We Should Be More Critical of Our Criticisms

[Ruin Explorer]

My wife and I are rewatching Buffy and Angel (much of it is brand new for her, actually), and I definitely found myself with some more understanding of and to a degree sympathy for the adult characters than I used to have. Of course,, the last time I did a full rewatch I didn't have a wife and children. They're both still great shows.

So is DS9, btw. Still my favorite Trek.

Yeah I'm definitely more sympathetic to Giles generally but also I'd criticise some of his outbursts more. What I think is striking though is you can see much more easily as someone "his age" how he's often restraining himself and intentionally being nice to Buffy about stuff he could be a huge dick about, and a lot of adults, especially in the 1990s, would have been huge dicks about. Like, at least in S1-3, he's definitely a "good person".

Principal Snyder comes off as even worse than he did somehow! Because he's actively malicious and petty towards Buffy and others! Before he sort of blended in to generalized adult wanker-ish-ness, but as another adult, I can see why Giles and Buffy's mom are so deeply contemptuous of him. He also feels like more of a joke, like, it's easy to believe Giles bullying him re: Buffy, whereas I remember being amazed by that.

Also wow, S1-3 Willow is a saint and these people would never have survived without her.

And Willow and Xander messing around in S3, as a kid, I was SO MAD with them, these TRAITORS, why would they do something so dumb and wrong when they both have cool/hot SOs? But as a middle-aged adult, with distance from being a teen myself, but without forgetting what it was like, whilst it's still obviously wrong, I can now appreciate that they're both hormone-filled teenagers who have long had some feelings for each other, and thus they were horny dumbasses, not horrible people.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Is the market leader ever the one doing the best work?

You know my answer there.


It's "no".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah I'm definitely more sympathetic to Giles generally but also I'd criticise some of his outbursts more. What I think is striking though is you can see much more easily as someone "his age" how he's often restraining himself and intentionally being nice to Buffy about stuff he could be a huge dick about, and a lot of adults, especially in the 1990s, would have been huge dicks about. Like, at least in S1-3, he's definitely a "good person".

Principal Snyder comes off as even worse than he did somehow! Because he's actively malicious and petty towards Buffy and others! Before he sort of blended in to generalized adult wanker-ish-ness, but as another adult, I can see why Giles and Buffy's mom are so deeply contemptuous of him. He also feels like more of a joke, like, it's easy to believe Giles bullying him re: Buffy, whereas I remember being amazed by that.

Also wow, S1-3 Willow is a saint and these people would never have survived without her.

And Willow and Xander messing around in S3, as a kid, I was SO MAD with them, these TRAITORS, why would they do something so dumb and wrong when they both have cool/hot SOs? But as a middle-aged adult, with distance from being a teen myself, but without forgetting what it was like, whilst it's still obviously wrong, I can now appreciate that they're both hormone-filled teenagers who have long had some feelings for each other, and thus they were horny dumbasses, not horrible people.

Yeah, horny dumbasses and emotional overreaction are the principle drivers of drama there, especially in BtVS. The stakes just go crazy because of the fantasy elements.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Is the market leader ever the one doing the best work?

Sometimes, yes. But usually only for a limited period.

As an example I would present World of Warcraft. That was, for a time, from like, mid-2005 to 2009 and then I dunno for sometime in the 2010s, doing the "best work" in the MMORPG space. Not all of the best work (particularly not in the PvP space), but overall the biggest proportion of the best work.

I think if we look at a lot successful videogames, which were, for a time, "the market leader", we'll see they were also doing the "best work" in the sense being used here. It's not universal - but it is pretty common, at least in some genres.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

But the dictionary does not, unless you're inferring a lot more nuance into the distinction.

View attachment 411032

That's pretty much the same thing as explain. In this context they are synonyms.

The part you're missing is "explaining" is not "showing or proving to be right or reasonable" - it's showing the steps you took that made you arrive at your conclusion.

You may ALSO think that your conclusion is a correct one, but sometimes after you go through the reflection process, you find that a step was made in error - a big reason why "explaining", in this context, is a far better thing than "justifying".

You might also review your steps when justifying, but the end goal is to prove yourself correct, whereas explaining, the end goal is the review-journey itself.

It's possible to do both at once, but they are two different things. There's crossover, which is why you have them jumbled, but the distinction is very important.

 

[Reynard]

The part you're missing is "explaining" is not "showing or proving to be right or reasonable" - it's showing the steps you took that made you arrive at your conclusion.

You may ALSO think that your conclusion is a correct one, but sometimes after you go through the reflection process, you find that a step was made in error - a big reason why "explaining", in this context, is a far better thing than "justifying".

You might also review your steps when justifying, but the end goal is to prove yourself correct, whereas explaining, the end goal is the review-journey itself.

It's possible to do both at once, but they are two different things. There's crossover, which is why you have them jumbled, but the distinction is very important.

Onew of the surest ways to test whether you actually know something or not is to try to explain it in detail.

This goes for our own thinking as much as it goes for changing a tire or whatever.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Is the market leader ever the one doing the best work?

Define "best." Because at some point, we are getting into "Scorsese territory."

Remember that whole thing? When Martin Scorsese criticized superhero movies (the market leader) as not being real cinema? Or to use an example from a recent thread here (about AI, because of course it was) when someone complained that who cares if AI is making music, because all the pop music since the '90s was just ... I forget the turn of phrase, but it wasn't a compliment.

Or think about that guy ... the one who's like, "Yeah, I liked that band before everyone else did. Now? Their music sucks."

The thing about being the market leader is that you have to appeal to mass audience. And have you met other people? They suck. They don't like the same things you do. But the market leader has to appeal to them as well.

Companies that aren't market leaders can choose to appeal to niche audiences. Or they can try to innovate and give the audience something that they didn't know that they wanted. But if those companies get too successful, guess what? They become the market leader, and are stuck having to appeal to a broad base.

But I think it is always important to understand that "best" isn't an objective measure. What is best for you may not be best for person sitting next to you on the subway rocking a Kid Rock t-shirt and complaining about that guy who never called her back.

You just never know!

 

[Desdichado]

The part you're missing is "explaining" is not "showing or proving to be right or reasonable" - it's showing the steps you took that made you arrive at your conclusion.

You may ALSO think that your conclusion is a correct one, but sometimes after you go through the reflection process, you find that a step was made in error - a big reason why "explaining", in this context, is a far better thing than "justifying".

You might also review your steps when justifying, but the end goal is to prove yourself correct, whereas explaining, the end goal is the review-journey itself.

It's possible to do both at once, but they are two different things. There's crossover, which is why you have them jumbled, but the distinction is very important.

I don't have them jumbled. I've been speaking English for over 50 years. I know what the definitions of justify and explain are. The nuanced distinction being made here doesn't matter in context.

 

[Reynard]

But if those companies get too successful, guess what? They become the market leader, and are stuck having to appeal to a broad base.

I feel like this is actually about whether the company remains independent or not. Or, to put it more directly, companies that have to serve stockholders are forced to "appeal to a broad base." And that rarely means innovation and experimentation.

 

[payn]

How did the 280 character limit that @payn mentioned come about?

Because it was more than 140 characters.