Even in the 1970s, writers had quite strict guidelines for scripts because audiences weren’t as sophisticated back then. For example, if a person died writers HAD to write in a character to “confirm” the death (“My god, he’s dead!”), otherwise people wouldn’t get it. Now the same thing is done with camerawork, and the right choice of music. We’ve become so much better at reading pop culture, that a lot of can be left out, because we can take them as given. We can use stereotypes, archetypes and familiar cues to guide the plot etc.

I’m not too worried about pop culture becoming too self-referential and thus too limited. I think current fashion has been recycling stuff a bit too much lately, but otherwise I think we’re golden. I think it’s impossible to build lasting legacies that won’t feel dated at least at some point, because people’s rising media literacy levels require that you push the limits of storytelling.

i guess the “smartness” depends on what you consider smart. the star trek self-referencing is also very heavily *nostalgic*, which i’d argue is not often considered to be very smart.

my fear: if you end up having a world in which the dominant pop. cultural pattern is the self-reference, you will end up building traditions and legacies. by its nature, this kind of cultural work is pretty efficient and ecological, with all the recycling going on, but it is also ultimately a dead end and in need of continuous rebooting.. or push starting?