Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Post History

50%
+0 −0
Q&A How do I indicate a superfan review vs a social-criticism essay?

I occasionally write short essays about classic films, and have been thinking about converting them into video essay for YouTube. What I observe are 2 very different types of essay – I'm not sure ...

1 answer  ·  posted 5y ago by wetcircuit‭  ·  last activity 5y ago by System‭

#3: Attribution notice added by user avatar System‭ · 2019-12-08T12:03:10Z (about 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/45607
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision by user avatar wetcircuit‭ · 2019-12-08T12:03:10Z (about 5 years ago)
I occasionally write short essays about classic films, and have been thinking about converting them into _video essay_ for YouTube.

What I observe are 2 very different types of essay – I'm not sure what to call them.

One type approaches the work as a **superfan**. The _canon story_ is revered, and the details are often about explaining the ending, or discussing plot points that are entirely _within_ the work. When this type of essay turns critical, it often takes the form of "fixing" the story. Sometimes these videos are clickbait, "trashing" the bad choices of the filmmakers, but since the criticisms are still mostly canon and in-world, I put these in the same "superfan" category.

The other type of essay is more aligned with **social criticism**. The details in the story are not as important as the _technique_ and _intent_. The work is put in cultural and historic context, stepping out of the "review" to discuss broader themes, compare other work that covers similar ground, its impact on the entertainment industry or its place in the career of the actors and director, or how the work reflects (or ignores) social conventions of its time.

There is crossover between the two, but the approach is so fundamentally different it's usually easy to separate the two essay styles almost immediately. A _superfan review_ expects the viewer to be familiar with the subject, and speaks as one fan to another. They can feel a bit naive and _consumerist_. There is social cache in being an authority of the canon.

The _social criticism essays_ don't presume the viewer has seen the film, and can be pretentious and pondering, speaking as one savvy intellectual to another. The viewer probably needs an awareness of film theory and an interest in film as an artform. The social cache is being an authority of art history and social movements.

The films I write about are not current box office, so my essays tend to lean towards the latter rather than the former. Are there any accepted _terms_ – or maybe other cues I can use to signal the difference?

#1: Imported from external source by user avatar System‭ · 2019-05-31T11:48:38Z (over 5 years ago)
Original score: 3