Recently Tor.com, one of the major online genre presences,
decided to add its piece to the gameboard by introducing a podcast of their
own. Hedging their bets on the logo, they titled the podcast Rocket Talk,
and produced a first episode on the Lego
movie. The host Justin
Landon, with guests Bradley Beaulieu (novelist and podcaster himself) and Emily
Asher-Perrin (Tor columnist and re-reader), together made an honest effort to
analyze the film and expressed their personal opinions in sunny fashion but
were unable to achieve the heights of critical discourse Landon obviously hoped
the show to be.
The sum essentially
a trading back and forth of subjective estimation, rarely did the conversation on
Rocket Talk truly flesh out the themes on the agenda in functionally objective
fashion. In discussing the hero’s
journey, Landon quoted Joseph Campbell.
But it was obvious from the discussion which followed none were
completely comfortable with the concept, the cursory reading not enough to
induce relevant discussion that interrogated the film in any significant
fashion. It goes without saying that
before a person can talk about whether or not material subverts an idea is to
first understand how the idea functions in non-subverted form. Based on the bandying of personal opinion
that the topic reverted to, none were fully knowledgeable. But this should be no surprise: the untutored
application of a literary theory rarely results in perspectives that fully penetrate
the material at hand; rather they limply cling.
Political
correctness an attack in all forms of media these days, the conversation on
gender representation proved to be better grounded ideologically. While it was obvious neither Landon or
Beaulieu ever participated in gender studies (they offered predominantly
conjecture), Asher-Perrin was able to make a couple of relatively astute
observations singular to the film. But
with time seemingly an issue and opinion just beginning to scratch the surface,
the discussion quickly shifted gears to fantasy intrusions on the real-world
and predictions regarding the film’s future public perception. The former again lacking the critical rigor necessary
to develop a sophisticated discussion, the latter proved more comfortable
territory, and the resulting conversation was the most informed of the
cast. Each of the three was able to draw
upon their genre reading experiences to offer an opinion supported by examples
that fit the topic.
By contrast, The Coode Street Podcast and The Writer and the Critic offer
discourse that directly and indirectly applies critical techniques and
analytical rigor (as well as knowledge of the field beyond mainstream genre). Rocket
Talk, like political segments on Fox or NBC, offered conversation that gave the
appearance of being in depth and on point, but upon closer examination reveals itself
to be simply a glossing over, the actual content not very robust. Each participant on the podcast dabbled in criticism
using Important Key Words (‘meta’, ‘subvert’, ‘hero’s journey’, ‘gender’, etc.),
but soon enough moved to the next item once they’d been spoken, the subject
matter getting off lightly despite having been brought in for deep—as Landon
states—interrogation.
Gary, Jonathan, and
their guests on Coode and Ian, Kathryn, and the authors they discuss on The W
& C have informed ideas and offer opinions rooted in a deeper knowledge of
the field at large, as well as subjects both cultural and literary. Thus, I would strongly urge Landon to invite such
guests if he truly desires intelligent discourse, or, vice versa, tailor the
agenda to the guests. This is no sleight
to the three, only it was obvious they lacked the analytical tools and underlying
conceptual knowledge needed to broach the subjects with the depth Landon intended,
and as a result were not fully in their element.
And lastly, were Landon
to shore up his own knowledge of literary and cultural theory through offline learning
and practical application, the podcast would only improve, and perhaps might
meet his expectations. By gaining a
deeper understanding of the theories to be discussed, such quotes as “I’m going to get really deep into this,
because that’s what I do.” and “This
is a smart, literary podcast.” will not be so easily offset by “It’s like this totally scary thing, that
like, he has to accept, uhh, and like…” and “A friend of mine who I’m friends with...”. The intention can be
lauded, but the ability to apply the tools of criticism comes from years of
reading, practice, and articulation, not through re-reading mediocre genre for
Tor (Abercrombie’s First Law trilogy)
or finding a wikiquote that summarizes the hero’s journey.
Kudos to the grand
intentions of Rocket Talk, I just hope someday the grasp attains the
reach. With casts such as the SF Squeecast, Adventures in Sci Fi
Publishing, Sword & Laser, etc.
so popular, the genre could certainly do with a great deal more high-brow
discussion. And the material is there, just waiting to be discussed…
No comments:
Post a Comment