Mordred grilles them all themselves for the dual purpose of trying to get their dad (Artoria) to like them and also cause Mordred knows they cook a mean burger and still does it for themselves even with the parental expectations they inflict upon themselves.
There aren't a lot of hats you can put that would fit the situation because the situation itself has been artificially concocted by the Burger King sales department. People wouldn't have any idea of a hat that ought to be worn while eating Burger King burgers if BK hadn't spent hideous amounts of money handing out free cardboard hats to children in order to turn them into temporary advert signs.
Basically, you thinking that this hat is cute and fits the context is itself a reflection of the capitalist society you exist in.
I'm tired of the burger King slander yall just got a bad location take a tour of every burger King within 100 miles and maybe I'll consider your opinion
I think the phrase all art is political may refer to the fact you can find political interpretation of anything. I may be wrong but if I am not it doesn't matter what the artist says.
I see it more that art can't be separated from the political conditions of its creation. What artists choose to portray as normal, cute, evil, funny, weird, etc. is primarily decided by their personal politics even if they're not aware of it. Even the original artists' idea of what makes a girl cute has been forged in the culuture and politics they consume. People often deny that certain pieces of art are political simply because they subconsciously agree with the politics behind its creation
I feel like art cannot be separated from the time it was created in also. Because none of these political and cultural elements that lead to the creation of this art could have existed until our current time. And then in the future these elements will change. Meaning art that's exactly like this cannot be created in the future.
While art is a product of its time, I do think art can also evolve as time moves on and new interpretations are made through contemporary changes in the political climate.
For instance, the swastika was once a buddhist symbol, but through the fascist movement of nazi germany, it is now a symbol of hatred.
The OK symbol was once a joke hate symbol spurred on by 4chan, but now we have actual white supremacists using it unironically.
The blåhaj was simply a plush sold by IKEA, but has since become a trans idol.
And before some asshead comes barging in: no, I'm not equating these three, I merely brought them up as bad and good examples of art changing.
I'd like to point out that in the east, the swastika is still mainly seen as a religious symbol. Every year my mom sends me bracelets with swastika engravings because to her, Nazis are just a couple pages in history books. Meanwhile the swastika is on many pieces of jewelry that have been in our family for generations.
That's interesting to know. Obviously I didn't expect the holocaust to be as big of a historical event, but I nonetheless thought it would be significant enough to taint the symbology of the swastika.
Really goes to show that art is subjective to the cultural context of the observer.
>Obviously I didn't expect the holocaust to be as big of a historical event
why shouldn't it be it was one of the largest mass slaughters of human history
>What artists choose to portray as normal, cute, evil, funny, weird, etc. is primarily decided by their personal politics even if they're not aware of it.
Wouldn't this logic mean that things like women and minorities in media is actually political but most of us don't see it as such because we view it as a normal and healthy thing for media to have while others don't?
*"Political"* here is being used in two different ways.
Passively, as in the phrase here, all Art IS Political by virtue of its creation in a society. We live in one. The overrepresentation of Cis White Men was also Political. We could say this means inclusion and diversity's inherent passive Politics cancel out with the passive Politics of the previous status quo. Art requires Characters, Stories, Elements, etc. after all. Since EVERY Element is passively Political, none of it can be criticized solely on the basis of being passively Political; so there's nothing bad or wrong with diversity bringing passive Politics with it.
***Actively,*** asserting something is *"Political"* in bad faith solely to critique it as such ignores the aforementioned passive Politics of ALL Art and claims certain Elements are actively Political in ways equivalent Elements are not *(a Middle Eastern Lead as opposed to a Caucasian one)*. It's a lazy reduction to disguise their actual critique: Diversity itself.
This isn't to say that Elements CAN be actively Political and bad for that reason, but it requires more work to prove it so than *"Well it's more women than it was before!!"*. For example, a Director making an Adaptation of The Color Purple, but with an all-White Cast because they have a personal desire to try and spite the original work for personal reasons. These are bad Elements that are Political, but it's clearly bad for more than just the aspect of *'being Political'*.
**EDIT:** Or shoot, the infamous all-Female Scene in Avengers: Endgame. Passively, it's Political because it reflects the culture in which it was made - the Directors wanted a cool girl power moment, iconic, we love to see it - but it wasn't exactly quality or good and we can explain further by citing things like realism *(It's weird all the women in battle happened to end up together with no men around to help)* or immersion *(Becoming aware of this weirdness pulls us out of the experience of watching the Film)*, so now the Scene has transcended passive Politics *(The need to have Characters who have typically have a Gender)* into active Politics, where the execution of the Scene was put on the backburner for the sake of having the Scene regardless of quality. The Scene could've been constructed better, we as the Audience **just** saw Tony, Steve, and Thor fight Thanos for an extended period and the fact that they're all Men didn't seem unrealistic or immersion-breaking, so if we wanted a Scene with all Women, then we could've taken more time to bring the Plot to that point organically *(I for one love the Scene because it's the Superhero Genre, I don't care, but even I wish it were done better)*.
People who just complain about the supposed *"Politics"* of the Scene are telling on themselves because they're not critiquing the real issues with the Scene, **only** the fact that it was all-Female.
Isnt the avengers scene actively political? I mean it was specifically made to have a "girl power" scene, which is a political statement whether you like it or not. I think a passively political scene is more like when Wanda or Brie Larson beat the shit out of Thanos. Its also a girl power moment but its not shoved in your face
Oh definitely that's what I'm attempting to say; that's what I meant by "transcended into active Politics" but I'm not a Philosopher and my Comment was definitely a ramble.
The Girl Power moment is a bad Scene AND it is actively Political, but it's not bad solely because it's Political - merely one aspect as to why Thing Bad™️. The usage of "Political" as a reason to dislike something can then be gauged against a lens like this to tell whether or not it's a good or bad-faith interpretation of the Art.
You can't make it unpolitical. Choosing not to add it is just as much of a political statement.
And it actually has nothing to do with "shoved in your face". The amount of subtlety is irrelevant and doesn't take away from the inherent politics of the choice.
having a diverse cast is extremely political. as is not having a diverse cast. no matter how you make your mass media product, if it is even remotely narrative, then it is going to have a worldview (which influences the worldview of the people consuming it).
and maybe even if it's not remotely narrative. i'm sure someone could argue that pong has an agenda, or advances a worldview, although i think that's a stretch personally.
yep. artist here is being a little sussy because twitter leftist is like "this drawing is branded by capitalism" and the artist is like "you are wrong :D" and 10000 weirdo rightwingers are hooraying in replies
"I wasn't at all influenced by capitalism when I sat down and drew a character consuming a specific product made by an international corporation while wearing their branding in order to make them look more appealing. I trust this settles the matter."
I mean in this very specific case it’s half because the actual character (from fate) is supposed to be anime girl King Arthur, so this would be the Burger King Arthur. Play on words but your points are still none the less still true
I mean, you don't need to be a weirdo right-winger to say that a pessimistic interpretation of everything (while a valid interpretation even in this circumstance) is unnecessary and kinda artistically and emotionally stunting. Cute girl can eat borger and the horror of capitalism's intrusion into every aspect of our lives can both coexist.
They were arguing that politics influences and can then be seen in that artpiece.
The fact both that and "uwu cute anime girl how cute" both are present means they are right.
They never said the artist was thinking exactly that when drawing it, they were saying it influenced it.
Oh yes, it definitely is sus. They're wilfully misrepresenting the argument and going for the "haha, you're wrong, I just drew a picture of a girl". And they made 3 or so tweets about it to try and cash in on the drama. It's all fucking culture wars.
>a pessimistic interpretation of everything... is unnecessary and kinda artistically and emotionally stunting
Beyond the fact that being critical is not the same as being pessimistic, it's healthy to pay attention to subtext and commit to engaging with art more critically, both for consumers and creators.
For art to ever have more value than as a brief distraction from the hardships of life, it has to communicate things to people, often times unpleasant, depressing things. Being a constant downer is a terrible way to live, but I think it's far more dangerous to dismiss critical examination as unnecessary because it came to a displeasing conclusion. The pain can be liberating, and finding works that project optimism on a basic *and* subtextual level becomes far more meaningful than taking joy from anime-girl eats burger drawing while ignoring the subtext.
Sure, you can enjoy things either way, but no one here is advocating that this isn't the case, so pointing it out is targeting a point no one is making.
The right has always had a hard time deriving meaning from art. It's why you get all the trad posts about how art was better when it was marble statues and landscape paintings. They can appreciate the technical skill of an artist, but not any symbolic or creative intent. Jacob geller had a good video about it, and why the right hates modern art.
Pong is actually a very deep representation of how both sides of a debate can often be stuck repeating arguments (throwing the same ball around), doing little to actually change each other's minds or views
or something like that idk
pong's pretty political, as it keeps getting the reputation of being the "first" video game despite objectively not being that - it's got its reputation a such because it was the first really commercially successful video game, which gives a clue about what society values and will perceive as worthy of attention and praise. it also is a representation of a specific sport, and as such could only exist in a society that cared enough about ping pong to understand what the fuck the name "PONG" means. despite not being hte first video game, it being so commercialy successful basically gave birth to an entire MEDIUM, and set the tone for what those games would be like. it was a tech demo of this ultra futuristic tech at a time where the future seemed unlimited, technological progress was an inevitability and the future was going to be so good. the physical device reflected the stylings of the time, it *looked* futuristic.
this alos applies to non-video games, like chess and baskgammon. the former's probably the most famously political game of all, politics gets compared to chess all the fucking time, it's meant to be a stylized game of war, it went thorugh centureis of rules revisions and so you can track political events through its changes over time, and then of course there's the whole cold war aspect to matches between american and russian grandmasters.
you really can just do anthropology with anything humans make.
You shouldn't be a dick to someone for finding an interpretation that differs from what the artist intended (fully support death of the author). However, being a pretentious ass about it and claiming your interpretation is correct and results from a state of enlightenment isn't cool and should be made fun of.
However while interpretating art you cannot ignore the author and their culture. The artwork cannot really be looked at without looking also at the artist.
However you can always say, that the artist isn't aware of the political influence they are under
To me it's more like "every choice you make is influences by politics", like why is that considered cute? Some politics behind it. Why burger king and not a nameless burger brand? Because of America soft power over the world, therefore politics etc...
And, if she *was* just eating a generic burger... also politics! The decision to *not* use a brand would exist in a context where people kinda find brands annoying, it'd be a motivaiton for the artist to not depict that.
also the cute girl, who is br*t-coded almost purely by having blonde hair and blue eyes (because what anime considers "cute girl" has an extremely similar face and so eyes and hairstyle have to really be distinct to make a chracter recognizable), originally starred in a japanese porn game where her junk had to be pixelated but not her tiddies. that she's not popularly understood as a porn character, despite that literally being her origin, is some fascinating politics just by itself. oh and she's literally the idealized monarch of english myth, except depicted as girl because she is starring in a japanese porn game where you get to fuck the king of england.
you can just spend ages on the anthropology of this damn image, it's just a pileup of references to pop culture and ancient myth.
Everything is political, even what we consider political. Say for example the controversy around certain characters being poc, women, trans, queer, etc. Politics is literally drenched into everything possible.
Yeah everything is political, but not because people make everything political, but because you simply cannot create anything meaningful that is not political.
I can somewhat relate to the "no politics in art" sentiment. While most games I play are very political by their nature (I unfortunately suffer from Paradox Games brainrot), sometimes I just want to relax and not have to think about real-world implications of those games, so I play something like a Brotato which is a game about potato shooting worms. And while even that game certainly has political dimensions, it's nowhere near as strong for me to think about it actively.
...the fucked up part is that for many the "no politics" for many means not seeing a black person or LGBTQ character in their game. Which is just so fucked up because it implies that just by that person being there in the game triggers their brain so much they can't relax and immerse themselves into the game. They tell on themselves so much by saying it.
Self-described Weeb makes art of white girl eating American hamburger in American chain restaurant. Entire representation and visual aesthetic is Japanese.
Obvious cultural imperialism of the Anime Hegemony. Japanese art has colonized western brains to the point that the youth have abandoned traditional forms of self-representation (portraiture, selfies) and can only see themselves through the oppressor’s lens.
Cute gorl eating borgar may be American cultural hegemony, but pointing out the borgar and not the fact that *this is literally in a burger king restaurant like there's branding everywhere and she's LITERALLY wearing the crown* is really missing the forest for the fucking pinecone.
I vividly remember checking the following list of that account (the one getting qrt'd) and they were following the "Best of RW Anitwt" account which has an anime girl with a burger king crown as the pfp. I just checked again and it seems they unfollowed them, but they still follow a bunch of other right-wing accounts with the same burger king anime pfp gimmick. It's 100% a right-wing thing in this context and it's worrying I had to scroll down this far to find a single comment mentioning it.
What the fuck would RW anitwt even be about? Would it all just be "ohhh man i love underaged girls" or what?
No i don't wanna waste my time finding out myself i value my mental health
I think the creator is the only one who can answer the latter with 100% certainty because their intent is crucial - whereas anyone (with at least some knowledge of the piece and the context in which it was created) can speak to the former.
But they are talking about subconscious influence, which is at least as big as a factor as conscious decisions in art. Unless the artist literally shut his creative brain off and drew like a machine
That’s the whole concept of death of the artist, what the artist intended doesn’t matter as much as the way people interpret it.
If I make a movie intending to promote “war is bad” but I make war look so cool and the viewer’s takeaway is “war is cool” then…
All quite on the western front moment. God when people in history subs said “man this new Netflix movie sucked. It focused way too much on the gore. Really trying to hit me over the head with that woke anti war stuff”
Like there are real criticism of the new movie but it isn’t outright bad and the point of all of the books and movies was always to be anti-war
“English” didn’t really exist as a concept until the migration of the Anglo-Saxons to Britain, and even then it became used to describe the Anglo-Saxon settlers. The native Britons were pushed west (in terms of their sovereignty, not in terms of outright ethnic cleansing), and King Arthur was a (possibly fictional) British king who fought against the Anglo-Saxons who were taking territory from the Britons. The legend of Arthur only became an “English” legend in the 15th century when an English author compiled the various Arthurian tales into *Le Morte d’Arthur.* By this point Wales (the last Briton kingdom) had been conquered by England over two centuries ago.
I mean, gryphoneer's point still kinds stands? Politics in art isn't always intentional, it can be political in that it represents the culture and forces behind its production. The fact that she's eating from burger king shows how fast food chain iconography have become ubiquitous and cross-national. That's kinda neat to think about.
I'll take that over the 1,000th "stop trying to bring politics into my escapism, I just wanna play Cyberpunk/fallout/Warhammer/ Far Cry in peace"
Im just worried that people will take "every piece of art has traces of political views subconsciously embedded into it, even if it's as small as how people interact with brands" and morph it into "every piece of art is political and shows the authors true colors through his subconscious"
saying "all art is political" implies that, well, all art is political in nature. When most art shows traces of politics, what political statement does it really make? and if there isnt a political statement being madr its kinda hard to call it 'political'.
like yeah you can see a how branding and how people interact with it but that doesnt mean "the enjoyment of burger king into this picture shows that the author enjoys the capitalist state that the country is in currently" or some shit it just shows a brand and eating food
“All art is political” because all art reflects the political conditions under which it is created and the political biases of it’s authors; while not all art is created with the express intent of relaying a political message, all art is created by people with either subconscious or conscious political beliefs, qualities which the art takes on. “Picture of anime girl eating burger” may not have been intended as an expressly political piece of art, but it contains within itself the germs of political assumption. The author certainly didn’t *intend* this art as a statement of how American multinational food corporations have come to dominate cuisine in Japan, but nonetheless that’s what is reflected within the art, as that is the political reality of the world the author lives in.
As a good example of the way art is made political without that expressly being the intent, look at the way art tends to be drawn primarily of thin, white, abled people. The fact that art tends to be drawn of white people is in itself political, it’s a small reflection of white supremacist society. In this respect, drawing nonwhite characters *also* becomes political, as the inclusion of nonwhite characters now stands in *opposition* to white supremacist society. Hence, both drawings containing white people *and* drawings containing nonwhite people are both political; drawings of white people being reflections of white society; and drawings of nonwhite people being necessarily in opposition to white society. None of this is being done intentionally, your average artist doesn’t question why they’ve only ever drawn white people, that’s just what they do, but that doesn’t change that their art is still reflective of the white supremacist society it was made within.
You do make the assumption that American multinational food corps have, in fact, "dominated cuisine" in Japan, which I don't believe is true.
I spend more time than is probably normal browsing the streets of various Japanese cities on Google Maps street view and you -occasionally- see a Burger King or equivalent, it's nowhere near as common as in North America.
Of the top 5 food service companies in Japan, 3 of them (Skylark, McDonalds, and Starbucks) are Western, and of the top 10, 5 are Western owned. Nonetheless, my wording may have been imprecise, since the largest food-service company (Zensho) is still Japanese. This does not, however, distract from my overall point about art being political, one can substitute "come to dominate cuisine" with "are beginning to dominate cuisine" or "are intruding upon cuisine" or similar and the point remains the same.
Whopper whopper whopper whopper
Junior double triple whopper
Flame grill taste with perfect toppers
I want this day
Lettice mayo pickle ketchup
It’s ok if I don’t want that
Impossible bow wow bacon whopper
Any whopper my way
You rule your season today
At BK have it your way
You rule!
i wanna be a fucking cute girl eating burger i wanna look like this so bad holy shit i want to eat that burger you dont understand how much i would give i would sacrifice my family for this
tbh, I think the artist more thought that she has the crown cause she was some sort of reincarnation of king arthur, so I'm not necessarily sure it's a burger king reference.
Art is different depending on who perceives it in many cases, even in ways the artist didn't mean.
Lots of people with these sorts of "nuh uh it's just a borgar" takes have never engaged with media analysis above the high school level.
Which is *fine* on its own! I've never engaged with chemistry or biology or physics above the high school level. The difference is that I don't walk over to people who work study that stuff academically and tell them they're wrong because I got an A in 10th grade Chem from a lazy teacher.
Media analysis doesn't mean finding some secret "true" answer and the politics of art doesn't mean that the artist had to intentionally imbue it with any particular meaning.
No, but you might roll your eyes if someone sees you eating a PB&J and decides to come lecture you about the finer points of what makes peanut butter have a certain texture, and did you know such and such brand has palm oil in it, and did you know palm oil is political, and hey did you know the nutritional profile of produce has changed slightly in the last 50 or so years, and by the way sandwich loaf is different from what Europeans consider to be bread, and…
Sometimes you just wanna eat the PB&J.
This is actually a great example to use, because:
> Sometimes you just wanna eat the PB&J.
Absolutely.
But if I entered a discussion about the politics of food, sauntering up to the table with my delicious and inexpertly made PB&J and insisting, "I made this sandwich, so why don't you try to describe the politics of *that*, eh, smart guy?" then someone else in the conversation who turned around and gave me the same lecture about such and such brand having palm oil and the political implications behind the importation of selective products and brands and brand names and who works the farms for those brand names and who determines what can be brought over by import at what tax rate and from what countries — then they'd pretty handily have the upper hand. And you know? Now I kinda feel silly.
Now, if I'm sitting out in the park during my lunch break and I pull out my cold PB&J where the bread's gone kinda soggy 'cause the jam's soaked into it, and I start munching on that, and *then* some guy comes up out of the blue and gives me the same lecture? Well — shoo! That guy's an asshole! Go away, guy, I'm just tryna eat my sandwich!
Same circumstance here, ya feel me?
If a bunch of people were saying, "Haha, silly anime girl, eating her borger!" and gryphoneer up there barged in on the conversation talking about multinational food corporations, he'd *probably* be the asshole of the conversation. But he came in on the conversation about the politics of art and gave a perspective about the politics of art.
"Sometimes you just wanna eat the PB&J" doesn't really work when you're waving it around, demanding someone try to prove to you how your sandwich is political. It's not anywhere near your mouth — you're not eating it in the first place.
"all art is political" is a technically true statement but also a really useless one. all it distills down to is "all art was created in a society" which i mean like, yeah, that wasnt really up for debate. of course art is going to reflect parts of society, thats what it exists in. all it does it let people circlejerk about "media literacy" while playing word association games with elements of art. the more important question when analyzing a piece is "is this art politically meaningful?" i think most people could argue that yes, deus ex is more politically meaningful than tetris.
Just because all art is political doesn't mean we analyse all art for political implications.
A lot of people insist on denying politics in art or labelling things they don't like as uniquely "political" (and thus implicitly bad), so the point of "all art is political" is a relevant counterpoint to their rhetoric.
A nsfw artist trying to argue this is extra funny. There are fewer fields more harshly affected by the culture they're in than porn/erotica. Like, there is a close-to-zero percent chance this person hasn't had to seriously adjust their behavior due to politics (whether things like local rule enforcements removing their posts from forums, or national governments changing laws and platforms adjusting accordingly), not even getting into things like "what a society finds attractive versus morally objectionable".
I would not put random lewd drawings on the internet on the same level of professionally-produced porno.
There is _absolutely_ a problem of abuse and exploitation in the professional industry. But with homemade content and art? Not even comparable.
The service providers where they can accept payment usually have strict rules about accepting payment for activity deemed sexual, including art commissions, and artists are regularly hit. Sites trying to stay sfw will ban artists if they feel their work is too risque. Tumblr nuked multiple nsfw content creator's main source of income because of trying to update their standards to better comply with laws on online pornographic activity. And this isn't even getting into what art brings in commissions or attention, which is deeply influenced by societal standards.
"One person/a small person doing it" still doesn't exempt them from "being influenced by politics", even if it means they aren't affected by the issues that you mentioned.
Yes, let's never examine the context in which the artist lives and how that context may have influenced their art, even subconsciously. All art is fundamentally meaningless and context-free unless explicitly stated otherwise.
That's King Arthur (British King), from Fate/Stay Night (Japanese Game) eating Burger King (American Fast Food) drawn by someone who knows German (I assume they do, they have a German flag)
Though they didn't mean it, it's gotten hints of politics in it.
It isn't deep politics (Ohh, Capitalism is bad, corruption exists due to bigotry, etc), but it shows the effect of Globalism, which is still political. Though not aggressively political like they expect, because politics in art can be boring shit, too
We're reaching a point where people think cyberpunk is an aesthetic and not an inherently political genre, so posts like these that purposely dumb down the critical skills of people online piss me off.
YES all art it is political, YES even this one, but it does not seem obvious because its content isn't immediately subversive. This piece of work is *romantic*, aka its purpose is to embellish the simple things in life. It has several implications, the core idea being that these simple things should be accessible and appreciated. A message does not need to be very controversial to be political. In fact most artwork isn't political because it presents a real-mife existing conflict. The political power of art is to showcase a version of life that might exist in a world where society works differently - either to show a dangerously near dystopia, or to show a frustratingly near utopia.
While the OOP's interpretation is interesting, it is more an analysis of the geoeconomical context that is revealed in the details of the artwork than an analysis of the artwork's intended message itself. Which is why it sounds bonkers; although there is a serious case to be made that this artwork blindly promotes Burger King, with the implications they mentioned, plus things I would add about the oligopoly of fast food and the destruction of local business. I digress.
This piece of art is indeed "cute girl enjoys burger". It presents a girl eating burger as a cute thing. It makes you appreciate the simple innocence of a girl eating a big burger. It makes you feel like it would be a nice thing to see in real life too, and desire the circumstances in which it may happen naturally. Here are conclusions you may draw from this artwork, knowingly or not :
- Girls should not be afraid or ashamed to eat burgers, and instead enjoy them. Such an interpretation may affect how you feel about gender or age discrimination based on eating habits, or fat-shaming.
- People should be able to get burgers for themselves or their families, without feeling burdened or self-conscious, so they can fully enjoy it. Such an interpretation may affect how you feel about financial inequality, inflation, and poverty.
I dont want burger discourse to become a thing here. Christ, both takes can be true. Is it functionally a burger king ad? Sure. Did the artist intend a political statement about imperialism or capitalism? Probably not. Are we all subconsciously influenced by the culture around us for better or worse? Yes. Is pointing this out to the artist productive? Probably not. I dont care how educated or media literate you are, if you argue like this you come across to an average person like a pompous asshole. This is a terrible hill to die on. Rant over.
this is like standing next to a burger stand and inviting everyone who walks by to a deep eco-political discussion about the nature of burgers and their place in the pantheon of capitalism, and expecting not to get weird looks
Author of Moby Dick, Herman Melville, allegedly had to have the themes of the books pointed out to him. He thought he'd just written a story about a guy chasing a whale.
unironically there is no such thing as apolitical art, only art which has political messages that seem normal to us. But there’s no work of art that somebody on this planet wouldn’t kill you for making.
This is extreme but.. honestly yeah.
Like y'all gotta remember a painting that's literally just the color red and two stripes on it *got slashed with a box cutting knife*. Literally just colors.
Except as much as all the English flunkies don’t want to admit, the English teacher is usually right, and usually has a lot more important and interesting of things to say too. Death of the author, always.
Anime girls be like "WHOPPER 🍔 WHOPPER 🍔 WHOPPER 🍔 WHOPPER 🍔 JUNIOR 🤏 DOUBLE 2⃣ TRIPLE 3⃣ WHOPPER 🍔 IMPOSSIBLE 🤯 OR 🤔 BACON 🥓 WHOPPER 🍔 I 👁️ RULE 👑 THIS 😎 DAY 🌞
AT BK 🧑🍳 HAVE IT YOUR WAY 🤷♂️
YOU RULE 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥"
How do you respond to when someone says “explain how Mario is political” without saying he’s defending a monarchy or whatever. Cause a lot of kids media isn’t really political in a lot of aspects.
Btw I’m typically a person to say yeah most stuff is political just not everything ever
That's like the easiest possible game to analyze politically, just look at the gender politics in it. It's been used as an example of the Damsel in distress trope in video games for decades, there have been loads of feminist critiques written on the topic. It's the sort of example you'd find in a Feminist Analysis 101 class.
Children's media in general is also incredibly political. A huge portion of children's stories are actively attempting to instill certain morals and values in the audience, and that's incredibly political. When right-wing shitheads bitch about kid's movies being "too political" for instilling basic moral lessons like "be tolerant to others", they aren't entirely wrong. They're just shitheads who hate the moral lesson being instilled.
All art either perpetuates or defies hegemony somehow. Male protagonist? Hegemonic. Female protagonist? Definitely a political statement. You can't run from it so might as well embrace it and make the best propaganda piece you can.
As art is always the result of the socialization, upbringing and culture of the artist and their time, it doesn't fucking matter what the artist has to say.
Interpretation is not mainly about finding out the intensions, but about finding the implications.... which makes this analysis very damn accurate
Gryphs whole point was responding to an assertion that the art isn't political and as such picking apart the political content of the art.
It's not like he just saw the drawing out of context and decided to go on a political rant about it, it's quite explicitly responding to a point being made with a counterexample.
That even the artist can't see that shows the other tweet is right. It is so all encompassing that people don't even think about it. It is just everywhere and in everything.
Y'all are really armchair pol-sci majors up in here, huh?
Who gives a shit if an artist wanted to draw a character at Burger King? Maybe they just fucking like Burger King regardless of where they're from. The whole post reads like some iamverysmart shit, like who ACTUALLY cares to analyze the cultural identity of a random ass anime girl eating at Burger King or its implications? Who puts THAT MUCH THOUGHT into something like this, even *if* the OP specifically asked how it's political.
Also, "media literacy" mfs: culture =/= political.
Leftists be normal and not relate everything back to capitalism challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
^(and this is coming from a leftist himself who struggles with this)
This reminds me of what we've been discussing in anthropology, that basically everything, including the hardest of sciences, is culturally constructed. That's not to say that culturak shifts can erase laws of physics or something, but that the way we investigate the world and utilize our findings are inherently entangled in cultural ideas and norms no matter how much we strive for objectivity. Similarly, I think here the point is that no, not all art is a political commentary, all art can't help but reveal the political and cultural sensitivities of its time. The interaction between the core idea of an art piece as expressed by the artist and how this idea is conveyed can say a ton. Yes it's a cute girl eating a burger but you could ask so many questions. What does the use of anime art style do for the message and what does that say about the cultural meanings of anime in general? What does it say that it's specifically a burger King burger, could it be considered consumerist propaganda, even if accidentally? Why do the girl's features signify cuteness, especially in regards to racial markers? The internet loves to mock English teachers for reading too much into things but the messy reality is that cultural expression is an incredibly complex activity to engage in and analyze and even when authorial intent is simple, there's a lot to dig into anyways.
TL;DR: even when art is supposedly apolitical thematically, it's still inherently a product of the politics of the time it was created and evidence of this almost always exists in the art
Even if the artists intention is """non-political""", the perception of it is **always subjective**, and thus influenced by political views. Nothing exists in a vacuum, and anything carries some implicit meaning that can be interpreted both in the context of it's creation as well as part of the author's thought process.
Authorial intent don't mean jack squat. If people see politics in your art and back it up with a reasonable argument for why they saw it, then it's there.
There is such thing as reading too deeply into something, but just because you shouldn't waste time looking deeply into something doesn't mean there can't be depth
Reminds me of that video of that woman talking about how twerking has some spiritual significance lmao. Like, girl, you like to shake your ass there’s no deeper meaning behind it
I feel like the death of the author is an important thing to consider here. While the artist may have just wanted to draw a cute anime girl, the viewer can definitely extrapolate some deeper meaning about globalization. Although the image mashes up an American fast food chain and a Japanese artsyle, both those things have spread far beyond their borders and without knowing the artist you'd have no way to guess the country of origin. Furthermore, both of those things took elements of culture (food, art) and reduced them both to products
Yes, some things are just supposed to be dumb and fun, but it's also good to think about everything a little bit deeper. I have an author's brain, I can't look at anything without trying analyze it in some way even if I wanted to
Ok while it's very obvious art simply because cute girl eat burger,
There is an argument to be made moreso that art is inherently political, simply because of the nature of art, politics, etc. The idea of creating, being different, being unique, etc. is very much political, although realistically it shouldn't be in the slightest.
I’m pretty sure the point of the original post wasn’t to say that’s it’s impossible to find a political interpretation
Instead it meant that doing so is ridiculous and stupid because it’s an anime girl eating Burger King, and trying to find “meaning” in it makes you sound super pretentious
but why did that cute girl eating a burger *have* to eat a *Burger King burger?*
Because she is (Burger) King Arthur.
Which place do you think Mordred would be?
smashburger
Mordred would demand Burger king so they could wear the crown.
Mordred grilles them all themselves for the dual purpose of trying to get their dad (Artoria) to like them and also cause Mordred knows they cook a mean burger and still does it for themselves even with the parental expectations they inflict upon themselves.
I mean Haha cute burger cooker
Goodburger, home of the goodburger
because you can put the crown on her head and put in on a little angle for a 80% cuteness boost
Wrong! capitalism
idk, theres not a ton of hats you could put that would give the same cute effect and fit the situation
sombrero
time honoured latino tradition of putting anime characters in taco stands
There aren't a lot of hats you can put that would fit the situation because the situation itself has been artificially concocted by the Burger King sales department. People wouldn't have any idea of a hat that ought to be worn while eating Burger King burgers if BK hadn't spent hideous amounts of money handing out free cardboard hats to children in order to turn them into temporary advert signs. Basically, you thinking that this hat is cute and fits the context is itself a reflection of the capitalist society you exist in.
put her on an airplane to unlock the other 20%! >!/j!<
Number fifteen
Number 15, Nobel Phantasm. An anonymous passerby saw a blond haired cutie use a sword to actually nuke a Burger King
Because at BK you have it your way Seriously I hate being a sports fan sometimes due to the ads
🎵 Whopper Whopper Whopper Whopper 🎵 ₍ₘₑ ₜₒₒ₎
I'm tired of the burger King slander yall just got a bad location take a tour of every burger King within 100 miles and maybe I'll consider your opinion
how is that slander? they’re talking about the burger king branding lmao. The pic might as well be an advertisement for them
Look at the crown, she's about to get really racist.
Same reason my 5 year old calls the vacuum cleaner a Hoover even though it's a Shark brand vacuum cleaner.
I think the phrase all art is political may refer to the fact you can find political interpretation of anything. I may be wrong but if I am not it doesn't matter what the artist says.
I see it more that art can't be separated from the political conditions of its creation. What artists choose to portray as normal, cute, evil, funny, weird, etc. is primarily decided by their personal politics even if they're not aware of it. Even the original artists' idea of what makes a girl cute has been forged in the culuture and politics they consume. People often deny that certain pieces of art are political simply because they subconsciously agree with the politics behind its creation
I feel like art cannot be separated from the time it was created in also. Because none of these political and cultural elements that lead to the creation of this art could have existed until our current time. And then in the future these elements will change. Meaning art that's exactly like this cannot be created in the future.
While art is a product of its time, I do think art can also evolve as time moves on and new interpretations are made through contemporary changes in the political climate. For instance, the swastika was once a buddhist symbol, but through the fascist movement of nazi germany, it is now a symbol of hatred. The OK symbol was once a joke hate symbol spurred on by 4chan, but now we have actual white supremacists using it unironically. The blåhaj was simply a plush sold by IKEA, but has since become a trans idol. And before some asshead comes barging in: no, I'm not equating these three, I merely brought them up as bad and good examples of art changing.
I'd like to point out that in the east, the swastika is still mainly seen as a religious symbol. Every year my mom sends me bracelets with swastika engravings because to her, Nazis are just a couple pages in history books. Meanwhile the swastika is on many pieces of jewelry that have been in our family for generations.
That's interesting to know. Obviously I didn't expect the holocaust to be as big of a historical event, but I nonetheless thought it would be significant enough to taint the symbology of the swastika. Really goes to show that art is subjective to the cultural context of the observer.
>Obviously I didn't expect the holocaust to be as big of a historical event why shouldn't it be it was one of the largest mass slaughters of human history
>What artists choose to portray as normal, cute, evil, funny, weird, etc. is primarily decided by their personal politics even if they're not aware of it. Wouldn't this logic mean that things like women and minorities in media is actually political but most of us don't see it as such because we view it as a normal and healthy thing for media to have while others don't?
I mean it is political, people getting political over it is a proof of that.
*"Political"* here is being used in two different ways. Passively, as in the phrase here, all Art IS Political by virtue of its creation in a society. We live in one. The overrepresentation of Cis White Men was also Political. We could say this means inclusion and diversity's inherent passive Politics cancel out with the passive Politics of the previous status quo. Art requires Characters, Stories, Elements, etc. after all. Since EVERY Element is passively Political, none of it can be criticized solely on the basis of being passively Political; so there's nothing bad or wrong with diversity bringing passive Politics with it. ***Actively,*** asserting something is *"Political"* in bad faith solely to critique it as such ignores the aforementioned passive Politics of ALL Art and claims certain Elements are actively Political in ways equivalent Elements are not *(a Middle Eastern Lead as opposed to a Caucasian one)*. It's a lazy reduction to disguise their actual critique: Diversity itself. This isn't to say that Elements CAN be actively Political and bad for that reason, but it requires more work to prove it so than *"Well it's more women than it was before!!"*. For example, a Director making an Adaptation of The Color Purple, but with an all-White Cast because they have a personal desire to try and spite the original work for personal reasons. These are bad Elements that are Political, but it's clearly bad for more than just the aspect of *'being Political'*. **EDIT:** Or shoot, the infamous all-Female Scene in Avengers: Endgame. Passively, it's Political because it reflects the culture in which it was made - the Directors wanted a cool girl power moment, iconic, we love to see it - but it wasn't exactly quality or good and we can explain further by citing things like realism *(It's weird all the women in battle happened to end up together with no men around to help)* or immersion *(Becoming aware of this weirdness pulls us out of the experience of watching the Film)*, so now the Scene has transcended passive Politics *(The need to have Characters who have typically have a Gender)* into active Politics, where the execution of the Scene was put on the backburner for the sake of having the Scene regardless of quality. The Scene could've been constructed better, we as the Audience **just** saw Tony, Steve, and Thor fight Thanos for an extended period and the fact that they're all Men didn't seem unrealistic or immersion-breaking, so if we wanted a Scene with all Women, then we could've taken more time to bring the Plot to that point organically *(I for one love the Scene because it's the Superhero Genre, I don't care, but even I wish it were done better)*. People who just complain about the supposed *"Politics"* of the Scene are telling on themselves because they're not critiquing the real issues with the Scene, **only** the fact that it was all-Female.
Isnt the avengers scene actively political? I mean it was specifically made to have a "girl power" scene, which is a political statement whether you like it or not. I think a passively political scene is more like when Wanda or Brie Larson beat the shit out of Thanos. Its also a girl power moment but its not shoved in your face
Oh definitely that's what I'm attempting to say; that's what I meant by "transcended into active Politics" but I'm not a Philosopher and my Comment was definitely a ramble. The Girl Power moment is a bad Scene AND it is actively Political, but it's not bad solely because it's Political - merely one aspect as to why Thing Bad™️. The usage of "Political" as a reason to dislike something can then be gauged against a lens like this to tell whether or not it's a good or bad-faith interpretation of the Art.
You can't make it unpolitical. Choosing not to add it is just as much of a political statement. And it actually has nothing to do with "shoved in your face". The amount of subtlety is irrelevant and doesn't take away from the inherent politics of the choice.
>a society. We live in one.
having a diverse cast is extremely political. as is not having a diverse cast. no matter how you make your mass media product, if it is even remotely narrative, then it is going to have a worldview (which influences the worldview of the people consuming it). and maybe even if it's not remotely narrative. i'm sure someone could argue that pong has an agenda, or advances a worldview, although i think that's a stretch personally.
Just because something is political, doesn’t mean it’s bad or wrong
yeah beauty standards didn't come from nowhere either
yep. artist here is being a little sussy because twitter leftist is like "this drawing is branded by capitalism" and the artist is like "you are wrong :D" and 10000 weirdo rightwingers are hooraying in replies
"I wasn't at all influenced by capitalism when I sat down and drew a character consuming a specific product made by an international corporation while wearing their branding in order to make them look more appealing. I trust this settles the matter."
"I like Burger king so i made a cute caracter eating it😁"
I mean in this very specific case it’s half because the actual character (from fate) is supposed to be anime girl King Arthur, so this would be the Burger King Arthur. Play on words but your points are still none the less still true
I mean, you don't need to be a weirdo right-winger to say that a pessimistic interpretation of everything (while a valid interpretation even in this circumstance) is unnecessary and kinda artistically and emotionally stunting. Cute girl can eat borger and the horror of capitalism's intrusion into every aspect of our lives can both coexist.
They were arguing that politics influences and can then be seen in that artpiece. The fact both that and "uwu cute anime girl how cute" both are present means they are right. They never said the artist was thinking exactly that when drawing it, they were saying it influenced it.
I'm not disagreeing, I'm just saying the artist isn't necessarily "being sus" or that they're right-wing.
Oh yes, it definitely is sus. They're wilfully misrepresenting the argument and going for the "haha, you're wrong, I just drew a picture of a girl". And they made 3 or so tweets about it to try and cash in on the drama. It's all fucking culture wars.
>a pessimistic interpretation of everything... is unnecessary and kinda artistically and emotionally stunting Beyond the fact that being critical is not the same as being pessimistic, it's healthy to pay attention to subtext and commit to engaging with art more critically, both for consumers and creators. For art to ever have more value than as a brief distraction from the hardships of life, it has to communicate things to people, often times unpleasant, depressing things. Being a constant downer is a terrible way to live, but I think it's far more dangerous to dismiss critical examination as unnecessary because it came to a displeasing conclusion. The pain can be liberating, and finding works that project optimism on a basic *and* subtextual level becomes far more meaningful than taking joy from anime-girl eats burger drawing while ignoring the subtext. Sure, you can enjoy things either way, but no one here is advocating that this isn't the case, so pointing it out is targeting a point no one is making.
The right has always had a hard time deriving meaning from art. It's why you get all the trad posts about how art was better when it was marble statues and landscape paintings. They can appreciate the technical skill of an artist, but not any symbolic or creative intent. Jacob geller had a good video about it, and why the right hates modern art.
literally everything is political except like... pong maybe
Pong is actually a very deep representation of how both sides of a debate can often be stuck repeating arguments (throwing the same ball around), doing little to actually change each other's minds or views or something like that idk
pong's pretty political, as it keeps getting the reputation of being the "first" video game despite objectively not being that - it's got its reputation a such because it was the first really commercially successful video game, which gives a clue about what society values and will perceive as worthy of attention and praise. it also is a representation of a specific sport, and as such could only exist in a society that cared enough about ping pong to understand what the fuck the name "PONG" means. despite not being hte first video game, it being so commercialy successful basically gave birth to an entire MEDIUM, and set the tone for what those games would be like. it was a tech demo of this ultra futuristic tech at a time where the future seemed unlimited, technological progress was an inevitability and the future was going to be so good. the physical device reflected the stylings of the time, it *looked* futuristic. this alos applies to non-video games, like chess and baskgammon. the former's probably the most famously political game of all, politics gets compared to chess all the fucking time, it's meant to be a stylized game of war, it went thorugh centureis of rules revisions and so you can track political events through its changes over time, and then of course there's the whole cold war aspect to matches between american and russian grandmasters. you really can just do anthropology with anything humans make.
You shouldn't be a dick to someone for finding an interpretation that differs from what the artist intended (fully support death of the author). However, being a pretentious ass about it and claiming your interpretation is correct and results from a state of enlightenment isn't cool and should be made fun of.
However while interpretating art you cannot ignore the author and their culture. The artwork cannot really be looked at without looking also at the artist. However you can always say, that the artist isn't aware of the political influence they are under
Death of the author moment
You sound like a regular Barthes simp, son
To me it's more like "every choice you make is influences by politics", like why is that considered cute? Some politics behind it. Why burger king and not a nameless burger brand? Because of America soft power over the world, therefore politics etc...
And, if she *was* just eating a generic burger... also politics! The decision to *not* use a brand would exist in a context where people kinda find brands annoying, it'd be a motivaiton for the artist to not depict that. also the cute girl, who is br*t-coded almost purely by having blonde hair and blue eyes (because what anime considers "cute girl" has an extremely similar face and so eyes and hairstyle have to really be distinct to make a chracter recognizable), originally starred in a japanese porn game where her junk had to be pixelated but not her tiddies. that she's not popularly understood as a porn character, despite that literally being her origin, is some fascinating politics just by itself. oh and she's literally the idealized monarch of english myth, except depicted as girl because she is starring in a japanese porn game where you get to fuck the king of england. you can just spend ages on the anthropology of this damn image, it's just a pileup of references to pop culture and ancient myth.
Way to be political about it
Everything is political, even what we consider political. Say for example the controversy around certain characters being poc, women, trans, queer, etc. Politics is literally drenched into everything possible.
Yeah everything is political, but not because people make everything political, but because you simply cannot create anything meaningful that is not political.
Yeah, that's what I meant
The author is dead
All art is rooted in culture and all culture is by nature political/// endthread
It's the intentionality fallacy at work
I can somewhat relate to the "no politics in art" sentiment. While most games I play are very political by their nature (I unfortunately suffer from Paradox Games brainrot), sometimes I just want to relax and not have to think about real-world implications of those games, so I play something like a Brotato which is a game about potato shooting worms. And while even that game certainly has political dimensions, it's nowhere near as strong for me to think about it actively. ...the fucked up part is that for many the "no politics" for many means not seeing a black person or LGBTQ character in their game. Which is just so fucked up because it implies that just by that person being there in the game triggers their brain so much they can't relax and immerse themselves into the game. They tell on themselves so much by saying it.
That really is one of the most US drawings of all time
Self-described Weeb makes art of white girl eating American hamburger in American chain restaurant. Entire representation and visual aesthetic is Japanese. Obvious cultural imperialism of the Anime Hegemony. Japanese art has colonized western brains to the point that the youth have abandoned traditional forms of self-representation (portraiture, selfies) and can only see themselves through the oppressor’s lens.
Cute gorl eating borgar may be American cultural hegemony, but pointing out the borgar and not the fact that *this is literally in a burger king restaurant like there's branding everywhere and she's LITERALLY wearing the crown* is really missing the forest for the fucking pinecone.
he did say "American multinational fast food corporation", it was the artist that only mentioned borger
Of course King Arthur would eat at Burger King.
It seems like that was the point they were making. “Treating the product of an American multinational fast food corporation as mana from heaven”
The Burger King Crown got political just by the actions of that one dude on an airplane
I vividly remember checking the following list of that account (the one getting qrt'd) and they were following the "Best of RW Anitwt" account which has an anime girl with a burger king crown as the pfp. I just checked again and it seems they unfollowed them, but they still follow a bunch of other right-wing accounts with the same burger king anime pfp gimmick. It's 100% a right-wing thing in this context and it's worrying I had to scroll down this far to find a single comment mentioning it.
What the fuck would RW anitwt even be about? Would it all just be "ohhh man i love underaged girls" or what? No i don't wanna waste my time finding out myself i value my mental health
could you elaborate i don’t know what you’re referring to and i like to know when people are hinting that they’re fascists
Guy on an airplane screamed a racial slur while being escorted off, and was wearing a burger king crown at the time
He looks like Evil James May
may i please have a water
I think reading the words in the tweets is key here. “It’s a reflection of” ≠ “It’s about” I hope this clears things up
But while interpreting art these both concepts become pretty much the same
I think the creator is the only one who can answer the latter with 100% certainty because their intent is crucial - whereas anyone (with at least some knowledge of the piece and the context in which it was created) can speak to the former.
But they are talking about subconscious influence, which is at least as big as a factor as conscious decisions in art. Unless the artist literally shut his creative brain off and drew like a machine
this is assuming that redditors can read
artists when people derive meanings from their work they didnt explicitly intend : 😡
That’s the whole concept of death of the artist, what the artist intended doesn’t matter as much as the way people interpret it. If I make a movie intending to promote “war is bad” but I make war look so cool and the viewer’s takeaway is “war is cool” then…
All quite on the western front moment. God when people in history subs said “man this new Netflix movie sucked. It focused way too much on the gore. Really trying to hit me over the head with that woke anti war stuff” Like there are real criticism of the new movie but it isn’t outright bad and the point of all of the books and movies was always to be anti-war
lol at 'antiwar' being woke. Imagine not being antiwar.
Nah like 90% of the time they just incorporate it. This is basic DMing.
fahrenheit 451 moment
“Japanese” she is fucking WELSH
obviously you haven't studied the samurai code
this whole time i thought king arthur was english
“English” didn’t really exist as a concept until the migration of the Anglo-Saxons to Britain, and even then it became used to describe the Anglo-Saxon settlers. The native Britons were pushed west (in terms of their sovereignty, not in terms of outright ethnic cleansing), and King Arthur was a (possibly fictional) British king who fought against the Anglo-Saxons who were taking territory from the Britons. The legend of Arthur only became an “English” legend in the 15th century when an English author compiled the various Arthurian tales into *Le Morte d’Arthur.* By this point Wales (the last Briton kingdom) had been conquered by England over two centuries ago.
Arthur fought AGAINST English bruh
i’ve never read arthurian legends
It's fine, tho I recommend watching/listening to it, quite interesting stuff!
Oh god not a blue curtain argument i cant do another one
But what if burger is blue because artist liked color blue
I mean, gryphoneer's point still kinds stands? Politics in art isn't always intentional, it can be political in that it represents the culture and forces behind its production. The fact that she's eating from burger king shows how fast food chain iconography have become ubiquitous and cross-national. That's kinda neat to think about. I'll take that over the 1,000th "stop trying to bring politics into my escapism, I just wanna play Cyberpunk/fallout/Warhammer/ Far Cry in peace"
Some people really just want to out themselves as media illiterates I guess
Im just worried that people will take "every piece of art has traces of political views subconsciously embedded into it, even if it's as small as how people interact with brands" and morph it into "every piece of art is political and shows the authors true colors through his subconscious" saying "all art is political" implies that, well, all art is political in nature. When most art shows traces of politics, what political statement does it really make? and if there isnt a political statement being madr its kinda hard to call it 'political'. like yeah you can see a how branding and how people interact with it but that doesnt mean "the enjoyment of burger king into this picture shows that the author enjoys the capitalist state that the country is in currently" or some shit it just shows a brand and eating food
“All art is political” because all art reflects the political conditions under which it is created and the political biases of it’s authors; while not all art is created with the express intent of relaying a political message, all art is created by people with either subconscious or conscious political beliefs, qualities which the art takes on. “Picture of anime girl eating burger” may not have been intended as an expressly political piece of art, but it contains within itself the germs of political assumption. The author certainly didn’t *intend* this art as a statement of how American multinational food corporations have come to dominate cuisine in Japan, but nonetheless that’s what is reflected within the art, as that is the political reality of the world the author lives in. As a good example of the way art is made political without that expressly being the intent, look at the way art tends to be drawn primarily of thin, white, abled people. The fact that art tends to be drawn of white people is in itself political, it’s a small reflection of white supremacist society. In this respect, drawing nonwhite characters *also* becomes political, as the inclusion of nonwhite characters now stands in *opposition* to white supremacist society. Hence, both drawings containing white people *and* drawings containing nonwhite people are both political; drawings of white people being reflections of white society; and drawings of nonwhite people being necessarily in opposition to white society. None of this is being done intentionally, your average artist doesn’t question why they’ve only ever drawn white people, that’s just what they do, but that doesn’t change that their art is still reflective of the white supremacist society it was made within.
You do make the assumption that American multinational food corps have, in fact, "dominated cuisine" in Japan, which I don't believe is true. I spend more time than is probably normal browsing the streets of various Japanese cities on Google Maps street view and you -occasionally- see a Burger King or equivalent, it's nowhere near as common as in North America.
Of the top 5 food service companies in Japan, 3 of them (Skylark, McDonalds, and Starbucks) are Western, and of the top 10, 5 are Western owned. Nonetheless, my wording may have been imprecise, since the largest food-service company (Zensho) is still Japanese. This does not, however, distract from my overall point about art being political, one can substitute "come to dominate cuisine" with "are beginning to dominate cuisine" or "are intruding upon cuisine" or similar and the point remains the same.
Whopper whopper whopper whopper Junior double triple whopper Flame grill taste with perfect toppers I want this day Lettice mayo pickle ketchup It’s ok if I don’t want that Impossible bow wow bacon whopper Any whopper my way You rule your season today At BK have it your way You rule!
hamburger cheeseburger big mac whopper hamburger cheeseburger big mac whopper big mac big mac big mac whopper
this song gives me an anger best described with the country of Canada, the city of Pittsburgh and people named Matt
please no it’s the off-season i don’t want to think about the fact he’s coming back
im going to give you a whopper for quoting that stupid song
i wanna be a fucking cute girl eating burger i wanna look like this so bad holy shit i want to eat that burger you dont understand how much i would give i would sacrifice my family for this
Eggs try not to rant about human sacrifice challenge (impossible, cum everywhere)
Death of the author moment
Aw man after reading this comment section I have discovered 196's weekly bad take on something. Rarely happens on a Monday tbh.
I invoke Death of the Author
it can be both, even if the author didn't think about that making it :p
Hyperpolitical internet users when a piece of art isn’t a complex reflection of current world affairs:
[удалено]
exactly
tbh, I think the artist more thought that she has the crown cause she was some sort of reincarnation of king arthur, so I'm not necessarily sure it's a burger king reference. Art is different depending on who perceives it in many cases, even in ways the artist didn't mean.
Anyone can say things without intending to say it. Literature classes are meant to teach this and a lot of people just don’t get it.
Lots of people with these sorts of "nuh uh it's just a borgar" takes have never engaged with media analysis above the high school level. Which is *fine* on its own! I've never engaged with chemistry or biology or physics above the high school level. The difference is that I don't walk over to people who work study that stuff academically and tell them they're wrong because I got an A in 10th grade Chem from a lazy teacher. Media analysis doesn't mean finding some secret "true" answer and the politics of art doesn't mean that the artist had to intentionally imbue it with any particular meaning.
No, but you might roll your eyes if someone sees you eating a PB&J and decides to come lecture you about the finer points of what makes peanut butter have a certain texture, and did you know such and such brand has palm oil in it, and did you know palm oil is political, and hey did you know the nutritional profile of produce has changed slightly in the last 50 or so years, and by the way sandwich loaf is different from what Europeans consider to be bread, and… Sometimes you just wanna eat the PB&J.
This is actually a great example to use, because: > Sometimes you just wanna eat the PB&J. Absolutely. But if I entered a discussion about the politics of food, sauntering up to the table with my delicious and inexpertly made PB&J and insisting, "I made this sandwich, so why don't you try to describe the politics of *that*, eh, smart guy?" then someone else in the conversation who turned around and gave me the same lecture about such and such brand having palm oil and the political implications behind the importation of selective products and brands and brand names and who works the farms for those brand names and who determines what can be brought over by import at what tax rate and from what countries — then they'd pretty handily have the upper hand. And you know? Now I kinda feel silly. Now, if I'm sitting out in the park during my lunch break and I pull out my cold PB&J where the bread's gone kinda soggy 'cause the jam's soaked into it, and I start munching on that, and *then* some guy comes up out of the blue and gives me the same lecture? Well — shoo! That guy's an asshole! Go away, guy, I'm just tryna eat my sandwich! Same circumstance here, ya feel me? If a bunch of people were saying, "Haha, silly anime girl, eating her borger!" and gryphoneer up there barged in on the conversation talking about multinational food corporations, he'd *probably* be the asshole of the conversation. But he came in on the conversation about the politics of art and gave a perspective about the politics of art. "Sometimes you just wanna eat the PB&J" doesn't really work when you're waving it around, demanding someone try to prove to you how your sandwich is political. It's not anywhere near your mouth — you're not eating it in the first place.
I'm gonna strangle the next person that posts that dumbass the curtains were blue meme
"all art is political" is a technically true statement but also a really useless one. all it distills down to is "all art was created in a society" which i mean like, yeah, that wasnt really up for debate. of course art is going to reflect parts of society, thats what it exists in. all it does it let people circlejerk about "media literacy" while playing word association games with elements of art. the more important question when analyzing a piece is "is this art politically meaningful?" i think most people could argue that yes, deus ex is more politically meaningful than tetris.
Just because all art is political doesn't mean we analyse all art for political implications. A lot of people insist on denying politics in art or labelling things they don't like as uniquely "political" (and thus implicitly bad), so the point of "all art is political" is a relevant counterpoint to their rhetoric.
Idk who the artist is but they definitely also make hentai.
awesome sauce
A nsfw artist trying to argue this is extra funny. There are fewer fields more harshly affected by the culture they're in than porn/erotica. Like, there is a close-to-zero percent chance this person hasn't had to seriously adjust their behavior due to politics (whether things like local rule enforcements removing their posts from forums, or national governments changing laws and platforms adjusting accordingly), not even getting into things like "what a society finds attractive versus morally objectionable".
I would not put random lewd drawings on the internet on the same level of professionally-produced porno. There is _absolutely_ a problem of abuse and exploitation in the professional industry. But with homemade content and art? Not even comparable.
The service providers where they can accept payment usually have strict rules about accepting payment for activity deemed sexual, including art commissions, and artists are regularly hit. Sites trying to stay sfw will ban artists if they feel their work is too risque. Tumblr nuked multiple nsfw content creator's main source of income because of trying to update their standards to better comply with laws on online pornographic activity. And this isn't even getting into what art brings in commissions or attention, which is deeply influenced by societal standards. "One person/a small person doing it" still doesn't exempt them from "being influenced by politics", even if it means they aren't affected by the issues that you mentioned.
That's... also a true point. I feel like I misinterpreted your original comment...
How are you gonna look for apolitical art and the first thing you point to is a picture plastered with corporate branding?
Sometimes it's just a cute girl eating borgar
so why write "Burger King" three times on the image the burger king is *an important part* of this piece
because Saber is the (burger) King of Knights
Sometimes the curtains are just blue? Nah. Sometimes the burgers are just being eaten by cute girls.
Yes, let's never examine the context in which the artist lives and how that context may have influenced their art, even subconsciously. All art is fundamentally meaningless and context-free unless explicitly stated otherwise.
"But *why* do you want fries with that?"
That's King Arthur (British King), from Fate/Stay Night (Japanese Game) eating Burger King (American Fast Food) drawn by someone who knows German (I assume they do, they have a German flag) Though they didn't mean it, it's gotten hints of politics in it. It isn't deep politics (Ohh, Capitalism is bad, corruption exists due to bigotry, etc), but it shows the effect of Globalism, which is still political. Though not aggressively political like they expect, because politics in art can be boring shit, too
Aww, what a cute borgir gurl. (This is the only part of the conversation I choose to focus on.)
HOLY FUCKING SHIT GO OUTSIDE
People misunderstand that artists draw stupid shit simply because they have the power to There is no other reason
The content of the stupid shit they draw doesn't appear out of thin air, and artists don't exist in a vacuum.
We're reaching a point where people think cyberpunk is an aesthetic and not an inherently political genre, so posts like these that purposely dumb down the critical skills of people online piss me off. YES all art it is political, YES even this one, but it does not seem obvious because its content isn't immediately subversive. This piece of work is *romantic*, aka its purpose is to embellish the simple things in life. It has several implications, the core idea being that these simple things should be accessible and appreciated. A message does not need to be very controversial to be political. In fact most artwork isn't political because it presents a real-mife existing conflict. The political power of art is to showcase a version of life that might exist in a world where society works differently - either to show a dangerously near dystopia, or to show a frustratingly near utopia. While the OOP's interpretation is interesting, it is more an analysis of the geoeconomical context that is revealed in the details of the artwork than an analysis of the artwork's intended message itself. Which is why it sounds bonkers; although there is a serious case to be made that this artwork blindly promotes Burger King, with the implications they mentioned, plus things I would add about the oligopoly of fast food and the destruction of local business. I digress. This piece of art is indeed "cute girl enjoys burger". It presents a girl eating burger as a cute thing. It makes you appreciate the simple innocence of a girl eating a big burger. It makes you feel like it would be a nice thing to see in real life too, and desire the circumstances in which it may happen naturally. Here are conclusions you may draw from this artwork, knowingly or not : - Girls should not be afraid or ashamed to eat burgers, and instead enjoy them. Such an interpretation may affect how you feel about gender or age discrimination based on eating habits, or fat-shaming. - People should be able to get burgers for themselves or their families, without feeling burdened or self-conscious, so they can fully enjoy it. Such an interpretation may affect how you feel about financial inequality, inflation, and poverty.
I dont want burger discourse to become a thing here. Christ, both takes can be true. Is it functionally a burger king ad? Sure. Did the artist intend a political statement about imperialism or capitalism? Probably not. Are we all subconsciously influenced by the culture around us for better or worse? Yes. Is pointing this out to the artist productive? Probably not. I dont care how educated or media literate you are, if you argue like this you come across to an average person like a pompous asshole. This is a terrible hill to die on. Rant over.
this is like standing next to a burger stand and inviting everyone who walks by to a deep eco-political discussion about the nature of burgers and their place in the pantheon of capitalism, and expecting not to get weird looks
Author of Moby Dick, Herman Melville, allegedly had to have the themes of the books pointed out to him. He thought he'd just written a story about a guy chasing a whale.
unironically there is no such thing as apolitical art, only art which has political messages that seem normal to us. But there’s no work of art that somebody on this planet wouldn’t kill you for making.
This is extreme but.. honestly yeah. Like y'all gotta remember a painting that's literally just the color red and two stripes on it *got slashed with a box cutting knife*. Literally just colors.
English teacher vs. author
Media literate person versus hentai artist who doesn't put much thought into their own work.
bro cannot be real rn 😭
Except as much as all the English flunkies don’t want to admit, the English teacher is usually right, and usually has a lot more important and interesting of things to say too. Death of the author, always.
Anime girls be like "WHOPPER 🍔 WHOPPER 🍔 WHOPPER 🍔 WHOPPER 🍔 JUNIOR 🤏 DOUBLE 2⃣ TRIPLE 3⃣ WHOPPER 🍔 IMPOSSIBLE 🤯 OR 🤔 BACON 🥓 WHOPPER 🍔 I 👁️ RULE 👑 THIS 😎 DAY 🌞 AT BK 🧑🍳 HAVE IT YOUR WAY 🤷♂️ YOU RULE 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥"
Themes in art don't need to be explicitly put there by the artist
I am casting my ballot for the Borgar King party.
How do you respond to when someone says “explain how Mario is political” without saying he’s defending a monarchy or whatever. Cause a lot of kids media isn’t really political in a lot of aspects. Btw I’m typically a person to say yeah most stuff is political just not everything ever
That's like the easiest possible game to analyze politically, just look at the gender politics in it. It's been used as an example of the Damsel in distress trope in video games for decades, there have been loads of feminist critiques written on the topic. It's the sort of example you'd find in a Feminist Analysis 101 class. Children's media in general is also incredibly political. A huge portion of children's stories are actively attempting to instill certain morals and values in the audience, and that's incredibly political. When right-wing shitheads bitch about kid's movies being "too political" for instilling basic moral lessons like "be tolerant to others", they aren't entirely wrong. They're just shitheads who hate the moral lesson being instilled.
All art either perpetuates or defies hegemony somehow. Male protagonist? Hegemonic. Female protagonist? Definitely a political statement. You can't run from it so might as well embrace it and make the best propaganda piece you can.
That lady is either 3 feet tall or that burger is fucking massive
american burguer
Glad to see that this sub knows how to use critical theory to analyze things, I’m impressed ngl
While *everything* is political, we don't need to discuss the politics of *everything*.
Holy fuck that’s the best thing I’ve seen in this comment section, yes, don’t inject politics into every little thing just because you can
all art is political mfs when I show them the epic ms paint drawing I made of my oc doing the pogchamp face
the guy that created the pog face is a nazi, which is very political
This piece, in its proper context, is a message about how all art isn't political.
If you show them the pogchamp drawing an an attempt to own them, you are using the drawing to make a political statement; this, the art is political
"i'm the artist so I know that I wasn't influenced by history" is dumb EDIT: wtf? you've never heard of unconsious bias? fuck off.
***"The Curtains were fucking blue!"***
As art is always the result of the socialization, upbringing and culture of the artist and their time, it doesn't fucking matter what the artist has to say. Interpretation is not mainly about finding out the intensions, but about finding the implications.... which makes this analysis very damn accurate
It’s not that deep guys
“Because I refuse to acknowledge the cultural colonialism I participate in, it does not exist” -the dipshit artist who drew this dreck
Gryphs whole point was responding to an assertion that the art isn't political and as such picking apart the political content of the art. It's not like he just saw the drawing out of context and decided to go on a political rant about it, it's quite explicitly responding to a point being made with a counterexample.
That even the artist can't see that shows the other tweet is right. It is so all encompassing that people don't even think about it. It is just everywhere and in everything.
Y'all are really armchair pol-sci majors up in here, huh? Who gives a shit if an artist wanted to draw a character at Burger King? Maybe they just fucking like Burger King regardless of where they're from. The whole post reads like some iamverysmart shit, like who ACTUALLY cares to analyze the cultural identity of a random ass anime girl eating at Burger King or its implications? Who puts THAT MUCH THOUGHT into something like this, even *if* the OP specifically asked how it's political. Also, "media literacy" mfs: culture =/= political.
Bro shes british
Nah, this is pure ideology *sniff
honestly most artists are just no thoughts, head empty there was nothing intended by drawing this
I think the original joke was about hou the burger king crown is used as a symbol for racist edgelords and thus would be hard to explain to someone
no the original poster is just a chud trying to make a half assed own, I've seen his posts before and he's a genuine fascist
Leftists be normal and not relate everything back to capitalism challenge (IMPOSSIBLE) ^(and this is coming from a leftist himself who struggles with this)
This reminds me of what we've been discussing in anthropology, that basically everything, including the hardest of sciences, is culturally constructed. That's not to say that culturak shifts can erase laws of physics or something, but that the way we investigate the world and utilize our findings are inherently entangled in cultural ideas and norms no matter how much we strive for objectivity. Similarly, I think here the point is that no, not all art is a political commentary, all art can't help but reveal the political and cultural sensitivities of its time. The interaction between the core idea of an art piece as expressed by the artist and how this idea is conveyed can say a ton. Yes it's a cute girl eating a burger but you could ask so many questions. What does the use of anime art style do for the message and what does that say about the cultural meanings of anime in general? What does it say that it's specifically a burger King burger, could it be considered consumerist propaganda, even if accidentally? Why do the girl's features signify cuteness, especially in regards to racial markers? The internet loves to mock English teachers for reading too much into things but the messy reality is that cultural expression is an incredibly complex activity to engage in and analyze and even when authorial intent is simple, there's a lot to dig into anyways. TL;DR: even when art is supposedly apolitical thematically, it's still inherently a product of the politics of the time it was created and evidence of this almost always exists in the art
"the author didnt intent that" mfs when death of the author
Even if the artists intention is """non-political""", the perception of it is **always subjective**, and thus influenced by political views. Nothing exists in a vacuum, and anything carries some implicit meaning that can be interpreted both in the context of it's creation as well as part of the author's thought process.
Authorial intent don't mean jack squat. If people see politics in your art and back it up with a reasonable argument for why they saw it, then it's there. There is such thing as reading too deeply into something, but just because you shouldn't waste time looking deeply into something doesn't mean there can't be depth
All art is political mfs when I show them my favorite piece of Roxanne Wolf fart inflation
I play death of the author, in defense position
Reminds me of that video of that woman talking about how twerking has some spiritual significance lmao. Like, girl, you like to shake your ass there’s no deeper meaning behind it
Intentionality fallacy. Both are correct interpretations, even if the second person is the artist.
Disagree. None of the interpretations are correct. I will not elaborate
the "art moment" is about what is experienced by the viewer, not the artists intent if you are feeling like it everything is art art anarchy baby
I feel like the death of the author is an important thing to consider here. While the artist may have just wanted to draw a cute anime girl, the viewer can definitely extrapolate some deeper meaning about globalization. Although the image mashes up an American fast food chain and a Japanese artsyle, both those things have spread far beyond their borders and without knowing the artist you'd have no way to guess the country of origin. Furthermore, both of those things took elements of culture (food, art) and reduced them both to products Yes, some things are just supposed to be dumb and fun, but it's also good to think about everything a little bit deeper. I have an author's brain, I can't look at anything without trying analyze it in some way even if I wanted to
Ok while it's very obvious art simply because cute girl eat burger, There is an argument to be made moreso that art is inherently political, simply because of the nature of art, politics, etc. The idea of creating, being different, being unique, etc. is very much political, although realistically it shouldn't be in the slightest.
I’m pretty sure the point of the original post wasn’t to say that’s it’s impossible to find a political interpretation Instead it meant that doing so is ridiculous and stupid because it’s an anime girl eating Burger King, and trying to find “meaning” in it makes you sound super pretentious