Argument Within A Framework

When one argues within a framework, one is not setting out to break the framework entirely by dismissing it out of hand. Rather, one is operating as if the framework of argumentation is reality, especially when discussing a piece of fiction. When discussing fiction, one must operate within the confines of that reality to argue points and ask questions as to why things are the way they are. One need not destroy the work from without, one can easily destroy it from within through the use and application of the story's own logic. External critique has a time and a place, mainly for the analysis of gaps in the story or figuring out why the author might have written something a certain way. Internal critique is how one takes apart a story to start with.

The Division of Culture Was Inevitable

As communication technology became better, inevitably it became easier to share full-length movies and TV series, either officially or unofficially, and prior to that, it facilitated original, viral content. This helped to individualize, and by extension, isolate the entertainment experience. Ultimately, this was always going to happen. Ever since the advent of home video formats, the entertainment experience has become more and more individual, and more isolated. Coupling this with the advent of miniature computers and handheld devices capable of storing and/or streaming high-quality video, and the isolation becomes greater. The printing press could be argued as the start of this phenomenon, as the widespread availability of printed materials, combined with increased literacy rates, means that reading becomes a solitary activity later in life. This combined with an increasing individualism in worldwide society and rising introversion means that this division of culture into subculture was inevitable.

All Religion Is Confucian?

    A topic that came to mind last week was that most religion is based in some worship of ancestors, akin to that of Confucianism's reverence of the elders and ancestors. All branches of the Abrahamic religions claim Jaweh as the Allfather. Greco-Roman mythology has all of the gods descended from the Allmother, even her own mate. From there, everything else came. Hinduism has the entirety of the universe born from one... Let's say "thing" from which all else came. Ultimately, all religion with any actual doctrine requires reverence of the past to the detriment of everything else. Decrees that were passed down based on opinions and whims get held up for centuries as the gospel truth. Passing words taken as absolute orders, and whatnot. Anyone who's familiar with Confucius should be feeling chills right about now.
    Even non-deistic religions, such as the various forms of Communism throughout the years, Nazism, most political dynasties, and many political systems, the way some revere public and political figures and loads of fandoms are heavily Confucian. They all hold an unhealthy reverence for those who came before, they all hold idealized versions of the past up over the reality of the situation, and they're all suspicious of new ideas, newcomers, and any change.

Cosmic Ret-Cons and nonsensical renaming.

The way the Romans adapted and adopted Greek myths as their own reminds me of what happened when Disney bought Star Wars. They renamed the characters, reorganized the entire history of the universe, and yet when everything's said and done, most of the same events happen, most of the characters are the same, but with slightly different names, and the order of events is slightly different. In fact, the Roman attitude toward Greek myths is also very similar to what happens with a lot of comic-book adaptations to any other medium. It's more akin to having read the original comics, then watching an animated adaptation. In fact, all of the the Greco-Roman mythological variations strike me as very similar to what happens when one story is adapted multiple times over centuries or decades, much like many comic book heroes, or indeed, other literary characters such as Robin Hood.