|
Post by Nora on Oct 30, 2018 23:31:21 GMT
1) I would say they do. 2) Not at all. 3) I see no problem with that. 4) Sure. 5) Sure. 6) Not so much. And yes, it is. 7) It's not too difficult to come up with a job for an Indian that's not based on a stereotype. 8) No and no. 9) In what way exactly? 10) Not so much as them not being able to get out of their pre-labeled boxes, as much as others not wanting to let them out. thanks for answering. so from what you write I understand your main problem is with feeding the stereotypes. Do you really see no value in generalization and identifying stereotypes and then perhaps using them for comedic purposes? Or what would be the stereotypes that would be ok to be used for comedy for you to feel its ok? Can you think of any examples of non demeaning stereotypes? I feel like I get what bugs you about it all, but I also feel like the list of restrictions on comedy (and art in general) grows very quickly without anybody being able to really explain or even identify what the rules are and that in the end its not contributing society as much as it is limiting the art form.
|
|
|
Post by Lebowskidoo 🦞 on Oct 31, 2018 12:36:50 GMT
I'm not Indian so I can't say if Apu was offensive or not. I thought he was a lovable character and a long running representation of that ethnic group. So, now the alternative is what? Zero representation? His character was never done in a mean spirited way. Homer could be seen as a stereotypical view of a white man but it's okay to laugh at yourself. Indian people I know thought Apu was funny.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Oct 31, 2018 13:30:45 GMT
1) I would say they do. 2) Not at all. 3) I see no problem with that. 4) Sure. 5) Sure. 6) Not so much. And yes, it is. 7) It's not too difficult to come up with a job for an Indian that's not based on a stereotype. 8) No and no. 9) In what way exactly? 10) Not so much as them not being able to get out of their pre-labeled boxes, as much as others not wanting to let them out. thanks for answering. so from what you write I understand your main problem is with feeding the stereotypes. Do you really see no value in generalization and identifying stereotypes and then perhaps using them for comedic purposes? Or what would be the stereotypes that would be ok to be used for comedy for you to feel its ok? Can you think of any examples of non demeaning stereotypes? I feel like I get what bugs you about it all, but I also feel like the list of restrictions on comedy (and art in general) grows very quickly without anybody being able to really explain or even identify what the rules are and that in the end its not contributing society as much as it is limiting the art form. I'll be completely honest: my only problem is people not being able to realize that what was acceptable to them may no longer be acceptable now. I actually do not have too big a problem with Apu. I grew up with the Simpsons. But if that stereotype is now offensive and the writers want to retire a fictional character, then that is perfectly fine. It's really not a problem until people make it a problem. They take offense that somebody has taken offense to a racist stereotype. Black face was once acceptable. The shuckling uncle tom was once a staple of comedy too. But we realized they were offensive and let them go. The only real difference here is that we are living this transition. The only restriction on comedy is to be funny. It's up to them to present what the audience will laugh at. It's not up to the audience to laugh at what they present just because they say it's supposed to be comedy. And art has always been restricted as well. Some of the greatest pieces of the Renaissance age were commissioned by the Church. They were heavily restricting what could be done. And yet, what we still have masterpieces. And I agree that the rules grow quickly. But I disagree that they can't be identified. They absolutely can if we just listen to each other without clinging to what we grew up with just because we grew up with it. I don't mind if we can't call gay people the f-word or represent them all as camp gays in movies and tv shows if it means that gay people will feel more comfortable in society. That's a far bigger contribution to society than a mere limit to art. And there is one final important thing to remember here: this isn't art for art's sake. This is entertainment for profit.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Oct 31, 2018 13:33:37 GMT
I'm not Indian so I can't say if Apu was offensive or not. I thought he was a lovable character and a long running representation of that ethnic group. So, now the alternative is what? Zero representation? His character was never done in a mean spirited way. Homer could be seen as a stereotypical view of a white man but it's okay to laugh at yourself. Indian people I know thought Apu was funny. Absolutely not. It's not an all or nothing situation. Get an Indian to voice him. Or give him a non-stereotypical job that wasn't a punch line when he was created. Homer doesn't have a stereotypical job. Why was it easy to come up with a non-stereotypical job for the white guy but not the Indian character? It's cool if Indian people you know thought Apu was funny. But there are plenty of Indian people you don't know who thought he wasn't funny.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Oct 31, 2018 18:06:41 GMT
thanks for answering. so from what you write I understand your main problem is with feeding the stereotypes. Do you really see no value in generalization and identifying stereotypes and then perhaps using them for comedic purposes? Or what would be the stereotypes that would be ok to be used for comedy for you to feel its ok? Can you think of any examples of non demeaning stereotypes? I feel like I get what bugs you about it all, but I also feel like the list of restrictions on comedy (and art in general) grows very quickly without anybody being able to really explain or even identify what the rules are and that in the end its not contributing society as much as it is limiting the art form. I'll be completely honest: my only problem is people not being able to realize that what was acceptable to them may no longer be acceptable now. I actually do not have too big a problem with Apu. I grew up with the Simpsons. But if that stereotype is now offensive and the writers want to retire a fictional character, then that is perfectly fine. It's really not a problem until people make it a problem. They take offense that somebody has taken offense to a racist stereotype. Black face was once acceptable. The shuckling uncle tom was once a staple of comedy too. But we realized they were offensive and let them go. The only real difference here is that we are living this transition. The only restriction on comedy is to be funny. It's up to them to present what the audience will laugh at. It's not up to the audience to laugh at what they present just because they say it's supposed to be comedy. And art has always been restricted as well. Some of the greatest pieces of the Renaissance age were commissioned by the Church. They were heavily restricting what could be done. And yet, what we still have masterpieces. And I agree that the rules grow quickly. But I disagree that they can't be identified. They absolutely can if we just listen to each other without clinging to what we grew up with just because we grew up with it. I don't mind if we can't call gay people the f-word or represent them all as camp gays in movies and tv shows if it means that gay people will feel more comfortable in society. That's a far bigger contribution to society than a mere limit to art. And there is one final important thing to remember here: this isn't art for art's sake. This is entertainment for profit. Translation: I'm a bit of a hypocrite who only pretends to be offended for the sake of staying in good with my trendy friends, and really have no particular issue with supposed stereotypes myself. However, I fear I'll be drummed out of the ranks if I don't put up a proper show of shit-shaming anyone who fails to fall in line with the conformist groupthink the people I hang with are into espousing, so I'm going to put up the correct propaganda tract here, as I'm too afraid of speaking outside of the party line for fear of making myself unpopular.
Thanks for clearing that up, bro. I'm sure the entire Indian subcontinent is forever in your debt .
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Oct 31, 2018 18:14:46 GMT
Easy, granny. High blood pressure is bad at your age. And don't worry about my actual grandma. She doesn't defend outdated racist stereotypes. Nothing says original thought like referencing one of the most referenced books of all time, huh? Plus, how can I be tone deaf if I actually understand culture changes? Someone didn't think that through, did she? I don't know. There's nothing more snowflakish than complaining about a show retiring a fictional character that will have absolutely no effect on you. Look, I get it. No one wants to be outdated. But it happens. The trick is not become old and bitter about it. Heck, if you hang on to your technology the way you hang on to your stereotypes, you probably still have a flip phone with over three shades of green on it. No you won't. You'll keep coming back and complaining some more about how your culture was better. Completely ignoring that your parents said the same thing. And their parents before them. Every generation gets left behind. No generation sees it coming. No generation can deal with it. It still hilarious. The fields of time are littered with the corpses of little punks who also thought they were the Voice and Vanguard of the Future. Your post makes a nice addition to that pile of rotting detritus .
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Oct 31, 2018 19:04:33 GMT
Easy, granny. High blood pressure is bad at your age. And don't worry about my actual grandma. She doesn't defend outdated racist stereotypes. Nothing says original thought like referencing one of the most referenced books of all time, huh? Plus, how can I be tone deaf if I actually understand culture changes? Someone didn't think that through, did she? I don't know. There's nothing more snowflakish than complaining about a show retiring a fictional character that will have absolutely no effect on you. Look, I get it. No one wants to be outdated. But it happens. The trick is not become old and bitter about it. Heck, if you hang on to your technology the way you hang on to your stereotypes, you probably still have a flip phone with over three shades of green on it. No you won't. You'll keep coming back and complaining some more about how your culture was better. Completely ignoring that your parents said the same thing. And their parents before them. Every generation gets left behind. No generation sees it coming. No generation can deal with it. It still hilarious. The fields of time are littered with the corpses of little punks who also thought they were the Voice and Vanguard of the Future. Your post makes a nice addition to that pile of rotting detritus . Outdated generations always like to believe that. There are far more corpses of people who just couldn't or wouldn't keep up with change.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Oct 31, 2018 19:05:47 GMT
I'll be completely honest: my only problem is people not being able to realize that what was acceptable to them may no longer be acceptable now. I actually do not have too big a problem with Apu. I grew up with the Simpsons. But if that stereotype is now offensive and the writers want to retire a fictional character, then that is perfectly fine. It's really not a problem until people make it a problem. They take offense that somebody has taken offense to a racist stereotype. Black face was once acceptable. The shuckling uncle tom was once a staple of comedy too. But we realized they were offensive and let them go. The only real difference here is that we are living this transition. The only restriction on comedy is to be funny. It's up to them to present what the audience will laugh at. It's not up to the audience to laugh at what they present just because they say it's supposed to be comedy. And art has always been restricted as well. Some of the greatest pieces of the Renaissance age were commissioned by the Church. They were heavily restricting what could be done. And yet, what we still have masterpieces. And I agree that the rules grow quickly. But I disagree that they can't be identified. They absolutely can if we just listen to each other without clinging to what we grew up with just because we grew up with it. I don't mind if we can't call gay people the f-word or represent them all as camp gays in movies and tv shows if it means that gay people will feel more comfortable in society. That's a far bigger contribution to society than a mere limit to art. And there is one final important thing to remember here: this isn't art for art's sake. This is entertainment for profit. Translation: I'm a bit of a hypocrite who only pretends to be offended for the sake of staying in good with my trendy friends, and really have no particular issue with supposed stereotypes myself. However, I fear I'll be drummed out of the ranks if I don't put up a proper show of shit-shaming anyone who fails to fall in line with the conformist groupthink the people I hang with are into espousing, so I'm going to put up the correct propaganda tract here, as I'm too afraid of speaking outside of the party line for fear of making myself unpopular.
Thanks for clearing that up, bro. I'm sure the entire Indian subcontinent is forever in your debt .
Translation: I don't understand nuance.
You're losing it in your advanced age, Blanche.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Oct 31, 2018 20:28:14 GMT
Liberal entertainment has an inherent problem of feeding on itself. You don't have this issue with classical approaches because there is no ulterior motives--classical art is not trying to transform society for the sale of transforming society. It is representing aspects of life that are assumed or known to be true.
But liberal entertainment exists first and foremost for message. And often the message is something intended to be trans-formative. So in the case of Apu, he was introduced as an idealized Indian immigrant--the educated successful store owner. Is he smarter than Homer? Yes. Is he more morally sincere than Lovejoy? yes. He is hardly a stereotype aka generalization.
But therein is the problem. They introduce this Indian role model--an artificial character in many ways, and what happens? The very group that is being flattered by the presentation becomes offended--because he has an accent (which is one stereotypical thing that is true to life--there ARE Indian immigrants who have accents). It was bound to happen, especially as the Indian community gets increasing representation in US society (which presumably, is what the creators of the Simpsons wanted to happen).
Art is not bound by political correctness. If it is true to life it is art. If it is deliberately distorting real life for message then it is something called propaganda.
Although the Simpsons will present shows which end with a message of understanding or compassion, they have the filter set to L. Because their presentation of some characters is fiercely negative. Groundskeeper Willie is a vulgar dumb working class Scottish immigrant. The Cletus family are dumb and disgusting.
If the Simpsons was seeking to be honest, it would be more realistic--they would have at least one other criminal besides Snake and the very least darken his skin to reflect real life crime stats.
And the Simpsons is made by FOX, the alleged rightwing network.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Oct 31, 2018 20:50:02 GMT
Translation: I'm a bit of a hypocrite who only pretends to be offended for the sake of staying in good with my trendy friends, and really have no particular issue with supposed stereotypes myself. However, I fear I'll be drummed out of the ranks if I don't put up a proper show of shit-shaming anyone who fails to fall in line with the conformist groupthink the people I hang with are into espousing, so I'm going to put up the correct propaganda tract here, as I'm too afraid of speaking outside of the party line for fear of making myself unpopular.
Thanks for clearing that up, bro. I'm sure the entire Indian subcontinent is forever in your debt .
Translation: I don't understand nuance.
You're losing it in your advanced age, Blanche. You'd have to have any for it to be understood.
But do continue on in your role as Privileged White Male from his position as Spokesman and Defender of the Non-Western European Peoples Everywhere. Mansplain to Granny some more, sonny; she finds you an entertaining tyke, if a bit on the tediously pompous side.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Oct 31, 2018 20:51:37 GMT
The fields of time are littered with the corpses of little punks who also thought they were the Voice and Vanguard of the Future. Your post makes a nice addition to that pile of rotting detritus . Outdated generations always like to believe that. There are far more corpses of people who just couldn't or wouldn't keep up with change. 'Outdated generations'? Going all Stalinist on us now, bro?
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Oct 31, 2018 21:04:59 GMT
Outdated generations always like to believe that. There are far more corpses of people who just couldn't or wouldn't keep up with change. 'Outdated generations'? Going all Stalinist on us now, bro? That's not actually what that means.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Oct 31, 2018 21:05:45 GMT
Translation: I don't understand nuance.
You're losing it in your advanced age, Blanche. You'd have to have any for it to be understood.
But do continue on in your role as Privileged White Male from his position as Spokesman and Defender of the Non-Western European Peoples Everywhere. Mansplain to Granny some more, sonny; she finds you an entertaining tyke, if a bit on the tediously pompous side.
Well, at least you've admitted your senility.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Oct 31, 2018 21:25:09 GMT
You'd have to have any for it to be understood.
But do continue on in your role as Privileged White Male from his position as Spokesman and Defender of the Non-Western European Peoples Everywhere. Mansplain to Granny some more, sonny; she finds you an entertaining tyke, if a bit on the tediously pompous side.
Well, at least you've admitted your senility. Too bad you haven't admitted your assininity.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Oct 31, 2018 21:28:35 GMT
'Outdated generations'? Going all Stalinist on us now, bro? That's not actually what that means. I doubt if you actually know what that 'actually' means.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Oct 31, 2018 21:31:44 GMT
Translation: I'm a bit of a hypocrite who only pretends to be offended for the sake of staying in good with my trendy friends, and really have no particular issue with supposed stereotypes myself. However, I fear I'll be drummed out of the ranks if I don't put up a proper show of shit-shaming anyone who fails to fall in line with the conformist groupthink the people I hang with are into espousing, so I'm going to put up the correct propaganda tract here, as I'm too afraid of speaking outside of the party line for fear of making myself unpopular.
Thanks for clearing that up, bro. I'm sure the entire Indian subcontinent is forever in your debt .
Translation: I don't understand nuance.
You're losing it in your advanced age, Blanche. So you're a proud bigot, huh? You spew vitriol against anyone older than you (14?) in every one of your hate filled shit stupid posts. That makes you an ageist Here's the reality you disgusting pedophile supporter. You are a pathetic little hypocritical white liberal that has yet to make a post that isn't shameless virtue signalling. Like many (most?) white libs you think running your suck from the safety of your all white gated community "defending" all of us swarthy folks somehow makes up for the fact you have never and will never have a friend that isn't also a shit stupid white hypocrite just like you. Continue with your non stop patting yourself on the back for doing less than nothing tho. Every post you make just proves my point. Heres more truth for your silly white kid mind to contemplate. If you ever do meet a non white person, they will see through your moronic charade just as easily as I did. You are white and I am not so if you trot out some lies about having a black friend (yeah right) or deny that everything I said is spot on then you're a RACIST!!!!!!!!!!! That's how it works these days whitey. Darker skin never sins. White is never right. If you weren't terrified of seeing a non white in person, you would probably carry a sign with those sentiments in a protest, huh? I won't even delve into why you have an avatar supporting one of the most evil woman hating serial killers in TV history. It's pretty obvious why you are a fan. Don't do so well with the ladies do you whitey? Your angry misogynistic posts to females in this thread erase any doubt about that. You're such a sad little nothing I shouldn't enjoy exposing you but I do. What's that noise whitey? I think there's a non white in your back yard. Better call the cops and then hide. Happy Halloween.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Oct 31, 2018 21:57:46 GMT
Well, at least you've admitted your senility. Too bad you haven't admitted your assininity. Not a word. Please stick to real words.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Oct 31, 2018 21:57:56 GMT
That's not actually what that means. I doubt if you actually know what that 'actually' means. At least it's a real word.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Oct 31, 2018 21:58:52 GMT
Translation: I don't understand nuance.
You're losing it in your advanced age, Blanche. So you're a proud bigot, huh? You spew vitriol against anyone older than you (14?) in every one of your hate filled shit stupid posts. That makes you an ageist Here's the reality you disgusting pedophile supporter. You are a pathetic little hypocritical white liberal that has yet to make a post that isn't shameless virtue signalling. Like many (most?) white libs you think running your suck from the safety of your all white gated community "defending" all of us swarthy folks somehow makes up for the fact you have never and will never have a friend that isn't also a shit stupid white hypocrite just like you. Continue with your non stop patting yourself on the back for doing less than nothing tho. Every post you make just proves my point. Heres more truth for your silly white kid mind to contemplate. If you ever do meet a non white person, they will see through your moronic charade just as easily as I did. You are white and I am not so if you trot out some lies about having a black friend (yeah right) or deny that everything I said is spot on then you're a RACIST!!!!!!!!!!! That's how it works these days whitey. Darker skin never sins. White is never right. If you weren't terrified of seeing a non white in person, you would probably carry a sign with those sentiments in a protest, huh? I won't even delve into why you have an avatar supporting one of the most evil woman hating serial killers in TV history. It's pretty obvious why you are a fan. Don't do so well with the ladies do you whitey? Your angry misogynistic posts to females in this thread erase any doubt about that. You're such a sad little nothing I shouldn't enjoy exposing you but I do. What's that noise whitey? I think there's a non white in your back yard. Better call the cops and then hide. Happy Halloween. No, poel. No to everything you'll ever write.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Oct 31, 2018 22:14:56 GMT
Too bad you haven't admitted your assininity. Not a word. Please stick to real words. Why? Are you too much of a real idiot to deal with neologisms ?
|
|