We Need to Talk About RWBY Again, Script Preview

THESIS: CREATOR, AUDIENCE, & CRITIC

Creating is hard. You have an idea. You shape and sculpt that idea. And then you show that idea to the world, gambling whether people absolutely adore your work, or take the work and shove it down your [censor] as they scream “[censor] you [censor] you’re such a [censor].” And nine times out of ten, it’s a mix of these things.

But it takes an extraordinary amount of courage to put yourself out there and offer yourself up to the world. As Theodore Roosevelt said in his Man in the Arena speech:

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood’ who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

I often enjoy the work of Brené Brown, a researcher who’s spent two decades studying courage, vulnerability, shame, and empathy. And I mean actually backing up her findings through data via long interviews with actual people. It’s through her I discovered the Man in the Arena quote, which granted me immense solace in my own work.

To be vulnerable, to put yourself on the line and expose yourself emotionally, is to be courageous, and vulnerability is the wellspring of creativity. When you’re being vulnerable, you are being raw, authentic, and in that, you share your own personal truth. And when you do that, it resonates. Whether people love or hate your work, you showed up, and that in and of itself makes you strong, and accepting this is the first step to becoming a better creator.

But there is most definitely an aspect of this that isn’t necessarily missing, but isn’t elaborated upon: the Critic. Because in this way of thinking, the Critic is dismissed almost entirely, at least at a glance. As if to say that it doesn’t matter if say a doctor were to make an error resulting in the death of a patient. In this case, criticism is vital. Criticism is the best method at improving ourselves.

But the problem is… that’s not how everyone views criticism.

Humans are a social species. We’ve evolutionarily benefitted from building communities and working together, and it’s ingrained in us that if we are to survive, we must band together. Given the context of modern society, this has become less about day to day survival, and more a matter of our fundamental need for human connection.

Just as hunger is your body telling you that it needs food, loneliness is your mind calling out for some form of connection. In August 2017, Psychologist Julianne Holt-Lunstad from Brigham Young University reported two meta-analyses and the connection between loneliness and premature mortality, all her team’s research having been conducted over decades across 148 studies and over 300,000 participants, and the results weren’t pretty.

People with reportedly stronger relationships were 50% more likely to live longer than their isolated counterparts, and the latter, with less or weaker relationships, were much more likely to experience problems with their mental health, and even suffer from cardiovascular disease. 

Art, thusly, is a tool to help us connect to one another. The entire purpose of Art is to allow one to express oneself, and for others to be moved by another’s work. Most of the media we love leaves an emotional impact in us; shares some sort of truth that resonates with us, because on some deeper level, we understand and relate to that truth. Even if it’s a story set in a fantastical world completely unlike our own, we can still relate to the fundamental truths of love, family, friendship, hope, and so on.

And so, we come to the three roles: Creator; Audience; and Critic; and these roles are pretty self-explanatory. Creators make the Art, audiences experience the Art, share it with others, and support the Creators… well, ideally, and Critics… well, people debate the purpose of Critics, actually.

Fundamentally, Critics analyze and dissect Art and share their feedback, but the reasoning differs from person to person. Some say it’s meant to be constructive to help the Creator, and others say Critics have no obligation to be kind or supportive. But if we’re to apply this thought that Art is about connection, then the Critic’s role is vital. If Art is meant to communicate a specific message, then the Critic’s job is to point out miscommunication.

In order to solve problems in Art not connecting with audiences, we need Critics who will honestly point out these problems. Nothing exists in a vacuum. We all contribute, consciously or not, whether or not we intend, to the greater whole, and Critics can influence how Creators craft their work. It’s an immense responsibility that, when mishandled, can lead to terrible things.

To cut yourself off from how you, as a Critic, might impact the Audience or the Critic, especially when you get to remain anonymous, not needing to worry about vulnerability, can lead to potential problems. It can start a chain reaction of misunderstandings, toxicity, and spite, ultimately damaging the Art you’re supposed to be helping in the long run, and when that happens, we all suffer.

This all said, no one is born plainly into one role for all time. You can be more apt for one over the others, but it’s actually best if most people have at one point attempted each role so we can all better connect and empathize.

“But Unicorn,” I hear you shouting. “Isn’t that obligation just going to tamper with the Critic’s feedback? Keep them from being completely, honestly, mercilessly objective?”

Well, I would argue it’d actually do the opposite. Because the Critics would be held accountable for what they say, it could potentially prevent hate bashing something, say, because it gets you clicks. You’ve proven yourself to be an unreliable source of criticism, because you put destroying the Art above giving valuable insight, and you used your anonymity as a shield to continue doing so.

However, there is theoretically some truth to this concern Critics have with wanting to remain unbiased and objective, but that begs another question: what does being unbiased look like? Is it even possible? What the fuck even is objectivity? Well… 

OBJECTIVE V. SUBJECTIVE: THE MATRIX

There are many schools of thought when it comes to criticism, namely whether to approach critique with an objective lense versus a subjective lense.

“Objectivity” is defined as… being objective. (Music stops) Thanks, Google, that helps. (Music resumes) “Objective” is defined as “not being influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing… FACTS.”

“Subjectivity,” meanwhile, is defined as “being based on or influenced by personal feelings, taste, or opinions.” Okay, so, sounds like Objectivity is the way to go for Critics, right? Well, for most of my time on YouTube, I’d have agreed. But as I’ve continued making my content, and given it more thought… I’ve realized it’s literally impossible.

Humans are… weird. Our emotions are filters or reactions to the observable world around us. Joy tells us we’re in as good place; sadness that something is wrong; anger that something is unfair; the whole Inside Out gang is here. But Art is meant to elicit our emotions and get a reaction out of us, and so that raises a question on whether separating our emotions from the Art we observe is even the right approach?

Sure, you can objectively discuss the technical aspects. Specific camera angles the Creator uses, dialogue or actions indicating points in a character arc, symbol or motifs relating to a specific theme, but this sterile approach on some level feels… unimportant, at least to me.

And that is my subjective take. That in our attempts to appear more Objective, we forget the significance of our emotions, our own experiences, that paint our reaction to a specific piece of Art. Even in how our own biases can make our reaction to a character or event different from that of another person, even a friend, who doesn’t share our biases or experiences.

So, we all try to reach this unattainable Objective standard, but to do so we simply try to downplay our Subjective thoughts that will stay with us far longer. No review, no critique, is 100% Objective.

So, what then? Do we continue trying to strive for Objectivity as much as possible? Do we just say to hell with Objectivity and accept our own Subjective feelings? What’s even a feeling? “What am I feeling? Is it a feeling? Some stupid feeling? Why can’t it just go away?” (Galavant) What even is truth? What is reality? What is life? What is anything? “What’s a fire, and why does it- what’s the word…?” (Little Mermaid) “BURN!” (RWBY, “I Burn”) What is this goddamn video? What is this brand of alcohol, and why does it suck? Ugh. I don’t even like alcohol. LOOK AT WHAT THIS IS DOING TO ME. I DO THIS FOR YOU PEOPLE.

Anyway, what was the goddamn point of all that sentimental flim flam? Well I don’t know! Whatever the fuck you felt. That’s Subjectivity, and the beauty of it you just roll with it. That’s literally the goddamn point.

But because this is YouTube, and the viewers demand blood, let’s just go ahead and… toss that all out. Let’s try to, while acknowledging our own Subjective biases and bullshit feelings, try to Objectively examine RWBY, in all its imperfections, and figure out what the hell we’re even looking at today. Is it really as Objectively bad as people make it out to be, and does what it Subjectively means to anyone even merit discussion?

I already regret this video. This better be worth the midrolls. SPEAKING OF WHICH!