The point I'm trying to make is that you can't completely disassociate art from the material conditions that created it. I was having a conversation about this with someone else earlier today when we made the observation that He-Man is basically western Sailor Moon, complete with queer identities, similar criticisms of society and even does transformations similarly.
They more or less independently ended up at the same thing, in the same time period, because the conditions in which they were created produced very similar outcomes. Both of them became gay cult icons to their audiences.
You can't divorce art from the conditions that creates it. We could take the entire aesthetic from either of these shows and port it, then try to remove as much ideology as possible from it to transform it into something else... But the key element grounding the art can't be removed or you ultimately remove its identity, you turn it into an entirely different "aesthetic". The gay elements and style are a core part of the dna for these shows, a rebellion component that criticises the conditions in society at the time of their creation. They physically can't be removed from these shows without transforming the aesthetic feel of them too far for everyone to feel they're comparable or correct evolutions of the original art.
The suffix -punk usage attempts to do this, but ultimately it continues to maintain a very small and un-removeable element of its core leftist DNA criticising society because it simply can't be entirely removed without transforming it into something nobody would call -punk anymore. They'd call it SolarFascism or some shit I don't know. Either way it would look transformatively different to Solar-punk in a way that people would no longer want to describe it as such.
The point I'm trying to make is that you can't completely disassociate art from the material conditions that created it. I was having a conversation about this with someone else earlier today when we made the observation that He-Man is basically western Sailor Moon, complete with queer identities, similar criticisms of society and even does transformations similarly.
They more or less independently ended up at the same thing, in the same time period, because the conditions in which they were created produced very similar outcomes. Both of them became gay cult icons to their audiences.
You can't divorce art from the conditions that creates it. We could take the entire aesthetic from either of these shows and port it, then try to remove as much ideology as possible from it to transform it into something else... But the key element grounding the art can't be removed or you ultimately remove its identity, you turn it into an entirely different "aesthetic". The gay elements and style are a core part of the dna for these shows, a rebellion component that criticises the conditions in society at the time of their creation. They physically can't be removed from these shows without transforming the aesthetic feel of them too far for everyone to feel they're comparable or correct evolutions of the original art.
The suffix -punk usage attempts to do this, but ultimately it continues to maintain a very small and un-removeable element of its core leftist DNA criticising society because it simply can't be entirely removed without transforming it into something nobody would call -punk anymore. They'd call it SolarFascism or some shit I don't know. Either way it would look transformatively different to Solar-punk in a way that people would no longer want to describe it as such.