement (resolution or conclusion of events).

In any literary work you're likely to read, from The Iliad to Beowulf (the poem, not Neil Gaiman's racist cartoon), any play you see from Hamlet to Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead, or any film you watch from The Maltese Falcon to Star Wars those six components will be there (there are exceptions, but they're extremely rare). They're the mechanisms which allow the narrative to unfold, you will see them if you know to look for them, & conflict is dark. It has to be dark in order to fulfil its function, it's supposed to be dark, that's how it works, it's conflict! More than any other element of the narrative, conflict is the most influential & the most important, because it's that conflict & its denouement which carries the weight of the rest of the narrative. As such it's quite normal for the darkness of the conflict to influence other narrative components e.g. the Trojan War in The Iliad provides much of the plot, the entirety of the setting, & all of the behavioural characterisation; much the same applies to Hamlet, substituting the siege of Troy for the murder of Hamlet's father, obviously. As the always excellent Tom Stoppard observes about narrative in Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead:

"we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see."

To say that dark narrative characteristics are a modern trend is fatuous. The oldest known narrative is the epic poem of Gilgamesh, well over four thousand years old (the tablets are in the British Museum & have been dated), in which you have immortals & gods battling it out, & particularly dark events unfolding. Even genocide in one instance, that's where the Bible stole its Flood story from all those hundreds of years later.

Literary narrative requires conflict which, by its very nature is dark. No darkness no narrative, no narrative no literature, no literature no art. It's not new, in fact 'dark & depressing' is very very very old, it's as old as the oldest story ever.

 

[white_wolf]

It's the American Hollywood trend, or that's how I like to call it. Stick guns and swearwords and dark colours on something, and hey presto, that something is automatically mature. No need for pesky things like a complex plot or deep meanings.

A product can be full of blood, violence, sex and foul language, and still be extremely immature. On the other hand, a product can be colourful, happy, positive and watchable by children, and still be powerfully mature.

Dark atmosphere and maturity are in no way related. It always amuses me when they slap some blood and a sex scene on a film with an entirely dumb plot, and they call it mature.

Perfectly said.

This is one of those you know it when you see it things I've found alot of works that toggle both immature and mature subjects coming off as average in both fields but getting a decent mature one that isn't full of T&A, emo characters, and an unbelievable amount of swearing for the time in question is hard to find.

 

[sageoftruth]

BecAuse usually kids don't get dark and mature. Also some themes aren't suitable for children. How is this hard to understand.

Kind of makes me wonder if raising kids on dark stuff would make them look up see Care Bears as mature content.

JesuOtaku put it very well. I don't remember her exact wording, but her point was that the fact that a series is dark doesn't automatically make it better. It doesn't make the characters more well-rounded, or the dialogue better, or the soundtrack more poignant, or the plotting more well-done.

I think that was in her Madoka Magica review. She said that the show wasn't good because of it's deconstructive nature, but because of all of the things you listed above.

OT: Some things are Edgy or dark for no reason, but I also see media that are always positive without any given reason (more vapid and vaguely happy than deservedly optimistic). Mature things are "dark" because there's lots of shallow immature light things to reject artistically. When "Darkness" becomes the standard for vapid immaturity, positive/fun things with good writing with be the groundbreaking stuff.

It kind of makes me wonder if raising kids on dark stuff would make shallow early teenagers flock to Care Bears as mature content. I'm definitely curious.

 

[sageoftruth]

Because they don't want to be seen as kids or childish. It's why when Frank Millar's Batman came out older readers could talk more openly about their hobby. Me personally I don't get the point of making it dark for the sake of making it dark, but then again I like comedy. I'll say this and leave because I don't wanna get my head chewed off, I don't like the Nolan Batman movies. The brooding and the constant talking about the philosophy of a grown man running around as a bat isn't fun. I like the Animated Series more, yes it is dark but it still has nuggets of humor that made it enjoyable.

Captia: "are you a us born Mexican american"
Why the fuck does that matter?

It's important also to note that most of them grew up on colorful happy-go-lucky material and were forbidden to view darker stuff. That very forbidden-ness of it is pretty much what makes them so convinced that they've grown up, when they finally get to see it.

 

[sextus the crazy]

JesuOtaku put it very well. I don't remember her exact wording, but her point was that the fact that a series is dark doesn't automatically make it better. It doesn't make the characters more well-rounded, or the dialogue better, or the soundtrack more poignant, or the plotting more well-done.

I think that was in her Madoka Magica review. She said that the show wasn't good because of it's deconstructive nature, but because of all of the things you listed above.

OT: Some things are Edgy or dark for no reason, but I also see media that are always positive without any given reason (more vapid and vaguely happy than deservedly optimistic). Mature things are "dark" because there's lots of shallow immature light things to reject artistically. When "Darkness" becomes the standard for vapid immaturity, positive/fun things with good writing with be the groundbreaking stuff.

It kind of makes me wonder if raising kids on dark stuff would make shallow early teenagers flock to Care Bears as mature content. I'm definitely curious.

Probably not. Care bears is a bit too childish for that sort of appeal. I'd think something more like one piece or the avengers would become popular or something else that's more optimistic and fun without being mindless. Then one-piece/avengers clones would come in hordes.

Light and Dark aren't necessarily mature or immature. It's just that mature topics (death, self-acceptance, nature of humanity, and the like) are coded as "dark" in someways, hence why the media that cover these things tend to be "dark".

 

[sageoftruth]

JesuOtaku put it very well. I don't remember her exact wording, but her point was that the fact that a series is dark doesn't automatically make it better. It doesn't make the characters more well-rounded, or the dialogue better, or the soundtrack more poignant, or the plotting more well-done.

I think that was in her Madoka Magica review. She said that the show wasn't good because of it's deconstructive nature, but because of all of the things you listed above.

OT: Some things are Edgy or dark for no reason, but I also see media that are always positive without any given reason (more vapid and vaguely happy than deservedly optimistic). Mature things are "dark" because there's lots of shallow immature light things to reject artistically. When "Darkness" becomes the standard for vapid immaturity, positive/fun things with good writing with be the groundbreaking stuff.

It kind of makes me wonder if raising kids on dark stuff would make shallow early teenagers flock to Care Bears as mature content. I'm definitely curious.

Probably not. Care bears is a bit too childish for that sort of appeal. I'd think something more like one piece or the avengers would become popular or something else that's more optimistic and fun without being mindless. Then one-piece/avengers clones would come in hordes.

Light and Dark aren't necessarily mature or immature. It's just that mature topics (death, self-acceptance, nature of humanity, and the like) are coded as "dark" in someways, hence why the media that cover these things tend to be "dark".

I know what you mean there, but kids just reaching their teens have a tendency to deduce that if something is forbidden to them until they're older, then it must be mature, regardless of what it is, don't you think?

 

[sextus the crazy]

I know what you mean there, but kids just reaching their teens have a tendency to deduce that if something is forbidden to them until they're older, then it must be mature, regardless of what it is, don't you think?

True, but I think Care Bears isn't so much forbidden as it is just considered kiddy crap. But that definitely explains the popularity of grim-dark shlock. All of the "maturity", none of the introspection or growth required.

 

[Lightknight]

Maturity carries certain baggage with it. Namely the disillusionment of the wonder life used to have where everything was possible. Instead, we find ourselves faced with the stark realities of our limitations and impending doom.

Understanding the grim nature of life is specifically the shirking of naivete of childhood.

So the reason is sound. But damn if I'm not almost 30 and in love with the Last Airbender series and Pixar films

 

[Aramis Night]

"You're not a child. You're childhood was over the moment you knew you were going to die."

I think it largely goes back to primitive rights of adulthood. Back when simply hitting a certain age was not enough to allow you to be considered an adult. The rites of passage were typically violent and/or painful and often contained an element of risk to one's life. Hence we now view such experiences as synonymous with maturity. Harsh experiences tend to mature those that suffer through them. It changes your outlook irreparably. It allows one to better their priorities.

We no longer have that requirement of our young and so we find ourselves surrounded by adults who lack maturity. I feel bad for pretty much anyone who hasn't had the thought that they are likely going to die in the moment, at some point before they turned 18. Without the knowledge of imminent fear of death, they lack the capacity to be truly grateful for life. So instead they grant importance to the trivial.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

The classical definition of adulthood is the abandonment of your childhood.

What do we associate with childhood?
-Lack of responsibility
-Being happy
-(I don't, but there's no denying that a lot of people do) Games, Anime/Manga
-Not being pressured by gender roles(not as much at least)
-Enthusiasm

All of that gets thrown out the window, and then you get adulthood. A boring, dry, existence peppered with a longing for times past.

Ergo, many people consider that the quickest way to maturity is by abandoning childhood, leaving us with such spectacular nonsense like Max Payne 3: a man who can use bullet time, and at the beginning of the game, is surrounded by extremely attractive people and mountains of booze, yet still acts like a mopey f**k 24/7 because grr, "gritty realism, look how mature this is".

I personally have no qualms with dark stories, but if you are going to venture down that route, commit to it. There's a reason why Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad are so popular; they don't just say "these characters are upset because they keep going on about how f**ked the world is", no, it makes you watch them participate in that nastiness. It makes the s**t elements of that world kick the door down and confront the characters. Also let's not forget Spec Ops The Line, and all the baggage it throws onto the player.

It's these half-way scenarios that I can't stand. Apocalypse Now is all the more memorable for that final scene because the entire movie was a literal journey up the river of madness, ending with a loud cacophony of a crescendo. It paid off all the build up, but stuff like Snow White and The Huntsman, which goes halfway in its edginess just falls flat and is ultimately disposable. Put alongside The Wolf Among Us which is a psychopath's journey to redemption or indulgence, it pales.

And let's not forget Man Of Steel. Yea it had the dull colour palette, and the 'I will commit genocide' plot, but it was just a constant stream of half-heartedness that the final moment in the movie just felt token and rather exhausting. Watchmen was going all in all the time, and it paid off because it was unrelenting, whereas Man of Steel just refused to decide if it wanted to be a dark retelling of Superman(which is kind of near-impossible anyway) or if it wanted to have some fun, so it was stuck in that drab limbo of the twain.

 

[gargantual]

I don't think its about maturity in reflecting the matured life. but mature in what it provides to the minds of matured readers. It doesnt reflect reality to instruct a person specificially on who to be and how to handle the mundanities and frustrations of modern life. It assumes you're ready for the opposite or whatever you're presenting.

I think its about a release. Its abstract expression, exploring conflict, morals, lust, desire, mystery, curiousity, rebelliousness in unfamiliar setting. Its just an area to not have to pretend everythings hunky dory which a lot of entertainment consumers don't like doing and find a release in such contrasting art, where readers dont need everything to make sense. they can put it away and return to the calm mundanity, and uncertainty of their lives.

Gritty feels 'emotionally real' in an art context for the first world. Its not meant to be mature in the typical way we expect but in ways that experienced minds can better understand. Its discovery to children, and a refreshing contrast to life for adults depending on how they interpret what they watch, play and consume. Even bright, seemingly perfect imagery can have an emo dark context to it, because our natural cynicism and grounded view of society, it resonates with some people who do have rough lives, as well as those who are made numb from their garden apt white picket fence picture, where the facade is friendly but psychological warfare reigns.

If I could analogize it. Its like many suburbanites probably wouldn't want to live in the city, but the dark, regal mysterious and urban remains grand and curious from a distance.

 

[gargantual]

Why do so many people think that in order to be mature, art has to be dark and depressing?

Your title, & therefore premise, is inaccurate; you specify 'art' yet only talk about comics not art or, more correctly in the context of your argument, literature. In that context & for that reason I'll presume to bracket comics in the same artistic branch as literary narrative:

Regardless of who you read, the inevitable consensus amongst academics, philosophers, & authors alike is that there are certain essential elements of a narrative. The specific number of these elements stated may vary depending on whose view you're paying attention to e.g. Aristotle's Poetics agrees in principle with Sternberg's Universals of Narrative, but Aristotle sub-divides these features & elements differently, but their qualities are identical - the mechanics of the narrative's delivery remain the same. Essentially the main narrative components are:
1. Plot (the events which occur in the story).
2. Setting.
3. Characterisation (typically physical & ethical, as well as behavioural).
4. Narrative style (typically third or first person).
5. Conflict (the reason for the story).
6. Denouement (resolution or conclusion of events).

In any literary work you're likely to read, from The Iliad to Beowulf (the poem, not Neil Gaiman's racist cartoon), any play you see from Hamlet to Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead, or any film you watch from The Maltese Falcon to Star Wars those six components will be there (there are exceptions, but they're extremely rare). They're the mechanisms which allow the narrative to unfold, you will see them if you know to look for them, & conflict is dark. It has to be dark in order to fulfil its function, it's supposed to be dark, that's how it works, it's conflict! More than any other element of the narrative, conflict is the most influential & the most important, because it's that conflict & its denouement which carries the weight of the rest of the narrative. As such it's quite normal for the darkness of the conflict to influence other narrative components e.g. the Trojan War in The Iliad provides much of the plot, the entirety of the setting, & all of the behavioural characterisation; much the same applies to Hamlet, substituting the siege of Troy for the murder of Hamlet's father, obviously. As the always excellent Tom Stoppard observes about narrative in Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead:

"we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see."

To say that dark narrative characteristics are a modern trend is fatuous. The oldest known narrative is the epic poem of Gilgamesh, well over four thousand years old (the tablets are in the British Museum & have been dated), in which you have immortals & gods battling it out, & particularly dark events unfolding. Even genocide in one instance, that's where the Bible stole its Flood story from all those hundreds of years later.

Literary narrative requires conflict which, by its very nature is dark. No darkness no narrative, no narrative no literature, no literature no art. It's not new, in fact 'dark & depressing' is very very very old, it's as old as the oldest story ever.

Yep. Actually a many narrative journey. From evolving moods in an epic EDM mixset (not a pop EDM mix of course), to themes in disney cartoon movies embrace those contrasts of light and dark and conflict to communicate to consumer what is bad, what is good, what are the peaks valleys and trials. So that we feel we've experienced some variety, and have actually gone on a journey. Without those blends and contrast, an overall work can appear to be tone deaf.

 

[Flutterguy]

Well I can tell you the Saw franchise is miles more immature then anything I've seen from Nickelodeon.

 

[GabeZhul]

I would think the root of the answer lies, as usual, in society meandering along like a blind bull in a china-shop and advertisements shaping culture.

To elaborate:
Around the early 20th century humanity "invented" a number of societal constructs, or rather codified them, such as the cult of love (Saying that every person has a soul-mate, that true love is glamorous and everyone should strive for it, etc.) or more importantly (at least in this case) the praising of childhood as the best part of one's life. In the past there were no such constructs. People usually got married based on economics and social status and children were treated as small adults who lived and worked the same way as their parents from a young age.

With the creation of the "child protection" ideal, suddenly people got enamored with the idea of childhood. The goal was to make kids happy (since they are supposed to be happy by definition, therefore if your kids are not happy, it's your fault, and you don't want that, now do you?), and to achieve this goal parents tried to surround their kids with happy imagery. This was the birth-time of the cute toys, the nice tales where everyone wins and other fluffy stuff. This was probably further helped by the blooming of the advertisement industry that further reinforced people's views about what kind of toys kids (especially young kids) should have, and later the widespread acceptance of cartoons aimed at kids with stylized art and pleasant color palettes.

However, this meant that childhood itself slowly became associated with the cute and pleasant things. However, as we probably all know, there is such an age called "being a teenager" when you want to distance yourself from being considered a child. This on the other hand was not a new invention, so it is safe to say that when the rebellious years rolled around and kids wanted to become "mature" instead of "childish", the easiest way was to target the symbols of childhood, the happy, optimistic, whimsical dressings.

And there you have it. Our modern colloquial definition of "mature" doesn't come from the actual state of mind that is maturity, but from the reactionary attitude that made it to be the exact opposite of the childhood ideal; dark, brooding, cynical and aggressive.

 

[Olas]

I think "mature" is just a meaningless word pretentious people use to try and elevate themselves or something they like. Ya, I know the word means that something pertains more to adults or older people, but that assumes there's a universal set of traits that define older people, which I don't think is really true. I mean how many adults watch Pixar movies now?

Now, in defense of grimdark, when you're like me as a teenager and you feel depressed and moody all the time, dark stories can speak to how you feel in a genuine way and be cathartic, whereas lighter stories tend to feel insufferable and unrealistic because they don't reflect the world as you see it. Ya, sure, the world isn't really all that shitty when you look at it rationally, but a story needs to appeal to more than just reason to be effective.

It's because this is the stuff that's age gated, and age gate = mature to a lot of people. Boobs and guns and cussing are considered off limits because they're for adults, so they're so awesome and mature!

Actually, boobs and guns and cussing are just awesome by nature. The fact that they're off limits to kids is just a sad fact of childhood.

However I don't think they necessarily correspond to grimdark either. You could probably make a PG kids movie super dark and depressing if you tried, I'm thinking Watership Down.


Meanwhile a movie with lots of "mature" content can be still be very upbeat.

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

It kind of makes me wonder if raising kids on dark stuff would make shallow early teenagers flock to Care Bears as mature content. I'm definitely curious.

Heh... didn't you notice that this has more or less happened already? Why did you think it almost become fashionable for teenage boys to watch My Little Pony? I mean, it's a pretty good show but I think a big part of why it caught on is because teens and young adults now long for something lighthearted and idealistic as a counterpoint to all the dark and gritty media they grow up with.

 

[AdamG3691]

this is an issue I have with endings in particular

now don't get me wrong, a sad depressing ending can pack a real emotional punch, and an ending HAS to fit its work

Brazil (the movie) has an ending that you might not call "happy" but its absolutly perfect

the thing is though I think people feel the need to do this just for the sake of it, I honestly don't see the point of coming away from a work feeling depressed and never wanting to re-visit it again than I do feeling eahter happy...or not happy but satisfied

ever watched the movie "Buried"?

jesus that was a shitty ending

the plot can be summed up as "guy gets kidnapped and buried alive as a pawn in a twisted mind game between a terrorist and a negotiator"

Spoiler

the last half an hour of the movie was all upbeat and hopeful, "we got the terrorist to tell us where you are, we're on our way, we're going to get you out of there just like we did Jimmy!"

then it goes on a big spiel about how they got him out just in time and the movie ends after sunlight breaks through the lid of the coffin.

Spoiler

except it doesn't end. after the fade to white victory, we're suddenly in the coffin again, the shoveling noises were coming from the phone being used to communicate with the negotiator and terrorist, and the last thing we see and hear is "oh my god... I'm so sorry... the terrorist didn't take us to you... this is Jimmy's coffin" and then the main character passes out and the screen fades to black.

"what the fuck was that?!?" was the first and only time I'd ever heard my mum swear.

I still have no idea what the point of the movie was, "terrorism is bad"? the movie had a great ending and message about hope in the darkest times and the power of perseverence and trust, if only they'd finished it 30 seconds earlier and didn't crowbar in a shitty twist for shock value and "grittyness"

 

[sageoftruth]

JesuOtaku put it very well. I don't remember her exact wording, but her point was that the fact that a series is dark doesn't automatically make it better. It doesn't make the characters more well-rounded, or the dialogue better, or the soundtrack more poignant, or the plotting more well-done.

I think that was in her Madoka Magica review. She said that the show wasn't good because of it's deconstructive nature, but because of all of the things you listed above.

OT: Some things are Edgy or dark for no reason, but I also see media that are always positive without any given reason (more vapid and vaguely happy than deservedly optimistic). Mature things are "dark" because there's lots of shallow immature light things to reject artistically. When "Darkness" becomes the standard for vapid immaturity, positive/fun things with good writing with be the groundbreaking stuff.

It kind of makes me wonder if raising kids on dark stuff would make shallow early teenagers flock to Care Bears as mature content. I'm definitely curious.

Probably not. Care bears is a bit too childish for that sort of appeal. I'd think something more like one piece or the avengers would become popular or something else that's more optimistic and fun without being mindless. Then one-piece/avengers clones would come in hordes.

Light and Dark aren't necessarily mature or immature. It's just that mature topics (death, self-acceptance, nature of humanity, and the like) are coded as "dark" in someways, hence why the media that cover these things tend to be "dark".

I know what you mean there, but kids just reaching their teens have a tendency to deduce that if something is forbidden to them until they're older, then it must be mature, regardless of what it is, don't you think?

Ah, I see now. I forgot the second piece to my hypothetical situation. If parents also forbade their children to watch anything that was colorful and idealistic until a certain age, would children suddenly view said kiddy crap as mature? Sorry. I thought I had posted that earlier, but it was just in my head.