3 ms·

I mean...you are the main character of your life

quickthrower2 5y ago
Sure, but the story isn't going to be like a movie, for most of us. (It's more likely to be closer to soap opera, but more plain).
- xkeysc0re 5y ago
  I disagree. Life is the ultimate expression of direct cinema and thus the apex of what a movie "is", ontologically speaking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cin%C3%A9ma_v%C3%A9rit%C3%A9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cin%C3%A9ma_v%C3%A9rit%C3%A9
  - oh_sigh 5y ago
    Someone's life but not anyone's life. Not sure why the films listed on that page are about JFK and Bob Dylan if you can make a move about anyone.
    - xkeysc0re 5y ago
      My personal favorite film about an "anyone" https://vimeo.com/64421202 https://vimeo.com/64421202 There's a lot of incredible cinema created from home movie footage as well as just letting the camera roll in your town https://www.topic.com/the-bard-of-braddock https://www.topic.com/the-bard-of-braddock
  - alephnan 5y ago
    Tell that to someone on minimum wage or have a terminal disease
    - xkeysc0re 5y ago
      I really don't get your point. There are tragic, soul-wrenching films about these very subjects. Not every film is a Marvel movie
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - alephnan 5y ago
        Like those YouTube videos where somebody is being altruistic for the video content. Maybe the poor is more interested in having food to eat than being in the spotlight
        xkeysc0re 5y ago
        OP said "Sure, but the story isn't going to be like a movie, for most of us." I'm just pointing out that life is, in fact, experientially like a movie just maybe not the feel good story of the year we'd like it to be
qmmmur 5y ago
Not really. You're primarily the side character of many others first and foremost. You are essentially unimportant.
- xkeysc0re 5y ago
  Do you not see the logical fallacy here? If the generalized "you" - that is to say, the randomly sampled human - is merely a side character to someone else and essentially "unimportant", then that implies by induction that we are all unimportant which is surely not the case, as this distinction implies and indeed requires a hierarchy of important "main" characters. So who is a main character?
  - tiahura 5y ago
    Don’t call me Shirley.
  - qmmmur 5y ago
    You know you can talk about things in the world without using deductive reasoning? Jeez...
  - fellowniusmonk 5y ago
    Probably not you? Probably not me? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox The real world is purely emergent so thinking you are a main character is just a fallacy, an absurdism. What you seem to be pushing back on is that when someone describes themself as a side character it implies that they still buy into "narrative drive" and they just think poorly of themselves. I think while one could argue that there are no main or side characters the simple fact is you can look at the friendship paradox to inform how you think about the problem. Let's forget narrative in the manufactured sense and talk about what scale of perception a person referring to themselves as a "side character" may be implicitly using as a reference. Does the universe revolve around you to any impactful degree and the answer is that it doesn't at all, one asteroid and we are all done, we are here by happenstance, on any cosmic scale or timeline we currently hardly exist. From an experiential human society scale some people function as higher power nodes than others and there is a good chance you are a lower powered node than the people you know, meaning each person is their self probably the least significant person they know. I'd argue that internalizing the friendship paradox and what we know about social graphs could reasonably lead someone to refer to themselves colloquially as a side character, "pretty much everyone I know is probably more important than me." is a fair self assessment for people to make.
seneca 5y ago
You're the main character in 1 life, a side character in hundreds, and irrelevant in billions.

Sure, but the story isn't going to be like a movie, for most of us. (It's more likely to be closer to soap opera, but more plain).

xkeysc0re 5y ago
I disagree. Life is the ultimate expression of direct cinema and thus the apex of what a movie "is", ontologically speaking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cin%C3%A9ma_v%C3%A9rit%C3%A9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cin%C3%A9ma_v%C3%A9rit%C3%A9
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  Someone's life but not anyone's life. Not sure why the films listed on that page are about JFK and Bob Dylan if you can make a move about anyone.
  - xkeysc0re 5y ago
    My personal favorite film about an "anyone" https://vimeo.com/64421202 https://vimeo.com/64421202 There's a lot of incredible cinema created from home movie footage as well as just letting the camera roll in your town https://www.topic.com/the-bard-of-braddock https://www.topic.com/the-bard-of-braddock
- alephnan 5y ago
  Tell that to someone on minimum wage or have a terminal disease
  - xkeysc0re 5y ago
    I really don't get your point. There are tragic, soul-wrenching films about these very subjects. Not every film is a Marvel movie
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - alephnan 5y ago
      Like those YouTube videos where somebody is being altruistic for the video content. Maybe the poor is more interested in having food to eat than being in the spotlight
      - xkeysc0re 5y ago
        OP said "Sure, but the story isn't going to be like a movie, for most of us." I'm just pointing out that life is, in fact, experientially like a movie just maybe not the feel good story of the year we'd like it to be

qmmmur 5y ago

Not really. You're primarily the side character of many others first and foremost. You are essentially unimportant.

xkeysc0re 5y ago
Do you not see the logical fallacy here? If the generalized "you" - that is to say, the randomly sampled human - is merely a side character to someone else and essentially "unimportant", then that implies by induction that we are all unimportant which is surely not the case, as this distinction implies and indeed requires a hierarchy of important "main" characters. So who is a main character?
- tiahura 5y ago
  Don’t call me Shirley.
- qmmmur 5y ago
  You know you can talk about things in the world without using deductive reasoning? Jeez...
- fellowniusmonk 5y ago
  Probably not you? Probably not me? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox The real world is purely emergent so thinking you are a main character is just a fallacy, an absurdism. What you seem to be pushing back on is that when someone describes themself as a side character it implies that they still buy into "narrative drive" and they just think poorly of themselves. I think while one could argue that there are no main or side characters the simple fact is you can look at the friendship paradox to inform how you think about the problem. Let's forget narrative in the manufactured sense and talk about what scale of perception a person referring to themselves as a "side character" may be implicitly using as a reference. Does the universe revolve around you to any impactful degree and the answer is that it doesn't at all, one asteroid and we are all done, we are here by happenstance, on any cosmic scale or timeline we currently hardly exist. From an experiential human society scale some people function as higher power nodes than others and there is a good chance you are a lower powered node than the people you know, meaning each person is their self probably the least significant person they know. I'd argue that internalizing the friendship paradox and what we know about social graphs could reasonably lead someone to refer to themselves colloquially as a side character, "pretty much everyone I know is probably more important than me." is a fair self assessment for people to make.

seneca 5y ago

You're the main character in 1 life, a side character in hundreds, and irrelevant in billions.