There has been some talk lately that big franchise “superhero” movies are doing damage to Hollywood. Older, more traditional directors have been blaming them for a reduced interest in what they call “true cinema.” Many actors defend the blockbuster genre saying that storytelling is a form of art, and there is no right or wrong in telling a story. (Of course the actors involved are probably being well-compensated for their enthusiasm.) As with most debates, there are two sides from which to choose. If I had to pick in this situation, I’d go with the folks who think superhero movies are not bad for Hollywood -- yet my choosing one side vs the other demonstrates a response humans have been practicing since well before we could mimic famous cinematic one-liners. To illustrate, I give you the final chapter in the life and times of Cavegirl Claire.
Now I am not saying expanded entertainment options are responsible for less tolerant communication in modern society--but they have not helped. It's possible you have never had the sensation of watching a story unfold at the same time that thousands or even millions of other people were, but it's pretty cool. For example, there was an audible, unifying scream the first time Ross kissed Rachel on “Friends” because everyone who was watching it was watching at the same time. And there was another time when the entire floor of my dorm crowded into our tiny lobby to watch the final episode of “Cheers!” together and some of us cried. And if you have experienced this phenomenon, I bet you did not realize that it could be an important experience...but I contend it is. It's exactly what used to connect us from week to week, when all we had were a few movies and just three major networks worth of shows to choose from. I probably sound like the older, traditional Hollywood directors blaming superhero movies for their challenges, but I miss being able to start up conversations about TV shows or movies with my neighbors. I miss old-school entertainment and its simple accessibility. It makes me sad that hardly any of my friends watch the same shows I do, let alone have the same streaming service. While I am happy there are more storytellers getting work and a larger variety of stories being told, I long for the sense of entertainment "oneness." I also feel for Claire, my inner cavedweller, who no longer finds listening to stories as satisfying as it used to be.
Up next: Consumers beware in "Un-natural Selection."
Bergland, C. (2019). Does "Flow" Open our Minds to Believing in "Oneness"? The Athlete's Way, Psychology Today.
Finuras, Paulo (2017). Language diversity and group immunity hypothesis: an evolutionary view. Academic.edu, Online. https://www.academia.edu/86525
Gladwell, M. (2002). The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Little, Brown and Company, New York.
Saad, N. (2019). "Disney Slams Hollywood Legends Shading Marvel." The Los Angeles Times, Online. https://www.latimes.com/entert
Click on "Congirl vs Cavegirl" above to see older posts. Comment below. Thanks!
© 2020 Penny Fie. All rights reserved.
It's been about 10 years since Amir had to end Claire's life, but the influence she has on her tribe lives on in her offspring. Amir is still the tribe's leader, but he and his followers are about to face some major changes. The boy that had been sent to bring Amir to his mother's (Claire's) cave eventually recovered from those events. In fact, Amir has been noticing signs that he would someday make a good leader. The boy is now close to 20 years old and has been demonstrating an ability to keep his cool under the daily pressures of cavedweller life. One of Amir's own sons, who had also been mothered by Claire, has also shown potential as a dependable leader, and Amir is considering which man he might relinquish his control of the tribe to. Amir is no longer fit enough to participate in hunts, and he can see how this change in circumstances is making the tribe uneasy.
Another reason the tribe seems uneasy is because of its success--Amir's tribe now numbers 160 members, and it seems that that number of people allows for anonymity, which in-turn is tempting some individuals to hoard food. This, understandably, is causing unrest between pair-groups. Amir finally decides that both of Claire's sons have earned enough respect (from himself and the other tribe members) so that each could take part of the tribe and travel in different directions; Amir is going to suggest that the tribe permanently split up.
Unbeknownst to Amir, this decision will do more than restore stability to each future tribe. His suggestion will eventually prevent the two tribes from ever interacting again. That is because of the "different is bad" rule for cave-dwelling. While most people assume that this rule applied to groups of prehistoric humans because of violent, competitive tribal tendencies, at least one researcher I fander has suggested that groups of people have historically stayed away from other groups to avoid germs that their bodies were not used to. He has found evidence that competition was not the only motivator for our species to interact predominantly with members of our own tribes; there is a possibility that groups of early humans instinctively did this to avoid contagion.
Now here's the thing about instincts. They are not a conscious choice. So Paleolithic people were not deciding to avoid other tribes because they were afraid of getting sick. It just so happened that tribes who did not intermingle with strangers survived longer and created more offspring who also avoided strangers. So when it came to successful cave-dwelling, you had to choose a side--you were either in a tribe or you were out. Biology is basically a numbers game; not only did the habit of migrating in groups of 100-150 keep tribes healthy, migrating in groups of more than 150 meant we could no longer see the world from the same perspective. A cavedweller's singular purpose of finding and sharing food was harder when there were “too many” perspectives to consider. According to another researcher I fander, this occurrence of many people perceiving or experiencing something at the same time and then reacting to it is known as "co-registration."
So co-registration was important. It was the thing that binded our ancestors into successful tribes. But I think it is still important today, specifically in relation to storytelling. With so many media outlets producing movies and shows, modern people have lost a reference point. Hollywood used to be the touch-stone, but now many people have less in common. Shows on network TV used to provide co-registration as well, and if we watched the same series but disagreed about a character's behavior or a change in plot, our differing reactions were not a big deal because it was “just a show.” But with the recent explosion of entertainment streaming options, we can seek out stories that match our belief systems or tastes, and we have less opportunity to practice friendly debate.
Now I am not saying expanded entertainment options are responsible for less tolerant communication in modern society--but they have not helped. It's possible you have never had the sensation of watching a story unfold at the same time that thousands or even millions of other people were, but it's pretty cool. For example, there was an audible, unifying scream the first time Ross kissed Rachel on “Friends” because everyone who was watching it was watching at the same time. And there was another time when the entire floor of my dorm crowded into our tiny lobby to watch the final episode of “Cheers!” together and some of us cried. And if you have experienced this phenomenon, I bet you did not realize that it could be an important experience...but I contend it is. It's exactly what used to connect us from week to week, when all we had were a few movies and just three major networks worth of shows to choose from. I probably sound like the older, traditional Hollywood directors blaming superhero movies for their challenges, but I miss being able to start up conversations about TV shows or movies with my neighbors. I miss old-school entertainment and its simple accessibility. It makes me sad that hardly any of my friends watch the same shows I do, let alone have the same streaming service. While I am happy there are more storytellers getting work and a larger variety of stories being told, I long for the sense of entertainment "oneness." I also feel for Claire, my inner cavedweller, who no longer finds listening to stories as satisfying as it used to be.
Up next: Consumers beware in "Un-natural Selection."
References
Bergland, C. (2019). Does "Flow" Open our Minds to Believing in "Oneness"? The Athlete's Way, Psychology Today.
Finuras, Paulo (2017). Language diversity and group immunity hypothesis: an evolutionary view. Academic.edu, Online. https://www.academia.edu/86525
Gladwell, M. (2002). The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Little, Brown and Company, New York.
Saad, N. (2019). "Disney Slams Hollywood Legends Shading Marvel." The Los Angeles Times, Online. https://www.latimes.com/entert
Click on "Congirl vs Cavegirl" above to see older posts. Comment below. Thanks!
© 2020 Penny Fie. All rights reserved.
Comments
Post a Comment