![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Into the weeds
I was watching the first episode of Schmigadoon and pondering the difference between and homage and a parody.
Can an homage exaggerate characteristics of the source material or does that make it a parody?
Can an homage change the emotional tone and remain an homage?
Does changing the emotional tone from drama to comedy, or the reverse, make it a parody?
Is an homage of a melodrama become a parody?
Does the intention of the creators matter?
Is a parody always mocking, or can a parody be loving and kind without becoming an homage?
What is the difference between an homage, a cover, and a performance?
It makes a difference to me what the creators intended. I don't like media which I perceive to be mean-spirited in intent. I don't like transformative work that disrespect the original material. But what does that MEAN? When I imagine the creators of Schmigadoon lovingly writing original songs that echo and reflect Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, The Music Man, and a dozen other musical I adore, I smile and love the show. When I imagine them laughing at the songs and trying to compete to make the characters sound ridiculous and the butt of the joke, I turn it off.
The material is the same. My feelings change based on what I imagine about the writers.
Why is that?
Feelings are stupid. Into the oubliette they go.
The garden is doing well. The rabbits seem to have moved on, so we removed some of the anti-rabbit cages. Only some!
I spent twenty minutes weeding one square foot of the leek bed, so that tells you how the weeds are doing. Clover and creeping charlie and little volunteer trees and something that is probably purple loosestrife. Pulling each little weed from around each tiny thread of leek is ... a lot of work. But I want leeks, so here we are.
NB: The questions posted herein are rhetorical. You are free to answer them, but I may not reply.
Can an homage exaggerate characteristics of the source material or does that make it a parody?
Can an homage change the emotional tone and remain an homage?
Does changing the emotional tone from drama to comedy, or the reverse, make it a parody?
Is an homage of a melodrama become a parody?
Does the intention of the creators matter?
Is a parody always mocking, or can a parody be loving and kind without becoming an homage?
What is the difference between an homage, a cover, and a performance?
It makes a difference to me what the creators intended. I don't like media which I perceive to be mean-spirited in intent. I don't like transformative work that disrespect the original material. But what does that MEAN? When I imagine the creators of Schmigadoon lovingly writing original songs that echo and reflect Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, The Music Man, and a dozen other musical I adore, I smile and love the show. When I imagine them laughing at the songs and trying to compete to make the characters sound ridiculous and the butt of the joke, I turn it off.
The material is the same. My feelings change based on what I imagine about the writers.
Why is that?
Feelings are stupid. Into the oubliette they go.
The garden is doing well. The rabbits seem to have moved on, so we removed some of the anti-rabbit cages. Only some!
I spent twenty minutes weeding one square foot of the leek bed, so that tells you how the weeds are doing. Clover and creeping charlie and little volunteer trees and something that is probably purple loosestrife. Pulling each little weed from around each tiny thread of leek is ... a lot of work. But I want leeks, so here we are.
NB: The questions posted herein are rhetorical. You are free to answer them, but I may not reply.
no subject