Categories, like #models, are useful tools. Some categories are very broad, such that they could encompass everything. Putting something outside of a category in some contexts does not make it a less valid member of that category.
Art and Politics
Art
- Everything is art
- Creating a definition of art only exists to create a world with less art.
- I don't want to work towards that world, and find it hard to sympathize with those who would.
- Some things are more explicitly art than others
- When playing 20 questions I will often ask "Is the person an artist (narrow)?", meaning a painter, sculptor, animator, or similar
- This does not mean that wide art is less valid, only that there are contexts where categories are useful
- When playing 20 questions I will often ask "Is the person an artist (narrow)?", meaning a painter, sculptor, animator, or similar
- I like art that strives to make the user feel something, and art that can do that on its own, without additional context.
Films
I often differentiate between movies and films when discussing among friends. This is a made up (but useful) distinction. Films want to be analyzed. They have themes and make points about life or society. They want to be viewed as Art.
Movies are also art (see above, you won't catch me saying they aren't!), but their primary goal is to entertain. That's not to say that films can't be entertaining, or that movies can't be poignant. Obviously these aren't aren't mutually exclusive categories, but convenient labels for discussions.
Fast and the Furious is a Movie. Synecdoche, New York is a Film. Most Marvel movies are movies (that doesn't mean they're bad — the first Iron Man ranks among my favorite movies, alongside Casablanca and the first Pirates of the Caribbean). Citizen Kane is a film. Many movies about war are films, meant more to make a point than (just) to entertain. Documentaries, by this definition, are almost necessarily films, while video essays ride the line perfectly.
This isn't a clear-cut category, but a lens for analysis. Personally, and perhaps controversially, I believe Wall-E is a beautiful and great film, but not a very good movie; it's not entertaining.
Similarly, the Jason Bourne films are full of car chases, fight scenes, and entertaining stunts that look cool. But they're also full of questions about the role of government, surveillance, personal freedoms, and the lengths one is willing to go to get answers (or revenge). They are excellent films that can be analyzed from both metrics. I would argue that they are more successful as films than as movies, simply due to the amount of time we spend with the political nature of the films. It's easy to watch a James Bond movie and focus on the stunts, forgetting about the fact that he's a state-sponsored assassin. The Bourne movies are entertaining, but they don't let you forget what's really going on. They're stories about government assets, people turned into weapons. The films wants you to hold Jason's horror in your mind, to question the "cool stunts" he's able to pull off. He doesn't want to be cool. He wants to retire to a seaside shack.
What does James Bond want? A hot babe, a strong drink, and the next job, mostly. Some of the later films (notably starting with the Casino Royale remake) add depth to Bond, but these aren't what most people think of when they picture the character. They think of a suave man with a gun and few qualms. That's entertainment (for better or for worse; that's a different article).
See Also
Politics
- Everything is political.
- Some things are more explicitly political than others
- Things directly related to governing: elections, laws, politicians
- Restrictions and regulations that affect a class of people
- Saying "I don't discuss politics" is not meaningless just because "everything is political"
- What you consider to be apolitical reflects your own beliefs. Those are the topics that are in the water around you; you cannot see them.
- "There are two races, white and political."
Value statements vs observations
See also Nonviolent Communication
There is a difference between labels and judgments, but some words are strongly loaded to the point where that distinction is unclear.
From: https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/07/18/the-whole-city-is-center/ The Whole City is the Center
A: I don't believe in laziness
B: What about my cousin Larry? He keeps promising to do important errands for his friends and family, and then he never does them. Instead he just plays video games all the time. This has happened consistently over the past few years, every time he’s promised to do something. One time my aunt asked him to go to the DMV to get some paperwork filled out, he promised he would do it, and then he kept putting it off for a month until it was past the deadline and she almost lost her car. He didn’t forget about it or anything, he just couldn’t bring himself to go out and do it. And he’s been fired from his last three jobs for not showing up, and…
A: Yes, yes, I’m sure there are people like this. But he probably has some self-defeating beliefs, or vitamin deficiencies, or mental health issues.
B: Okay. Well, my mother is going to be away for the next week, and she needs someone to dog-sit for her. Her dog is old and sick and requires a lot of care each day. She’s terrified that if he doesn’t get his food and medication and daily walk on time, something terrible will happen to him. She’s willing to pay a lot of money. Do you think I should recommend she ask my cousin Larry?
A: No, of course not.
B: Why not?
A: He probably won’t do it. He’ll just play video games instead.
B: Why do you think so?
A: Because he has a long history of playing video games instead of doing important tasks.
B: If only there were a word for the sort of person who does that!
...
(Note (mine): This is where the value statement comes in. Is "laziness" a moral failing)
A: Because “lazy” is laden with the idea that lazy people should be punished. You should yell at them to get off their ass and do some work.
B: I mean, I’m not sure that’s wrong? When my aunt and uncle tried to take Larry to the psychiatrist, he didn’t want to go. My uncle started screaming at him that if he didn’t make the appointment he would never amount to anything, and he would be a loser his entire life, and they would disown him – and I guess it freaked Larry out enough that he made the appointment. And it seems like if that kind of thing makes people do important stuff for their own good – whether it’s make appointments or hold down a job – then it might be reasonable, at least from people whom the lazy person has entered into some kind of relationship with.
...
A: Excuse me, do you know the way to city center?
B: Don’t worry, good sir! You’re in city center right now!
A: But…this whole area looks suburban. And the edge of the city is right there – past that street there’s only rolling fields as far as the eye can see. How can this be city center?
B: The whole city is the city center!
A: What?
B: That’s right. We decided that it was pretty stigmatizing to say that certain parts of the city were non-central. You know, it implied that the people there were just a bunch of yokels who weren’t real citizens the same way everyone else was. So we held a referendum, and everyone agreed that the whole city would be classified as the city center.
A: That’s pretty weird, but…look, I need to get to the tourist office, and I know it’s in city center, so if you’re not going to direct me to city center..can you just tell me what part of town the tourist office is in?
B: It’s in the center. The whole city is center.
A: Let’s try this again. Please point me in the direction of the Tourist Office.
And so on