A Moral moral never land
In the article written by James Harold called“ A Moral Never- Never Land: Identifying with Tony Soprano” author questions to the moral effects of TV on human life. Harold’s main claim in this article is that TV shows like The Sopranos combines both sympathetic and repulsive elements of life and ultimately its good for to invite the viewers to think deeply about the nature of good and evil. Also the author questions that there is nothing wrong with loving characters such as Tony Soprano because this show, shows audience the complexity of the character in a realistic way. I agree with the central argument of James Harold in three crucial aspects, the overall simplicity of Plato and Tolstoy’s argument, the positive outcome of providing multiple perspectives and that because the show strives for virtual reality.
In his article Harold gives a considerable space to explain the point of view of Plato and Tolstoy in this case. For Plato and Tolstoy art is morally corrupting. They both defend the idea that art corrupts its audience by playing on emotion. As Harold mentions deeply that for them emotional effect of art is undeniable and it’s enough to influence how people act and what kind of people they become. For example for him if someone watches something violent it automatically affects him. Harold respond their argument with saying that this kind of a thought is more valid for their time and nowadays people have the enough knowledge to make the difference between the good and bad. That’s why for my opinion art is the best path that goes from self- development. Overall I totally disagree with the perspective of this two and think these shows are just portrays that is served for audience to interpret.
Harold explains that another reason The Sopranos is different is that it provides multiple perspectives is another reason that somehow related with others. Probably the most different quality of “The Sopranos” is this show provides us with both the good and bad
In his article Harold gives a considerable space to explain the point of view of Plato and Tolstoy in this case. For Plato and Tolstoy art is morally corrupting. They both defend the idea that art corrupts its audience by playing on emotion. As Harold mentions deeply that for them emotional effect of art is undeniable and it’s enough to influence how people act and what kind of people they become. For example for him if someone watches something violent it automatically affects him. Harold respond their argument with saying that this kind of a thought is more valid for their time and nowadays people have the enough knowledge to make the difference between the good and bad. That’s why for my opinion art is the best path that goes from self- development. Overall I totally disagree with the perspective of this two and think these shows are just portrays that is served for audience to interpret.
Harold explains that another reason The Sopranos is different is that it provides multiple perspectives is another reason that somehow related with others. Probably the most different quality of “The Sopranos” is this show provides us with both the good and bad