This trope isn't just bad for retcon reasons. It deflates the dramatic tension of the story. Shylock is a sympathetic and complex antagonist, but his antagonism is brutal and intransigent. Any attempt to nerf that evil is going to rob us of the pucker-inducing tension culminating in that magnificent courtroom scene.
That's "why is frozen."
I think the instinct to de-villify villains comes from the spasming consciences of increasingly degenerate writers. This was certainly the case with William Blake (although he managed to do it without becoming a lousy writer, somehow). I think modern writers experience inner shame because they often live shameful lifestyles, and seek to soothe their consciences by rationalizing away society's moral instincts.
Like the fat positivity movement fighting fat-shaming, this is the evil positivity movement fighting evil-shaming.
Rather than turning to Christ in repentance, asking their evil to be swallowed up in His atonement, they deny sin altogether, and so imagine they need to repentance.
Good points. Much of this I think may follow on from the impulse to make *oneself* the still point of the turning world so you can define your evil as good. Which of course sets everything else spinning around you—if my fat is healthy then eventually other people’s actual healthy must become toxic. Explains why revision and rewrite is endemic to the project.
Totally agree. Another example of this phenomenon: Rebecca's Tale by Sally Beauman, a revisionist version of one of the most popular novels of all time, Daphne du Maurier's Rebecca. One of the ways our previously-Christian culture has become ensnared is through the manipulation of empathy: If we just understood and felt the feelings of deviants and other insistent sinners, we would not condemn them but see them as victims and feel sympathy for them. Foreseen in various places in the book of Deuteronomy, where God's people are told to "show no pity" on the idolators who were delivered into their hands because they would ensnare their hearts. And ensnare they did.
The modern idea of "the marginalized" definitely encompasses ugliness and mental illness, while excluding traditional moral judgments. Given this, it is not surprising that orcs would be made sympathetic. There's an interesting thread on Twitter by James Palmer about Rings of Power. He writes, "The primary problem with the RINGS OF POWER is that it's bad - badly written, badly cast, badly staged. But the secondary problem is that the creators have no understanding of what Tolkien was trying to do, and nothing to say themselves."
I would love it if you gave a similar level of scrutiny and analysis to the thematic differences between Lord of the Rings and the postmodern nihilism of Game of Thrones, and what that transition says about us culturally.
This is a great essay. Just got a subscription from me.
As an aside: I can’t freaking stand Frozen. Never could. We have this silly debate every winter when my family gets together, and I’m the lousy, retched “here’s the only guy in the world who doesn’t like Frozen” dude.
Nothing says “Let It Go!” like barricading oneself in a remote ice castle and bearing a grudge against humanity for eternity.
So glad you’re here! Friend was pointing out to me that in context the song makes a little more sense. But I think overall the movie’s logic is still kind of a mess
You're not the only guy in the world who doesn't like Frozen. My author wife comes up with a new way to fix Frozen at least three times a year because it's such a dumpster fire
This trope isn't just bad for retcon reasons. It deflates the dramatic tension of the story. Shylock is a sympathetic and complex antagonist, but his antagonism is brutal and intransigent. Any attempt to nerf that evil is going to rob us of the pucker-inducing tension culminating in that magnificent courtroom scene.
That's "why is frozen."
I think the instinct to de-villify villains comes from the spasming consciences of increasingly degenerate writers. This was certainly the case with William Blake (although he managed to do it without becoming a lousy writer, somehow). I think modern writers experience inner shame because they often live shameful lifestyles, and seek to soothe their consciences by rationalizing away society's moral instincts.
Like the fat positivity movement fighting fat-shaming, this is the evil positivity movement fighting evil-shaming.
Rather than turning to Christ in repentance, asking their evil to be swallowed up in His atonement, they deny sin altogether, and so imagine they need to repentance.
Good points. Much of this I think may follow on from the impulse to make *oneself* the still point of the turning world so you can define your evil as good. Which of course sets everything else spinning around you—if my fat is healthy then eventually other people’s actual healthy must become toxic. Explains why revision and rewrite is endemic to the project.
Totally agree. Another example of this phenomenon: Rebecca's Tale by Sally Beauman, a revisionist version of one of the most popular novels of all time, Daphne du Maurier's Rebecca. One of the ways our previously-Christian culture has become ensnared is through the manipulation of empathy: If we just understood and felt the feelings of deviants and other insistent sinners, we would not condemn them but see them as victims and feel sympathy for them. Foreseen in various places in the book of Deuteronomy, where God's people are told to "show no pity" on the idolators who were delivered into their hands because they would ensnare their hearts. And ensnare they did.
Mmm, to empathize is different than to identify—a distinction often lost, back to antiquity as you say!
The modern idea of "the marginalized" definitely encompasses ugliness and mental illness, while excluding traditional moral judgments. Given this, it is not surprising that orcs would be made sympathetic. There's an interesting thread on Twitter by James Palmer about Rings of Power. He writes, "The primary problem with the RINGS OF POWER is that it's bad - badly written, badly cast, badly staged. But the secondary problem is that the creators have no understanding of what Tolkien was trying to do, and nothing to say themselves."
https://x.com/BeijingPalmer/status/1829497128504156418
But they do have something to say: "marginalized good." The orcs in ROP flow naturally from that.
Manent has a whole thing about how being tolerant of everything naturally evolves into elevating the weird, the ugly, the obscene
I would love it if you gave a similar level of scrutiny and analysis to the thematic differences between Lord of the Rings and the postmodern nihilism of Game of Thrones, and what that transition says about us culturally.
I think I talked a little about this on my podcast somewhere but I can’t remember where lol
I bought an annual subscription to this substack just to tell you what a great essay this is.
Dang, well, welcome! Hope you stick around :)
This is a great essay. Just got a subscription from me.
As an aside: I can’t freaking stand Frozen. Never could. We have this silly debate every winter when my family gets together, and I’m the lousy, retched “here’s the only guy in the world who doesn’t like Frozen” dude.
Nothing says “Let It Go!” like barricading oneself in a remote ice castle and bearing a grudge against humanity for eternity.
So glad you’re here! Friend was pointing out to me that in context the song makes a little more sense. But I think overall the movie’s logic is still kind of a mess
You're not the only guy in the world who doesn't like Frozen. My author wife comes up with a new way to fix Frozen at least three times a year because it's such a dumpster fire
As someone who is not a LOTR's follower, but did enjoy Dexter, I think I now understand my fascination with the serial-killer blood spatter analyst.
I like the first season of that show a lot. It’s smarter and subtler than many subsequent shows from the “peak anti-hero” era
Just finished reading East of Eden…maybe I should try my hand at making Cathy/Kate just a “misunderstood young lady”. 🤢