Subject:
|
Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 4 Nov 2000 00:36:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
587 times
|
| |
|
|
> From: "Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com>
>
> I *was* hanging back a bit.
>
> There are some very very subtle issues here. Like I said in my original
> post, I couldn't put my finger on what was bothering me exactly. And
> Damraska summed it up nicely, it's satire of a meme, not a call for genocide
> against a real thinking living creature.
>
> That said, I guess I'm not sure I'm happy to be lumped into the "pro PC"
> camp by you Mark, because I'm not PC in any way shape or form. And I'm not
> too happy to be apparently charged with not being clear on how not to be
> offended. (was that enough nots in one sentence? I found it naughtily knotty
> to parse)
I didn't lump you unequivocally into any camp. Nor did I charge you with
anything.
You wrote:
> > Jar Jar is a sentient being (of a fantasy world) and I suspect he has rights
> > and doesn't like being beat up because he talks funny or looks funny. He
> > didn't CHOOSE to look goofy, did he?
IMO, this sounds an awful lot like a PC sentiment. "JarJar is a minority, so
let's all be ultra-nice to him"
You wrote:
> > Talented as this work is, and as much as it made me laugh, I am not sure I
> > want to see a bunch of other works that all "celebrate" intolerance. or
> > something.
After which, I suggested that you don't read them. I'm not sure why that
made you mad.
Where were you going with that statement. anyway? Usually, after people make
statements about not wanting to see things they deem offensive, they follow
up by asking that no one else see those things either... "because of the
kids" or some such.
Since you didn't follow up that statement with anything, I jumped to a
conclusion you didn't make. I apologize for that.
>
> I know I don't have to look at stuff, thanks very much. But when someone
> posts something and says in effect "look at this, isn't it neat?", by golly,
> if I by chance don't happen to think it's neat, I'll darn well say so, and
> you in turn can hit "next" too if you don't want to hear it. (else, what
> you're asking for is uncritical adulation or silence... and that, frankly,
> isn't what is needed here, this being .debate)
I can certainly hit the "next" button. Please note that I never posted any
messages calling for you to put a stop to posting your opinion.
>
> In this case, I'm not *sure* if it's neat or not. For once I'm not
> completely certain I know all the answers, believe it or not.
>
> I know it's *technically* neat. It's a tour de force of what can be done
> with a tiny budget, graphic illustration software and a good imagination.
> But as a piece which is claimed to be art/satire, I have to judge it on its
> artistic merits too. (that's the way my process works) I can't decide if the
> message is "important" enough to warrant the gore. Or if I agree with that
> message, actually.
>
> Please don't accuse me of being close minded if I happen not to agree that
> it's appropriate for my kids, even if I can't put my finger on why, or if I
> happen not to dislike JarJar, or Lucas and his marketing machine, or even
> Timmy (well, we're speaking hypthetically here :-) ) as much as everyone
> else does.
>
> Because if you do that, you're being the close minded one, hmm?
I haven't and won't accuse you of being closed-minded. I'm not sure why I
deserve that last little jab.
>
> THINK about what I'm saying before reacting,
I would appreciate if you'd do the same. You jumped to a few of your own
conclusions as well.
~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin
--
Mark's Lego(R) Creations
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
62 Messages in This Thread:
   
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
