I was scrolling through Instagram while in bed and this meme struck me as funny, initially for the shock factor of devaluing someone’s entire argument with such a silly argument. But as I was sending it to my friends and rereading the original argument the dialectical nature of what it was saying sunk into me. Whether or not this is true is beside the point, the idea that we want to experience bad things instead of good things is counterintuitive but it makes sense in a bad-faith sort of way. We have anxiety about thoughts, especially of tastes, and it’s a hell of a lot easier to talk down on Morbius than it is to give a thoughtful and well-thought-out analysis of Casablanca. Moreover, the idea that we turn to YouTube for validation of those bad things is interesting because it’s almost denying us the freedom of forming our original thoughts while virtually (literally and metaphorically) simulating having those thoughts, “that YouTuber or movie critic is thinking exactly what I’m thinking” this may be true, or it might be a form of copium that people tell themselves instead of forming genuine opinions that could put their SELF-generated thoughts and opinions on display to be criticized. In that sense they were slowly moving away from Sarte and into the man of the hour Hegel (cheers).
“They must engage in this struggle, for each must elevate its self-certainty of existing for itself to truth, both in the other and in itself. And it is solely by staking one’s life that freedom is proven to be the essence….
The individual who has not risked his life may admittedly be recognized as a person,12 but he has not achieved the truth of being recognized as a self-sufficient self-consciousness. As each risks his own life, each must likewise aim at the death of the other,” (187)
In this sense the person who watches a YouTube video, movie critic, etc, and virtually has those thoughts and opinions escapes from this death battle with an artificial sense of victory over some other self-counciness while never actually putting anything on the line. They don’t have any risk but reap the psychological reward. This person is just that person, they are not self-sufficient self-consciousness. This also parallels the broader structure of the meme itself, we are avoiding the death battle(remember I said it didn’t matter if it was true or not), the “good” argument that the original user posted is not the one we saw or enjoyed, it was the “bad” response that was promoted and recommended by the black box of the Instagram algorithm. I can’t for certain say that if the counter to the original user was a good argument it would be less popular but it most likely would be. Instagram recommends memes not well throughout arguments in a format that allows for context. Moreover, given the context that I am showing you this meme and I got it from a meme page, I am both the nodding person to the meme page and the YouTuber to the person currently reading this.
In addition, the use of the words BAD and GOOD have inverted meaning in this scenario. While usually, a good movie is something we would want to watch and a bad movie is something we don’t want to watch, this implies the opposite and thus flips the meanings of what makes a good and bad movie. A bad movie is good because you can virtually nod your head along to its critiques and a good movie isn’t good anymore because we don’t want to watch them. Moreover, YouTube can be thought of as the mediating middle here because it is what causes bad movies to become good. Ultimately we can’t mean what we say.
Its definitely interesting take, in fact I myself often go back and watch “bad movies” from when I was a kid, but now as an adult they become good not from a change in the movie itself but a change of mind that allows me to partake in a different time of my own life. In a sense watching the movie and allowing my own thoughts and nostalgic yearnings to advance a new perspective on the movie that I might enjoy more than my older preconceptions. Ive also found myself talking about these movies in a new light to friends as if to validate my own thoughts about thoughts and where they should fit in the minds of others by garnering that validation.
This was well explained. It helped me recognize another perspective. I would say I’m on the opposite side of the spectrum. I would not intentionally watch a bad to be a critic and feel validated. I didn’t know people would do this for validation and not just to be a troll on the internet. I particularly like your last paragraph which you did a wonderful job summarizing everything. I think the Bad and Good have a very thin line based on what you’ve mentioned and because we have so many mediums along with YouTube it can be difficult to confidently say this is exactly that (good or bad). if people are willing to mindlessly watch a bad movie with no goal other than to be able to chat about it among others, then they truly have no center or control over their consciences. Lastly, this is such a great baseline that can be applied to other topics greater than movies I enjoyed reading.
I agree with the comments above and found your post on how we like to experience bad things is interesting. It reminds me of popular films like the Room or the Venom films that people love to see even though the movies are so bad. Even with the new Madame Web movie that came out in theaters a while ago, people wanted to go because of how badly it was reviewed. There is something about “bad things” that make us very curious. Additionally, I liked your final argument about YouTube being a mediating middle for bad movies becoming good.