I’m listening to the podcast Game Studies Study Buddies review the book Engineering Play by Mizuko Ito. They’re discussing the theory of fun that gets argued for in this book, specifically in the context of children’s “edutainment” games that are/were common in North American primary schools (idk if they’re still popular, but I played a lot of them when I was kid) - that saying “I’m having fun” for children in this environment is a non-confrontational way of disagreeing with authority, that “having fun” is a good rationale for not listening to adults, not putting away the toys or getting off the computer or etc. Children grab onto the fact that playing these “edutainment” games and other “fun” activities they’re forced to do in school is premised on the idea that children learn better (and can be fooled into learning) when they’re “having fun.” This is despite the fact that the definition of “having fun” is often very different for adults in positions of authority than it is for children, but it is a shared language children can use to articulate their resistance to authority in these educational settings in a way that is not immediately read as hostile/anti-social (or at least, less so than outright saying “I don’t want to do what you’re telling me to do”).
And the hosts connect this to the concept of ‘escapist media’ - they call it “the rhetoric of non-obligation,” this idea that you can engage with a piece of art and intentionally not think about its political or social content as a way of “having fun,” that “having fun” is necessarily divorced from any critical evaluation of art, and that this rationale of having fun is sufficient to explain this mode of engagement. But when placed in the context of adults describing their relationship to mass produced art, it’s no longer a child bucking against authority, but rather a person resisting some larger critical discussion they perceive as authoritarian or otherwise intruding on their “fun” by being critical - in essence, viewing critical evaluation of a piece of art as a de facto argument to stop having fun, that the only reason to do this critical evaluation would be for the purposes of telling other people to stop having fun.
Obviously I don’t think everyone using the term ‘escapist media’ are like, automatically and universally behaving like children or anything, it is a widely popular term whose casual usage doesn’t mean you’re committing to that form of argument. But I do very frequently see people use their enjoyment of ‘escapist media’ as a way of like, articulating their desire not to confront critical readings of whatever they like, always placing “critical thinking” (a very loaded term) as this necessarily miserable, upsetting, unfun activity that can only ever intrude on an emotional state of “having fun.” And this includes a lot of discussions online about the benefits of “critically engaging” with media, that while it may not be fun it’s still necessary because it makes you more a moral/smart/sophisticated/etc person. and I think that is a very miserable way of approaching critical engagement
94 notes
·
View notes
💛💖🏳️🌈?
💛 what’s a popular ship you can’t get behind and why?
Totk zelink, botw zelink, aoc zelink, just that entire zelink. Idk why, there is def chemistry, I just don’t like it. I actually have the entire zelink tag blocked cuz I’m sick of seeing them 💀 I’m kinda on the fence with zelink in general but that specific one I do not like.
💖 what is your biggest unpopular opinion about the series?
Kinda broad there XD idk, I guess phantom hourglass doesn’t deserve all the hate it gets and it’s not a bad game in general. Sure some can say it’s the worst in the series but to say it’s a bad game? Nuh-uh, that’s just wrong. There are much worse games out there I assure you. Phantom hourglass is flawed but there are so many GREAT things about it! Idk if that’s very unpopular tho, a lot of people have started liking it lol.
I guess a better unpopular opinion is that the ocean king temple isn’t that big of a pain to get through? At least if you know what you’re doing and if you don’t have a guide, it’s actually very fun to explore the temple. But this one I def understand the hate even tho my opinion has changed on it lol
🏳️🌈 any characters that are seen as queer but you don’t see them that way?
😳 do I even want to MENTION this? A specific character does not really come to mind truthfully, but I am sick and tired of people saying that Link can’t be cis or whatever. Like yes he’s androgynous for us to project ourselves onto him, and so people have every right to project their headcanons onto him and make him trans, gay, etc. but others also have a right to make him not queer. Now I really don’t have many lgbt+ headcanons about a lot of Zelda characters (save a few) so I ultimately don’t care about others having queer headcanons, and if you want to make Link or any Zelda character lgbt+ then go ahead! I admit I do that with some of the characters that I do have headcanons for! But if you believe that a link can’t be cis and straight because “that goes against his androgyny” you’re actually stupid. Cis people can be androgynous. Straight people can be androgynous. Nobody fits these perfect little boxes. I think we should just be respectful to headcanons and understand that none of them are actual canon, therefore people can do whatever they want 🤷♀️ no need to gatekeep or force people to have headcanons that simply aren’t canon, ok?
13 notes
·
View notes
What Polyamory Does For The It Fandom VS In The St Fandom.
These are some brain worms I've had for a while and I've decided to share, regardless if it makes some people mad. Although that is truly not the intent of this post. Anyways. If you haven't been in the It fandom and only have stayed in the St fandom this post may not make sense but I do encourage you to read it.
I joined the It fandom in 2017. I'm one of those few people who were in the It fandom first before moving over to also join the St fandom in late late 2017/early 2018. I had a blog for consuming content but I didn't start making content until 2020 for the It fandom and more recently and regularly for the St fandom. Anywho what I'm trying to say is that I've seen a lot.
I loved many ships in the It fandom and one of the main ships is Poly Losers Club. This is the first fandom I've seen where a poly ship was one of the more popular ones. Even if someone didn't ship all the Losers, throuple and quatrouples (is that how you say it?) have always been popular in this fandom.
Because it is almost unanimously agreed across the fandom, that whether platonically or romantically, all the Losers love each other. Even the most die hard of reddie shippers, the fandom's most popular ship, can often agree on certain fanon headcannons, Stan and Richie practiced their first kiss on each other, Eddie's first crush was on poor oblivious Bill. And that comes back to the agreement that all the Losers love each other. Ships in this fandom have never had an issue coexisting. If someone shipped something different from someone it was always more like "oh that's not my favorite but I definitely see where you're coming from'" OR they're like "yeah no they're in love too," Hardly ever any belittling or any superiority complexes.
That's what makes being in this fandom fun and easy.
Poly Losers even often features a gay man and a women and I've read many beautiful fics where this is explained as they're more best friends than lovers but Eddie doesn't love Bev any less because she's a woman. This fandom allows Eddie and Bev to have an amazing and emotionally intimate relationship because I feel like this fandom does understand, for the most part, that platonic love is just as important as romantic love.
Now on to the St fandom. There are some poly party shippers out there but they are far and few. And there is SO MUCH shipping discourse. Yes I could talk about Mileven and Byler but come on, it goes beyond that. It's with Jany and Stancy, Ronance and Rockie. Elmax and Lumax, and Steddie and Stonathan. Just about every ship you think of there is an alternate ship that people will fight for. They will belittle you for shipping something they don't, and insist that your ship is nothing but platonic. That,,,that just doesn't happen in the It fandom. You know the joke, "All the Losers had a crush on Bill at one point," I think that in itself says a lot. Bill, the arguably least liked character, (my poor bb), has the joke that all the losers had a crush on him at one point.
I'm getting off track. Anyways I'm not saying that shipping everyone together in a poly sense would fix everything with these shipping wars but i do believe why there was never any shipping wars in the It fandom was because of Poly Losers. Also when I talk about poly in St I mean it like Poly Party and Poly teenage crew. Not together, I hate that I have to clarify that.
In the St fandom, it's just not as universally agreed that everyone loves each other, even in the basic platonic sense. All anyone seems to care about in the St fandom is romantic love. A lot of shippers want to be right, they want to prove that their ship will be cannon which just,,,sucks the fun right out fandom spaces.
Canon, fanon, why can't people just make cute fan art and talk in babbles about thoughts they have on a ship. Why do you have to be right about what's going to be the canon ship? Why do certain people feel the need to put down and even to the extent as far as bullying people who ship something different? I've never seen a fandom so focused on 'canon pairings' like the st fandom. (Side note I was never in the sherlock and supernatural fandoms, I knew to mention this)
The party, like the losers, are friends who have been through turmoil that have bound them together for a lifetime. I don't care what pairing you give me from st, whether it be a platonic or a romantic one, I will tell you that those characters deeply care for each other.
Side note: it's worth a mention that the Duffer brothers originally wanted to film the It remake and when they didn't get it, we got Stranger Things. It can be argued that the Party is based off the Losers club so you know what that means? THEY ALL LOVE EACH OTHER. Take it as platonic or romantic idc.
Again, I don't think that poly party is the answer to ending the shipping wars. I do think however that if people could remember how much the party members mean to each other, that that could make less tiring fandom spaces.
Okay I'm done. I just thought this was an interesting point on how it's been like in the It fandom vs the St fandom.
Wait I was doing tags and I forgot to mention that there are few people who ship Elumax and Stoncy, two throuples and kudos to them. They're just worth a mention, I didn't forget about ya'll
111 notes
·
View notes
MANY THOUGHTS HEAD FULL, it's analysis time
So, Ruby has been blaming herself for a number of deaths, or at the very least, beating herself up about not being "good enough" to save them. Pyrrha and Penny especially, given the circumstances. Chapter 8 made that pretty clear, right?
This was all part of this period in her life where she has struggled with that heaviness, that feeling of never being enough. This is the period of her life that took her down to her lowest. She was in her caterpillar stage, if you will.
Once she hit rock bottom, she was taken to the tree, and quite literally cocooned in it. She was forced to confront her guilt and self-doubt, which is what needed to happen in order for her to rise. The tree represents change, rebirth, metamorphosis.
And when she emerged, she left those shackles behind. She realized she had been enough all along, and accepted herself, imperfections and all.
She's moved on to a new period in her life. That era of giving away pieces of herself and sacrificing her own well-being, of feeling inadequate, is over. She no longer carries the weight of Pyrrha and Penny's deaths on her shoulders.
In that way, Pyrrha and Penny represent the past, and Ruby's aforementioned guilt and self-doubt in chapter 8.
It's heavy, so heavy it's crushing her, but she feels like she can't let go of it. And that's what was preventing her from moving forward, what was holding her back.
But what about the future, and what could be?
In chapter 8, Oscar and Little both represent the future, and the people Ruby hasn't lost yet.
She's shown both of their deaths, real or not, and it's enough to break her. What is the point in fighting if everyone she loves is just going to die anyway? How could she ever look any of them in the eye again if she isn't good enough to protect them, even now?
This is the manifestation of Ruby's greatest fear.
But, at the same time...
...they also represent the good things the future could hold.
Little has ascended and become Somewhat. They found their purpose, and came back as a better version of themselves. Somewhat may not have Little's memories...but the heart rarely forgets, right? The bond Ruby had with Little is still there, deep down. Just because they're gone, and they may not see Somewhat ever again...that doesn't mean she has to leave them behind. They live on as a part of her memories.
EDIT: and how could I forget!!! Ruby's one act of kindness is what led Little to becoming Somewhat, becoming what they needed to be. Ruby's actions and decisions can lead to good, even remarkable things, in the future. And this is proof!
"Nothing, no one, is ever truly gone."
Oscar has the courage to face whatever it is the future holds for him. He is afraid, and he doesn't deny that, he fights on in spite of it. He is a very open and honest person, and he could see Ruby's pain from the beginning. He sees her.
And something is budding between Ruby and Oscar. Something is going to shift once they reunite, as they've both been made painfully aware of how it would feel to lose each other. How will their relationship grow from here? Will they find comfort and safety in each other? Will they grow even closer? I believe it was Miles himself who said their relationship is still being defined. Who knows what the future holds for the both of them, together?
Unlike the past, the future is uncertain. It could lead to many things, both good and bad.
With the end of this volume, we've reached a very big turning point. Ruby has taken the first steps toward the future, ready to leave the weight of the past behind.
61 notes
·
View notes