- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
Though I think Scott Adams is stupid about a number of things, he does have this funny criticism of artist's thinking. The logic going that artists often imagine all parts of stories, like from books, movies, or TV shows, has relevancy to the plot, so if anything is ever mentioned as being part of the story then it must be relevant. And you see a similar action in place with pundits, where they hear some random rumor about Trump, consider part of the Trump story, and imagine they're seeing all parts of the story even those behind the scenes so they must be understanding it all in its entirety.
There's a similar thing where creators seem to feel they're making their stuff for professional critics, and professional critics certainly expect everything to be aimed at them, and this is such an ingrained idea that most people expect it too. Look at the reaction to Michael Bay saying he doesn't make his movies for movie critics... practically everyone acted like that was the most arrogant, low-class thing they'd ever heard, when it really should be fucking common sense that you're not making massive multimillion dollar films for the sake of a small handful of professional complainers.
To relate this to Trump, I think the fact that he addresses the American people rather than just aiming demographic-catered speeches at carefully selected areas is what gets them. The common knowledge among the political aristocracy is that the President is there to serve Congress, the Supreme Court, and the News Media... any talk of serving or speaking to the people is supposed to be just that, talk. Hell, remember when Trump was newly-elected and there was a spate of articles just openly criticizing him for being sincere? People have gotten so used to politicians being nothing but actors that one who actually says what he fucking means is openly acknowledged as some kind of detestable freak of nature.