Written by Otaku Apologist
Let’s face it, the western media market is full of propaganda elements. You sometimes have to really, really search for content that doesn’t have the tropes you hate.
When I’m watching Netflix for example, so many shows are forcing ideas, instead of discussing them. There’s nothing wrong with plurality in media, as fiction is supposed to explore different viewpoints and offer entertainment with educational aspects.
The problems start when a writer is forcing every creative decision to align with their foregone conclusion about how they view the world. This is why too many modern writers disrespect the source material.
As fiction often has villains, conflict, some moral themes, it is natural to find yourself in a debate with yourself on how the story should develop. A good writer will embody the point of view they argue against. You have to empathize with the enemy.
The villain should have ample justification that makes you almost root for the terrorist. Then, you’re actually writing something interesting. Because the villain, if he or she is right, they could win. There is actual tension in the story.
Money Heist (La Casa de Papel) is a Netflix show written from the perspective of the villains. The Spanish bank robbers are humanized, you root for them. And I’m going to spoil this, they win. And in the context of that story, they deserve to win. Even though stealing is wrong, yes, the robbers deserved their loot.
I won’t spoil the story much more, but basically, the series highlights the immorality of the modern central banking system. The robbers don’t steal in the traditional sense, they print the money.
A good writer will tie their hands behind their back, when it comes to making their moral argument. If the story doesn’t naturally lead to the conclusion the writer wants, she needs to let the opposing viewpoint win.
And this is where I see western writers struggle these days. They really fucking want their darlings to win. But if your heroes aren’t earning their victory, it’s just a participation trophy.
This isn’t complicated, my friends. Good fiction is an exploration of ideas, it should not be pushing an agenda. This world isn’t nearly simple enough to force a singular conceptual framework on it. Accept that you might not have all the facts and you could be wrong.
This is my anti-propaganda text, but I’ve also written a pro-propaganda text, where I argue for the merits of propaganda and censorship. Yes, I actually did that. These texts are not in conflict with each other. They are different points of view to the subject. They complement each other. Because apparently, that’s not how people think these days, I have to say this. Opppositional views complement each other. Fuck you.
