MovieChat Forums > I Saw the TV Glow (2024) Discussion > The director was viscerally disgusted by...

The director was viscerally disgusted by 95% of the things they had to do to promote this movie.

posted 7 months ago by [deleted]
24 replies | jump to latest

They hate capitalism.

Because that’s the world we all live in. … I’m so viscerally disgusted by 95% of the things that I have to do to promote this movie. To operate in these hallowed halls of capitalism and not feel absolutely insane, it requires some kind of taking the red pill. Or privilege-tinted sunglasses.

https://variety.com/2024/film/features/i-saw-the-tv-glow-jane-schoenbrun-interview-owen-trans-1235989079/

[–] CMX (265) 5 months ago

I wonder how they think movies can be made then?

[–] diezman (2097) 4 months ago

Wow, how edgy

[–] Zarkoff (1853) 4 months ago

In this context, isn't they singular? You are referring to one person.

Wouldn't it be correct to write, "They hates capitalism." I admit that sounds odd, but I think it's grammatically correct.

[–] [deleted] 4 months ago

Jane goes by they/them. If I don't use the correct pronouns I could find myself in prison.

[–] Zarkoff (1853) 4 months ago

Of course you should use their preferred pronouns.

I was talking about the grammar, using hate instead of hates when they is singular in this case.

Jane likes movies.
They likes movies.

I might be wrong about that, though. It just seems like it should be written that way for consistencies sake, but I could be wrong. In cases like this, they is being used for an individual, because they doesn't fit into the traditional gender binary.

[–] capuchin (3182) 4 months ago

'They' has been used as a singular pronoun for centuries (Apparently, since 1300 to refer to an 'unknown person), but has always -- to my knowledge, anyway -- been treated the same way as it is when it's used as a plural. And that's what is considered correct through long usage. 'They were on the staircase' as opposed to 'He was on the staircase.'

There's certainly an argument that it isn't grammatically correct. And I think there were prescriptive attempts to tidy it up during the early Victorian era when academics were obsessed with making English conform to Latin conventions. But as part of natural language -- which is really how language works, rather than having rules imposed upon it -- it's 'they were', 'they like', &c, even when singular.

[–] Zarkoff (1853) 4 months ago

Interesting. In this case, the grammar professors seem to be going with what sounds right over consistency, IMO.

[–] capuchin (3182) 4 months ago

Well, it's the old prescriptive versus descriptive grammar argument, isn't it? And a lot of grammar rules were made up by a handful of people, and imposed long after the language had evolved; for example, the idea that split infinitives are wrong ('to boldly go' instead of 'boldly to go' or 'to go boldly') has never really had a place in English -- and is completely unsupported by old English literature. That's a thing in Latin.

But I suppose both why 'they' became the word used for a person of unspecified gender and why it was still treated as a plural even with this singular use is probably lost to time. Just happened that way. But, yeah, you're right: it isn't consistent and therefore I can understand why someone would think it was 'wrong'.

[–] Zarkoff (1853) 4 months ago

I'm not a student of language and don't know anything about the descriptive versus prescriptive grammar argument. I just know that the form a verb takes is supposed to match the subject of the sentence. LOL. I majored in a STEM subject in college. Questions like this can be kind of interesting, though.

You are right of course that people have been using they when a person's gender is unknown or not specific. I remember some grammar sticklers didn't really like it when they was used that way, though. I was sometimes told to write "he or she" instead of they. This was not consistent, though.

Also, I think "he or she" used in those situations might be considered problematic now, since it promotes the gender binary and would be seen as exclusive. It wouldn't surprise me if people who prefer "he or she" are being told that they need to change their ways and join team they.

I think you're right, though, "they are" is the way, not "they is". It's got history and just sounds more correct.

[–] capuchin (3182) 4 months ago

I think that I may have been occasionally told to use 'he or she' at one point too -- but, even without the non-binary issue, it sounds so clumsy. 'He or she was on the staircase' versus 'They were on the staircase.' Hmm. Yeah. Don't like 'he or she' in those circumstances. It's only a hop, skip and a jump away from 's/he'.

I've also been in organisations with style guides where I've been proof-read and had changes made that just felt utterly arbitrary -- through which I've learned that everyone has different ideas about these things.

When it comes to grammar issues, I long ago decided to trust writers more than I trust teachers or grammarians. You know, if it's good enough for George Eliot (or whoever it might be), it's good enough for me.

[–] Bigt (114) 2 months ago

Why would we do that? They refers to a plural....stop with this fucking lunacy for fucks sake. I'm not calling someone a they/them. HE or SHE can get fucked.

[–] Zarkoff (1853) 2 months ago

The person who replied to me made a good point. We use they when we are referring to someone of an unknown to us gender. They is singular in that context.