From the NYT review of “Team America,” speaking of Stone and Parker:
It seems likely, though, that their emphases and omissions reflect a particular point of view.
Do you really think? I had been laboring under the impression that Trey Parker and Matt Stone, like all artists of genius, choose to put things in and leave things out of their non-infinite works soley on the basis of totally abstract and impartial standards of aesthetic excellence. If it's likely that their art reflects (well, come on, let's just say it: “is tainted by”) a “particular point of view,” isn't it likely that other creative works might also reflect a point of view? Am I to understand that the makers of The Day After Tomorrow had the crotchety Vice-President resemble Dick Cheney for, god forbid, political reasons? Christ, A.O.. Where were you when I was taking Introduction to Literature, when I needed you?
A.O. Scott, critical supergenius:
There is also this:
“South Park,” with its class-clown libertarianism and proudly juvenile disdain for authority, has always been hard to place ideologically, but a number of commentators have discerned a pronounced conservative streak amid the anarchy, a hypothesis that “Team America” to some extent confirms.
Yes, libertarianism, even of the class-clown variety, is hard to place ideologically! It would be too easy to place it as libertarian. Hmmm… A.O. Scott, some day we will fathom your depths.