|
Towards The YA Ethics: the intersectional nature of ableism in online Young Adult discourse in this thesis I will
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:20 |
|
|
there are multitudes of subhumans in the mel mudkiper/book barn metaverse, for example: people who talk about hating twilight, they are also subhuman pls what is the cutoff for calling something omni- vs metaverse? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
Carthag Tuek posted:there are multitudes of subhumans in the mel mudkiper/book barn metaverse, for example: people who talk about hating twilight, they are also subhuman Its subhumans all the way down (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:10
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:What people posting about it You posted that in a subforum that has an active Twilight hate-read thread. Just because you made a separate point out of the two statements combined doesn't mean you didn't literally state that Twilight readers are subhuman. It's possible I react more harshly to "subhuman" because I am a POC though and it gets used in a lot of bad contexts.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:10
|
|
|
yeah no it's a dumb word choice. i expected it to be an irony thing where people making fun of twilight might use it but apparently not
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:13
|
|
|
I am in a weird position where I feel like I should apologize for my word choice because it clearly upset you unintentionally but at the same time I also feel zero remorse about it
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
loving hell you're insufferable don't apologize
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
The point of that post seemed to be that people who hate on Twilight aren't any different from people who read Twilight 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
Enfys posted:The point of that post seemed to be that people who hate on Twilight aren't any different from people who read Twilight but I used a word that could be construed in the most unfavorable of circumstances to maybe be evocative of racism and that makes me bad
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:18
|
|
|
Sometimes it feels like this subforum's culture is partially stuck in like 2012, where making GBS threads on things or liking the right things is the key goal of posting.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:18
|
|
|
Enfys posted:The point of that post seemed to be that people who hate on Twilight aren't any different from people who read Twilight the point of the post is fine. i think, at least. but the word choice is pretty dumb
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:20
|
|
|
its why we're the only good subforum left the last oasis of those whose sense of self-identity is not so irreparably tied into their consumption of media that they take negative things about stuff they like as personal insults I am sure there is a book podcast thread in RGD you could post in if you just want acritical support of your tastes and daily affirmation of your value as a person
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
It's ok to not like things too
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
It's important not to pretend you are better than the people who like the thing you're making GBS threads on. Signed me, who likes better things.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:22
|
|
|
I like contemporary american lit so its not like my glass house is not visible from space
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:23
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:but I used a word that could be construed in the most unfavorable of circumstances to maybe be evocative of racism and that makes me bad oh get over yourself. it's just distasteful
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:23
|
|
|
I really really hate the whole aggressive “it’s okay to like something!!!!!” thing that’s going on everywhere. sure, but it’s also okay to dislike and even hate something that’s bad. this whole lazy acceptance of anything and everything is how Netflix can churn out mediocre trash every goddamn month and yet people are still going “yaaaas gimme more”, and any iota of critical thought and reading that achool and university are supposed to help you develop just rots away, slowly and steadily
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:25
|
|
|
Sure but it's also good to be able to distinguish between "this book is poo poo" and "this book's readers are poo poo".
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
ulvir posted:I really really hate the whole aggressive “it’s okay to like something!!!!!” thing that’s going on everywhere. sure, but it’s also okay to dislike and even hate something that’s bad. this whole lazy acceptance of anything and everything is how Netflix can churn out mediocre trash every goddamn month and yet people are still going “yaaaas gimme more”, and any iota of critical thought and reading that achool and university are supposed to help you develop just rots away, slowly and steadily same or, as eloquently put https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7pKjTfrETI
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that this is all about stopping criticism. Plenty of criticism happens in other forums. Criticism of the form "X sucks and the people who like it are subhumans" doesn't really anymore, because that kind of posting is neither funny or insightful in any way.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:31
|
|
|
I have never claimed or aspired to be funny or insightful
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:lol yes why be thoughtful when you can just consume You just seem so unhappy. You don’t have to buy anything. You can go to the library. Well, when covid is over, you can go to the library. Like just post about Walt Whitman or China Mieville or whatever Americanists care about. Wouldn’t you like that?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 01:37
|
|
|
I am literally stunned that your solution to the criticism of consuming art as product is "use a library"
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 02:24
|
|
|
TheAardvark posted:Sometimes it feels like this subforum's culture is partially stuck in like 2012, where making GBS threads on things or liking the right things is the key goal of posting. That can't be right all the longest threads here are about loving the drat product
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 02:25
|
|
|
Please keep posts focused on books or authors, not other posters. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 04:09
|
|
|
Yes more on the topic of art as commodity for consumption this topic had good potential
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 04:18
|
|
|
Bilirubin posted:Yes more on the topic of art as commodity for consumption this topic had good potential Agreed The commodification of art sucks that is the Mel position
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 04:39
|
|
|
Also, to prevent anything as astoundingly dumb as "just use a library then" from being said again, let's clarify what is meant by the commodification of art. It doesnt mean "buying art is bad" it refers to the reduction of the reader-text experience into one based on the idea of the text being treated as a commodity instead of as text. Meaning that a reader approaches the text not as a vessel of information but instead as a item that is expected to fulfill the consumer's pre determined interests. The reader engages with a text on the understanding that the text will do the things the reader expects of it. If those expectations are met, the text as product is "good" if not met, they are "bad". It reduces the complexities and beauty of the experience of engaging with art into a superficial act of treating art as one would treat a car or shoe, by utility. The recent rehashes and returns of YA authors is a prime example of this. These new books only exist as product, devoid of intent other than to provide a service to a consumer who demands an experience they already know Mel Mudkiper fucked around with this message at 05:28 on May 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 05:26
|
|
|
Ya know, Exit Through the Gift Shop looks at all of the arguments y'all are making but in a much more interesting manner and everyone should watch it instead of making the same arguments not as well.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 07:54
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Also, to prevent anything as astoundingly dumb as "just use a library then" from being said again, let's clarify what is meant by the commodification of art. Everything is a commodity under capitalism though. To the billionaire who wants it, your favorite renaissance painting is just a thing he desires because there aren’t any others like it, even though it wasn’t made to be put into a market. There might be a better vocabulary for talking about aesthetic experience than commodity fetishism, but there’s going to be trouble. The kind of experience people want from their art changes with the cultures people live in and the kinds of art that get made. I don’t think we’re going to be able to find a transhisorical notion of engaging with beauty, or a great definition of beauty or art. Instead, it might be more productive to ask what’s a great piece of art to you, and what is your rubric for appreciating it? How do you treat a text and why does that make sense to you?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 08:28
|
|
|
A human heart posted:That can't be right all the longest threads here are about loving the drat product Huh? The longest thread is the Song of Ice and Fire thread, and lots of the other long ones are pretty equivocal or divided about their topic. Antifa Turkeesian posted:Everything is a commodity under capitalism though. Capitalism sees (almost) everything as a commodity, but people living under capitalism don't have to. Mel Mudkiper posted:I know the answer is "money" but I wish artistically bankrupt YA authors didn't come crawling back to their main franchises for prequels and psuedo sequels after a few years Also I can't believe nobody lolled at the idea of J. K. Rowling writing money, especially while she's releasing a book free online. And Meyer, Collins, etc. aren't exactly poor.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 09:26
|
|
|
Also, don't call people subhuman, and especially not just because of the books they like.
I'm the Book Barn IK. Feel free to PM me or email bookbarnsecretsanta@gmail.com if I can help you with anything.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 09:32
|
|
|
I wish I was more lax about my expectations of books. I find when I have a genre or style in mind that I’m disappointed more often and also rarely surprised since I’m going into some kind of known.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 13:25
|
|
|
Safety Biscuits posted:Also I can't believe nobody lolled at the idea of J. K. Rowling writing money, especially while she's releasing a book free online. And Meyer, Collins, etc. aren't exactly poor. We all know rich people never do things for money. Are you loving serious. Also yes, the only thing Rowling had done with her franchise since it ended was release a free book excellent counter point. Antifa Turkeesian posted:Instead, it might be more productive to ask what’s a great piece of art to you, and what is your rubric for appreciating it? How do you treat a text and why does that make sense to you? How is introspection of personal taste a response to a criticism of a societal view of art other than a lazy way to deflect dealing with the criticism Mel Mudkiper fucked around with this message at 14:10 on May 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 14:02
|
|
|
StrixNebulosa posted:
Especially for me because I can put it in my "read" shelf instead of the "unread" shelves. The longer it's been in the latter, the better it feels.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 15:07
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:We all know rich people never do things for money. Are you loving serious. I’m asking for the theory behind the practice. You can’t just invoke terms like beauty, art, and experience while thinking their definitions are transparent to others. What is the method we’re discussing? Formalism? Presentism? Reader response? Give us a case to look at and show us how it works.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 16:39
|
|
|
I dislike the idea of calling people who uncritically engage with a book (either through their love for it or their hate for it) subhuman. Calling them fascists is much better, seeing as fascist art (and their oppression of, yes, "subhuman" art) was all about denying the critical experience and instead art existed to valorise the fascist, i.e. sate their desires, especially their desire to be seen as great.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 16:50
|
|
|
Fair point. Of course, this forum thinks it is the Mishima readers who are fascists.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 16:51
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:I’m asking for the theory behind the practice. You can’t just invoke terms like beauty, art, and experience while thinking their definitions are transparent to others. What is the method we’re discussing? Formalism? Presentism? Reader response? Give us a case to look at and show us how it works. Again you are deflecting. Describing a problem does not necessitate prescribing a solution
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:20 |
|
|
Mrenda posted:I dislike the idea of calling people who uncritically engage with a book (either through their love for it or their hate for it) subhuman. Calling them fascists is much better, seeing as fascist art (and their oppression of, yes, "subhuman" art) was all about denying the critical experience and instead art existed to valorise the fascist, i.e. sate their desires, especially their desire to be seen as great. have you ever heard of futurism, because that runs counter to what you just said and just assume I name dropped every known fascist/fascist sympathising author (like pound, celine, hamsun, mishima and so on) because that doesn’t fit with their works either ulvir fucked around with this message at 19:19 on May 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2020 19:17
|
|