I’m referencing a previous post titled Black Panther Analysis and brought the topic of propaganda onto a seperate post soas not to hijack that original thread.
By leaving patterns out of a story, that kind of story is designed to encourage audiences to “fill in the blanks” that heavily relies on common narratives that exist in a given culture in a specific time.
Some people will reference the most often cited narrative in the culture at that time to “fill in the blanks”.
Some people, who have a broader awareness of historical/cultural facts, are likely to “fill in the blanks” with different information. Having a broad awareness immunises an audience member from the intended propaganda.
Is the story therefore successful for the more aware audience member?
I would venture to say that audience members with broader knowledge can still appreciate other aspects of a propagandised film or book but they are not going to soak up the reinforced common narrative.
Propagandised films and books lose relevance across time, thereby not really standing the test of time. But, if they have other redeeming aspects they might, but will likely be seen as a curiosity by later generations. Or, perhaps they will be called a book or film of its time.