Maxie Zeus
02-01-2002, 03:56 PM
This post is directed to everyone who has participated in the various "Why criticize JL?" discussions. There are too many of those threads around, so to reach everyone I'm going to have to add another one.
Why is it important to reach everyone? I'm going to pull rank here and say "Because I'm a mod." That doesn't make my reflections "official policy," but it should give some clue as to how we like things around here.
First, the purpose of this board is to have thoughtful, reasonable, intelligent (and entertaining) discussion of "Justice League" and everything associated with it. Criticism of the show is surely covered by that mission statement. To point out and discuss weaknesses in the show is in no way contrary to the spirit of this board.
This is because discussion is (or should be) educational: Even if you do not agree with another's view, or do not accept his arguments, it is possible to learn from them. I will be forever indebted to Clayface, to Failure, to DarkAngel; to Gpoliceman and The Old Maid and Jim Harvey and The Mad Hatter; and, yes, to JckNapier2 and Heehaw and SimonMoon5 for posts that I've queried and dissected and fought and reconsidered, all because they led me to a better appreciation of BTAS and STAS and BB and Phantom Menace and other things. I not only understand my fellow posters better, I understand certain shows and movies better (and my own opinions better) for arguing about them. I hope I have returned some of the same to them.
What makes this process so hard for people, though, is that it can get personalized. A stupid argument (and there are lots of stupid arguments out there) should never be confused with the person giving it; and to see your argument or opinion attacked does not give you grounds to feel personally assaulted. It is hard to cultivate that kind of distance, and heaven knows I too often fail myself, but it remains a worthy ideal: Discuss and defend with spirit and enthusiasm, yes, but never at the expense of the person you are arguing with. And by the same token, don't be quick to detect in another's post a personal insult.
I say the above mostly in defense of those who have criticized JL: They have a place here, and they have come in for quite a bit of abuse. Matters cannot go on like this. I don't recall a single post in which a JL critic said "Only dumb people like JL" or even implied it. But I've seen too many posts that encourage the critics to shut up or disappear. We will all be poorer for it if they take this "advice."
For the record: Only trolls are unwelcome here, and troll-patrol is a mod responsibility.
Keep the personal stuff out of it. And, on a separate but related note, I think this also goes for references to the show's creative staff. Zinging Bruce Timm does not make for cogent criticism, and tends to make the zinger look petty. You're not hurting him or his collaborators, but you are lowering your esteem in the eyes of others.
Criticism with substance is welcome. And most people know that. That, at any rate, seems to be why the complaint is now turning to the relentless and tedious nature of the "negativity" of the criticism.
I think this complaint makes a good point. We try to read each other's posts for content -- what it says -- but too often attitude -- how it says it -- gets in the way, infecting the atmosphere. Of course, when I say that attitudes need fixing I don't mean personal attitudes (that would be a personal criticism of the kind we should abhor). I mean that the posts themselves ought to be couched in a way that is not so miasmically depressing.
But I'm under no illusions as to the likelihood that this will change. "Cultivate a more sympathetic style," I would say, but I doubt that it is in most of us to do so. Probably it's genetic. We're all fanboys here, and the withering scorn of "Worst episode ever!" is the flip side of "That totally ROCKED!!!!" I mean, an opera diva wailing over her dead lover has nothing on the shrieks a disappointed fanboy can send up.
So the critics (myself included) should take to heart the following warning: You may think you're being wittily devastating when you say nothing good about an episode or the show. But everyone else probably just sees Comic Book Guy waddling around with his crack showing. Hopefully, that image will make us pause before we "race to the Internet" so we can "register our dissatisfaction within minutes."
That doesn't mean every post has to be a mix of positives and negatives. But people pick up on your personality over time, and over the total of your posts. A cold-eyed appraisal of JL may reveal many warts and flaws, but it should also pick out its virtues, and you shouldn't be shy about discussing those virtues when you see them. Even if your final personal judgement is negative, others will show themselves more likely to respect your opinion if you show yourself fair-minded enough to talk about the strengths as well as the weaknesses. You'll have lots of time and opportunity in the months ahead. Go ahead and take advantage of it.
Finally, to both sides: I can give no better example of how honest, loving and unsparing criticism of a Timm-produced show is possible than The Old Maid's essays on "Batman Beyond" in the Pro vs. Con (http://www.toonzone.net/worldsfinest/bbeyond/editorials.html) section of "World's Finest" (the Toon Zone site associated with the WF boards). There you will find intelligent and provocative reflections on that show authored by an essayist whose ardent love of the show is not tarnished by her pitiless criticism, and whose criticism is borne of the deep respect she feels for the show.
Why is it important to reach everyone? I'm going to pull rank here and say "Because I'm a mod." That doesn't make my reflections "official policy," but it should give some clue as to how we like things around here.
First, the purpose of this board is to have thoughtful, reasonable, intelligent (and entertaining) discussion of "Justice League" and everything associated with it. Criticism of the show is surely covered by that mission statement. To point out and discuss weaknesses in the show is in no way contrary to the spirit of this board.
This is because discussion is (or should be) educational: Even if you do not agree with another's view, or do not accept his arguments, it is possible to learn from them. I will be forever indebted to Clayface, to Failure, to DarkAngel; to Gpoliceman and The Old Maid and Jim Harvey and The Mad Hatter; and, yes, to JckNapier2 and Heehaw and SimonMoon5 for posts that I've queried and dissected and fought and reconsidered, all because they led me to a better appreciation of BTAS and STAS and BB and Phantom Menace and other things. I not only understand my fellow posters better, I understand certain shows and movies better (and my own opinions better) for arguing about them. I hope I have returned some of the same to them.
What makes this process so hard for people, though, is that it can get personalized. A stupid argument (and there are lots of stupid arguments out there) should never be confused with the person giving it; and to see your argument or opinion attacked does not give you grounds to feel personally assaulted. It is hard to cultivate that kind of distance, and heaven knows I too often fail myself, but it remains a worthy ideal: Discuss and defend with spirit and enthusiasm, yes, but never at the expense of the person you are arguing with. And by the same token, don't be quick to detect in another's post a personal insult.
I say the above mostly in defense of those who have criticized JL: They have a place here, and they have come in for quite a bit of abuse. Matters cannot go on like this. I don't recall a single post in which a JL critic said "Only dumb people like JL" or even implied it. But I've seen too many posts that encourage the critics to shut up or disappear. We will all be poorer for it if they take this "advice."
For the record: Only trolls are unwelcome here, and troll-patrol is a mod responsibility.
Keep the personal stuff out of it. And, on a separate but related note, I think this also goes for references to the show's creative staff. Zinging Bruce Timm does not make for cogent criticism, and tends to make the zinger look petty. You're not hurting him or his collaborators, but you are lowering your esteem in the eyes of others.
Criticism with substance is welcome. And most people know that. That, at any rate, seems to be why the complaint is now turning to the relentless and tedious nature of the "negativity" of the criticism.
I think this complaint makes a good point. We try to read each other's posts for content -- what it says -- but too often attitude -- how it says it -- gets in the way, infecting the atmosphere. Of course, when I say that attitudes need fixing I don't mean personal attitudes (that would be a personal criticism of the kind we should abhor). I mean that the posts themselves ought to be couched in a way that is not so miasmically depressing.
But I'm under no illusions as to the likelihood that this will change. "Cultivate a more sympathetic style," I would say, but I doubt that it is in most of us to do so. Probably it's genetic. We're all fanboys here, and the withering scorn of "Worst episode ever!" is the flip side of "That totally ROCKED!!!!" I mean, an opera diva wailing over her dead lover has nothing on the shrieks a disappointed fanboy can send up.
So the critics (myself included) should take to heart the following warning: You may think you're being wittily devastating when you say nothing good about an episode or the show. But everyone else probably just sees Comic Book Guy waddling around with his crack showing. Hopefully, that image will make us pause before we "race to the Internet" so we can "register our dissatisfaction within minutes."
That doesn't mean every post has to be a mix of positives and negatives. But people pick up on your personality over time, and over the total of your posts. A cold-eyed appraisal of JL may reveal many warts and flaws, but it should also pick out its virtues, and you shouldn't be shy about discussing those virtues when you see them. Even if your final personal judgement is negative, others will show themselves more likely to respect your opinion if you show yourself fair-minded enough to talk about the strengths as well as the weaknesses. You'll have lots of time and opportunity in the months ahead. Go ahead and take advantage of it.
Finally, to both sides: I can give no better example of how honest, loving and unsparing criticism of a Timm-produced show is possible than The Old Maid's essays on "Batman Beyond" in the Pro vs. Con (http://www.toonzone.net/worldsfinest/bbeyond/editorials.html) section of "World's Finest" (the Toon Zone site associated with the WF boards). There you will find intelligent and provocative reflections on that show authored by an essayist whose ardent love of the show is not tarnished by her pitiless criticism, and whose criticism is borne of the deep respect she feels for the show.