This piece argues that entertainment media produces nothing that can invoke change or engage the viewer to learn or change with the film as they watch. The author of this piece believes that there is no “feedback” between the viewer and the entertainment media business and so it is useless and only causes mankind to stagnate and flounder. Hence the entropy and negentropy argument.
As for whether or not his critique holds true today, I would have to give a resounding no. I don’t even think it held true when this was written. But moving back to the present, the whole purpose of Youtube and Facebook is the ability to express yourself freely, and generally with little, to no censorship at all. The critique really falls apart because his whole point is that entertainment media does not obtain the path of negentropy, but only entropy. Sure some sites or forms of media will dissipate and became polluted or corrupted by the industry, just as is his argument with the entropy concept. But there will always be a fresh format or site that is innovative and just waiting for a chance to be discovered, and will take the place of that which is no longer engaging. His critique is flawed in that it looks at the subject in individual cases and not the entertainment media as a whole. As a whole it has always been moving forward and bringing new items to the table.
I believe this author to be someone who tried to make it in the industry but could not make it as an artist and so then decided to try and bring it all down by taking scientific statements out of context and illogically placing them in an essay that is more self-depreciating in itself, than humankind and its’ entertainment.
No comments:
Post a Comment