The Responsibility of Pop

Andy Warhol and other Pop Artists of the 50s and 60s, I learned in high school art class, pushed against the irrelevance of abstract expressionism and celebrated modernity. Pop is popular.

I like to go back to decades-old movies on Rotten Tomatoes and just enjoy pitying the poor schmucks who gave movies the wrong reviews before the public consensus was decided; the idiots who gave Batman and Robin a good review before we'd all agreed to loathe it; or the morons who criticised Fight Club ('99) before we all agreed it was diamond plated gold. Popular is good.

By the way, one such dunce was Robert Ebert. He gave Fight Club a negative review. You can read the whole thing here: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/fight-club-1999

But Ebert's main criticism of the movie is that it's an unapologetic male violence marathon, "macho porn" and that it's attempts to subvert its premise fail. However, the film's style, gloss, and thrill smooth over its thematic shortcomings for most viewers. Nevermind that the film hijacks violence as a sexy metaphor for anti-consumerism. Good is well-made.

 This review reminded me of our discussion in class of The Virgin Suicides, an beautifully written book that I believe is problematic in theme. The novelist hijacks teen suicide as a sexy metaphor for the repressive nature of the suburbs. Well-made is consumed.

So for my conference paper, I plan to go down the you know what and question the social-responsibility of popular narratives.