I'm attempting to describe a phenomenon I see, which pertains to art media and it's place in culture and the world, relating to the manner in which it reflects humanity and the populace for which it's a part and that it's of. The phenomenon is a missalignment in who it's trying to reflect and appeal to and what it actually is supposed to appeal to, were it to appeal to anyone at all. My mind went to the words "aethstetically confused", but the object in question isn't aethstetics, so what might I be trying to articulate?Sorry if that's confusing or sounds like sophistry, feels like mind puke and I feel gay for even typing that but I know I'm on to something.
>>1551909I can't understand what you're saying very well since it's not too well articulated, but the first thing that comes to mind is baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation. Maybe try reading that and see. At least the first chapter or so
>>1551915It's a bit hard to describe. What prompted my thought was the announcement of a game that people are calling woke because of characters and choices around them. "Woke" is obviously a term which points at something but doesn't really define anything, it points but it doesn't explain, and I was trying to find an apt description of the phenomenon people were picking up on when they rush to that term, how to describe what exactly it is that people think is wrong with it. Because I can't think of the word I need I just have to circle around it and hope someone understands. "Archetypally confused" is another thing which comes to mind but while the phenomenon concerns archetypes, that too doesn't work, because the object of the matter isn't archetypes. For all I know, what I'm trying to articulate hasn't even been given a word, and to be fair, a situtation which would promp the need to even think the word up I'm not sure has ever properly occured until recent times because it's something which has been taken for granted. Sorry if this is a bit word salady, but I can't help but make it so in an attempt to explain.Thanks for the recommendation, I'll have a gander at that book, though I don't expect it to have quite what I'm looking for. I might just have to work on inventing a whole new word LOL.
>>1551916I don't necessarily have a word, but I definitely think you should check out the book
>>1551920I'll definitely give it a read. Thank you!
