Why I choose utilizing Satirical Themes vs Mainstream Parody

Since my early beginnings as a writer, storytelling has always been a form of escapism, especially while my mind was processing emotions due to events that ultimately were used as a basis for interactions and scenarios between my characters. This has led to a lot of chapters being close to reflections of my own life when utilizing masturbatory protagonists, however, at the same time, allowing them to branch off into directions relative to their developed nature.  Then there were, of course, characters who were inspired by their own real-life counterparts. This practice of mine actually started when I used to write comic-strips and injected my friends into them. The purpose served as an engagement of fantasy within our social group. That said, there were those who had an issue with the exaggerated interpretation of their personalities, which is bound to happen with such very similar traits being portrayed.

While I still remain unapologetic, I have admittedly favored using satirical premises and themes rather than parody as I feel the latter is limited to the current period of which the piece is created. Satire has a lot more longevity and relative points. This is a fact that we’ve seen throughout history. I believe I really came to this conclusion after President Trump’s election. As colleagues recall, his original presidency in the GCArts Universe’ Earth 3/12 was meant to be a parallel outcome, much like how the 2010 video game ‘Vanquish’ included a cameo appearance of their own president at the end, who mirrored Hilary Clinton. Whether or not ‘Vanquish’ had intended to try and predict or create an alternative outcome of that year’s election remains to be told. [Ending spoilers to ‘Vanquish’ in the link below]

After the United States election in 2016, I found myself molding what once was an unflattering imitation, into a composite that while could be compared to the Chief of State, was seen as an idealistic politician with views more so biased to humanity, than selfish in nature. It made very little sense to–and I hate this phrase with a passion- -“beat a dead horse”.  I feel as if the act of artistically critiquing the government has been lost underneath the internet’s shock value culture. My sentiments extend beyond that subject matter if we are to discuss modern entertainment as well. The narratives that society is fed by the media often sidesteps encouraging thought for the purpose of baiting emotion. While one’s interpretation or conclusion may ultimately be confirmation bias, the lack of viewpoints argued in a scenario allow for such reasoning to be easily maintained.

For example, if you were to watch Dreamwork’s 1998 ‘The Prince of Egypt’ animated film, you could reasonably come to the conclusion that God was the antagonist of the film. Instead of God communicating to Ramesses II directly, arguably exploiting his love for Moses as a brother, and his love for Egypt’s supremacy, the route that is taken ultimately results in mass hysteria, the first-born genocide of babies and eventually distrust in followers. This interpretation would not be possible if the film were written to be propagandistic. The ‘Book of Exodus’ is treated as an inspiration, rather than factual history that it needs to faithfully adapt. This gave the screenwriters freedom to structure what is now referred to as a masterpiece by both followers of religion and atheists.

To conclude my thoughts, content must provoke without prejudice and persuade open-ended discussions, rather than reflect echo chambers that continually serve as ego boosts to corporations, political figures, and celebrities in society.