|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Aug 15, 2018 8:46:54 GMT
I understand the PC mentality and whether or not I go along with it in real life is one matter. And everybody has their own opinions about what is correct and proper and right and wrong. Okay, fine.
But, what about when it comes down to a work that stems from the creative impulse that is deep inside the person? Whether it be a song or a movie or a book or a painting or a tv show? Should the individual who creates something feel any obligation towards political correctness?
My feeling is that there is no place for PC in the arts and, if anything, it is a total detriment to creativity and it is completely destructive to the most underlying and basic reason why creativity is so essential in the first place.
For better or for worse, I'm about as apolitical a person as you could ever meet, and I really can't muster up a bare minimum of respect for PC in real life, though I can understand the whole "changing times" thing. On the other hand, for the person who is endeavoring in some way to be fully and effectively and passionately creative (and what would be the point of wanting to create something, if one weren't being passionate about it?) , I would find the whole notion of political correctness to be counter-intuitive and irrefutably repellent. There is absolutely NOTHING colorful or interesting or amusing about political correctness.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Aug 15, 2018 11:58:15 GMT
I understand the PC mentality and whether or not I go along with it in real life is one matter. And everybody has their own opinions about what is correct and proper and right and wrong. Okay, fine.
But, what about when it comes down to a work that stems from the creative impulse that is deep inside the person? Whether it be a song or a movie or a book or a painting or a tv show? Should the individual who creates something feel any obligation towards political correctness?
My feeling is that there is no place for PC in the arts and, if anything, it is a total detriment to creativity and it is completely destructive to the most underlying and basic reason why creativity is so essential in the first place.
For better or for worse, I'm about as apolitical a person as you could ever meet, and I really can't muster up a bare minimum of respect for PC in real life, though I can understand the whole "changing times" thing. On the other hand, for the person who is endeavoring in some way to be fully and effectively and passionately creative (and what would be the point of wanting to create something, if one wasn't being passionate about it?) , I would find the whole notion of political correctness to be counter-intuitive and irrefutably repellent. There is absolutely NOTHING colorful or interesting or amusing about political correctness.
Any thoughts? |
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Aug 15, 2018 13:45:43 GMT
My question for anyone complaining about "PC" is simple: what is it you want to say that you're being prevented from saying?
Don't give me generalizations about walking on eggshells, watching every word or the offense of others. What is it, specifically, that you want to say?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2018 13:50:02 GMT
No
|
|
|
|
Post by Catman on Aug 15, 2018 16:09:15 GMT
No.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Aug 15, 2018 17:16:20 GMT
In the first place, “political correctness” is not really a Thing. It is just a creation of the extreme "right" (i.e. wrong) to whine how backlash against hate speech and institutional racism is really persecution that violates their First Amendment rights. Apparently, conservatives can say anything they want about anybody else but if you reply back to them, you are being P.C. and oppressing them. Conservatives also use PC to object to advances in the arts such as color-blind and gender-blind casting in movies and plays. A worthy goal that often gives more depth and meaning to the play/movie being performed. That is PC to conservatives who prefer to see white male faces in lead roles and are especially offended when black or Latino actors are used instead or if women replace males.
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Aug 15, 2018 17:22:25 GMT
In the first place, “political correctness” is not really a Thing. It is just a creation of the extreme "right" (i.e. wrong) to whine how backlash against hate speech and institutional racism is really persecution that violates their First Amendment rights. Apparently, conservatives can say anything they want about anybody else but if you reply back to them, you are being P.C. and oppressing them. Conservatives also use PC to object to advances in the arts such as color-blind and gender-blind casting in movies and plays. A worthy goal that often gives more depth and meaning to the play/movie being performed. That is PC to conservatives who prefer to see white male faces in lead roles and are especially offended when black or Latino actors are used instead or if women replace males. ^^^THIS^^^ But I will elaborate in another post...
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Aug 15, 2018 17:59:26 GMT
To be completely honest I am on the fence. Let me explain why.
Take the TV show Game of Thrones. I love that show. In the show there are many instances of violence, foul language, nudity, rape and blood letting. Aside from being particularly well written show, one can make the argument that those things are the reason why the show is so good. One can also make the argument that those things are un-PC and should be changed. Neither argument is inherently wrong or correct. I can see both sides.
Personally, I wouldn't change a thing about the show, but that doesn't mean I don't see the other point. The thing is this: I think you should make the art you're going to make: TV show, movie, painting, novel, stand up act, etc. and then take whatever heat is coming your way. Take your stand. Even if its going to be negative.
Artists should be free to express themselves without fear of censorship, but you also have to be ready to face the fact that there are going to be people that wont like it if your art is about say for example rape. If you want to put that out there then you're the one that has to defend it.
There's an episode in GOTG where a bunch of soldiers take over a small village. There are no men there (they're off at war? I don't remember) so the soldiers gather up the women and have their way with them. Rape galore. And the show is graphic about it. No holds barred.
IMO showing the horror of that was necessary to show because A) these are truly disgusting men and deserve their comeuppance, and B) rape and war are no joke. It is an artistic choice the show has made from day one to be graphic about said things (The show is also very big on characters going through A LOT of suffering before they triumph against overwhelming odds, but I digress).
On the other hand, did they have to show it quite so graphically? Its pretty brutal.
I think the real question is not what your topic is, but rather HOW you choose to depict that topic. In any case as an artist you should have the freedom to depict said thing in any way, but you have to ask yourself as said artist "what am I putting out into the world in depicting it any given way?"
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 15, 2018 18:05:42 GMT
My question for anyone complaining about "PC" is simple: what is it you want to say that you're being prevented from saying? Don't give me generalizations about walking on eggshells, watching every word or the offense of others. What is it, specifically, that you want to say? While does it only have to be self-interest? I want everyone to be able to say anything possible they might want to say, without witch hunts in response that kill their careers, close their businesses, etc. I want James Gunn to be able to make pedo jokes, and I want Roseanne to be able to call people apes, and I want Kathy Griffin to be able to take a photo with a decapitated Trump head, and I want Trump to be able to say "n****r," and I want Rahm Emanuel to be able to call people "retarded," and on and on and on. My view is obviously that political correctness doesn't belong anywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Aug 15, 2018 18:19:01 GMT
No.
But political correctness extends beyond whether to show violence or nudity. That isn't really political correctness since it is a creative decision whether to show something or to let one's imagination fill in the details.
It also pertains to who can be shown to be violent or not, authoritative or not, successful or not, evil or not. So these days, a white male, especially one that might seem strong and assertive has to be made invisible or compromised to keep the political correctness on track. Or a woman who weight 110 pounds can beat up a bunch of 200 pound men.
Political correctness that interferes with truth or natural observations on behavior is where it is the most damaging, and accounts for the weakness and lack of merit in modern art, film etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Aug 15, 2018 18:52:20 GMT
My question for anyone complaining about "PC" is simple: what is it you want to say that you're being prevented from saying? Don't give me generalizations about walking on eggshells, watching every word or the offense of others. What is it, specifically, that you want to say? I want to have my super horned up main character, a 28 year old gay man, say to his attractive, brand new sex partner... "Let's get Chinese Eyes!"
That's one thing, anyway. There are others. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Aug 15, 2018 19:02:26 GMT
My question for anyone complaining about "PC" is simple: what is it you want to say that you're being prevented from saying? Don't give me generalizations about walking on eggshells, watching every word or the offense of others. What is it, specifically, that you want to say? While does it only have to be self-interest? I want everyone to be able to say anything possible they might want to say, without witch hunts in response that kill their careers, close their businesses, etc. I want James Gunn to be able to make pedo jokes, and I want Roseanne to be able to call people apes, and I want Kathy Griffin to be able to take a photo with a decapitated Trump head, and I want Trump to be able to say "n****r," and I want Rahm Emanuel to be able to call people "retarded," and on and on and on. My view is obviously that political correctness doesn't belong anywhere. I agree with everything you said. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2018 19:04:55 GMT
In the first place, “political correctness” is not really a Thing. It is just a creation of the extreme "right" (i.e. wrong) to whine how backlash against hate speech and institutional racism is really persecution that violates their First Amendment rights. Apparently, conservatives can say anything they want about anybody else but if you reply back to them, you are being P.C. and oppressing them. Conservatives also use PC to object to advances in the arts such as color-blind and gender-blind casting in movies and plays. A worthy goal that often gives more depth and meaning to the play/movie being performed. That is PC to conservatives who prefer to see white male faces in lead roles and are especially offended when black or Latino actors are used instead or if women replace males. Personally i rather see women and blacks\Latinos in original roles instead of hand me down roles. Its like Hollywood are telling women and blacks and Latinos that they are not worthy of original story lines and characters. But you know i think they are worthy of original stories and characters. Sadly many people do not think this. |
|
|
|
Post by TutuAnimationPrincess on Aug 15, 2018 19:25:11 GMT
Of course not, political correctness doesn't really belong anywhere. If anyone wants to be sexist or homophobic towards me, whatever, let them be wrong in their own little bubble. Free speech should always remain as such.
|
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Aug 15, 2018 19:35:11 GMT
There's an episode in GOTG where a bunch of soldiers take over a small village. There are no men there (they're off at war? I don't remember) so the soldiers gather up the women and have their way with them. Rape galore. And the show is graphic about it. No holds barred.
IMO showing the horror of that was necessary to show because A) these are truly disgusting men and deserve their comeuppance, and B) rape and war are no joke. In this particular example the PC would be evident if all the women are shown to be horribly upset about it, and all the men are shown to be violently aggressive. In real life wars of conquest were common and rape was also not uncommon. It was likely not even seen as bad. In the Iliad, the concubine Briseis is taken from Achilles but ultimately returned--and she wants to go back. She's a prisoner--yet she wanted to go back to her captor who may well have murdered her family.
Same thing with people watching public executions. Men, women, little kids used to watch them and no one was thinking: "the children shouldnt see this. Cover your eyes dear."
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Aug 15, 2018 19:43:38 GMT
My question for anyone complaining about "PC" is simple: what is it you want to say that you're being prevented from saying? Don't give me generalizations about walking on eggshells, watching every word or the offense of others. What is it, specifically, that you want to say? While does it only have to be self-interest? I want everyone to be able to say anything possible they might want to say, without witch hunts in response that kill their careers, close their businesses, etc. I want James Gunn to be able to make pedo jokes, and I want Roseanne to be able to call people apes, and I want Kathy Griffin to be able to take a photo with a decapitated Trump head, and I want Trump to be able to say "n****r," and I want Rahm Emanuel to be able to call people "retarded," and on and on and on. My view is obviously that political correctness doesn't belong anywhere. You get half your wish: those people are all able to say all those things. The half that they - and you - don't get is freedom from any responsibility. What's the big objection to so-called political correctness? Silencing certain forms of expression, right? The problem with the approach you advocate is that it would do that very thing: silence opposition. It's a two-way street: if Gunn and Roseanne and Griffin and Trump and Emanuel - or whomever - want to exercise their freedom to do all that, then the freedom of others to make their objections known comes with the territory, and they have (to use an un-PC phrase) to man up...or shut up, and stop playing the victim to conjured boogymen like "PC," "SJWs" or "witch hunts." |
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Aug 15, 2018 19:55:17 GMT
There's an episode in GOTG where a bunch of soldiers take over a small village. There are no men there (they're off at war? I don't remember) so the soldiers gather up the women and have their way with them. Rape galore. And the show is graphic about it. No holds barred.
IMO showing the horror of that was necessary to show because A) these are truly disgusting men and deserve their comeuppance, and B) rape and war are no joke. In this particular example the PC would be evident if all the women are shown to be horribly upset about it, and all the men are shown to be violently aggressive. In real life wars of conquest were common and rape was also not uncommon. It was likely not even seen as bad. In the Iliad, the concubine Briseis is taken from Achilles but ultimately returned--and she wants to go back. She's a prisoner--yet she wanted to go back to her captor who may well have murdered her family.
Same thing with people watching public executions. Men, women, little kids used to watch them and no one was thinking: "the children shouldnt see this. Cover your eyes dear."
But you're talking about different times where societal norms were different. We're talking about nowadays with our norms.
I cant say how women felt about this particular episode because admittedly I haven't spoken with a lot of women about this episode, only one. And while she was disturbed I think she was disturbed the same way I was, as opposed to some PC way.
But I imagine that if I were a woman and/or a rape victim my opinion about seeing rape depicted in my favorite fiction might be different. I don't know.
p.s. Briseis was choosing the lesser of two evils in the Iliad. Achilles who treated her relatively well, as opposed to Agamemnon who treated her like shit. Either way she was property. Not much of a choice really. Also, I dont think there ever was a war where rape was seen as "not bad." At least not from the view of the women that were raped and that of their husbands.
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 15, 2018 20:06:15 GMT
While does it only have to be self-interest? I want everyone to be able to say anything possible they might want to say, without witch hunts in response that kill their careers, close their businesses, etc. I want James Gunn to be able to make pedo jokes, and I want Roseanne to be able to call people apes, and I want Kathy Griffin to be able to take a photo with a decapitated Trump head, and I want Trump to be able to say "n****r," and I want Rahm Emanuel to be able to call people "retarded," and on and on and on. My view is obviously that political correctness doesn't belong anywhere. You get half your wish: those people are all able to say all those things. The half that they - and you - don't get is freedom from any responsibility. What's the big objection to so-called political correctness? Silencing certain forms of expression, right? The problem with the approach you advocate is that it would do that very thing: silence opposition. It's a two-way street: if Gunn and Roseanne and Griffin and Trump and Emanuel - or whomever - want to exercise their freedom to do all that, then the freedom of others to make their objections known comes with the territory, and they have (to use an un-PC phrase) to man up...or shut up, and stop playing the victim to conjured boogymen like "PC," "SJWs" or "witch hunts." No one wants to silence any expression. You can SAY whatever the heck you want to say. What I have a problem with is taking away folks' livelihoods, taking away their platforms to say whatever they heck they want to say (which I want to grant the opposition, too), etc. Taking those sorts of actions is different than speech. Speech is fine. Some other actions are not fine. Let's make the world one big "speaker's corner." Anyone can say whatever they want. Anyone can say anything back to them that they want, etc. What we don't do is tell people that they can't say things in the speaker's corner, that they can't come to the speaker's corner, that if they say particular things in the speaker's corner they'll lose their job, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 15, 2018 20:09:48 GMT
Imagine if we were to say, "Sure, you have freedom of religion. It's just that you don't have freedom of consequences of religion. So if you pick some religions, you might be fired, ostracized, etc. But still, you can pick that religion."
|
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Aug 15, 2018 20:22:38 GMT
Also, I dont think there ever was a war where rape was seen as "not bad." At least not from the view of the women that were raped and that of their husbands.
What if the husbands are dead-then what? Spend the rest of their life as widows?
There's also said to have been a tradition in Feudal societies "droit du seigneur" where the landlord of the estate has the right to brides on their wedding night (though some dispute its historical accuracy).
There's a story I read in a book about the making of a movie. It was filmed around Spain and there was a boat operator with his wife who was transporting cast and crew to the location. He had met his wife by raping her as a teenager. They remarked how odd it was that she was ok with it. The author just shrugged it off as peculiarities of the local customs in the area.
If a society is built around the assumption that force and violence are common place, how unusual would it be? Slapping women and kids used to be common to, in movies and comic books. It wasn't seen as good, but it wasn't so bad as to made a federal case out of it.
I don't think Agamemnon treated Briseis badly. I am pretty sure he even said he hadn't even touched her. It was the symbolic act of him taking "what belonged to" Achilles that was the issue. She could have just said she didnt care where she ended up. And there's lots of references to the negativity of war in it so I think this was a conscious decision meant to highlight that while he was seen as a frightening warrior he was not regarded as such by her.
|
|
