Brief Thoughts on "Fame and Misfortune"

So I managed to watch the most recent episode this morning. I'd heard some rumblings about the portrayal of the characters in this one, so I wanted to see for myself. First of all... the description really didn't do it justice. Neither the characters nor the fanbase argued about which section was "the best." The episode was all about missing the point--latching onto Pinkie Pie's humor, or Applejack's sense of family, or... whatever the heck was the problem with Rarity, rather than recognizing the value of the friendship lessons. And the song was about... how all of the characters are imperfect, but that's okay? I mean, that's a different message entirely, but the song was catchy, and that's a good message, so...

But here's the thing. The rumblings I'd heard were that people were upset at the writers taking a jab at the fanbase. You know what? I'm not so fragile that I can't take some good-natured criticism. But this jab seems... completely misdirected. It's a picture of a fanbase I do not recognize.

Let's start with the basis right away. Do the writers really think that the fanbase ignores the friendship lessons at the end of the episodes? Those were my favorite part! It's literally in the title of the show: we're here to learn about the magic of friendship. In what universe, on what internet, are there hundreds of fans watching the show and somehow ignoring and missing the Aesops at the conclusion? That's not even getting to the part where we criticize the show for its lopsided morals, like the Rainbow Dash episodes that equate tormenting your best friend with teaching her a lesson, or the hypocrisy of having an episode use Spike as the butt of a joke right after "Power Ponies."

So that for one thing is weird. But then what the heck was up with the weird fandoms around the different characters? The way I understand it, Rarity is one of the most popular characters among fans, and Applejack is one of the least. I've never heard of this idea of fans being so into the Apple family that they call themselves "Sweet Apple Admirers" and imagine themselves part of the family. And are there really fans that dislike Rarity so much that they think she shouldn't be a part of the group? And again, maybe this is just my interpretation, but Pinkie Pie really isn't that funny, and fans don't fixate on that. They love her randomness, her sympathy, and her ability to make anyone smile. Her best depictions have always been as an entertainer, not as a jokester.

There are a couple of fair points I have seen in the fan discourse. For example, the idea that Fluttershy keeps learning the same lesson over and over again. But what baffles me is, that argument makes no sense when bringing it up to Fluttershy. If you're talking about a biography, where the character is real, then how can you argue against what actually happened? No, when fans make that complaint, it's going to the writers. If you're writing a TV show, if you're writing a story, there should be continual forward motion and growth, and you should have multiple dimensions for growth. If your answer is, "She didn't learn it 100% the first time," fair enough, but... how many times did the "What I Learned Today" videos do the "Stare at [X], I guess?" joke? Seven, eight? Also, while I think the line about "Twilight was better before she got wings" has dwindled since the writers have demonstrated this change was for the better, at the time, I really do think it was a substantive problem that should have been better handled. Graduating Twilight from "student of friendship" to "princess of friendship" deserved a lot more leadup than one episode. (Hey, at least Twilight got a movie after that to cope. Starlight got two episodes and the opener to season 7, and she wasn't even in most of the latter. )

I guess my dissatisfaction with this episode can be boiled down into a nice, manageable lesson for all you writers. The moral and narrative execution of the story rests squarely on your shoulders; you don't get to pass the buck by saying, "But this is what really happened!" Well, sorry, but that's what happens when you decide to be God; you get to pick what really happened, and it's your job as authors and creators to make a "really happened" that is plausible, interesting, and meaningful. ...I don't know. Bleh.

[I suppose the counterargument is that the Equestrian fanbase isn't supposed to represent the brony fanbase. But my response to that is 1) Still, why are they analyzing a piece of non-fiction like fiction? and 2) okay, so why bother telling this story at all? See, there's this thing I'm gonna call the Allegory Axiom: "Everything in a story is an allegory for something in real life." Stories are reflections of the real world--manifestations of the collective unconscious. If you make a bunch of characters that fan over the events of the show, the connection between them and the IRL humans that fan over the events of the show seems pretty clear to me. Not only is it facile and pointless to make a little bottle story that refers to nothing in the real world, it's impossible. All art is political--or to avoid the cliche, all art makes some judgment about reality.]