I didn't decide to write stories if I didn't like them and didn't believe in their power and all that, but for all that art (even bad art) can inspire, they are not manifestos or manuals for meaningful change in our society. https://twitter.com/magencubed/status/1267078084588720130

Like, I've spent too much of my life dedicated to telling and reading and analysing stories to tell you they're junk, obviously, but they aren't substitution for a systemic analysis of our society, community building, understanding of political theory and a thousand other things.

A scroll through Hong Kong's protest art will tell you that stories & junk pop culture can inspire plenty.

But they're not manifestos.

We can't be the substitute teacher who puts on an episode of X-Men instead of teaching about civil rights movements https://twitter.com/uwu_uwu_mo/status/1176630543049515009?s=21

It's the nature of stories that they will be using one thing to talk about another thing.

Metaphors are fundamental to stories, and not just in Juliet telling Romeo that she wishes he were a falcon that she can reel back to her hand or that her love is as boundless as the sea.

Metaphors are how we understand stories and relate them to our lives, they're how writers write about their lives, abstracted and indirectly, all their own experiences refracted through fiction.

Star Wars is about galactic empires and fascism, Hunger Games is about oppressive regimes and X-Men is about civil rights, sure, but it's also about the personal character arcs of their protagonists. The stories and the story world is built around them.

Stories are compelling when the broad strokes of the macro plot are mirrored in the emotional states of the characters. Pathetic fallacy, allegorical drama, etcetc. This isn't a criticism. But it just means they've of limited utility as a manifesto.