| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Todd Lehman writes:
> > Maybe, rather than taking the "offensive" stuff out altogether, something
> > like this could accompany future comic strips right at the beginning, as
> > part of a disclaimer explaining that it is SATIRE against the offensive
> > marketing engine that dominated SW:TPM. That way, for the humour-impaired
> > or non-hardcore SW fans, it could serve as a warning to read no further.
>
> I'm a little disapointed in that coment. I don't think it's being humor
> impaired to question the value of something which shows intolerance.
Ya, "humour-impaired" isn't an accurate phrase to use in this context -- it's
too loaded. See last paragraph here:
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=6892
> I'll even admit that when I read the story, I laughed at Jar-Jar's beating
> (though not nearly so much as the rest of the story). When Larry posted on
> the subject, I thought about it, and found that I was wrong to laugh at it.
> It isn't really funny. I don't think it's satire either. I think there would
> be far more effective ways of expressing satire. I agree, Jar-Jar was an
> almost nauseating character.
But it's not Jar-Jar being beaten -- that's only what you SEE. What's going
on underneath is that it's making a statement against the Lucas marketing
juggernaut crapola that resulted in Jar-Jar and TPM being a lesser movie.
And people are just letting off steam about it. (I suppose that would be
much clearer if the comic strips had disclaimers!)
> I will be removing the link on my web page to the picture of Jar-Jar and
> Timmy chained on a deserted island since I feel that that is no different
> (though I got a much bigger laugh out of that one).
wow.
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
25 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
