Calibans, Mongrelfolk and diability awareness

[Bedrockgames]

The trick is to note that the negative aspects are issues of society, not of the person who is disfigured. The Phantom has been driven to his state not by his disfigurement, but because society won't accept him as he is.

My point is there shouldn't be one approved way this needs to done. What matters is if the character is interesting, compelling, terrifying and how the story can move us. I think we run a real risk of limiting how artists can explore these topics and closing off avenues that are actually quite empathetic but get lost in the 'optics only' lens. I judge the overall message of a work. And even then I am still not going to write off a great novel or movie (I may handle the material differently myself if I approach the same themes but art is messy sometimes)

 

[Bedrockgames]

The Phantom has been driven to his state not by his disfigurement, but because society won't accept him as he is.

What I think is interesting about the Phantom of the Opera, and granted it does depend on which version we are talking about (the character in the novel, in the movies, or in the musical), is there is kind of an open discussion about how much the evil is a product of his own will versus circumstances. Clearly he has been victimized by a society that rejects him. And the question becomes how much blame and responsibility one can put on him for his actions (which include murder). I think why he is compelling is he is still, at least to my mind, clearly a evil, but the disfigurement and anguish of his life, make him sympathetic (without losing the horror element that can be so easily lost when you have overly sympathetic villains)

 

[Umbran]

I think we run a real risk of limiting how artists can explore these topics and closing off avenues that are actually quite empathetic but get lost in the 'optics only' lens.

It isn't an "optics only" lens. Indeed, you miss the entire point is you think of this as "optics".

 

[Bedrockgames]

Ugly = evil is also a problematic trope, normalizing standards of beauty as a basis for "good" or "evil".

I think with movies, it being a visual medium, it just often works though. There is that saying "A face that needs to be punched" when casting for antagonistic characters and I think there is something to that. There is a character named Trumpet in the movie A Moment of Romance who just gets under your skin the whole film, and when he finally faces off with the protagonist in the end, it is so cathartic. A big part of what makes it work is the look of the actor playing him

Let's be honest though most 'ugly' characters in hollywood movies wouldn't be ugly in real life, they just are usually people who aren't as attractive as the other actors or have a striking look.

 

[Bedrockgames]

It isn't an "optics only" lens. Indeed, you miss the entire point is you think of this as "optics".

I think a lot of these cases are optics only. And I don't think I am missing the point. I have been following these discussions for a very long time and it is extremely clear there are lots of people who want to simply jettison tropes wholesale and who aren't interested in even nuanced takes on them

 

[Bedrockgames]

Indeed, you miss the entire point is you think of this as "optics".

I think we just have some fundamental disagreements over media and tropes. Which is fine. We aren't all going to agree. But what troubles me is there is the approach that has gained traction in teh gaming community and in other quarters where you have to agree with a series of arguments about tropes, including which ones are bad and why, and if you don't people will dismiss you in various ways. But this isn't a settled argument. It is an ongoing discussions and people are never going to fully agree on something so subjective

 

[Bedrockgames]

Deleted. Misunderstood posts original context

 

[Bedrockgames]

It's not all about you personally.

The point I was making wasn't that it was about me. It is that people act like purifying media tropes or getting people to think about tropes in deeper ways means they care about disabled people. My point was the plight of the disabled requires more substantive help than taking a critical studies lens to media tropes. That is why I mentioned the difficulty of putting food on the table. It is also one of the reasons I get particularly opinionated about topics like this.

 

[Morrus]

My point was the plight of the disabled requires more substantive help than taking a critical studies lens to media tropes. That is why I mentioned the difficulty of putting food on the table. It is also one of the reasons I get particularly opinionated about topics like this.

It's not an either/or situation. Two things can be true at once.

 

[Bedrockgames]

It's not an either/or situation. Two things can be true at once.

I understand and I believe you believe that is the case here. But I would ask you to also understand that I believe this isn't just a case of two things being true. I think one is false and doing more harm than good (for a variety of reasons). But in particular I think it is giving people a false sense that they have helped a given community when in fact they really haven't (and in many ways they have just made things harder for them)