sometimes i think people hold malevolent to a higher standard than it should be held to. even ignoring the ‘one man show accomplishment’ reasoning, which i do think is still super valid and the whole thing is automatically pretty damn impressive because of that even if you think the writing is bad, there are a lot of other reasons this show doesn’t deserve the level of analysis, introspection or criticism it gets.
the amount of dissection malevolent goes through is the same as any other media: steven universe, supernatural, my hero academia, magnus archives, old gods of Appalachia, whatever. do you know what all of those things have that malevolent doesn’t? money. teams of people. time. multiple sets of eyes on the script before it goes to publish.
yes, it’s the author’s choice to skip all that and publish anyway, but i wonder if anyone considers that the man is basically putting his first draft of every thought that comes into his head into the public eye without any buffers or walls. that’s insane. fanfic writers are barely willing to do that and they don’t get the stampede malevolent gets.
i’m not saying we should all pity the white guy with a loving family and comfortable financial situation. i’m just wondering if people take into account that he’s giving us his first rough drafts every week, and what we’re all critiquing is not the best he can do. it’s just the best he can do at this time in this format, and a lot of the problems i think we all have with his work could be fixed if he wasn’t committed to the momentum of publishing.
unfortunately that’s the barrier he has: if he stops, he won’t start again, so he has no choice but to keep going even if it’s not his best. He’d rather create mediocre work with plot holes and inconsistencies and faux pas and unconscious biases than give up and frankly, i relate to that.
it’s nuanced, to critique and criticize work that is largely unfinished as it comes out and with the constraints that are put upon this show. but it doesn’t feel like the crit space (or neg space, i guess, although i think that’s a damning way to name yourselves if you’re so victimized by people who love the show despite its flaws) is nuanced. it feels like it’s willingly trying to distance itself from any positivity about the show beyond whatever season is personally most engaging (i’ve seen people say season 1 was the only good one. equally, every season up to 4. i think it’s universally agreed 5+6 were messy, even diehard fans can admit that things were a little off the rails.)
anyway. does anyone have anything engaging to discuss about how this show is uniquely published and written? (and before you all harp on it again, yes, we all know he ‘doesn’t have to do it this way’ but that’s a stupid straw man and you know it. the fact is that’s the concept. that’s how an artist is choosing to perform and respecting that even if you don’t like it is an important part of a dialogue about it. telling me that he doesn’t Have To be a one man show is like telling an oil painter they can just use a camera to capture the same scene and it’ll be more realistic. that’s not the damn point.)
