deadpool-vs-peter-griffin

From the cave drawings of primitive man to the linguistic circle jerking of academia, there have been attempts to form an all-ecompassing narrative to interpret all of reality through. As of currently, the human race has still not developed this narrative, with some even believing that it is impossible. However, the development of such a narrative has never stopped. Each human around the world, regardless of nationality, economic class, gender, race, political affiliation, and even time period has worked towards this mission. It is as inherent to being human as breathing is. With the human race working for so long on this one project, it is sometimes important to reflect upon all that it has done and to highlight important trends within them. There is, however an issue with portraying such information. Information of this nature can only truly be represented through art but that comes with the complexity of the fact that every form of art and its properties such as genre, medium, and style carris with it, its own implicit narratives - making it hard to reflect upon the nature of narratives if one is trapped within the perspective of one narrative to begin with. There is however a solution - a piece of art that consistently contradicts its own narrative through constant subversion while using those subversions to comment upon narratives as a whole. This is what the rap battle of Deadpool vs Peter Griffin attempts to achieve.

The film begins with an overview of a social platform, with its posts acting as windows into the introductions of each character, employing a post-modern technique known as a metaframe, the intent of which is to remind its audience to view this piece of art as just that and not as a narrative to fully adopt or immerse one's self in. This post-modern technique is then further subverted by the fact that the social media intro is not a reminder of our own lives but a fictional narrative in itself—showing the increasingly blurry lines of the perceptions of fiction and non-fiction within the 21st century. Furthermore, it could be argued that this is a critique of social media itself, as it operates within the capitalist paradigm—serving as echo chambers and a means of control over its users, feeding them narratives to inform their perception of the world and then reinforce it. This shows that it is not just enough to be skeptical of a grand narrative but of local narratives as well, leading to one of two extreme conclusions: eternal impermanence through the continuous rejection of the formation of a grand narrative, or a modular form of narratives that are easily replaceable and form a greater meta-narrative through their interactions with a minimal grand narrative acting as its platform to ensure consistent protocols that each narrative can communicate with and be formed from.

Deadpool begins by listing characters he could have fought against which would have made more "sense" than Peter Griffin, before being perplexed by who he is battling. This brings into question: what "sense" is there? Each character has some sort of connection with the character of Deadpool—some more direct and some that are somewhat of a reach. Deathstroke is obviously the character that Deadpool was originally a parody of (a historical connection), and the next one is The Mask, another fourth-wall-breaking comedic character (genre connection). This continues on until Bugs Bunny (the mascot of Deadpool's corporate owner's archnemesis, and a historical connection through Deadpool's actor's previous films). But all of these battles are rejected in favor of the one that we are currently watching. To cement this rejection of what is considered "sense," the sequence then ends with another subversion. Not only is Peter Griffin introduced, but he is introduced as the martyr of woke culture, Jared Fogle. This invokes a political message while also reinforcing that "sense" is not a true guide that we can depend upon in this world. It makes us wonder and re-evaluate whether Jared Fogle really deserved the malicious attacks and smear campaigns impressed upon him by the liberal media.

The film then begins to make very obvious references, tired jokes, and even a line from the ERB rap battle quoted verbatim without its original context. This is a critique of the creative bankruptcy of "sense"—a force that flows from the human and manifests itself in the form of art that has nothing to say but to point out primitive mental connections that appeal only to the less evolved humans who have yet to comprehend reality beyond a pre-modern stage. Art exists to show something new, to present a perspective that exists beyond what we would normally discover ourselves. It brings us out of our own subjective realities and into the realities depicted by the artist, from which we can then use to stare back at ourselves and see our own implicit realities questioned.

The continuous questioning of one's realities can lead to many conclusions - one of which are delusions. Delusions within a modernist context is seen as an erroneous result of a faulty narrative but if it can be proven that delusions have utility then it can also be argued that these faulty narratives do aswell. If such thing were to be proven infact, it would eliminate the concept of faulty narratives entirely and instead create a new category of narratives based upon pragmatism. Delusions will then be seen as the results of pragmatic narratives, allowing one to more deeply reflet upon narratives and their value outside of accuracy and falsifiability. But where can one find such case of a useful delusion? Rap. Throughout the battle, there are many points which can be described as the erroneous result of a faulty narrative - such as the idea that Deadpool is Spider-Man, but which are useful within the context of the art and its mission to reflect upon narratives - in this case contribute to its commentary on "sense" and narratives as a whole. Delusions, and therefore faulty narratives, are therefore not conisidered invalid if proven untrue as it can still be utilized in a constructive way.