Subject:
|
Re: Reality == fiction?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 5 Nov 2000 18:00:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
824 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> OK, now we get to the heart of the matter that I was trying to put my finger
> on when I started this... but before I comment on Josh's post let me say • this...
>
> Todd kind of backpedaled from his statement that he hates JarJar. I don't
> think he should have! I hate JarJar too.
He should have if that's how he feels. And really, he didn't backpedal so much
as clarify. And why do you hate JarJar?
> I think it is ok to strongly
> strongly dislike someone or something,
From a personal inner peace (and health) kind of stance, I think it's better
not to.
> and to choose not to help them or to
> even work (in a lawful, peaceful way) to undo whatever it is that they are
> trying to accomplish.
Maybe. There are lots of things that are illegal that shouldn't be, and a fair
share of things that are legal that also should not be. Undoing someone's work
simply because you don't like them is clearly not a good idea. If they are
doing harm, that's another thing entirely.
> Heck, there's someone here on LUGNET that I hate, and I actively work to
> undermine that person and their ideas when I can without being so disruptive
> that I violate the ToS.
Only one? One that rises above the others? And actually hate? I disagree
with lots of people, but I don't feel strongly enough about anyone here to hate
them.
> OK? Really... I think Mark S said it quite well when he said that there has
> been a lot of taking things out of context and a lot of overreacting. He's
> right. In hindsight maybe I should never have brought up what I think is an
> esoteric point if I didn't have it well formed enough to make clear what I
> was getting at.
Disagree. People discussing a thing can help to clear it up for you.
> > Again: Digital representation of toy image of CGI construct of fictional
> > lifeform from fictional planet =/= (does not equal) real person.
>
> THIS is the crux of the matter, I think. IS this statement true?
Depends on "real person."
> Now suppose that instead of actually advocating this beating directly, the
> poster merely suggests that it might be OK to do it by showing good guy
> protagonists doing it. Still bad. We're getting closer to Dan's comic. But
> the key differences are legion.
No. The "key" differences are trivial.
> JarJar is already known to us
I don't think that matters. At best it seems to matter because it's a context.
But that's just a dehumanizing convenience. Not at all a good thing.
> and despised for valid reasons.
No. He's annoying. That's all. I believe that if you (any of you, not just
Lar) "despise" Jar-Jar, then maybe you need to get out more or seek
strong lithium treatment. (Oops, sorry, there I go with my amature mental
health care again.) Jar Jar is not despicable, if anyone is (and I don't
advocate this stance...at least not for this reason), it's Lucas.
> The protagonists aren't themselves good guys. But most
> importantly, Dan's comic is (in hindsight) clearly satire. Mark thinks those
> differences are enough. I'm not sure I can come round to thinking they are
> too, I dunno.
I actually think that the clarity of the satirical intent is plenty to deny the
title of hate speech to this comic. But it is in poor taste, and I will
continue to assert, not fit for youthful consumption.
> But I do know this. I at least don't think the reality/fictionality of
> characters is relevant. What is relevant is whether it's clearly not satire,
> and whether it's clearly advocacy.
Yes. Exactly.
> Fail those tests and I'm against it.
> (still protected speech, still OK to create it, just not going to be
> counting me as a fan, that's all)
I agree with all that too.
> I'm convinced as ever that my kids can't quite make the distinction yet but
> that is my problem, not Dan's
Here, I'm not sure. I think that the condition in which all the kids grow up
is the problem of everyone. The reason that we provide public schools
(misguided though it may be) is to invest enough of our values early enough in
all kids that they won't be any more of a drain on society than they would be
without public education.
> ... what I WOULD ask is that when people post
Right, you asked. That was good. The problem arised when people decided that
your asking was ordering.
> Do they have to? Nope. But it would be nice. Maybe that's not a
> workable suggestion.
Why would that possibly not be workable?
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Reality == fiction?
|
| (...) Aha! Thanks for writing that! I feel that while I hate Jar-Jar, I don't despise him. (Isn't that a strange contradiction?) Now I know how to say this: What I hate isn't Jar-Jar per se, but the fact that a character like Jar-Jar, which I find (...) (24 years ago, 5-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Reality == fiction?
|
| OK, now we get to the heart of the matter that I was trying to put my finger on when I started this... but before I comment on Josh's post let me say this... Todd kind of backpedaled from his statement that he hates JarJar. I don't think he should (...) (24 years ago, 5-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
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
|
|
|
|
