thereās this specific brand of lazy media criticism seen on tumblr and twitter that I like to callĀ āchecklist criticismā. it is called like this because it consists on checking for the presence of superficial signifiers of a Bad Tropeā¢ (as if going through a static checklist) in a given piece of media and declaring said piece of media to be, therefore, bad, without taking into account factors such as context, nuances, the handling, the framing, and, most importantly, what makes this bad trope bad in first place, and if the harm it usually causes is still being perpetrated in this particularly story given the aforementioned contextual variables.
an example of checklist criticism that happens a lot is the common ā[x] this tv show has a female character [x] who dies before the show is over, therefore = Woman In The Refrigeratorā¢, show bad!ā Okay but, how did she died? What were the circumstances around her death? What purpose did it serve in the larger story? Did she die just to advance someone elseās story or she died fulfilling her own arc? Did she had any agency in the way she went or was she a passive victim of circumstance? Was her death dignified or unnecessarily violent? Are there any other important female characters that make it to the end? The Woman In The Refrigeratorā¢ trope is not bad because women dying in fiction is inherently bad ā if no female character were ever allowed to die, even in war or crime or post-apocalypt fiction, thereād be very low stakes for female characters, and low stakes mean very little reason to care about them. The WITR trope is bad because itās about treating female characters as more expendable than male ones, banalizing violence against women in fiction, and cutting short female representation from pieces of fiction ā which, most of the time, is already low. A female character whose death has an actual point in her own storyline, whoās afforded the same weight and dignity as male characterās deaths, and in a story where thereās no shortage of other female characters that survive the end of the story, is not a Fridged Woman, sheās just a female character who dies.
Another example ā and here Iām taking an example from my own identity, so I donāt get accused of stepping on anyoneās feet ā would be something likeĀ āthis book has a [x] latina character, sheās [x] loud and spontaneous, she likes to [x] flirt and sleep around. Spicy Latinaā¢! Book racist!ā Okay, is she a caricature of a loud and spontaneous latina or is she a fully realized human being with a fully rounded personality, including dreams and wishes and opinions and vulnerabilities and agency, who just happens to be spontaneous, like so many people across multiple ethnicities happen to be? Is being flirty and spontaneous her only character traits or does she have more (that may go against other stereotypes about latinas)? Is her flirtness and sexuality framed in a fetishistic way that favors a (white) male gaze or it is framed in a nuanced way that prioritizes her pov and her agency and herĀ pleasure and her happiness? Did the author really give her those traits because theyāre a lazy fuck that couldnāt think of other traits to give his latina character other than spontaneous and flirty or do those characters traits have an actual point in the context of this particular story? Again: keep in mind why bad tropes are bad in first place.
We live in a time where reductive criticisms are an easy source of clout over actually thoughtful and deep analysis that donāt easily lend themselves to the type of short and snappy hot takes for twitok format and Iām exhausted.Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā
stormborns
origamiaround
titsay
ellievsbear
snowghoul
dededos
prguitarman
