It's a Mad World...is this a solution?
I have just read the latest entry in madworld’s journal. It’s about a dream she had and a photo (apparently posted by someone else) based upon it. The image was entitled “The Blue Klux Klan”. Unbelievably, someone complained that it was “racist”!!
I agree with her totally when she writes, “Come on people, lighten up and take things as they are meant, not what you want them to mean.”
I think most of us have suffered at times from the PC brigade.We would all agree that racism, sexism, ageism etc are evil; about that there is no dispute. But to follow a PC track where no-one seems to have a sense of humour or a sense of proportion (or even any COMMON sense ) is wrong and pathetic.
One of my photomanips is called “Just that time of the month”. It contains nudity and violence; however, its theme ( which to my mind was fairly obvious) is the empowerment of women. And yet, a number of people complained that it denigrated women…....precisely the opposite of its purpose! The site moderators suggested that I add an explanation, so people could understand what I was trying to do. I was happy to do this, even though I always feel that explanations of Art or poetry tend to sound a bit pompous; also, in my experience working out what a work is about is half the fun. Anyway, since I added that explanation literally hundreds of people have viewed the work. Is this the answer….to add an explanation to every poem and image so we are not misunderstood? I don’t know; it seems a bit extreme, but perhaps that is the way.
What I do know is that, while personally I regard myself as Left Wing, and a firm believer in everything that genuinely promises to enrich the human spirit and progress the human race, I could do without the phoney liberals, the phoney feminists, and the New Puritans who see virtually all erotic Art as what they call “pornography”, and claim that it degrades women. Such people, often ignorant and full of self-importance, can do great damage if they are allowed to. While we are on this site, we must of course abide by its rules, but those of us who believe in freedom of expression, ordinary human decency, and a “live and let live ” attitude( and who still have, mercifully, a sense of humour) should find SOME way to avoid being misunderstood.
aaronschwartz
I think I agree with your last sentence, but it raises as many questions as it offers answers. Freedom of expression is something that should be promoted and protected, in my view. But it cannot be unlimited in its scope. Expression that promotes hatred, for example, is not permitted under the laws of most countries with a developed legal system. Standing on the soapbox of “ordinary human decency” waving a “live and let live” banner sounds pretty good, but it’s not enough. People can be deeply offended by certain words and images. If those words and images were not intended to be hurtful but nevertheless have that effect, it is not sensible to blame the viewer for being thin-skinned or too “politically correct”. The artist, surely, must look at their work and its effect and decide whether it does in fact express what was intended. A sense of humour is a wonderful thing, but not all people in all communities share the same sense of humour. Points of reference politically, historically, philosophically and artistically vary greatly from one place and one group to another. With the ease of publishing on the internet for everyone in the world to see, it is not so simple any more to apply those old nostrums about “common sense” or “live and let live” and expect every reader or viewer to understand or agree.
I saw that blue KKK picture. My sense of humour serves me very well, but I didn’t find that particularly funny. I didn’t find it offensive, personally, just uninteresting, but I can certainly understand how some people might be offended or hurt.
I am suggesting that artists have some responsibility to consider their work in a context, to understand the size and range of their audience, and to be sensitive to the possible harm that a poorly conceived or poorly executed work could cause. And if the artist concludes that they have created something that communicates effectively what they have to express, and if they publish their work to a global audience expecting reactions, then why would the artist be surprised – or unhappy – that their work caused offence to some? If an artist is misunderstood, it just might be in part the artist’s fault, might it not?
After many years as a professional performing artist, director and writer, I learned at least one thing: the audience is never wrong. Maddening, frustrating, surprising, annoying, but not wrong. And after years as a courtroom lawyer, I have learned at least that there really are two sides to a story, and it is nothing short of folly to pretend otherwise.
So finding some way to avoid being misunderstood sounds like an admirable goal ! Whoever wrote “Come on people, lighten up and take things as they are meant, not what you want them to mean.” begs a few big questions, like “what DID you mean?” and “why should I lighten up when you have been heavy-handed and hurtful?” and “why as an artist are you not sensitive to and understanding of the range of reactions your art evokes?”
Paul (Quixote)...
This is a rather ignorant discourse. There is nothing to be gained by insulting other. I have not seen the bad photo of the KKK, but having read its justification and freedom of speech, I must say that the writer who supports this crap, knows nothing of the history of the KKK, As a matter of fact, looking at “Darkvampire’s” work, I would say that he/she has a bent towards the KKK and the Hitler syndrome and a general racist and sexist predisposition. Further, I also have my doubts that he/she understands what art is all about, and the goals of all true artists.
Art is serious, there is nothing funny about being an artist and working towards changing perception and guiding the audience to think positive thought and work towards a more humane society where we communicate effectively with each other to avoid the things which those like the KKK and Hitler have done thru history. I am not surprised, however that there are still so many individuals and groups who continue to believe that this is the way forward, But, these individuals who associate with such dispicible trash, should never hold themselves up as artist.
aaronschwartz
Hey, there were other comments here a few minutes ago. Where did they go?
darkvampire
To Aaron: Firstly, I didn’t put this forward as a solution, as you imply. I wrote, “Is this the answer?” I was merely attempting to stimulate debate, and indeed to invite suggestions from other people who might make me think more deeply about the matter. It worked, because you have replied, and I am grateful that you have offered your point of view.
Secondly, while I agree with you that “Freedom of expression is something that should be promoted and protected”, I disagree with your implied statement that we should refrain from publishing a work if we feel it may offend someone (if you did not mean to imply this then I am mistaken). You yourself point out that the Internet is worldwide, and it has proved impossible really to police it. Do we not have to accept that in today’s world it is unrealistic and unwise to have anything but the very minimum of censorship? All the garbage politicians come out with offends me deeply, but I have to put up with that. Hardly a night goes by without something on the TV offending me, but I put up with it because I respect the right of others to watch what they want. Considering whether a work might offend someone is not in itself, in my view, a valid reason for not publishing it…otherwise virtually nothing would be published.
I regard myself as a gentle person, and maintain that I do not wish to hurt anyone; but I feel it is dangerous to give other people the power to control what we watch or say.
Returning to your first paragraph, I did not say that people are too “politically correct” because they are offended, but rather because they complain about a work being published, which is a very different matter. What troubles me deeply is that the worst offenders in this regard seem to me to be those who tout themselves as “liberals”, lovers of freedom etc. Often they justify the most reactionary views under the guise of “protecting the rights” of particular classes of people, when they really just want to boss everyone about and get their own way.
You wrote, “Why would the artist be surprised – or unhappy – that their work caused offence to some”…but that is just the point; I would never be unhappy about that. It may be an opportunity to examine it, but I would never be angry or upset because someone didn’t like my work. It is their insistence that it must be thrown in the bin because they don’t like it which disturbs me.
Anyway, thank you for responding. Personally, I have by no means made up my mind about all this; one interesting avenue of exploration is the question of who does the censuring, how do we know we can trust the censors, and so on (I don’t mean on the bubble lol………I mean in the wider society).
darkvampire
To Paul: You write, “There is nothing to be gained by insulting others”, and yet you accuse me of having” a bent towards the KKK and the Hitler syndrome and a general racist and sexist predisposition. Further, I also have my doubts that he/she understands what art is all about, and the goals of all true artists.”. You say this without the slightest evidence, unless of course you can tell all this by my works. I don’t wish to emulate your lack of respect, but your intolerant words would seem to support my argument rather than detract from it.
aaronschwartz
I saw a comment or two by Sally Omar here, and it’s gone now. Why is it gone?
aaronschwartz
We are talking here about freedom of expression, and you’re talking about censorship. Has someone censored Sally’s comments? I would rather believe not.
Paul (Quixote)...
He deleted those comments from the women contributors. He is a sexist, and a sypmatizer of Nazis and the KKK. Probably a social failure who begs some attention, regardless of whom its from. Where is your own strength? You little man of no consequence.
aaronschwartz
DV, all the things you “implied” about what I actually said are completely inaccurate. Read my words. I have made a good living for many decades expressing exactly what I mean.
I suspect that you have deleted Sally Omar’s comment(s). If that’s so, then your “arguments” are completely hypocritical and insincere. So tell me – did you delete her comments or not?
DanaMS
…_phoney liberals, the phoney feminists, and the New Puritans who see virtually all erotic Art as what they call “pornography”, and claim that it degrades women. Such people, often ignorant and full of self-importance, can do great damage if they are allowed to_…
Aren’t you one? Do you think ANYTHING is allowed under a name of ART?
Why don’t you defend your work describing its beauty instead of offending people?
Why do you try to push others down? To look better in eyes of those who will believe how unfair you were judged? Well your art is shown to the public and if someone has negative feelings – you can’t call them ignorant. I am very tolerant person, really open-minded and I love erotic art and I must say yours is controversial and offending at moments. Learn how to properly respond to the critique. Or maybe you are so full of self-importance that you can’t handle one?
darkvampire
To Aaron: I’m afraid that I didn’t find your statements as clearly expressed as you claim. You wrote, “The audience is never wrong?” Do you really believe that?
Regarding my deletion of some comments, you call me hypocrite. Did I delete those comments? Yes, I certainly did. Why did I do so? Because I was instructed by the site moderators to “delete anything she leaves on your work and ignore her altogether”.
darkvampire
To Paul, I would maintain that your decision to descend to insult rather than argument demonstrates that your position is weak. Incidentally, five out of the seven positive comments on “Just that time of the month” were from women, not from men.
darkvampire
To Dana, You ask me, “Do you think ANYTHING is allowed under a(sic) name of ART?” If you re-read my original statement you will see that the answer is “No”.
You asked me, “Aren’t you one?”. I’m sorry but I don’t understand the question.
You wrote, “Why don’t you defend your work describing its beauty instead of offending people?” I didn’t claim that my work is beautiful, and I never intentionally offend anyone.
You asked, “Why do you try to push others down?” I don’t.
You wrote, “Learn how to properly respond to the critique. Or maybe you are so full of self-importance that you can’t handle one?” You completely misunderstand what we are discussing. I welcome critique; the matter under discussion is free expression and censorship.
Paul (Quixote)...
Your explanation about Sally’s deletion is a bold lie, you also deleted Helen Bascom’s comments. You are indeed a hypocrite. I would believe that you are one of those guys with deep psycological issues that you need to deal with. Art is about inclusion and caring, not about hurting people. I look at the way you dissect women, particularly their private parts in a way which suggest your hatred of women, perhaps your own mother, and the association with the swastika and Hitler. If you are hope to do surrealist art, you are indeed a failure.
darkvampire
“Your explanation about Sally’s deletion is a bold lie”. I have the e-mail to prove it.
darkvampire
To everyone: I started this piece in my journal to stimulate debate about Political Correctness, and to learn about other people’s views. I made a simple suggestion that perhaps we should include explanations in our work to limit the calls for censorship by those who misinterpret them. I have been polite and amicable throughout. Observe how quickly some people have dragged the debate down into the gutter! I am absolutely unknown to one contributor, who has stooped to insulting my dear mother, God rest her soul. Yet I have not gone down the same road of insult and vilification. Further proof of my views regarding those who preach tolerance but don’t practise it, is not required, I think.
aaronschwartz
Erasing Sally’s and Helen’s comments leaves you with no credibility whatsoever when you hold forth about freedom of expression and censorship. You are a fraud.
darkvampire replied
No, I am not a fraud. It is you and your “liberal” cronies who are once again trying to derail a useful discussion with your dishonest tactics.
aaronschwartz
I am not calling you a liar; I am calling you an intellectual fraud. You espouse freedom of expression and purport to eschew censorship, and you delete people’s comments from your journal. Don’t bull&$ me about “RB” made me do it. You can leave people’s comments from anybody up on your journals and RB doesn’t care. I am in the business of detecting bull&*, and I’m getting a strong aroma. And yes, I would like to see a copy of that email. And yes, I did mean that the audience is never wrong. In showbiz, the audience is always right.
aaronschwartz
“It is you and your “liberal” cronies who are once again trying to derail a useful discussion with your dishonest tactics.” Ah, now you’re showing your true colors! I knew you couldn’t keep up that fake persona for long. LIBERAL! Boogah boogah! “Dishonest tactics”? What a sad, flailing, angry little fraud you are beginning to sound like.
darkvampire
I did not write liberal, I wrote “liberal” ie phoney liberal, the sort that preaches tolerance but every time a debate doesn’t go their way they use dishonest tactics to derail honest debate.
Put your money where your mouth is: If you send me a private e-mail address via bubble mail I promise on my word of honour that I will send you a copy of the mail instructing me to delete comments, providing you promise to apologise and give $20 to a charity of your choice. If I cannot produce the mail I promise to apologise to you and to give $20 to you personally. Are you man enough for that?
darkvampire
Apparently not. I’ve just been thinking; there are so many really nice, kind , decent people on the bubble, so why am I wasting my time on the sort of characters who stoop to outrageous insults ( accusing me of being a Nazi and KKK sympathizer, of dissecting women’s private parts[!] etc. If that is the only way you can argue,then argue with yourself. This discussion is closed. The offer of $20 still stands.
aaronschwartz
I am not going to pay you $20 to see a copy of one of your emails. I’m not stupid enough for that.
darkvampire
Ahhhhh. I thought you were all hot air and nothing to back it up. Get off my journal with your trolling ways!
aaronschwartz
Sure thing, buddy. I’m not the least bit interested in coming back to your journal. You’re too creepy.
darkvampire
Well, thank you, Aaron; I’ll take that as a compliment lol.
Joe Valcourt/M...
Orwell’s double think and double speak is alive and well on RB
darkvampire replied
It sure is, MA.