Nostalgic Ventures

Posted: January 30, 2022

By: Wesley - Nomadic Polymath

"Nostalgia is a necessary thing, I believe, and a way for all of us to find peace in that which we have accomplished, or even failed to accomplish. At the same time, if nostalgia precipitates actions to return to that fabled, rosy-painted time, particularly in one who believes his life to be a failure, then it is an empty thing, doomed to produce nothing but frustration and even greater sense of failure."

-- Drizzt Do'Urden from Streams of Silver by R.A. Salvatore --

Taken on its own merits nostalgia is a tricky concept to place firmly on one side of being good or bad for you. Sometimes it is weaponized for greed or guilt or demonization of the present, other times it is used as a template to enrichen the future. We see evidence of this peppered throughout our society, specifically in media, it's through this lens that I'll attempt to convey noble implementations of nostalgia and nefarious uses of nostalgia. Some of these examples are not going to be clear cut because nostalgic ventures are typically subjective.

Looking back at the wide range of media (books, film, music, games, etc.) there has been revamping of old plot lines and characters with new storytellers at the helm for as long as creative mediums like those have existed. How many stories can be boiled down to the Hero's Journey just with a different layer of settings and characters? Nostalgia at its core is woven through the very act of telling stories. This entry itself will leverage nostalgia to get its point across. The point being that longing for what the past had to offer can be destructive or beneficial to your current agenda, it really depends on how you intend to wield that longing.

"Doing what they can, with what they have, when they have it."

-- Hidden Brain on NPR --

A segment on NPR touched on this train of thought tangentially by discussing how certain people respond to tragic events that befall them. They brought a story to the forefront about a girl who enjoyed surfing and one day she fell victim to a shark attack and lost her arm. This girl didn't let that stop her from pursuing her desire to surf and approached returning to the water with only one arm with this sentiment, "I don't need easy, I just need possible". How would you respond to losing your arm? Or any other form of "control" on your life such as hearing, vision, etc.? They purpose that people that seem immune to these types of setbacks view them differently. Rather than wishing those events didn't happen to them they've changed their approach to embody that quote above. They recognize that doing the best they can with what they have available when it is available is the true marker of success. This surfer wanted to capture the feeling of riding the waves once again so allowed that nostalgia to fuel their drive to overcome the obstacle of having one arm.

The way we interpret nostalgic presentations will skew the way we share that media with our network. On one extreme we have the originality purists that see any use nostalgia as a negative and will speak poorly of or simply avoid the attempt to hook their attention. On the other extreme are the fanboys that want every piece of media to reference or continue any other form of media they've encountered regardless of the quality. Take this with a grain of salt as I'm sure the multidimensional spectrum of nostalgia is more complex than those two points. For the sake of convenience those are two I'll reference going forward, the attempt here is to speak objectively about something that has layers of subjectivity.

Let's start with an easy to spot nostalgic lever being pulled: King Kong. The first time that story graced the silver screens was in March of 1933, it later had reboots released in 1976, 2005, and 2017. All told, King Kong has appeared in 12 motion pictures across nearly 90 years of film. Does modern retelling of the same story do the original justice? What does that mean to do the original justice? There are wide opinions about the subject that really depend on your stance, the position taken here is that to do the original justice is to pay respect to the source material while updating the plot beats using more modern interpretations. Some might say that the strict retelling of King Kong in 2005 does the original more justice than the reshaping of the story in the 2017 reimagining. If placed side by side the 1933 movie and 2005 movie follow generally the same narrative line while the 2017 film takes liberties with the characters and story to achieve something new altogether. Personally, I think both newer movies pay their respects to the original and update it to meet modern viewing standards.

Another blatant nostalgic lever can be seen in the book/movie Ready Player One. This time around it's an entire new story set in the Hero's Journey arch that brings in elements from other media to tug on the hearts and minds of the readers or viewers. Woven throughout this story are little references or nods to things that make you think of the 1980s, included are less than subtle pulls on the lever. Without a specific piece of material to point to and say that's the original how do we measure the justice done? Well, does the inclusion of these exterior element serve any point in the story beyond a callback here or there? How does their inclusion enrich the narrative playing out? Again, these questions are often answered through the eye of the beholder.

To me, I think those two examples represent the extremes of fanboy versus originality purists. A fanboy would love every incarnation of King Kong while the purist might scoff at the overuse of the setting and character. On the other side, a fanboy might look at Ready Player One then scoff just as hard by their favorite character being harnessed to bolster another setting and the purist might see that movie as a great combination of elements to bring something original to life. It's definitely not clear cut, if I wanted I could twist my own narrative here and swap the roles of either party. The point being to think about these factors on your own terms by leveraging the questions peppered throughout this entry.

Comparing another two instances of obvious nostalgia baiting we jump to Star Wars: The Force Awakens and the latest Scream. You might find that personally, I'm somewhere in the middle of being a fanboy and a purist. With these movies I like one more than the other for exactly the same reasons. Both flicks tell incredibly similar stories as their original counter parts, nearly beat for beat remakes using new and old characters to tell almost identical stories in similar settings. Depending on your level of commitment to the originals and how you define that commitment you'll likely form your own opinions here. Both can be described as soft reboots or reboot sequels, they restart a story along the same path the original left off but introduce new elements to revive the narrative. I myself found I enjoyed Scream more because the nostalgic twists and turns making sense in this series, whereas in Star Wars it felt like a lazy storytelling to limit itself to what was done before.

To varying degrees the next examples all trigger that same sort of nostalgic pull and can elicit wildly different opinions on whether or not that's a bad thing. Looking at 2021 release exclusively here, consider the following and think about the elements of nostalgia at play in their presentations. Matrix Resurrections, Ghostbusters: Afterlife, Spider-Man: No Way Home, Space Jam: New Legacy. All of those heavily rely on their references to previous materials that spawned huge fandoms and incredible followings. You don't have to look that hard on the internet to find the differing takes people have when talking about how one or all of these either ruined or enhanced what came before.

Having been an avid follower of How I Met Your Mother I'm surprised by how well How I Met Your Father has hooked my attention. If I leaned towards the purist end of the spectrum I'd be upset by how many times there are subtle references to the first series. On the same note, I'd be upset pushing too hard towards being a fanboy because of the same reason. There are pieces of original storytelling here, however, if you're creating a new story that has a lot in common with the old story how do you bring balance to your use of nostalgia? It's like walking a tight rope and three episodes in I'm onboard for what they have going here. It is the proper level of using what came before as a template to build a new future.

Media is a convenient way to express how nostalgia can be used for the benefit of ourselves and other or for pure evil intentions. I'm going to form different opinions then you might and that's okay. Nostalgia is a tool to be used to achieve one goal or another. It can destroy those that seek to replicate the past entirely while the same memory can be used to help bring to life a bold future. Are we supposed to wish that things were as they once were or can we live with what is and aim to mold the path ahead with the wisdom of our past?

Point at a particular moment in my life and I can tell you one way or another if nostalgia was harming or helping me. I think my depression is often triggered by that rosy-painted longing for what I consider to be better times in my life. I think my optimism feeds on weaving the joy from my past into the journey I'm on currently. Finding empathy for those involved in creative works doing the best they can, with what they have, when they have it has unlocked even more joyful moments because I choose to see their use of nostalgia as something more than just baiting me to consume more of their media. I make attempts to absorb art in all its forms, appreciating it for it is rather than identify the gap between what it is and what I think it could be. I try my best to look into my past for ways to enrich my days to come instead of being consumed by the gap thinking.

The main question I want to leave you with is how are you wielding nostalgia to shape you future?