Tarnishing innocence, improper use of interpretation, and the rise of pseudo-intellectualism : a hog rant
I want to preface this by saying this is my own opinion and you are always entitled to yours. I am ok with a healthy, respectful debate but there will be no blatant hate towards me, my mutuals or anyone who reposts this allowed. Ok? Cool.
As you indulge in media , especially older media, you are often interpreting it through your own eyes. A lot of media is up to interpretation and analysing media, taking time to read, and learning your source material is a very beneficial thing. However, some things are not up to interpretation. A few examples of this are certain songs, books, or films made for a specific group of people (often POC or LGBTQIA+ people), which get popular on social media platforms and “interpreted” by people who it was never intended for. This is especially common with media made for POC being taken by white people and heavily misunderstood, often tarnishing the source material for those who it actually belongs to. This is also incredibly common with culture, particularly East Asian culture. Culture becomes gentrified FAST and the cycle of initial love-gentrification-hate continues, even though the culture was never meant to be given away.
Back to fictional media, many people find comfort in fictional worlds and feel it is an escape from reality. Your own interpretation of this fictional word, however, is often different to that of others. Your interpretation is shaped by your own experiences, preferences, and knowledge of the original source material, which is exactly why it is so different. Different interpretations are often beneficial for others to hear and share, but there comes a point where interpretations can be flat out wrong or even disrespectful to the creator.
Enter contrarianism.
For those who don’t know, contrarianism is effectively the “devil’s advocate” position, which is taking the opposite view of the popular or most widely accepted belief. It can be a very good thing when used correctly, however combined with human nature it can often be something harmful that ostracises others and disrespects their work.
The contrarianism in media, especially interpreting older media, is extremely common but often quite irritating and harmful for people who do not hold those views to deal with.
Modern contrarianism is usually a combination of three things. Pseudo-intellectualism, genuine contrarian ideas, and the joy or humor of tarnishing innocence for others. Ruining innocence is a particularly strange way to engage with media- however it is EXTREMELY popular. For example:
-my little pony (self explanatory, I’m gonna use “pinkie pie is a serial killer” as my example)
- Romeo and Juliet (accusing Romeo, who is canonically a young teenager, of being a pedophile)
- how to train your dragon (toothless being “unable” to love do to the fact he is reptilian. Real reptiles do not feel love but it is shown in the movie that dragons clearly do not have standard lizard brains)
- titanic (“Jack was a fuckboy” theory)
These interpretations do not prove extremely high intelligence, which is often the intent of the contrarian. What they do prove is a joy for taking the innocence out of media and characters that are more innocent than they interpret. In many of these examples, the character being vilified ( pinkie pie, Romeo Montague, toothless, and Jack) is explicitly delivered as non violent. The only violence we see from these characters (save pinkie pie) is self defence, protecting others, or when absolutely necessary. These are not aggressive characters.
On a different note, accusing characters (especially minors) of being sex crazed is a form of contrarianism that doesn’t sit well. This is often directed at Romeo, stating he was “just sad Rosaline didn’t do it with him”, forgetting Romeo is a minor canonically and he is never shown to be crazed with sex. That and the victimisation and heavy infantilisation of Juliet, who is shown to be more interested in sex with Romeo. Accusing young male leads who are very clearly shown and intended as protagonists/ love interests as “just fuck boys” ignores the original intent of the creator. These interpretations often make others very uncomfortable, especially when they become popular and more mainstream.
On the tarnishing on innocence, for many people there is fun in ruining the innocence of a character or media. This can be fun (mlp infection Aus) but it can turn disturbing very fast. I suppose I am not the right person to speak out about tarnishing innocence of characters as I turn my favourites into monsters (werewolves, vampires, etc) very often. But there is a difference between a werewolf au and saying a young boy was a homocidal predator who drove a thirteen year old to suicide.
Continued:
These dark Aus/theories have been around for a very long time. They are extremely popular for the fact it makes an originally wholesome, tragic, often beloved source dark and unpalatable to the majority. It can be simply broken down to what I call a “Sid” mentality. This is when a person deliberately ruins or destroys something others love often to get a reaction or attention. As we all know stirring up controversy is a big way to get attention on yourself fast. Modern contrarians are often not as intelligent as they think, as it’s not hard to make an “evil fucked up version” of a beloved media. It’s harder to create your own from scratch. In a way these people are just kids who want attention by being edgy.
