On Being Told What to Write

 

So, here we are again entering the horrifying world of Prior Review and Content Control. I swear this topic comes up every so often as a matter of course these days, and nowhere is it more prevalent outside of politics than in the world of genre fandom. This particular incident was pretty extreme, reminding me of a certain Batman movie's devoted, fanatical base about twelve years ago whose ire and outrage resulted in several attacks when I posted a link to my review on the now defunct Yahoo! Message Boards.

This time was different, however. Not only did it take place on Facebook, but it also resulted in a volley of personal and professional attacks. The fanboy Battalion has mutated since those days of simply telling a person they were wrong and sending threatening emails to professional film critics for not liking a movie they adored. 

I wouldn't have even known about this if not for the fact that a Facebook friend had posted her views on James Gunn's "The Suicide Squad" by referring to it as basically a stupid failure. I concurred, posting my blog post/review to show her just how much. You can read that here. I saw a dissenting comment from a guy whose name shall remain undisclosed (I'll refer to him as "Soy" based on a comment another friend made) which I read and immediately forgot all about. However, at some point between me not being online for a while and finally going back on, my Facebook friend had unfriended and blocked this individual for comments she found obnoxious.

Like any juicy scandal-loving 'Murican, I decided to look him up. To my delight, I found that he had reposted the above review and written a disdainful commentary about it. This was so his like-minded, sycophantic followers could start making insulting comments about the review itself, the writing of it, and the various word choices they deemed pretentious. The post was public, so it was easy for me to jump in, first by thanking Soy for the repost and then responding to some of the comments about the review. I found it interesting how Soy kept trying to make it seem as if me seeing negative comments about something I wrote was some sort of turnabout is fair play situation instead of an expected part of being a writer...Almost as if he was some uber-nerd twit who didn't know what the hell he was talking about.

This suspicion was compounded by the fact that he seemed hellbent on telling me what I should have written, and how I should have written it. The review, in his opinion, lacked "nuance," a word he seemed to have just learned sometime this week and couldn't  wait to use over and over until he sounded like a special needs parrot. I began to wonder: What exactly had him so upset and offended? My dislike of the material, the way I presented it, or the fact that I didn't gently take him by the hand and explain every sentence and word choice so he didn't soil his diaper? I suspect it was all three.

In the midst of Soy's kiss-ass geek patrol calling my writing terrible and saying how much it sucked, he kept telling me how I should have written my review. Oh, and he used the word "nuance."

A lot.

I've dealt with guys like this before. They represent both cheeks on the political butt. Extreme righties tend to indulge the behavior more often, but extreme lefties do it, too. The tactic is to lure the person onto their page, insult them and then let their friends attack them from all angles while appearing to be the reasonable one "just trying to make a point." It is a tactic employed by both bully and bullied alike. It hasn't ever worked on me when dealing with people who were much better at it, and it sure as shit didn't work on me this time.

The intellectual lightweights on Soy's page were barely a distraction, but they definitely brought the entertainment value. Yet despite the constant back-and-forth with such gems as "I want to kill your high school English teacher 'cause you suck" and other award-winning zingers of the highest level, Soy was still telling me what and how to write.

Deciding I'd had enough fun with the dingleberries, I focused instead on the post's originator and his repeated insistence that my post lacked...sigh...NUANCE. 

At this point, I'd already had a relatively decent back-and-forth with the one person not necessarily following Soy's orders who had expressed an interest in knowing what my opinion of the movie might be now that the initial hostility had faded. And to be fair, I did give Soy one point: The review was not a *GROAN* nuanced take on the film. It wasn't intended to be; it was written as an extension of my Facebook live posting. Soy even admitted my views on the handling of Viola Davis' character were pretty accurate.

The conversation could have, and probably should have, ended there. We had found a point on which we agreed and did not agree on the rest because Soy had issues with the way it was presented. Fair enough. I've stopped reading many a novel for similar reasons. The difference is, I didn't contact the author and tell them how they should have written the novel. I moved on. It's what grownups do. Soy, on the other hand, chose this as a hill to die on, a cause he could not relinquish. He was, in essence, the fanboy cliché nobody can stand; a know-it-all expert on all things with no foundation in any of them who thinks he has the right to police content. 

I owe no one who isn't paying me for my work anything. The mere fact that he was ignorant of the difference between a journal-like blog post and a professional film review shows that he proceeded from a false assumption. I certainly don't feel obligated to some random shit-starter on social networking to accommodate him with my writing, nor am I fazed by a bunch of followers of this person to feel that I need to alter my writing style. Awards, positive reviews and over thirty published stories speak for themselves. Besides, anyone who gets that angry over someone's opinions about a silly movie has more emotional issues than I am qualified to deal with.

I will thank Soy and his too-cool friends for the blog post material. It's difficult to not write about someone who accuses me of getting upset about a post when the post I am responding to is literally the result of the person getting upset about a post, throwing a tantrum, and trying to gain validation. Pointing out a person's lack of self-awareness doesn't usually go well, and I wound up blocked for my efforts. 

However, in the interest of helping people get past their soft, squishy ego problems, may I submit for their use...

Oh, I almost forgot:

NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE
NUANCE

Idiotic Comments I've had to Correct on Yahoo News Article Comment Sections.

I have no idea why, but I still deign to look at and comment on Yahoo! news articles. It's a fascinating glimpse into the miasmic anus that is the human condition.  Morons feel empowered pre-2006 style to write some of the most hateful, reactionary crap because it is still anonymous. But it isn't just a repository for stupid points of view, it's also where knowledge and facts go to die. It's where I've come to believe the mentality that says facts are the same as opinions was born.

For instance, some windsock level intellect commenting on filmmaker/comic geek Kevin Smith's effusive praise of "Avengers: Endgame" wrote, "Maybe that’s why he doesn’t make movies anymore.. to busy watching other people’s Marvel movies." 

Never mind that he wrote "to busy," he also neglected to do a quick search of Smith's filmography to find out about the movie he just released a few months ago. 

Assumptions reign supreme, however. On another article about the "Star Wars" comic book that one guy took issue with, he wrote, "Millennials writing Star Wars is as bad as the remake movies that BOMB every year."
Never mind that the only Star Wars film that was considered a major disappointment was "Solo." There's also the fact that a quick glance at the comic writer's bio reveals he is 45, hardly a millennial. 

Perhaps my favorite and subjectively speaking the best in recent memory is the brain stem-challenged twit whose criticism of a commentary article amounted to, "So this article's headline..... questions whether the movie flopped.... yet the article comes to the conclusion it clearly did. Gotcha."
To that one, I merely replied, "Yes, that's how analysis...works."

All of this brings me to my good buddy, Phil, possibly the biggest idiot I've encountered since a certain would-be children's book author/podcaster who ran screaming on Facebook several years ago when I caught him using biased sources and manipulating his interviews.  Phil is a real piece of work, a lump of coal in a diamond mine, and he didn't go easy into the stupid night. 

It all started when he misinterpreted someone's point on an article about the upcoming controversial film, "The Hunt." I won't spend time synopsizing the film here, but you can read the article by clicking here.

When I dared mention Phil-baby's lack of comprehension, he replied, " don't care what he said. The movie is inciting violence and hatred. What happens when one of you ANTIFA whackos act out what is on screen? Take your masks off and show your face, don't hide behind masks and hidden meanings in movies."

I replied, "Wait, now I'm a member of ANTIFA because I pointed out your lack of comprehension? Shall I call you a Nazi because you don't listen to logic? Rather not." (This was me still attempting to be reasonable and hopefully show him how he'd allowed his misplaced passion to cause an unjust value judgment.)

He instantly became enlightened and contrite, replying, "well you can't teach stupid, so you are free to babble all you want. If you defend this movie, you are promoting violence and hate."

He was right, of course. My objective attempt to point out that he didn't even understand what the original meant was clearly an incitement of violence. Clarification=ANTIFA, after all. 

I must have really gotten to him, though, because he followed up by writing, "then why are you here? My position is clear, the movie promotes violence. You proceeded to attempt (poorly) to insult me. So what is your goal troll? Either you disagree w my opinion, which means you support the movie, or you are just a worthless troll. Which one?"

At this point, I felt like we'd bonded to the level where I could extend a compassionate voice to him. So, I naturally replied, "Phil Wow, you really are a moron. Just because your position is clear doesn't make it less idiotic. Just means you're clearly stupid and unable to grasp simple concepts. That's why I'm here. Because you're so incredibly unintelligent, it drew my attention like a moth to flame. Movies don't promote violence, they tell stories. Many of them are poorly made, but the purpose of art is to challenge social norms and make us question. You can't do that. I get it. You're a MAGA drone, which is far worse than a troll."

And he lovingly wrote, "ok if that is your view, you are ignorant. This movie isn't "challenging social norms", it is dangerously promoting violence against those w differing political views. This is an extremely dangerous message in these times, and if you support and think its ok, you are just as ridiculous as you sound here. I'm more educated than you could ever dream, so keep up your Yahoo trolling career."

Now, nobody besmirches my Yahoo trolling career. I make good money doing...Wait.

Anyway! I wrote back, "Phil being educated and being intelligent are not always the same thing and it would seem that you are living proof of that. So, you can bandy about your Internet University credentials all you want. The simple fact is you are woefully ignorant of how art works and therefore more dangerous to society than a stupid, gimmicky movie because somebody thought it was a good idea that you be allowed to vote."

I then follered up with, "Also, educated people don't make insane leaps of logic based on anecdotal observations. Ex. Calling someone a member of ANTIFA because they clarify another person's point."

He replied, "ok you are exhausting and really gonna hurt yourself w big words. If you choose to glorify violence as "art", then you can own the consequences of supporting such as ridiculous film."

And my final reply, "Phil I'm sorry, does the poor educated genius struggle with my so-called "big words"? If you're exhausted, go take a nap lil'' fella and the big folks can keep talking."

That was the last thing posted. I feel like I really made a difference. I just know Phil reformed his ways and stopped being a judgmental asshair. He embraced the ability to analyze objectively and is even now spreading what he learned to others of his kind in an attempt to guide humanity into a new era of enlightenment unseen since the lost continent of Atlantis hit a dinosaur and sank into the Louisiana Bayou!