#HOWEVER! I also focus a lot of my time in academia on media analysis. I spend a lot of my time in therapy on character analysis. | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

housmania · 7 years ago

Text

In Defense of TJLC

A response to this Slate podcast and to general misconceptions.

Hello! Call me soe. I like cats, BBC Sherlock, and friendly online communities. I hope you do too.

I also blog about TJLC. So, when a Slate podcast came out this week portraying TJLCers in a jarringly negative light, I was dismayed. What I heard was not the community I know.

This post’s aim is to tell the other side of the story. I’m writing both for people who support TJLC and were shocked to hear of the podcast, and for people outside TJLC whose initial impressions have been skewed by the podcast or other outside sources.

I’ll address four of the most common arguments against TJLC through the lens of the argument presented by Willa Paskin, the podcast’s creator:

TJLC, as a theory, is “far-fetched” and merits no serious consideration.

TJLCers are dogmatic, ideological, and close-minded.

TJLCers have hated on people outside of TJLC to an unusual and appalling extent.

TJLC has brought more harm into the world than good.

I intend to refute these points. In the process, I hope to represent your run-of-the-mill TJLCer: not a hateful extremist, but rather someone who supports a theory, enjoys discussing it, and is happy to let those who don’t live their happy lives.

It also means adhering to the standards of a good TJLC meta writer: going through the podcast thoroughly, addressing Ms. Paskin’s correct insights as well as her failings; reading and acknowledging critics and downright opponents; citing all sources; and remaining civil and open-minded. I wish Ms. Paskin had afforded us these privileges.

I genuinely believe that Ms. Paskin meant well. Nonetheless, the biases of her sources, combined with several misconceptions and imperfect research, result in a piece that portrays TJLC inaccurately.

To understand what the podcast got wrong, we first need to cover:

What is TJLC?

TJLC is the theory that the characters John Watson and Sherlock Holmes will end up in a canonical romantic relationship on the BBC show Sherlock. People who support this theory are called TJLCers. TJLCers write analyses of the show, the Sherlock Holmes stories, and numerous other sources known as “metas”.

TJLC is short for “The Johnlock Conspiracy.” I must immediately clarify that this name is a joke. It began humorously and is always, always used tongue-in-cheek. Keep this in mind: Many misconceptions about TJLC arise from the fact that we take very few things seriously, as I’ll discuss later.

What isn’t TJLC?

TJLC is not the same as Johnlock.

Johnlock refers just to shipping John/Sherlock—thinking they’d make a cute romantic couple, without necessarily having any expectation of that happening on the show.

More fundamentally: Johnlock is about creating transformative, creative content. It’s about making something new. In essence, it’s fiction.

TJLC is about analyzing evidence that’s already there. It’s nonfiction.

Ms. Paskin frequently blurs the lines between the two and mourns TJLC for not having the same level of creativity. She explains, for example, that fandom reads into tiny elements of a show to create a transformative space. But TJLC is not transformative. That’s Johnlock.

Neither is TJLC based on wanting the show to “bend to [our] desires”—i.e., Johnlock shippers projecting wishful thinking onto the show. I’m happy to serve as a counterexample for that! I actually didn’t ship Johnlock at all before discovering TJLC. Rather, I found the theories plausible and loved the idea that a show centered around deduction and analysis could also be the subject of deduction and analysis.

Of course, people who already ship Johnlock are more likely to be attracted to TJLC. But the basis of TJLC is not to “see in the story that you have, the story that you want” (46:40)—that’s shipping—but to analyze the story you already have.

I cannot stress this enough: TJLC is analysis, NOT shipping.

TJLC and the “Great Game”

As the podcast explains, TJLCers aren’t the first analyze Sherlock Holmes. Fans of the originals have been analyzing the stories since the 1880s. These early theorists actually gave the name to two kinds of fan analysis: Watsonian and Doylist.

Watsonian fans played the “Great Game,” treating the stories like a real world. Doyle didn’t exist, so every detail had to be explained in-universe rather than attributed to author techniques or error. They’re closer to your modern shippers, creating headcanons to fill in gaps.

Doylist fans acknowledged that (no duh) Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was a real person, and therefore analyzed the stories as works of literature. They are essentially literary analysts and critics, the kind that wind up on JSTOR.

TJLCers are Doylists. Obviously, someone made the show. That means we analyze character arcs, cinematographic techniques, and rhetorical devices in the dialogue like a researcher in film studies or literature would.

Ms. Paskin warns that in the Watsonian Great Game, people kept “tongues planted firmly in cheek; TJLCers, not so much.” And yet, that’s the point! You wouldn’t expect a literary analyst to go “lol maybe The Great Gatsby criticizes society but like who knows” any more than you’d want Watsonians to really believe that because John Watson’s wife called him James, his middle name is Hamish (Scottish for James) rather than acknowledging that Doyle just forgot. A ridiculous premise entails a humorous approach. A reasonable premise entails a rational one.

TJLC isn’t quite the same as highbrow analysis, however, for three reasons:

First, we use our analyses to speculate about the future of the show. We don’t have the privilege of analyzing a complete work. In that sense, the closest analogy I can think of is that of political analysts: examining what’s already been said and done to predict what will happen next.

Second, we evolved from a fandom space. That means that the barrier between TJLC and Johnlock, between nonfiction analysis and creative fiction, is never as solid as it would be in academia. Furthermore, a significant number of TJLC meta writers also engage in fictional fanworks, making it more difficult to distinguish where hard analysis ends and transformative work begins. I’ll go into some of the nuances of meta in a bit.

Third, the people in TJLC are generally queer women and often young. And we can’t discuss biases against fandom and TJLC without acknowledging sexism and homophobia. When a film critic writes a theory, it’s deep; when we do, it’s ludicrous. Paradise Lost is fanfiction just as much as AO3, but only the former is treated as legitimate literature. Theories about straight couples are plausible; ones about queer ones are suddenly delusional or fetishization. Adult fanboys are mature content creators; fangirls are hysterical.

Conversations about the implicit biases in media depictions of fandom aren’t my focus here. Nonetheless, it’s crucial to bear in mind that highbrow criticisms of fandom that focus only on its ill effects and ignore the complexity, depth, community bonding, and social change that fandom (analytical and transformative) creates often denigrate fans as immature and delusional without considering whether that accurately represents even a significant minority of a fandom. It’s a bias that we should all keep in check.

As progressive as Ms. Paskin may be, the podcast also falls into this trap. In particular, she emphasizes sensationalist depictions of TJLC theories—highlighting far-fetched theories and glossing over deeper points—and the contemptible actions of very few TJLCers while glossing over the far more plausible mainstream theories and kindness of nearly all TJLCers. As a result, we naturally look hysterical and delusional.

So let’s tackle each of those issues: TJLC as a theory and the behavior of the TJLC community.

TJLC as a Theory

If you don’t support TJLC, I’m not asking you to be convinced by a few paragraphs. The aim here is simply to explain why TJLC is plausible.

Ms. Paskin asserts that (1) TJLC is completely unsupported by the original Sherlock Holmes stories, (2) that romantic coding in the show is simply “a knowing wink,” and that (3) TJLC “is based on an unfalsifiable premise: that the creators are lying to you.” In fact:

1. TJLC is supported by the original stories.

The Sherlock Holmes canon contains significant, documented evidence of queer coding similar to other works of the same time period. It’s also reasonable to theorize, based on biographical data, that Doyle himself was bisexual.

The extent to which the stories were deliberately coded is a matter of debate. Yet Ms. Paskin simply asserts that “Conan Doyle wasn’t trying to create a homosexual subtext when he wrote the characters, but he did write a deep and committed friendship.” As @one-thousand-splendid-stars put it:

How on earth can anyone possibly know if the homoeroticism was intentional or not, when ACD could’ve been persecuted for admitting it, or making it more obvious?

Ms. Paskin’s assertion, which does not acknowledge any evidence to the contrary, again conflates Johnlock shippers with TJLCers. Johnlock is about transformative fiction; TJLC is about nonfiction analysis.

Ms. Paskin also suggests that TJLCers are “queering” the text, except that queering generally implies a queer theory approach to something that wasn’t queer to begin with. Our whole objective is to reveal that the text was originally queer.

2. The basis for TJLC is the show itself.

Ms. Paskin supposes that TJLC is “is based on an unfalsifiable premise: that the creators are lying to you.”

But TJLC isn’t based on anything the creators have said. It’s based on analysis of the show itself.

There’s a whole lot of analysis; good summaries are here and here. Essentially, we argue that given the level of coding on the show, the most probable outcome is that there is deliberate subtext meant to foreshadow that John and Sherlock will become a couple. Elements like Sherlock being indifferent to women, yet “romantic entanglement would complete [him] as a human being” suggest that the subtext isn’t just a “knowing wink,” as Ms. Paskin asserts: it would be poor writing (not to mention queerbaiting) to complete such a setup and not follow through.

3. The creators

Ms. Paskin finds it alarming that TJLCers believe Moffat and Gatiss are deliberately lying when they say that Johnlock will not become canon.

And normally, I would agree! Except that Moffat and Gatiss have a long history of lying through their teeth about plot developments. For example, they vehemently repeated that The Abominable Bride would be a stand-alone episode completely independent of the show, but it turned out to be a drugged Sherlock’s theorizing about Moriarty’s plan. And before Series 4, they said that Mary would become a long-running character, then killed her off in the next episode.

So it’s not a stretch to think that they could be lying about one more thing, particularly when TJLC relies on independent evidence from the show itself.

In fact, Paskin argues that TJLCers, like Watsonians playing the Great Game, base their theories on a “contradiction”: “On the one hand the author might as well not exist, but then on the other hand, this person who doesn’t exist has made this perfectly explicable logical thing.”

Except that unlike Watsonians, we do acknowledge that the creators exist. We analyze the show as a work of fiction, with narrative techniques that can be analyzed just as much as plot elements.

Furthermore, the fact that the creators lie constantly doesn’t mean we don’t pay attention to what they do say. They have large incentives to keep upcoming plot twists secret, but that doesn’t mean they can’t reveal their motivations and influences. A lawyer questioning a lying witness can still gain information from what they do say.

Take a closer example: Say I went back to 1897 and asked Bram Stoker if there’s queer coding in Dracula (which is now well-documented). He would probably respond along the lines of “I’m not a sodomite; also, what???” But he might wax poetic about homoeroticism in Walt Whitman’s poetry and mention that his charismatic but domineering idol Henry Irving was the basis for Dracula.

So no, there’s no contradiction between analyzing the show and the creators’ influences while still believing that they don’t want to reveal upcoming plot points.

The Behavior of the TJLC Community

How Theories Work

Ms. Paskin rattles off several far-fetched TJLC theories that make TJLC as a whole sound ridiculous. Furthermore, she implies that TJLC is a monolithic community with a “dogmatic” belief in all of these theories, such that criticism and discussion don’t exist.

Guess what? I’m in TJLC, and I don’t believe half the theories she mentioned. That’s because TJLC is much less uniform than its detractors would believe. Furthermore, the general level of confidence that people have in a given piece of evidence depends on its strength. In other words, the more evidence for something, the more likely that TJLCers agree on it. The less evidence for something, the more likely we are to treat it as just something cool that could turn out to be coincidence.

We can divide TJLC meta into five basic categories:

1. Foundational meta

These are well-respected analysis of character arcs, dialogue, and other clearly deliberate plot elements such as this one. Pretty much all TJLCers agree with them. These are your best-researched, most widespread meta; they form the true basis of TJLC. Here are some examples. And yet they hardly show up in Ms. Paskin’s discussion, because they don’t make TJLC sound too far-fetched.

2. Circumstantial evidence

TJLC can stand on foundational meta alone, but there’s also secondary evidence to support it. This includes the “drinks code” (the theory that beverages serve as symbols on the show, supported by subsequent creator remarks) and similar theories that can’t hold up TJLC by themselves, but do provide extra evidence and add nuance to theories about character arcs and plot development.

3. Accessory meta

These are analyses of elements that could well turn out to be coincidence due to scarce evidence. If true, they allow us to establish character arcs in greater depth, but it’s perfectly possible that any given one is coincidence. These include the theories on wallpaper and lighting that Ms. Paskin reports as though they were the pillars of TJLC. They’re theories that I read and go, “Hm, interesting; maybe.”

4. Spinoff theories

These are theories that deal with specific paths the show might take. They generally have groups of supporters within TJLC, but each spinoff theory usually only has a smaller group of supporters within the larger TJLC community.

It’s important to note that many major theories don’t have to do with Johnlock at all. Take M-theory, the idea that Mycroft and other characters are under Moriarty’s thumb, or EMP, the idea that some episodes take place in Sherlock’s mind palace. If, as Ms. Paskin asserts, TJLC is about wishful thinking and wanting Johnlock to be canon, what would be the point of these? Furthermore, if TJLC is monolithic and dogmatic, why do we constantly discuss and critique these theories in constructive discussions? I had to make a whole table of theories after Series 4 because everyone’s opinion was so different!

5. Crack theories

These are usually clearly labeled “crack” and are never meant to be taken seriously. Again, TJLC contains a lot of humor. So sometimes, we goof off and write theories like this one that are clearly ridiculous, usually with an exaggerated conspiratorial tone, to have fun in the spirit of the Watsonians. Unfortunately, some people outside TJLC think we actually take these theories seriously and accordingly treat us as crazy people. Guys… Ctrl+F “crack” first.

To summarize:

TJLC contains theories with varying levels of evidence that are treated with corresponding levels of seriousness.

TJLCers are far from dogmatic. Different people have different views, and that’s OK.

TJLC is founded on criticism and discussion (here’s an example). By disagreeing on meta, we gain better insight into the characters.

Addressing Ms. Paskin: The theories she dwells on are EMP and M-Theory (40:04 and 10:37), both spinoff theories. They do not form part of the main body of TJLC, and fans are far more flexible about that stuff because it’s not nearly as firmly supported as foundational meta. She cites a clip analyzing Mycroft’s theme in the score, which is accessory meta that could well turn out to be coincidence. (By the way, I have serious doubts about all three of these theories. And TJLC is perfectly accepting of that!)

She also talks about loudest-subtext’s meta on the 2009 BBC queer representation report, whose objective was to demonstrate that it was possible for TJLC to happen from a production/permission standpoint, not to prove that TJLC was happening on the show. In that sense, it’s closer to circumstantial evidence.

She also fears that TJLCers “try to find order and logic and reason in every detail.” Again, sane TJLCers treat less solid evidence as less likely to be true. Caveat: Some TJLCers do go overboard. But they do not represent the overwhelming, sane majority.

TJLC Culture

Confidence and Criticism

Ms. Paskin finds it alarming that many TJLCers regarded TJLC as far more well-supported, even certain, than “an opinion or a possibility” or “just one ship among many” (14:50).

And yet, in an academic setting, isn’t it normal to think that the theory you researched and support is correct? Again, we hit the boundary in how the public perceives highbrow research and fan analysis. TJLC was not “just one ship among many” because (again) it’s not a ship, it’s a theory based on research and analysis. So naturally, we had a higher level of confidence in TJLC becoming canon than a shipper with an unsupported ship would.

Ms. Paskin implies that this confidence led directly to TJLC being unable to take criticism and therefore hating on people outside the community, since “denying [TJLC] was denying the truth” (14:55). But—first off—confidence does not directly lead to thin skins. Again, we debate everything. If good meta writers couldn’t change their minds given new evidence, TJLC wouldn’t exist.

Yet even when some TJLCers were more certain about TJLC than could be reasonably expected, the overwhelming majority was perfectly nice. We can, in fact, agree to disagree with others.

But this brings us to the most painful part of the podcast:

Fandom Toxicity: The Broad Picture

The podcast, having painted TJLCers as delusional, dogmatic crusaders, goes on to argue that TJLCers hated on people outside TJLC to an unusual and deplorable amount, such that TJLC’s main effect was to increase toxicity in the Sherlock fandom.

For starters: Yes, a few TJLCers did fit this despicable mold. I universally condemn people who went out of their way to attack people outside or inside the community. They are an insult to TJLC’s values of inclusivity and rational debate. And my heart goes out to the people who suffered as a result of them.

But guess what? All the TJLCers I’ve talked to agree with that. Because the fact is that awful people form an incredibly small minority of TJLC.

Most of the TJLCers who listened to the podcast found this to be the most insulting and painful part. They’ve reiterated time and again that the community as a whole is not a toxic place. @artfulkindoforder put it best:

So many TJLCers were never mean to anybody.

You can think we’re unrealistic, immature, delusional—fine. But at the end of the day, the overwhelming majority of us stuck to our circles of courteous people and just had fun.

In broad terms, there were several inconsistencies between the podcast and what I found. First, the podcast attributes toxic behavior to large swathes of TJLC, when in fact it tended to be a small group of repeat offenders, many of whom would attack people inside TJLC as well as outside it. loudest-subtext, a longtime TJLC blogger, discussed this here.

Secondly, the podcast makes absolutely no mention of the hate that TJLCers—often perfectly civil ones—received, which makes it easier to paint TJLC as engaging in vicious, one-sided attack. TJLCers, especially at the beginning, received shocking quantities of anonymous hate. Like attacks on people outside TJLC, I’m sure that the attacks on TJLCers were also due to a tiny minority of toxic people. But to gloss over them entirely is to paint an incomplete and biased picture. As @one-thousand-splendid-stars put it:

I’m not going to pretend that there was never nasty behavior from TJLC, but I’m also not going to say her description of us was accurate. She presented the TJLC fandom like it was a toxic cult.... She talked about fandom bullying as though we were never on the receiving end of it, and weren’t ever ridiculed, or called stupid, or sent anon hate, or harassed. To imply that tjlcers were only dishing it out is just flat out inaccurate.

The anonymous attacks on TJLCers had several results. First, TJLC developed a culture that stresses avoiding confrontation with outsiders: leaving other shippers be, unless they seek out TJLC posts. For example, some of the first things I learned were to misspell other ship names on TJLC posts so they wouldn’t show up when people wanted content promoting that ship, and not to reblog posts from outside shippers’ blogs with TJLC-related comments. Far from attacking outsiders, the whole point is to let people who disagree with TJLC do their own thing.

Second, the vast majority of TJLCers despise anon hate because they receive it unusually often. I’ve never seen a community with so many posts reminding people never to resort to it because they’ve seen how it hurt TJLC bloggers.

Third, a handful of TJLCers who got repeated and unwarranted hate did get more combative. But when looking at their later behavior, it’s important to understand that many of them became less willing to compromise on TJLC because they’d seen toxic fans remain unwilling to compromise or debate with them. And most of the conflicts I’ve seen as a result came from anti-TJLC people coming specifically to comment on TJLCers’ posts, not from TJLCers going out of their way to fight non-TJLCers.

Specific Incidents

I didn’t want to rely on secondhand knowledge about hate to write this response. In the spirit of TJLC, I wanted to be fair and impartial. That meant looking through the blogs of people who had received hate inside and outside TJLC. So here’s what I found out:

First off, it was awful. I was looking 4-5 years back to find the worst instances of hate in the community, and I wasn’t used to it because the bloggers I interact with are universally inclusive and civil.

Ms. Paskin discussed three specific incidents on the podcast: top/bottomlock, the 2015 221BCon incident, and post-Series 4 anger.

When top/bottomlock came up, I was baffled. First off, that discussion is ancient. It’s so old that by the time I joined TJLC in late 2015, it had practically died out. More importantly, a “debate” that Ms. Paskin describes as “very specific and dogmatic fanon” was—as I’ve understood—never taken seriously. Again, TJLC is not a very serious place, and people outside it are bound to misinterpret inside jokes. 99% of TJLCers saw top/bottomlock as nothing more than fodder for crack theories, and yet Ms. Paskin’s sources on this issue—none of whom are actually in TJLC—describe it as a debate of monumental importance.

The 2015 221BCon, on the other hand, was a serious conflict. As far as I can tell, people like Emma genuinely suffered, and the fact that neutral fans received anonymous attacks is shameful. But the results of this stretched to TJLCers as well as people outside TJLC, something that the podcast conveniently neglects to mention.

The end of Series 4 disappointed people throughout the Sherlock fandom. I’m not talking about Johnlock: plot inconsistencies, weird characterizations, and plot pulled from a horror movie resulted in its lowest Rotten Tomatoes rating ever. TJLC is too small to have that kind of clout, so to say that TJLCers were the only ones disappointed is clearly inaccurate.

Ms. Paskin claims that Series 4 “seemed straighter, not gayer, than before” and yet John telling Sherlock that “romantic entanglement would complete you as a human being” is uh…pretty gay. For many TJLCers, the problem wasn’t that there wasn’t Johnlock; the problem was that the quality of the show seemed to have drastically decreased.

TJLC immediately split into two groups. One group left TJLC, believing that Moffat and Gatiss had been queerbaiting. Many of them began constructive anti-queerbaiting discussions. Unfortunately, a few took their anger out on the creators.

The resulting hateful messages do not represent the views of the vast majority of former TJLCers, let alone people who still support TJLC. The fact that Amanda Abbington received a death threat is disgusting; and yet in TJLC, she’s always been regarded as a sort of beloved “fandom aunt”. In addition, Ms. Paskin cites an article that claimed that fans “dampened [Martin Freeman’s] enthusiasm.” But that interview has already been revealed as a clickbait-seeking misinterpretation—by Freeman himself.

The second group—those remaining in TJLC—were a bit desperate, and I’ll be the first to admit that several theories with scanty factual basis became more popular then than they would have in calmer times. The Apple Tree Yard theory, for instance, is clearly ridiculous in retrospect. But even I was willing to consider it. (Not my finest moment.) As a side note, however: the far-fetched “China cancelled Johnlock” theory she mentioned is by someone who’s not only outside TJLC, but also notorious for hating it

But regardless of the quality of these theories, 99% of the remaining TJLCers were certainly not hating on people—because who was there to hate, if there was no queerbaiting?

Ultimately, the podcast’s descriptions of hate related to TJLC are one-sided, distorted, and do not reflect the conduct of the overwhelming majority of TJLCers.

Podcast-Specific Errors

There’s a reason why the podcast comes off so different from reality: its research is seriously flawed.

For a podcast about TJLC, Ms. Paskin interviewed a whopping one (1) actual current TJLCer, whom she apparently interviewed after building much of her argument. Every other interviewee was outside TJLC and specifically disliked it. That will hardly make for an unbiased final product.

As a result, she culminates with several remarks that are genuinely insulting. She likens TJLC to “any other standard conspiracy where you have a Judgment Day,” suggesting that we’re irrational and fanatical. She summarizes the entire community as “people being cruel to one another because they disagree about how a fictional TV relationship should turn out,” combining every misconception of (1) TJLC being a ship instead of hard analysis, (2) blaming every TJLCers for the actions of very few, (3) TJLC being a silly fan thing rather than a starting point for meaningful research into queer representation and literary analysis, and (4) ignoring TJLC’s vast contributions to TJLCers’ lives while overemphasizing those who were harmed by it. Both remarks are in keeping with standard media portrayals of fans as irrational and immature. I expected better of her.

Ms. Paskin says that she “had a dream about…digging deeper, talking to more people, ones who could perfectly explain the allure of TJLC to me.” She had the opportunity to interview more actual TJLCers, but didn’t take it.

But the offer still stands! Come talk to us! Learn about what we’re actually like! Criticize our theories, if you think we’re dogmatic. Ask us what we think of TJLC, if you think it ruined our lives. Our ask boxes are wide open!

What the Podcast Left Out

Swimming in descriptions of TJLC as a source of hatred, the podcast glosses over one tiny little detail: that TJLC genuinely improved the lives of the vast majority of TJLCers.

I came out because of TJLC. I learned how to analyze literature because of TJLC. I discovered new parts of history and the queer people who have always been part of it. I found a community of curious, passionate, funny, and kind people who I could talk to.

And I’m just one person. I know people who found lifelong friends because of TJLC, wrote books because of it, became students of gender and sexuality studies, found a community of support when they had mental health, financial, or other personal problems, and had a blast theorizing about the possibility of landmark LGBT representation. Heck, Rebekah of TJLC Explained filmed hours of people talking about how much the community meant to them. And I even know former TJLCers who, though disappointed with the show, still appreciate how much it taught them about queer theory, queer history, and themselves.

Evaluating TJLC as a whole, it’s not far-fetched, dogmatic, or primarily a source of “darkness.” It’s a legitimate theory, supported by debate and rational analysis, that improved the lives of far more people than it ever hurt.

You’ve read this. Now what?

If you’re in the media:

This Slate podcast is now the #1 result when I search The Johnlock Conspiracy. Thousands of kind and logical voices on Tumblr and other sites are immediately silenced by well-known publications. So yeah, I care what the media thinks. Few voices have widespread effects. I want people trying to find out about TJLC to get a well-researched, less biased view of it.

Please, take your research seriously when discussing fandom. Interview actual members of the community. Be aware of the public bias of fans as unworthy of serious attention and unable to construct rational, legitimate arguments. And fight against it.

If you’re inside TJLC:

Researching for this meant a trip into the darkest parts of TJLC. We need to acknowledge that not everyone in this community is nice to everyone all of the time, and this resulted in incidents that seriously hurt some people. Remaining civil, especially when faced with disagreement or outright malice, means we keep this community friendly for everyone.

If you’re outside TJLC:

Thank you for taking the time to learn about a topic from someone you don’t necessarily agree with. We need more of your open-mindedness in the world.

If you completely disagree with me, please don’t send me anon hate. Constructive criticism is cool. Anon hate is lame. Be cool. But I welcome questions, comments, and constructive debate. My ask box is always open.

Thank you for reading.

-soe

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

@thesaltofcarthage @devoursjohnlock @waitedforgarridebs @one-thousand-splendid-stars @garkgatiss @shinka @witch-lock @jenna221b @sarahthecoat @inevitably-johnlocked @the-7-percent-solution @artfulkindoforder @warmth-and-constancy@marcespot@whtboutdeductions@tjlcisthenewsexy @bluebluenova @heimishtheidealhusband @tendergingergirl @sagestreet @ebaeschnbliah @221bloodnun @marcelock @watsonshoneybee @victorianfantasywatson

#tjlc #slate #johnlock #sherlock #bbc sherlock #soe #slate podcast

97 notes · View notes

thedatasciencehyderabad · 3 years ago

Text

Greatest Data Science Programs In Hyderabad

Stemming is a technique utilized in Natural Language Processing , which plucks out the bottom type of phrases by the elimination of affixes from the phrases. Lemmatization is one other generally used NLP approach, which combines the completely different inflected word types to be analysed as a single item. You will learn about the utilization of this predictive mannequin in this module. Sorting As the name suggests, Sorting is a technique to arrange the information in a particular order for a transparent understanding of reported data.

Not solely from Hyderabad, however we also get students enrolling from Bangalore, Nagpur, Bhubaneshwar, Delhi, Mumbai, Pune & various different cities, India. These deliverables help in addressing the goals of fixing the problem at hand. Some of them are, Prediction evaluation based on the inputs given, Social media recommendations used on YouTube/Netflix, Segmentation for advertising, forecasts for sales and revenue, Optimization for danger administration, etc. We encourage all candidates to amass complete details about this program before enrolling. Once you enroll yourself for this course you won't have the power to declare any refund for the quantity that has been paid. However, there's a deferment policy the place a candidate can choose to postpone his enrollment to a later batch.

Artificial Intelligence is expounded to constructing good machines able to perform duties and mimicking people. Big Data has its day-to-day functions in Social Media, Stock Exchange, and Airports, that generate a huge amount of knowledge every second. Big Data is the collection of giant volume information, growing exponentially with time, the data may be structured, semi-structured, or unstructured. They utilize fundamental knowledge of arithmetic, statistics, laptop science, and so on. Data scientists clear up complex information issues with their strong knowledge and experience in certain scientific disciplines. A. The students can pursue ME/ MTech/ MSc/ MBA/ PGDM in Big Data Analytics at PG-level.

We may also assist our students in figuring out the areas where there’s room for enhancement and practice them to attain perfection. Our mock interview classes will help college students in building their confidence to clear the real-time interview rounds of multinational firms. By the time of this Data Science Course in Hyderabad program completion, college students will be assisted in resume preparation and interview scheduling. Data Scientists will also be serving the enterprises in constructing correct marketing methods, better useful resource management, analyzing their competitors’ metrics and far more. The prime focus of this course is to transform college students into totally competent Data Science specialists.

Instructor-led online coaching is an interactive mode of coaching where members and coaches will log in at the similar time and reside classes will be carried out nearby. These periods will present scope for active interplay between you and the trainer. 360DigiTMG provides one of the best Data Science certification on-line training in Hyderabad along with classroom and self-paced e-learning certification programs. The complete Data Science course details can be present in our course agenda on this page. With the rise in Big Data & the prominence for information pushed choice making corporations are investing closely in Data Science.

I extremely advocate this course with my full conviction & sincerity to everyone who needs to begin out a career in DATA SCIENCE expertise. Thank you very much Innomatix Team, for serving me to begin my Data Science Career. Time collection evaluation is performed on the info which is collected with respect to time. Understand the time series components, Level, Trend, Seasonality, Noise and strategies to establish them in a time sequence knowledge.

Since they are additionally into development we're also getting entry to real-time projects. Thanks so much to Innomatics coaching institute and I undoubtedly suggest this to everybody. The course in Hyderabad is designed to go well with the needs of scholars as properly as working professionals. We at 360DigiTMG give our college students the option of each classroom and on-line studying. The average wage of a Data Scientist is Rs.10.3 lakhs each year in Hyderabad, India.

Capstone projects gave a lot of insights about the actual life industry problems and points. Career counselling periods helped me ace a quantity of interview rounds. The program is ideal for any Fresher who wants to be taught Data Science and make a rewarding profession out of it.

Our trainers & mentors shall be fastidiously monitoring the performance of each and every pupil who will be then suggesting priceless guidelines following which students can tremendously improve their overall performance. We may also be assisting the students in resume preparation and interview scheduling. We shall be extending our 100 percent help to the scholars to help them get efficiently placed.

They are led by a team of McKinsey, IIM, ISB, FMS and IIT alumni having rich industry experience. We have got 7 different schools working in our Data Science Training In Hyderabad program. All our trainers are real-world analytics specialists from IIT & IIM background. It additionally offers a Data Science course in Hyderabad with an excessive quality Training & Friendly surroundings to study. I enrolled with Mind Q for a Data Science course in Hyderabad after visiting multiple institutes.

Yes, data science training in hyderabad are good as they've concise content with a major focus on practice and workout routines. MBA in Data Science and Analytics is considered one of the programs offered at the postgraduate degree in the domain of Data Science by only two colleges in India- SCIT Pune, and KJ Somaiya, Mumbai. Admission to the BCA Data Science courses is through the benefit of the category 12th marks. BSc Data Science and BCA Data Science are the two most popular UG Data Science programs in India. The length of the PG Diploma in data science programs typically ranges from 6 months- 2 years.

One of the most recent applied sciences that have attained a speedy demand in Data Science. Data science has turned into a necessity for most industries in recent instances. Many are in the hunt for reliable Data Science institutes to master this exciting know-how and have a tremendous future.

In addition to those places of work, 360DigiTMG believes in constructing and nurturing future entrepreneurs via its Franchise verticals and therefore has awarded in excess of 30 franchises across the globe. This ensures that our high quality education and related services attain out to all corners of the world. Furthermore, this resonates with our international strategy of catering to the wants of bridging the hole between the industry and academia globally. Post completion of the training, one should take an internet examination facilitated by the college and may attain 60% or extra to complete the course and gain the certification. Subsequently participants can verify their alumni standing on SGIT , Steinbeis Global Institute Tübingen.

Professionals who don't have any prior knowledge of the field can simply start with this Data Science certification training as you’ll achieve a radical knowledge of the basic concepts as nicely. Put yourself in the place of a hiring supervisor; say her name is Paula. She has carried out a lot of analysis and has determined to hire at an entry-level. The person she hires might need to work with her and her staff of data scientists, enterprise analysts, data analysts, and business intelligence developers. Yes, this data science course in hyderabad is appropriate for recent graduates in addition to experienced professionals who are willing to start a career in Data Science.

Data Science has a number of functions starting from fraud detection, demand forecasting, danger evaluation & administration, seismic interpretation, visitors control and recommender techniques and more. The functions of Data Science aren’t restricted to anybody's explicit field and could be seen across the industry verticals. So wait no more, the time is ripe to step into the job market of Data Science. Master data of the highest Data Science skills & attributes that would get you instantly employed by enrolling for our superior Data Science Course Training in Hyderabad program. Knowledge of Statistics & probability is should for this Data Science course.

For more information

360DigiTMG - Data Analytics, Data Science Course Training Hyderabad

Address - 2-56/2/19, 3rd floor,, Vijaya towers, near Meridian school,, Ayyappa Society Rd, Madhapur,, Hyderabad, Telangana 500081

099899 94319

https://g.page/Best-Data-Science

0 notes

attemptingthoughtfulness · 5 years ago

Text

Narrative Reconstructions of History or The Butler isn’t as bad as I thought

For my English finals we had to watch two movies, one of them was the 2013 movie The Butler that retold the story of Cecil Gaines, an African-American who became a butler at the White House in the 1930s after escaping enslavement in the South. It greatly dramatizes the Civil Rights Movement through the lense of a figure whose job description entails to be non-political (which is an entirely different can of worms). The movie had gotten a lot of flag due to its Oscar-bait properties and stretched the phrase “inspired by real events” quite a bit, inventing an entire b-plot to heighten the tension and create conflict.

When I first watched the movie, I met it with the scepticism we all reserve for most things we’re forced to consume and don’t really have any personal stakes in. It was an Oscar-bait, it wasn’t historically accurate and it wasn’t very good – narratively and visually. It was okay, from what I remember more than a year later, but it did inspire a rather lengthy written rant the lights of which I would love to share if the hard drive it is on wasn’t literally 600 kilometres away from where I’m stuck in social distancing.

From what I mostly remember, I criticized it a lot for being historically inaccurate and there were definitely some weird choices from cinematographers but here we get from my rather apologetic insights to my passive aggressive rant: So. I just. Read… I mean, basically a rant on AO3 that was a version of all those very good and insightful video essays that centre around media criticism on pop culture. Basically, it was “Hamilton is bad and here’s why” and I mean, of course I just had to read it, right? I am aware that I am a bit more biased than the usual Joe, but yeah, let’s get into it.

For what the description promised, an essay on deconstructing Hamilton the Broadway Musical and something about the toxic fandom, it started out very rough before I realized what was going on. This wasn’t the work of a media critic at all (okay, if you publish your essays on AO3 and not on your personal tumblr-blog, the aspects of academically sound criticism seem laughable), it was a historian’s perspective.

It is actually better than I initially gave it credit for, not much but definitely a little. I can’t really comment on the aspects of the toxic fandom because I’m quite new to this and never really deeply engage with The Fandom™ as a collective entity but fandoms, by their nature, tend to be very intense and often times inspire a lot of gate keeping and, in that regard, toxicity, so I am sure the writer had some reason for being annoyed by it.

What I had a problem with was the second kind of argument: They were doing what I had done with The Butler, but better. With a more clickbaity title, but still. They wrote a lengthy, historical analysis citing sources and everything; it wasn’t “deconstruction” in the way it’s generally used in academia, or rather philosophy, referring to semiotic analysis rather than literally taking something apart. It was historical analysis, which is, for all intents and purposes, fine.

So, here’s my problem with that: it felt like a rant because it was a rant. It wasn’t an essay because the way it constructed its argument towards the conclusion kind of didn’t work and I should have expected that, but I didn’t, so, let’s get started.

The entirety of the document is “here’s where Hamilton is historically inaccurate” and “here’s why your waifus are shit”, which is. Big ouf. Until we reach the conclusion, which did have rather meaningful insights that we’ll be getting to later. The reason reading it prompted me to write this rant was that I, since The Butler, had finally understood what narrative and creative freedom means. There are actually a lot of parallels between The Butler and Hamilton (one’s probably got more artistically skilled people and a bigger box office but let’s not get there): They’re fictionalized history for consumption – and to a wider extend education.

What Hamilton ultimately did was to take a lot of creative freedom to make a good mixtape and stage show and one could argue, that it is a perfectly sound decision to dramatize and focus on certain aspects of the Revolutionary War than all of them. And I would agree with that argument. I don’t think judging media for its accuracy towards its source material is a very productive way to look at; no matter if you don’t – or particularly if you do – care a lot for its origins. I won’t go too “Death of the Author” on you, because that’s not really the conversation we’re having here and because context does matter and there are more layers to that argument.

You could also make the same argument for the “your waifu is trash”-part, that however we chose to fictionalize a stage musical that already is a narrative construction of history in our heads (in the business we call that “headcanon”) doesn’t really matter. At this point it’s a story of a story of a person who’s been dead for centuries that we only have stories about – it’s pretty much the closest to fantasy we have for reality.

But here’s where that rather long historical analysis in search of inaccuracies and falsehoods has a point that it communicates rather poorly but is a very valid point: History doesn’t exist in a vacuum and how and who we chose to idealize it and its actors in our heads does have effects on how we view history. The reason media that is based on history is often times criticised is because it’s critical (pun intended) to cautiously keep our eyes on the way it sheds light on its actors, on who we chose to dramatize, who we antagonize, whose story we tell. Stories, by their nature, are not reality, they can’t be. They’re narratives that are cherry picked and cherry picked for a reason – and they have a huge responsibility in the impact they have.

While “The Butler” performed unexpectedly poorly at the box office and is probably only watched by bored English students in one of Germany’s 16 states, Hamilton dwarfs that by comparison probably going down in history (pun intended) as one of the biggest cultural artefacts of the early 21rst century, while telling the heroic story of way more #problematic people.

But here’s a thing I learned from all the Hamilton animatics on YouTube: Hamilton the American Musical has ceased to be solely a musical on history; there’s a reason the AO3 fandom-tag for Hamilton is “Hamilton (Miranda)” and not “18th century revolutionary war” or “history” or “actual Alexander Hamilton”.

Here’s a question: Do you even know how Hamilton looked like? How Lafayette or Mulligan looked like? If you aren’t an American citizen and carry his face around in your purse all the time, you probably don’t. I’m sure I didn’t until I searched for songs of the musical “Hamilton” on Google and have his portrait pop up. I would argue that most people who know and love and listen to Hamilton don’t imagine the actual, history-canon, Alexander Hamilton when they imagine the story of the musical, the imagine Lin Manuel Miranda in the costume and role of Alexander Hamilton.

I remember the outrage when Hamilton got released about the historical inaccuracy for casting people of color as the founding fathers and Miranda actually had to justify it by saying he casted whoever was best for the job, which is a perfectly fine statement, and that race is a social construct and it really doesn’t matter, but I bet he also thought at some point that if he only casted historically accurate it would have been the whitest musical ever – even whiter than musicals historically already were. The 1770s were pretty white in terms of players in major historical events and who was allowed to fight in war and participate in politics. Like, super white. Just imagine how fucking white a musical on war and politics would have been.

I’m not saying it doesn’t matter. It does. I’m not saying Hamilton the American Musical can be viewed completely shut off from its historical roots, and in fact shouldn’t be - it’s important to remember that probably every single one of them was super problematic by today’s standards. I’m not saying the historical lense is a wrong method of criticism, it isn’t. But I’m also saying that this are not reasons to disregard it as a meaningful piece of art and ironically Hamilton, the musical not the person, makes the exact same argument in its inherent flawedness: History matters and breathes in our present and telling those stories is important.

0 notes

bitch-a-la-mode · 7 years ago

Note

What's it like being an anthro major? I've been thinking about going to back to school for it.

YAY! Something I know about! So basically Anthropology is the study of humans (in Greek “anthropos” literally means “human” and logos means “study”; it’s the study of humans!) One of the first things to know about anthropology is that there are 4 subfields (3 depending on where you are). These fields can be dissected into smaller fields, but for now the main fields are as so:

Cultural/Social Anthropology- basically the study of different cultures and societies. This study gets confused a lot with sociology. But, from my experience as a sociology minor, they’re pretty different. While sociology focuses mainly on creating arguments from statistical analysis, cultural anthro focuses on small groups, studying them, and writing about them (sometimes making comparisons or arguments). There are also smaller fields within this field that focus on specific things (so like my professor has her PHD in cultural anthropology, and she specializes in medical anthropology. She basically studies how medicine is different in one place versus the other and how things like gender, race, and sexual orientation effect the kind of care you get at a doctors office.) basically you can study pretty much anything and call it “culture”. Your choice of fashion is culture, your hair is culture, how you eat a burger is culture, everything is culture. This field can probably give you the most to work with. A big thing to remember is that you have to be very open minded when studying a culture.

Linguistics- now linguistics has become very popular in media recently to the point where people (especially people who don’t know much about Anthropology) think that it’s a independent field of study (which it is not, it’s a subfield). Because of its media attention, some people are kinda confused as to what they do. Linguists study language as you might have guessed. Now I’m not the biggest fan of linguistics so I might be a little biased or give you slightly incorrect information. But from what I know and understand, linguists basically study how language changes based on the language being spoken and the society. For example, the way you talk to your friend is different to how you would talk to your boss. Another big thing is how language changes based on historical influence. So like the way you use a word now is different from how you would have used it 100 years ago. Linguistics love slang. They love learning how to use words differently (I had a professor who didn’t understand why people used the word “mood” and once we explained it, she thought it was the most interesting thing ever and talked about it for 3 classes straight). They have all these fancy names for things in language like “phonemes” and in my opinion it’s probably the hardest subfield to study. They like dissecting grammar rules and understanding them on such a deep level that unless you dedicate all your time to this study, you’ll probably never fully understand it.

Physical/ Biological Anthropology: now there have been many debates about this field. While Anthropology is a social science, bio anthro does a LOT with the physical sciences (mostly biology, hence the name). A lot of universities consider it as a new degree and depending on the school, you could either get a degree in science or the arts. But I digress. Basically this field studies humans on a physical level. They like studying our relatives, the gorillas, and the physical aspects of humans. Evolution is their best friend! While cultural and linguistics studies ideas, bio anthros study the physical aspects of humans. I know a lot of people who get degrees in this and go to med school because you learn so much about the body! I’m pretty sure you have to take at least two courses on osteology (the study of the skeletal system) or anatomy. Basically from the top of your head to the soles of your feet a physical anthropologist will know and study this. (They also study other animals. They LOVE Darwin’s finches in the Galapagos.) A big field within this field is forensic anthropology. Those people study remains that are beyond recognizable for people like the police.

Archeology- now depending on where you are, archeology May or May not be a subfield of Anthropology. In the U.S. it’s a subfield, but in Europe (and maybe Asia?) it’s an entirely different field (so in these places there are only 3 fields of anthropology). Anyways, this field focuses on ancient human civilizations. And when I say ancient, I mean ANCIENT. I’m talking like even before the ancient Egyptians. Like, mostly cavemen. Unlike physical anthropologists, archeologists focus of humans that are long gone. A lot of people think this one is the coolest because of Indiana Jones, but it is far from that. Unless you’re really lucky, you probably won’t be going on expeditions. If you do, however, the chances of you finding some ancient temple are so rare it’s not even funny. Most of the time these crazy bastards will literally go into the desert and start digging. They find practically garbage and are amazed by what they find. What they like to do is find remains of ancient civilizations and try to piece together how the societies were like. For example, they’ve found remains of what is assumed to be a woman and inside what would’ve been her digestive tract, they’ve found traces of a fetus. They discovered that in this ancient society, if there was a premature birth, the people would have a ceremony and eat the fetus remains. They also use quite a bit of science, but probably not as much as physical anthropologists.

Anthropology is a social science, which means that you’re gonna study humans in some type of way. Like psychology, sociology, and all the other ‘Ologies’, this area consists of a lot of reading and writing. Basically all you’ll ever do is read one book after another, and write research papers. But if that’s your thing it’s pretty easy and nice. Like a lot of liberal arts degrees, you can’t do much with a bachelors unless you have a lot of experience or good connections. To get an internship in legitimate anthropology is so difficult, many require master degrees! But the nice thing is that it’s a liberal arts degree, emphasis on liberal! Many anthropologists may not be going on insane expeditions, but quite a few work in academia. Some publish work, some don’t. I have a friend who works a marketing internship and uses what he’s learned to attract certain demographics. I, on one hand, would like to work in a museum. There’s a bunch of stuff you can do with Anthropology! It can apply to every day life. And again, you might not be studying some rare species in the Amazon, but humans are all around us! We literally surround ourselves with humans, and we study humans! We literally surround ourselves with our work! Anthropology is all about observing and learning and if that’s what you like to do then I say go for it! It’s very rewarding in my opinion and as someone who did a complete 180 with her degree (I went from biomedical engineering to cultural anthropology) it is very rewarding if you truly enjoy it! And the thing is that humans will always be here, so however or whatever you study about humans, there’s always a way to incorporate that into your work. And again, Anthropology is such a broad degree choice than you can get a wide range of jobs that you can incorporate your lessons into.

If anyone thinks I might have been wrong in some way please add onto this! If you think differently I’d love to hear what you have to say

@cheesethenachos

#cheesethenachos #linguistics #cultural anthropology #archaeology #physical anthropology

11 notes · View notes

canvaswolfdoll · 7 years ago

Text

CanvasWatches: My Hero Academica

If there’s something I needed in my Anime Repertoire, it was a fun, pulpy Shonen Series.

I have selected My Hero Academia because frog girl.

Tsuyu Asui and the various tumblr posts she spawned is what drew my attention, and I was hearing good things about the series, so I thought I’d give it a go. Plus I’m catching it in the early stages, so there’s not too much of an archive to panic over. It’s a good time to get in.

I’m not one for long runners, since I enjoy definite start and end points.[1] Media designed to just go on forever, stuffed with filler and formula is a quick eject for me. And I’ve never been one for fighty man Shounen.

I couldn’t get into Dragon Ball Z, because I only caught brief segments, and those segments were the parts with Goku floating there staring down his enemy. Or Buu turning someone into a cookie and eating them. Contextless nonsense that was very unappealing.[2]

Naruto began it’s dubbed broadcast as I entered Middle School. However, those were troubled times of much grounding due to academic indifference, and I couldn’t be bothered to monitor the broadcast schedule. So I fell off the Naruto train… basically after the second episode.

I didn’t care about pirates enough to try One Piece, and Bleach seemingly left no cultural weight to enter the equation.[3]

However, these reviews are nothing if not a bizarre justification for making up for my misspent youth. Because yearning for the nostalgic past is what adulthood is for.

And I finally committed to Funimation’s streaming service, so, yay! More dubs for Canvas![4] Which leaves only the Viz stable to have difficulties with.

So… why does My Hero Academia succeed where it’s predecessors fail?

Likeable cast, mostly. While other self-perpetuating shonens have large casts with various interesting gimmicks, usually only one or two will resonate with the viewer, and there’s often little by way of character complexity or arcs.

Meanwhile, MHA has a cast that, oddly, are mostly characterized by positivity. There’s one or two grumpy loners, sure, but they’re handled with an almost parody tone, and the rest are actually nice kids you can appreciate.

And our protagonist, Deku, is notable for not being uniquely special. At the outset, he’s in the minority of people without powers. He eventually gains some, a decision I’m… conflicted on, but he gets superpowers by earning them.

Deku’s a tenacious fanboy, particularly idolizing the biggest hero in the world, wanting to follow the man’s example. However, as he doesn’t have a gift, he’s seemingly incapable of reaching that point.

Our hero takes this in stride, instead dedicating his attention to analyzing heroes and their methods. He’s a very clever and intelligent protagonist, and considering he’s following the trail of Naruto and freaking Goku, that defining trait is a refreshing departure.

Then he earns his chance at his dreams by being undeniably heroic despite being a squib.

Now there are obviously two sides to Deku inheriting All Might’s power:

One one hand, we miss the story of a muggle climbing his way up the ranks through sheer willpower and analysis.

But, with him getting All Might’s power, we instead see a young boy struggle with a power well beyond his control and capabilities.

While I’d prefer the Rock Lee route, the physical struggle of Deku literally destroying himself with every use of One for All, and the ramifications (risk of permanent damage and Deku needing to use it strategically) is a compelling narrative thrust in its own right, so I can’t complain too much.

The duality of All Might is an interesting sight to behold. In full hero mode, he’s nothing if not positive and encouraging. Outside of that persona, All Might is a little pessimistic and grumpy, but he still has a clear streak of good that’s never suppressed, even when he’s feeling sick.

It would’ve been easy and in line with established tropes to make All Might a lazy and harsh task master, but even when sending Deku through an excessively intense training regiment, All Might’s encouraging and positive, pushing Deku not for his selfish purposes, but because he honestly believes in Deku.

Then, after Deku goes above and beyond the task All Might set (clear out a stretch of beach), All Might tells his student to eat a strand of his hair, which is precisely the sort of thing I make jokes about when watching television.[5]

The even more amazing thing is that this positivity isn’t exclusive to All Might. The entire hero cast are positive and supportive people. Besides Bakugo, who’s the childhood friend turned rival character, no one specifically puts down anyone else. Every challenge and lesson has the whole of Class 1-A cheering each other on.

Even during the admission trials, where they’re literally competing against one another, you never see any character go out of their way to sabotage another.

Normally, it’s so easy to make the main character a total reject, give them a whole community of opposition and conflict. So it’s refreshing that everyone who wants to be a hero is a positive person.

It’s the same reason so many people gush over pages featuring Batman offering sympathy to others instead of punches. We want our heroes to be the best example of humanity, something to aspire to be.

Which is the exact philosophy that brings All Might to take Deku under his wing.

Then Bakugo, who’s introduced as a violent bully, wanting to believe heroics is his birthright, becomes mocked for being such a hothead. He’s got a powerful quirk, was number one for the admission test, but the rest of the class silently agree that they don’t wish to abide by his attitude. And it’s not even bullying Bakugo, but more gentle mocking and pushback against his egocentrism and violence.

Because the class are still children, but their nature shows a preference toward acceptance and teamwork, and an openness for redemption. The class’s treatment of Bakugo is negativity towards his current actions, not the kid himself.

UA is structured to be a competitive environment, a whetstone to hone the next generation of heroes. You have to compete in a trial to get into the programs, teachers can expel whole classes, and you can lose your spot in class to someone in a ‘lesser’ course. However, even when the cast are explicitly telling one another they’re gunning for each other, it’s usually with a tone of ‘nothing personal, it’s just the situation,’ and there’s no hard feelings. No one resents anyone else, really, and there’s no hesitation to work together when the situation calls for it.

Which is important because this is a show for children, and it’s showing, by example, that intent and actions are a better defining trait than raw ability or natural born talent.

A lot of the quirks are explicitly underwhelming. Class 1-A runs the gamut between making explosions, nullifying gravity, sticky balls, being invisible, and having a tail, with various and unequal limitations. It’s not what you have that makes you good or evil, it’s what you do with it.

To further cement this, One for All is absurdly powerful, and after a training montage, Deku’s given a portion of the quirk. And that portion is so strong, so powerful, that even with the preparation All Might put him through, using it still physically breaks Deku.

Which means, while most Shonens are about the protagonist becoming stronger, working their way to being the best there is, Deku literally gets handed that strength in episode 4. So, instead of growing powerful, Deku has to learn restraint and self control when using One for All.

Because being a hero isn’t about being better than everyone else, it’s about using what you have effectively to make the world around you a better place, with both physical abilities and personality.

Deku has the right personality and philosophy, he needs to learn how to use his power.

Bakugo knows how to use his power, but he doesn’t quite have the needed interpersonal skills or humility.

Thus why the two are the rivals.

The actual arcs do a good job of tracing old structures while also bringing in its own twists.

There is, of course, the introductory arc, where we’re introduced to the protagonist whose dream seems impossible to him, until a mentor figure steps in and grants him the one thing needed to proceed (A quirk for Deku, headwear for Naruto and Luffy). Then he meets his crush and turns a few low-grade rivals into allies (like you do) as he begins the journey to become the best… hero/ninja/pirate/grim reaper?[6]

Deku takes the entrance examine, which he technically failed, but he put in such a good effort that he was given bonus points so he could enroll at UA anyways.

Then we get a nice mix of Slice of Life and implied opposition from a mentor figure, who turns out to have been performing a secret test of character.

Next, the main cast is given their first field mission, which suddenly becomes a lot more serious than expected.

Which brings us to the end of the first season.

So, a quality that I find takes a series from good to great is its approach to balancing drama and comedy: namely, no one’s truly exempt from either. Naruto had shades of it, Fullmetal Alchemist did it to the hilt. Sometimes it’s well set-up jokes, sometimes it’s just goofy character designs.[7]

Class 1-A is filled with goofballs, and even though they serious up when a horde of villains crash their first rescue training mission, their personalities are able to leak a good amount of comedy where needed.

Then the entirety of the second season is dedicated to the required tournament arc. Which… okay, time for Canvas to zone out, right?

Well, no. Because My Hero Academia is pretty good at both dynamic combat and interesting situations. Further, the previous season already did a good job of establishing people’s powers, so there’s space to split the focus between showing fine details and solid character work.

UA’s tournament is actually a broadcasted sports festival, so the competition starts with a obstacle course, which revels in all the slapstick potential inherent. Deku also wins it by looking at the mine field that is the final obstacle, and says ‘Nah. I can use this.’

Good for our hero!

Then, the second event is a cavalry battle,[8] where Deku’s reward for winning the first event is getting a 10 million point bounty on his head. It’s so unfair it turns to the realm of parody. Which I’m all about.

The second event is thus a showcase of Quirk Synergy, more of Deku’s strategy and resulting counter strategies, and more slapstick. So that’s nice.

Since Deku soundly won the first round, our protagonist is getting diminishing returns for the rest of the arc.

The third event is straight up tournament battles, but with most of the cast already eliminated, so that saves time, and the show only really focuses on the big events, split between the second half of one episode and the first of another. Between those, there are match ups that are just squashes[9] and comedy.

The final winner is then Hannibal Lecter’d on the podium in a great mix of character drama (he didn’t like the way he won) and comedy (because the final winner has to be actively restrained and muzzled. That’s just silly!)

Then the cast picks out their codenames.

Which pretty much brings us even to where the dub’s gotten.

I’m having a good time with the show, and I look forward to more episodes. It’s going to be interesting to follow an anime episode by episode instead of marathoning the whole thing through. Let’s see if I can keep my sanity.

Kataal kataal.

[1] There are exceptions, mostly in the form of webcomics and Discworld. [2] Dragon Ball, meanwhile, had a youthful energy that drew me in. But it also aired infrequently so I never got totally invested. [3] Okay, I had a high school friend who was interested, much to the annoyance of another high school friend, who had a weak understanding of difference in media interests. [4] You had your chance Crunchyroll! [5] Seriously, ask Vulpin, it’s exactly my humor. [6] Again, never got into Bleach. [7] Depowered All-Might looks like a muppet. [8] A sport I’ve only seen in the context of anime, but should totally be more common. [9] Following a wrestling podcast may be helping me appreciate some of the meta-aspects of fight scenes.

#CanvasWatches #my hero academia #boku no hero academia #anime #CanvasReviews

6 notes · View notes

makingscipub · 5 years ago

Text

Making Science Public 2019: An overview

Every year I think: This will be the last year I write something for this blog… and each year I write a bit more. And so it was this year. Whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing, I really don’t know. But it distracts me from life’s increasing troubles and keeps me sane.

As usual, I have written about biological topics, such as gene, genome and germline editing and epigenetics, about climate change (a bit), and about metaphors. I have also ventured out or rather back into a bit of history of science and even history of linguistics, a territory I had left behind decades ago. And, of course there is a bit of science communication sprinkled over all this like Christmas glitter.

When I had no time or had no inspiration, a few guest bloggers filled in some blogging gaps for me. Thank you!

Gene drive

Let’s start with biology. My focus this year was on ‘gene drive’, as I was lucky enough to be a co-applicant on a Wellcome Trust funded grant directed by Sarah Hartley that focuses on how we talk about this new biotechnology intended to, amongst others, deal with mosquitoes that spread malaria, dengue fever, Zika and so on. I wrote a post about the project overall, based on its press release.

However, my interest in gene drive started before that, when I listened in to a radio programme and tried to trace the etymology of the drive in gene drive – and found it actually stems from a metaphor relating to the driving of locomotives! Talking to people about gene drive, in English, German and French, I also discovered how many roadblocks there are to what one may call ‘gene drive communication’, over and above the obscure etymology.

Once the project started, I tried to gain a better understanding of the concept of ‘gene drive’ and the more I looked the more confused I got. So I wrote a post about the link or not between gene drive and GM mosquitoes and another about the link or not between gene drive and microbes like Wolbachia. GM mosquitoes and Wolbachia have been used in the wild to deal with the threat of malaria and other diseases, but actual gene drives not yet.

When starting to do some media analysis with Aleksandra Stelmach, the research fellow working on the gene drive communication project, I discovered a confusion or rather disruption of a different kind relating to the reliability of a database that we normally use for our research. The blog also delves, like my first one, into the beginnings of what one may call ‘gene drive talk’, which began in the 1990s, but has accelerated since 2014.

While I was exploring confusions and probably confusing people in the process, Aleksandra wrote an excellent, clear and non-confusing blog post about the emerging metaphors around gene drive which she extracted from a 2019 Nature article. This complements nicely an earlier post I had written about metaphors and mammals and gene drive.

Epigenetics

Another topic that preoccupied my thoughts this year was, or rather continued to be, epigenetics, which has been appropriated not only by people who want to sell wellness products but surprisingly also by people who want to establish a new way of studying biology and society. I thought this through a little bit in a post on epigenetics and the solid fundamental science that’s going on but is competing with fantastic expectation.

Epigenetics in academia and advertising

Seeing the nuanced way that epigenetics is discussed by scientists, I was surprised to see how much less nuanced the uptake of epigenetics has been in social science academia, let alone by advertisers and marketers. So I collaborated with Aleksandra Stelmach and Cath Ennis on an article detailing the way in which epigenetics can be used to do things, be it advertising alternative wellness products or promoting alternative ways to do sociology, in particular to explore the so-called ‘biosocial’.

Our article, exploring all this in detail through the lens of social representations theory and metaphor analysis, has now appeared online and will be part of a special issue that will be published in print early next year.

Epigenetics in popular culture, advertising and academia

Some of the other epigenetics posts focused on the over-hyping of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance, others zoomed in on epigenetics in popular culture: for example turkey dinosaurs and pancakes, the emergence of he metaphor of witness marks in a popular article, epigenetics on Pinterest.

This last post was written in collaboration with Cath Ennis who also wrote two important guest posts. One dealt with the use of epigenetics as a metaphor or analogy to think with, i.e. to think about cultural phenomena like sacred texts or even inequality; the other explored the way epigenetics has been portrayed in science fiction (and it has the best image!).

In the middle of the year, a confluence of events, brought about by blogging, led to a brief collaboration with the historian of science Andrew Reynolds, which led to him giving a joint paper (but I really didn’t contribute a lot) about chromatin landscapes at a history and philosophy of science conference. I wrote a short post about this venture.

And finally, I also wrote a post about the great way in which some scientists, in this case doing research on epigenetics and worms, use twitter threads to make their research public. I still haven’t done that myself! For another great example of how threads can be used in science communication, here is one by Ewan Birney on ethnicity and genetics.