Years ago, my friend ranted about a popular Tumblr post — one that she claimed ruined people’s ability to analyze media. This post was from a person complaining about their English class, and it claimed that, although English teachers might suggest that “blue curtains” in a novel could symbolize “immense sadness,” sometimes “the curtains are just f*cking blue.” I agreed that the post itself seemed misguided, as settings are often powerful literary symbols.
Authors control every word, character, and aspect of their story’s setting, so they tend to use these elements to make a point. Since the color blue commonly represents sadness, I’d consider that not just a clear symbol, but also a heavy-handed one. However, I didn’t see how that Tumblr post would “ruin” the Internet’s critical thinking skills in terms of analyzing books and movies.
However, as I’ve immersed myself in online fandom spaces, I’ve noticed this issue come up frequently.
Ironically, many people who claim to love reading readily shame those who read too analytically.
If someone points out that an author used a symbol, “The curtains are f*cking blue!” will appear in the comments. If someone brings up a message or theme they’ve gleaned from a movie, people will respond with, “It’s not that deep.” And if someone connects a book to real-world issues, someone will inevitably say, “Let people enjoy things,” as if books are only enjoyable if they don’t reflect reality.
At first glance, these kinds of comments appear to be throwaway lines. However, they ridicule others, painting them as “nerds” or “social justice warriors” and therefore kill intelligent conversation. They also diminish the thought that writers put into their stories and the ways that books can change the world.
That’s why phrases like this are called “thought-terminating clichés.”
They’re sound bites that often repeat, ending critical analysis before it can flourish.
This phenomenon isn’t just limited to the Internet. “It is what it is” is a common phrase that implies that since the world has so many flaws, nothing will ever change, so discussing how to solve global issues is pointless. Similarly, “Let’s agree to disagree” suggests that no amount of discourse will change anyone else’s mind and that polarizing topics matter less than keeping the peace.
Psychology suggests that when someone repeats something, others are more likely to believe it, even if they initially know the information is false. When people think that a book or movie “isn’t that deep,” because they constantly see that phrase on the Internet, they don’t just lose out on understanding its themes; they can begin to refuse to analyze anything. These “thought-terminating clichés” discourage all curiosity, even though intellectual curiosity can help us understand important issues and question the media that we consume. People who rely on clichés rather than analysis may not know that curious people tend to be happier and more resilient.
So if you see one of these “thought-terminating clichés,” ask yourself why others may not want to engage in the messages they find in books and movies. The answers might reveal a lot about the media that you consume every day, how it holds a mirror up to the world, and why some people refuse to delve into real-life issues.
Featured Photo by Thought Catalog on Unsplash.
Such a great point! Ignoring media analysis really limits Retro Bowl how much we can learn and understand from the stories we love.
It is critical to recognize the impact of the media we consume, as Sophia Forster underlines in her article. The dangers of not examining the information we consume are real. Being aware of the messages, biases, geometry dash and influences embedded in media allows us to make more informed decisions and build a critical viewpoint.