• mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It does the same kind of scene building as your Uncle.

    Incorrect. Because:

    How does this reasoning not apply to the your Uncle portion of the meme?

    One is specific and the other is so goddamn generic you could add it to anything. And people have.

    • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      How specific or generic something is has no bearing on whether something has meaning. All being generic gets you is that it can have different meaning based on the context. A meme template can be incredibly generic and thus be used everywhere because of how any content will work with it. The specific and generic parts of this meme are the one two punch of its delivery.

      The format:

      x:

      y: content

      Or more generally:

      x:, y:, …, n-1:, n: content

      Is fun, but doesn’t deliver content better than:

      content

      Because any content that was worth delivering already was fun enough to share on its own. Again, why stop at removing the first part of a setup we don’t need, when we don’t need the setup at all. Stop with the drum rolls, and ‘needs no introductions’ statements, when the content can be put directly on display. edit: typo

        • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They both add context when put together. The meme would be different without either line. If we take away the first line, your Uncle is alone, talking to himself.

          Both of these lines are superfluous. The meme’s format is to move from a generic statement to a specific one. How each line builds the scene is different, but they are both building the same scene.

          The more important question is what does all of this context get us? As we both seem to agree, not a lot.