the lovable loser aesthetic

I guess this is a modern take on hamartia? I seem to have a great fondness for this aesthetic. works that come to mind are the films of wes anderson (esp. bottle rocket, but I also love rushmore and the royal tenenbaums), the 'mats, rocky. what are other works that I should check out? do you like it or is it just bullshit twee weepy self-sabotage?

i like those three films but as an aesthetic (or trope which begets a particular emo-twee aesthetic) it could happily be left in the last decade

"lovable" and "loser" are words that do not go together imo

I was waiting for you to say that. predicatableLAD

damn yr playing hard to get again lex

hamartia has nothing to do with this

Is this actually an aesthetic though or what? Is it a recent thing? I'm trying to think of narratives from history that incorporate this, but it seems like something that kaboomed int he last ten years. Is it a hangover from grunge/generation X self-deprecation? Or is it a trickle effect of indie/alternative now having infiltrated the mainstream?

TV ads now feature people with geek specs and badly-fitting sweaters - people with aspirational appeal, because in the last ten years the most aspirational jobs for many are those working in creative media. It runs a viscous gamut of Creative = Arts = Outcast = Loser = Lovable = Popular = Success. The indie aesthetic fits in there somewhere.

But in recession times, when print media is flailing and people are starting to wake up with a hangover from the Hoxton/Williamsburg slumber party, public aspiration is going to shift and I can see strong-willed and steadfast characters and role-models replacing the meeker, lily-livered outsider types.

I misread this thread title as 'the lovable loser acoleuthic' and was shocked at you, dayo.

:}

jon arbuckle

re: dog latin, I kinda differentiate this from the larger twee/indie/emo current by virtue of, well, strong-willed characters who keep on running up against inherent character flaws (which is why I kind of see this in hamartia-like terms). I don't see this aesthetic as being indulgent in self-pity/self-deprecation, moreso in self-sabotage.

people are starting to wake up with a hangover from the Hoxton/Williamsburg slumber party,

mad <3 for your skewed state of the nation posts, dog latin

think we could use some examples not from the work of wes anderson before speculating further...

I was in Wakefield not all that long ago and definitely saw signs of people waking up

bertie wooster?

Del Boy?

Wile E Coyote?

Dunno if Bertie Wooster's a loser though. He basically always breaks even, and is perfectly happy with this (and rather than a strongly willed desire, it's often his generosity and loyalty that set his troubles in motion).

candide

job

http://pinstripebindi.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/bridget-jones_265_153147a.jpg

Is this like people who might have the Beats and Bukowski etc as some kind of semi-role models but have ditched the unlikable/alcoholic/egomaniac bits?

Also Charlie Brown.

haw, I can see Bukowski fitting right into this

and yeah why didn't I mention Charlie Brown in the OP to counterweight the wes anderson.

Wasn't exactly lovable though right? xp

http://i.imgur.com/2udCj.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/rPuso.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_qskaSRkns8A/SQpzUsH41AI/AAAAAAAADyQ/yONRO2ucJAM/s400/BukowskiGrave112898A1.JPG

is that max fischer cosplay u_u

xp to nickB, not really, but I still love him

the picture of the boxer - perfect. thought about bringing up on the waterfront as well

charlie chaplin

dostoevsky's idiot

i think it's max fischer cosplay, tho the english private school system is basically one big max fischer cosplay

red buttons

Those fuckos in High Fidelity

isn't jarvis cocker the ne plus ultra of this in england?

don quixote

don quixote otm

I've never seen any of his work but do ya'll think w.c. fields would qualify

http://preaprez.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/wimpy2.jpg

I guess as well as Del Boy it's a necessary component of swathes of sitcomland - protagonist/s have strong desires, almost achieve them, are undermined by their own greed/vanity/pride, and back to the beginning: Rising Damp, Cheers, Steptoe etc etc etc

father ted

prince myshkin vs homer simpson

Thank god this conversation veered away from indie flick losers so rapidly.

not so fast

http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/2771429/Adam+Sandler+PunchDrunk+Love.jpg

protagonists in paul auster novels

god i hate everyone mentioned in this thread

lucifer

god i hate everyone mentioned in this thread

Even Prince Myshkin?

ESPECIALLY prince myshkin - absolutely infuriating character

lucifer may, in fact, be patient zero

ignatius j. reilly

contenderizer OTM about the definition of "loser" depending on certain values. The Dude in Lebowski is a happy guy - I don't remember him thinking of himself as a loser.

there is no one archetype for loveable loser, bernard –– i think that is what a lot of posters are asserting. loserdom in terms of broader american culture is a lot different than loserdom in terms of american film-making traditions. i.e. the basic expectations of comedic dramaturgy often necessitates oddball, quirky, characterization that begins LOW(/losery) and ends HIGH(/less losery), and benefits from large and noticeable change.

are there any kafka characters who would fit into this?

favourite "loveable losers" of recent TV land: Michael and George Michael Bluth (altho they are from a wealthy family and are funny in spite of their relative misfortune so this doesn't really work).

@ dayo, i don't think anybody in kafka is loveable at all

http://www.glennsasscer.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/rocky.bmp

yeah but they always lose xp

multi-xpost "funny in spite of their relative misfortune" seems like as good a qualification for this role as any!

Remy OTM

chichikov probably would have ended up as one had gogol finished dead souls

@ dayo, i don't think anybody in kafka is loveable at all

― they call him (remy bean), Tuesday, January 11, 2011 2:15 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

I prefer examples of losers who are totally incapable of mastery over their environment and are STILL intended to be hateable even when everyone surrounding them is worse. Peter Kien in Auto De Fe springs to mind.

the replacements are the example i'm feelin most so far — appeal seems inseparable from their failure to 'break out' and find a mainstream audience, which is itself inseparable from profound 'character flaws' (drunken shambolicness). then again, they're so universally well-regarded among ppl 'in the know' that it's hard to really think of them as losers at this point.

woody allen in practically every role ever? (xp)

yeah - and self-sabotage through drinking was a part of their m.o., at least that's what I've gleaned from ILM xp

okay let's run with the "self-sabotage" thing, cuz that seems like the most promising so far.

obviously it can't just be any kind of self-sabotage — like john rocker is not a lovable loser for alienating fans thru racism+homophobia, mel gibson is not a lovable loser for calling a cop "sugartits", etc. — but there's still some kind of connection with 'compulsive behavior'?

fictional characters get a bit more leeway b/c they can have "rich interior lives" and "quiet reflective moments" and all that shit that nobody ever knows or sees or cares about irl, where you have to deliver on at least a little bit of yr potential or there will be nobody watching the self-sabotage

rich interior lives also allow for ways of eliciting sympathy for the character w/o such appeals coming from the character herself

btw started thinking about this today because I've been listening to 'first place loser' by diddy-dirty money nonstop and the only phrase I can understand in the song is 'first place loser'

does Pavement's career trajectory (buzzworthy unpolished 1st album --> catchy accessible 2nd album --> offputting stonerjam 3rd album) qualify them for lovable loserdom?

would it change anything if they were like "yeah we worked our asses off on Wowee Zowee and genuinely thought we had a masterpiece on our hands; not sure what happened there"?

i.e. how delusional can you be while remaining lovable?

http://bayougirlblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/hang_in_there_kitty.jpg

pavement can gtfo, they never cared in the first place

Once you start to revel in it you become a punchable loser and Pavement went way over that line.

I think the 'strong-willed desire to achieve something that's thwarted by an inherent character flaw/some act of compulsive self-sabotage' is the key here

I'm gonna go ahead and disqualify the royal tenenbaums, btw

so caring = prerequisite? what about like, a reluctant child star who seems unable to just get out of showbiz, so instead withdraws into increasingly obscure/artsy/unappealing vanity projects?

university of virginia fratboy = not loveable loser

I haven't seen the royal tenenbaums, i hope that doesn't put too much noise into the communication channels

feel like sincerity counts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5KWI71s3DY

- can "just not getting it" ever count as a compelling character flaw?
- what about "talented artist who toils in hopeless obscurity only to achieve posthumous success"? (this one's kinda weird cuz it involves a near-total disconnect between the persona and the works)
- ed wood?

I prefer examples of losers who are totally incapable of mastery over their environment and are STILL intended to be hateable even when everyone surrounding them is worse.

this is a thing i do not get - why is it considered such a good thing to read novels/watch films/etc about hateful people being hateful? at least with the loveable loser aesthetic you get to engage yr capacity for human sympathy.

"sincerity" wd tie the LL into Japanese notions of the noble failure I think - tho with differences. A lot of noble failures didn't do much loveable in the Disney sense of the word, but inspired a higher kind of love or honour thru their sincerity in defeat?

this is a compulsive subject for somebody convinced that they veer well to the feckless side of the LL archetype to be mulling on. but I'm very interested in the notion of overcoming and shaping one's destiny. those ideas seem like the mainstay of fictional arts, and the LL is the obvious negation of them or counterargument. I feel like Odysseus or Achilles display LL characteristics before turning it around thru slyness or suicidal adherence to honour.

haha Phil D. that song is the first thing I thought of. It makes me think of me dad!

why is it considered such a good thing to read novels/watch films/etc about hateful people being hateful?

It feels closer to a kind of felt truth than yr conventional heroic epic I guess

Cf Martin Amis, imo.

Could also look at this as an attempt to solve the "if human beings are motivated only by selfish impulses, however submerged, then how does goodness happen?" equation

http://blogs.laweekly.com/westcoastsound/Dean%20Venture.jpg

you thought oh he's a loser, a bum, someone the str8 community wouldn't give a fuck about
well aren'tcha????
well yyyeahhhh

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3066/3027232436_1a222168b4.jpg

Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.

Feel like George Costanza is some kind of commentary on this idea: he's situated as an LL, but actually shows the bitterness, festering resentment, rage, self-delusion that irl LL's may be prone to.

george bailey was the one i was going to say.

this is probably wrong (and it's hard to tell since he has so much sex) but tyrone slothrop might be one of these people? i dunno if anyone loves him. he certainly loses though.

one of the reasons i loved the scott pilgrim movie was that it seemed to be undermining the indie-film lovable loser archetype: scott pilgrim is a weak and sensitive boy whose weakness and sensitivity are revealed to be methods of emotional manipulation, and movie over and over again reminds us how alone he is in his own barren head. the accuracy of that picture is why it's hard to think of people for this thread.

also i get george bailey confused sometimes with elwood p. dowd so maybe him? but things work out pretty well for him.

Feel like George Costanza is some kind of commentary on this idea: he's situated as an LL, but actually shows the bitterness, festering resentment, rage, self-delusion that irl LL's may be prone to.

― portrait of velleity (woof), Tuesday, January 11, 2011 9:58 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark

oh totally! huh never thought of it that way

yeah that's a rly interesting reading. makes sense tho

I prefer examples of losers who are totally incapable of mastery over their environment and are STILL intended to be hateable even when everyone surrounding them is worse.

e.g., http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/67/Confederacy_of_dunces_cover.jpg

Holden Caulfield?

woof OTM re: george costanza. nice deflation of a too often sentimentally conceived character type.

and DLH OTM re: scott pilgrim, though that's a more conventional characterization, in that he seems to "learn his lesson" in the end, softening the blow somewhat.

and yeah, it's impossible even to like kafka's characters. pity's about the best you can hope for there.

sometimes its nice to see what you become when you get to know people