Greentext

3994 readers

1556 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

Anon is often crazy.
Anon is often depressed.
Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 11 months ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

317

Anon doesn't like Rorschach (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

79 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But even I can see how, particularly for a time in the 00s and sometimes beyond the examination of toxic masculinity became the iconification of toxic masculinity. It’s not “if they say it’s their favorite film, run”, it’s “man, on the aggegate all of those did the opposite of what they were ostensibly trying to do”.

Never, ever, ever underestimate the ability of the public to miss the point. Any interpretation of media, no matter how obvious and intented, will trigger “you’re just reading too much into it” or “leave your politics out of my movie” comments.

I guess I don't see why mass misinterpretation needs to be the final word on a film's cultural impact (and/or moral value). Times change, people change, and ideas change, but the movie and the message of its creators is still there.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Sure, it's not like it was an intended result, but it's still a valid critique of the period and the movement. It doesn't have to be the "final word", but it's definitely A word. Some of the cultural impact was absolutely the opposite of what it intended, that's a fair observation. I think Palahniuk, particularly after he came out, has addressed that pretty head-on (see below), but also with much less social repercusion.

I also don't think it's a moral assessment of the film or the book or their authors, though. It's a read on the audience, for sure. I think it's valid to point out that if one is unironically on board with good ole Tyler Durden that's... you know, a pretty big red flag right there? Not for the movie, but for the individual audience member.