The Fuck Nuance Analysis in Summary.
Art from the animation The Midnight Gospel
These are some takes from what I’ve learned over watching a commentary on paper by a college professor I don’t know, about nuance called fuck nuance. Lmao. Anyway, it’s an interesting view so I took some notes to remember and apply in either projects or everyday life, I hope they are useful to you.
About sociology and trying to assert communication for explaining topics or discussions, prefer simplicity and quality over quantity and complexity.
The nuance trap proposes that sometimes is contra effective to consider every truth relative, as in considering a criminal murderer forgivable after having his past explained with nuance, as we’ve seen in villain storybooks. It makes someone irrefutable when you add complexity to their character.
The “Explain like I’m five” approach works in to escape the trap because a five year old does not understand nuance so you have to pass the message first in order for them to understand and If you succeed, explain the rest of the idea to them later with nuance.
As quoted by the paper from Healy, K (2017). “Fuck Nuance”. Sociological Theory, 35(2). 118-127.
“By calling for a theory to be more comprehensive, or for an explanation to include additional dimensions, or for a concept to become more flexible and multifaceted, we paradoxically end up with less clarity.”
That means, we lose information by adding detail.
And he continues,
“In everyday argument, we care more about whether theories are interesting then whether they are true.” Even though truth matters the most regardless of being told in detail or not. A good demonstration of this would be the show Cosmos by Carl Sagan.
Or in my own addition, The Amazing Digital Circus, a web animation series on youtube, with complex topics often very smartly conveyed by the animation crew with poses, colors and situations or smart remarks in speech rather than an actual explanation of whats going on. Another series that does it beautifully on youtube is Alien Stage, which tells a story through its songs, animations and comics. Yes, I’m using this analysis to share my favorite shows, quiet. Lets continue.
Besides, you risk sounding pretentious when using complexity for an argument. Good examples are governments trying losing the misinformation war and activists failing to grab people’s attention and sympathy for the cause.
“It springs from the desire to substantively engage with one’s audience rather than intellectually subdue it.”
Who is your audience?
In the end what matters most is how clear and engaging your ideas are.
Reality is nuanced only to us, but not in itself. Simple and true statements do exist, as in “genocide is bad” means end of discussion. There’s no nuance to add here. In these types of situations overthinking and over complicating things can cloud judgment.
Thanks for reading this long text, it’s a compilation of notes from this video commentary I saw on youtube from Elliot Sang, called “Sometimes Nuance is Bad”. And to end with a note from someone’s comment on the video: this is not to say nuance is bad in all situations, it is still good for academic analysis of shit just not effective for everything that’s all.