I feel like we’re delving into some sort of media theory film criticism arena now, which is far from my area of expertise, but:
You say “if the reviewer didn’t enjoy this” like that’s the axis the discussion should turn on, and that if evidence came to light that she had actually enjoyed herself, that that would make the video more agreeable. I would argue that this isn’t actually case, because we can only judge the video’s worth based on the facts presented to us in it. We should be talking about the facts of what we see and how we are interpreting them. If they had wanted us to think she was fine with it, they could’ve put that in the video - the fact that they didn’t informs how we interpret it.
The facts are that she eats the pepper and immediately says something like “oh god”, and spends the rest of the video - the parts I watched, anyway - with a pained expression, occasionally interjecting to explain how much pain she’s in. At no point does she give any indication that she’s remotely pleased with the situation. Maybe she is deliberately being deadpan in her delivery, and is actually having a great time, but that doesn’t make the presentation as we see it any less unsettling.
(I hope you can forgive the vague quotes - I would have given exact quotes but honestly, I don’t want to rewatch the video.)
I ate some concentrated ghost pepper at the Denver County Fair in August. The guy didn’t tell me until after I ate it that it’s the second hottest pepper in the world. I’m very tolerant of spicy stuff, but this sent my mouth spiraling into heated hell. It stayed burning and my eyes watering I think for over half and hour at least.
I’m not arguing the video’s morality. I don’t consider this particularly coercive or exploitative, so I have no problem with her choosing to do so.
It’s the idea that I was supposed enjoy watching someone in pain to be unsettling. The idea that I gain pleasure from someone else’s tears of pain is… well, as I said, I felt vaguely unclean. Maybe I’m missing the mild sadistic streak necessary to enjoy it.
I also consider this different from the slap-stick like videos that abound. There the amusement is not primarily derived from the victims extended suffering, and in fact people tend to enjoy them more if it turns out the victim is unhurt.
Thanks for the response. I’m not well-educated when it comes to criticism either, but my impression is that your approach (“We should be talking about the facts of what we see and how we are interpreting them”) is a popular but not a consensus view. I think there’s still a substantial “context matters” contingent. More specifically, at the end of the video (I don’t blame you for not watching that far), the presenter thanks the viewers for their support, says it’s “been amazing”, and refers to the project in the first person plural, which I hear as an implicit claim that she has agency in the project.
EDIT: Thought I should clarify a couple things: when she says that “[something garbled] has been amazing”, I assume she’s talking about the broad experience of working on the project, not the periods of pain in particular. And when I say “claim”, I mean a claim by whatever entity is controlling her words at that point, which I suspect without certainty is her.
I’m pretty well versed in criticism. Both approaches are valid. Really. And I swear I’m not being postmodern about that.
You are never going to be rid of context, but at the same time it’s totally valid to limit yourself to the how and why of the presentation chosen. Then you can add context about that choice too.
The important thing is to identify what approach you are using. But we’re not really writing dissertations here or anything.
I watched this and thought this might be a fun thing to do for a dance audience. I could definitely imagine a dance where I’d have to perform something while reacting to a pepper. I also enjoy hot peppers so it might not be fair to the audience unless it was outside my comfort zone.
Am I the only one who was actually able to pay attention to the review? I found it useful. I was seriously thinking about buying that game … now I won’t.
I am impressed with the performance. I ate a whole habanero once. I was rendered completely non functioning for about 15 minutes.
Hmm. I totally related to the host, hearkening back to memorable chili-eating experiences and combinations of food and drink/chaser* I admired her brave and professional delivery, and felt overwhelming amounts of respect for her badassness.
I also felt a strong desire throughout the clip to ameliorate her suffering, and that was the only thing I felt a bit strange about, because the means I adopt to weather waves of food heat are slightly perverse.
I find that hitting myself on the back of the head, slapping my face, and boxing my ears hard, evens out the endorphin flood while distracting myself from the chili-induced pain at the top of the pyramid. So I kept wanting to see her hit herself upside the head repeatedly, sigh very, very briefly in relief, then shout, “Aahh! Ack!, Diamond Dragonbutt 3 retains the game-play of previous, AAHGHHG, pant-pant-pant, versions so you won’t have any problems there, AAAGHHG, pant.”
I went back to look at some clips of the male reviewers, and found them a lot less disturbing. Not certain if it was because of the female reviewers tears were a greater signifier of pain or because my cultural programming makes me far less comfortable with sitting around while watching women (and presumable even worse, children) suffering - even voluntarily.
Have to agree with coding horror, though. Suffering as attractive? Yikes.
