RE: On the Suspension of Disbelief
I find your method of considering suspension of disbelief fascinating.
Your take on suspension of disbelief seems to lean heavily on new criticism, which I'm sure you're familiar with. New criticism insists on the self-contained nature of the work, analyzing its form, internal logic, internal consistencies, internal aesthetics, etc. We owe the practice of close reading to the new critics, even as they attempted to gloss over the external ramifications or applications of literature (e.g., the cultural significance of the work of the Harlem Renaissance writers).
I find your take interesting because I have never personally critically examined the suspension of disbelief. In fact, I've only ever used it in a colloquial, non-academic sense. Usually, when I've used the phrase, I've used it to compare a work of fiction against my perceived reality. Basically, as a barometer for how believable a work is and how much of my world and worldview I need to leave behind to even understand how this fictional universe works or how the characters behave in it. I'll give you two examples.
First, The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand. Her characters are all so steeped in her objectivist worldview that it is, at times, impossible to understand or anticipate their actions. There is a logic and a pattern to their behavior, and I remember actually quite liking the development of the characters, dialogue, and plot, but their objectivist worldview is sociopathic. And there are problems galore with the messaging, but I'll leave that critique aside; I'm sure it's been written about plenty.
In the realm of video games, I've often had trouble with suspension of disbelief in Hideo Kojima's works. There's some real nonsense in there. I pick on his games because he presents a narrative that endeavors so assiduously to maintain its grounding in our reality--or at least something very closely adjacent to our reality. Then, Vamp runs vertically up a silo, The Sorrow takes me on a spirit vision quest down that godforsaken river, and deep hypnosis is supposed to explain what's going on with Liquid Ocelot. The series is so replete with fantastical elements, reversals, scientific jargony explanations, and then retconned explanations that it leaves the player's head spinning. Ultimately, when I play those games, I have to choose to suspend my disbelief about the way this universe operates because otherwise I'm going to be constantly questioning how various actions and plot points are even possible.
But I do it willingly. I suspend my disbelief because Kojima is a damn good storyteller. I have my gripes with each of his games, but they've all made me more critically engage with the world around me. Furthermore, with Kojima in particular, all those competing explanations and contradictions that he himself has worked into the story end up actually working cohesively. With his constant struggle between genetics and socialization as the determinants of human destiny, the contradictory answers add something to the narrative. They keep the debate alive and force me to consider the limitations of ideological adherence to one view or the other. From Kojima's games, I've learned to never underestimate the power of either force.
Like I said, I've never critically engaged with the concept of suspension of disbelief (although I've critically engaged with MGS plenty). You've drawn my attention to another way of analyzing and enjoying literature, so thanks for that!
I'm leaving my comment as a reply here because I very much resonate with @michaias points! (and also loved the Ayn Rand references haha! which btw can be said of many of her works. Although there's something to rescue from the way the characters behave, they act truly sociopathic from time to time. But I guess she never really cared for socially accepted behavior anyway, did she?)
I hadn't ever hear of the terms new criticism or Suspension of Disbelief but now that I do I find it that they are really something I align with. My point of view from some time ago is something like anything is believable as long as you go beyond the shapes it takes. Like seeing those shadows on the cave's wall and then closing your eyes and thinking beyond those dark contours...
For example, my dad was always upset that I watched so many animation shows ('cartoons') and played so many videogames. And I understand how people can get lost in the shapes and colors, the bright explosions and cycles of starts and finishes, just to pass time... But there was a point where I started thinking a little beyond. Seeing the works through and gazing upon the people that made them, the times and places from where they came, the processes involved; and could grasp a bit more of the very much human ghost that all works of creativity carry along.
It happened with one of my favourite shows, Adventure Time, which has been highly criticized for its retconning and other inconsistencies. The first seasons weren't even thought as part of a story, but only loose whacky adventures. But then it evolved into something more, and the creators could see its potential to tell whatever stories they wanted to tell. And I could see the show evolving, and I thought it was beautiful... So where I saw a Work with inconsistencies (in many other occasions too), I started seeing now that Work and Inconsistency could not be separated, but instead that the Inconsistency is a intrinsic and fundamental part of the Work. Because it says a lot about the process of those who create such works.
(I think that's partly how @michaias feels about Kojima's storytelling, right?)
Anyways, just wanted to share a bit of my experience with Suspension of Disbelief :D Thanks to this post, my awareness on how I approach Works and my own way of thinking, deepens. I love reading this kind of material: the kind that makes you realize and think about stuff going on in your own head. Words for one's thoughts. It truly makes me feel connected to others and that's something I really value! Thanks a lot, @theironfelix!
UwU ~ Thanks for the compliments and thanks for philosophizing!~
On the Ayn Rand bit, I guess it was more taking these characteristics of Capitalist society that seemed to be churned out more often and trying to say they are the only good... which in a relativistic sense (hypocritical to her philosophy when she called herself an "objectivist"... and which she developed thanks to the education provided by a still Socialist USSR btw...) could make sense... but she's more reifying/deifying these qualities when Capitalist just tends to benefit from those people more often then not.
Suspension of Disbelief I did heard of since childhood; new crits since early highschool but a long time for me to despise this long-held idea of suspending disbelief (especially in its contemporary form unlike past forms).
c:
Dialectical outlook of a work right here, and also one of my favorite TV shows as well. (When I meant externals, they are meant, in a dialectical sense, bearing lil' influence or heavily translated into something else when incorporated into something... after all: the bullet shot at a block of cheese didn't totally do the job nor does it go unscathed. The bullet applies force on the cheese, the cheese has to accommodate for this force by accelerating somewhere in proportion to its mass. The bullet on its part then receives, thanks to Newton's Third Law of Physics, a reaction force back due to it applying force to begin with, which causes massive de-acceleration / acceleration in the other direction.)
{Hue!~)
UwU ~ Thanks for reading and thanks for philosophizing! Before I go on replying, do look at my comment adding upon the post as to explain why it ended abruptly. Anyways, I probably should mention that, like GWF Hegel, works of Art reflect Nature and Culture (and is more of an internalized thing instead of a pure external). (Of course I would go on to then say, as a Marxist, that then Art feeds back to Nature and Culture because of the power of Human Agency. Thus showing a form of how Humans enact decisions while still being informed by Nature and Culture. Basically: indeterminist gang.) Anywho, very interesting yer thoughts on them (especially MGS; have yah ever heard of Lorerunner’s rumination or Super Bunny Hop’e videos on the MGS series?). Any a case, glad to make yah think!
I've never heard of Lorerunner or Super Bunny Hope. I think the only "critical" supplementary research I've ever done on video games was Redgrave's work on Bloodborne. I'm just fortunate to have friends who also like games, philosophy, literature, and history, so we've been having these kinds of conversations going back a couple of decades. I think Xenogears was what really got us started on this mess...
Dangit, I typed Hop’s not Hop’e! Anyways, that’s nice yah got lucky with yer friend choice.