|
Sax Mortar posted:What does this even mean? Stand up to keep things as they are and don't dream of things getting better because that's actually a nightmare? That's the essence of conservatism
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
Subjunctive posted:It means he got a word wrong, utopia/dystopia. Eh, to a lot of people "utopia" implies "impossible pie-in-the-sky fantasy place" instead of or in addition to "perfect place where everyone's happy". Combine that with his conservative fears as discussed above and it's easy to read it as also including the familiar conservative criticism of progressive ideals as delusional and impossible in the real world. Not that I think he put that much thought into it, but that might be the water he's swimming in when he says it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 15:50
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:It means he got a word wrong, utopia/dystopia. No. Because conservatives lack imagination, they think utopia means everyone gravitates towards some sort of lifestyle “mean” in order to achieve equality, as opposed to everyone getting to live a life of wealth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 16:11
|
|
|
Sax Mortar posted:What does this even mean? Stand up to keep things as they are and don't dream of things getting better because that's actually a nightmare?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 16:40
|
|
|
Lemniscate Blue posted:Eh, to a lot of people "utopia" implies "impossible pie-in-the-sky fantasy place" instead of or in addition to "perfect place where everyone's happy". (I'm not defending Scott or anything, just pointing out that the word very intentionally contains both meanings and always has.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 17:08
|
|
|
drat those greeks and their puns, i hope it rains corn on them
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 17:13
|
|
|
"Cloud cuckoo land" also derives from Greek.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 17:34
|
|
|
AtraMorS posted:For what it's worth, the word "utopia" was originally meant as a pun containing both of those meanings. Iirc, depending on how the first syllable was pronounced or spelled, the word either meant "good place" (eutopia) or, quite literally, "no place" (utopia). Yes, Scott is a doofus, but also you're correct. Also, the point of many dystopian narratives is that the dystopias they depict are the results of attempts to create utopias. A history hands borne this out. The dystopias of the 20th century resulted from utopian projects. Our own late-capitalist dystopia can be, at least in part, blamed on weirdos who read Atlas Shrugged and try to transform the United States into a capitalist utopia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 19:41
|
|
|
its weird how you have a bunch of 1950s media where there's a bunch of neo company towns where its a planned community created by some biz.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 20:08
|
|
|
RoboChrist 9000 posted:Did you not see the deluge of liberals making "Trump is just like Voldemort!" comments for the last decade? Like I feel like Harry Potter Liberal was a term we more or les used on these very forums. Yeah, a lot of older generations had Tolkien as an influence, but I don't think he was as big an influence on Gen X overall the way Potter was on Millennials. Like yeah, they don't follow Rowling, but they definitely have the milquetoast centrist liberalism of the books reinforcing their own beliefs. And they dream about going to Hogwarts. I don't think that people picking up a villain name from fiction and applying it to a real politician indicates that someone is taking political messages from a book, just that they remembered the bad guy's name. (I also don't see a deluge of those comments here or in other places online, but that might be individualized). 'Milquetoast centrist liberalism' is a pretty bland takeaway, and I don't see how you would establish that Harry Potter influenced people into becoming milquetoast centrist liberals rather than people who were already inclined to milquetoast centrist liberalism liked it because it didn't challenge their beliefs. That's what prompted the 'citation needed', I don't see how you can determine that Harry Potter was exercising any strong political influence rather than being milquetoast and appealing to something pretty common. I also don't think Tolkien had much political influence on Greatest Gen, Boomers or Gen-X, he certainly had a large influence over the shape of fantasy fiction, but I don't see that the parts of politics of LOTR that are relevant to the modern world really drove anyone's political stance. Victar posted:TLDR - listen to Shaun's podcast, it's really good, and it does a lot to explain the maybe-not-obvious-at-first-glance neoliberal leanings of J.K. Rowling's writing. I did listen to Shaun's podcast, which makes the comments about the political influence of Harry Potter even stranger to me - Shaun points out some significant political positions the book takes, like antisemitism, pro-slavery, and pro-gender-conformity messages, and I don't see them getting picked up by the people influenced by the books. I've actually seen a lot of people who liked Harry Potter when they were younger but are critical of the flaws in the books now, which I'd call the opposite of being politically inflenced by the books.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 20:34
|
|
|
What separates JK Rowling from people like Orson Scott Card or any other successful author with similarly toxic worldviews is that she made Star Wars money on the back of the books being so inexplicably popular and a lucrative film and multimedia franchise.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 20:53
|
|
|
Star Man posted:What separates JK Rowling from people like Orson Scott Card or any other successful author with similarly toxic worldviews is that she made Star Wars money on the back of the books being so inexplicably popular and a lucrative film and multimedia franchise. What separates them is that JK Rowling is Oprah levels of famous, more or less everyone knows who she is or has heard of her, and she uses her fame and money to actively advocate against Good Things. Does Orson Scott Card do any of that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 22:12
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:What separates them is that JK Rowling is Oprah levels of famous, more or less everyone knows who she is or has heard of her, and she uses her fame and money to actively advocate against Good Things. Does Orson Scott Card do any of that? Card has written editorials and spoken in favor of laws against homosexual activity and against gay marriage and headed and financially supported a Christian lobbying group that opposes gay rights. He doesn't have the same level of fame that JK Rowling does, but he certainly has used his fame and money in the same way. And frames himself as a victim of cancel culture because pro-LGBT artists don't want to work with him and there was a significant movement to boycott the Ender's Game movie when it came out. Card's views actually show up in his most notable works significantly less than Rowling's do, so a lot of people are inclined to seperate the art from the artist.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 22:25
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:What separates them is that JK Rowling is Oprah levels of famous, more or less everyone knows who she is or has heard of her, and she uses her fame and money to actively advocate against Good Things. Does Orson Scott Card do any of that? Card was on the board for the National Organization for Marriage. Which does exactly what you think it does
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 22:26
|
|
|
Pantaloon Pontiff posted:Card's views actually show up in his most notable works significantly less than Rowling's do, so a lot of people are inclined to seperate the art from the artist. Wasn't he the guy who re-wrote Hamlet where Hamlet's dad molested everyone when they were kids, with the intended moral that that's just what gay people do, only to backpedal hard once people were like "hey man what the gently caress"? Like obviously it's not his most famous work, but still.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 22:46
|
|
|
Given the resources, Card would likely be just as detrimental to the world as Rowling is. He’s a better writer, at least.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 23:19
|
|
|
Huh, I really didn't know. I thought his worse thing that people said about him was "he's Mormon".
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 23:20
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:It means he got a word wrong, utopia/dystopia. Yeah, I think it was a pretty obvious slip up with his language but funny because he accidentally kind of of told the truth. ... I was thinking today about the common complaint that "you couldn't make a show like that today" and thought of All in the Family. You absolutely COULD make a show like that today. It just has to be as funny and as clever as that show was. Archie is certainly the butt of the joke(s), but there are several episodes where the spotlight is put on Mike, Gloria or George Jefferson that challenge liberal ideas and expose hypocrisy. Several good shows and movies poke good fun at liberals and leftists; King of the Hill, Portlandia and even the SImpsons immediately spring to mind. Documentary Now is another one. The just have to be rooted in truth and loving funny, but RW comedy never understands that. Take The Babylon Bee where, instead of using numerous examples of liberal/left leaning intentions and policies backfiring or going wrong, they just wallow in the shallow end of the pool and all the jokes are like "Girl WIth Blue Hair Wonders Why She Can't Find a Sales Job" or "Teenager Shows Up to Job Interview Obviously High". Haha. Like most things, conservatism is always the last to know or learn anything, practically by definition, since the whole idea is "keep things the same as they used to be". They get there eventually but we have to drag them kicking and screaming. When was the last time you heard a CHUD bitching about interracial marriage (or even gay marriage, really)? I guess now they've just circled back around to books and sexy musicians.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 23:53
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:When was the last time you heard a CHUD bitching about interracial marriage The last time one was featured on a national TV ad campaign, probably.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2024 23:56
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Huh, I really didn't know. I thought his worse thing that people said about him was "he's Mormon". You can be Mormon and still be left-facing, such as Ken Jennings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 00:11
|
|
|
Card also got pulled from a plum Superman writing gig, if I'm not mistaken. I think that was in the middle of the "didja hear he's homophobic?" backlash, to which his defense was that his personal views were private, which of course teed up the ultimate counter that he put money and resources into anti-gay organizations, so... that was the end of that!
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 00:44
|
|
|
Star Man posted:You can be Mormon and still be left-facing, such as Ken Jennings. Sorry I wasn't trying to say that all Mormons are bad. Just that the "worse" thing I heard about him was that he was a Mormon. Didn't realize he was a homophobe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 00:48
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Huh, I really didn't know. I thought his worse thing that people said about him was "he's Mormon". That's a standard right-wing response when exposed as a bigot, they claim 'Oh, I'm being persecuted for having traditional religious beliefs, so much for the Tolerance!'. The Youtuber Shad of Shadiversity did the same thing when people started to object to his misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia, though he has significantly lower reach and resources than Card. So it's probable that you heard that the worst thing people said about him was "he's Mormon" from one of his supporters. Crunch Buttsteak posted:Wasn't he the guy who re-wrote Hamlet where Hamlet's dad molested everyone when they were kids, with the intended moral that that's just what gay people do, only to backpedal hard once people were like "hey man what the gently caress"? Like obviously it's not his most famous work, but still. wikipedia posted:Hamlet's Father is a 2008 novella by Orson Scott Card, which retells William Shakespeare's Hamlet in modernist prose, and which makes several changes to the characters' motivations and backstory. It has drawn substantial criticism for its portrayal of King Hamlet as a pedophile who molested Laertes, Horatio, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and the implication that this in turn made them homosexuals. I had either not heard of that or had forgotten it, but I think it's clearly appropriate for this thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 01:40
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:drat those greeks and their puns, i hope it rains corn on them 
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 04:10
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I was thinking today about the common complaint that "you couldn't make a show like that today" and thought of All in the Family. You absolutely COULD make a show like that today. It just has to be as funny and as clever as that show was. Yeah, the chud claim that you can't make shows like that these days is hilarious. You absolutely can. You could even sell it to a major network! Their actual problem is that to do so you have to be talented enough to make it good. This generation of mega conservatives has completely lost that ability. The closest they could come would be to say a lot of slurs and other offensive things without making much of an actual show around it. Nobody wants to watch something like that, so it won't sell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 04:20
|
|
|
They think their complaint is that you can't make a show like that anymore, but their actual complaint is that that show was better because they were in its age demographic when they watched it. Many such cases!
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 04:36
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I was thinking today about the common complaint that "you couldn't make a show like that today" and thought of All in the Family. You absolutely COULD make a show like that today. It just has to be as funny and as clever as that show was. Archie is certainly the butt of the joke(s), but there are several episodes where the spotlight is put on Mike, Gloria or George Jefferson that challenge liberal ideas and expose hypocrisy. Archie was the butt of the jokes most of the time, but even so he was written as a deeply flawed but still human character. Edith's Crisis of Faith was, by today's standards, perhaps a slightly insensitive treatment of trans identity and trans issues, but holy gently caress, it aired on network TV over Christmas and near enough two decades later people were still okay with Ace Ventura: Pet Detective. Besides which, the fundamental conceit of that argument is that modern audiences would not be okay with raw portrayal of Unacceptable Things, and of course that argument is utter nonsense because films keep being made that portray those things. Quentin Tarantino made Django Unchained in 2012, and got an Oscar for best original screenplay. I think proper art can be made using slurs and deal with heinous subjects and you won't have it held against you! ...! posted:Yeah, the chud claim that you can't make shows like that these days is hilarious. You absolutely can. You could even sell it to a major network! Their actual problem is that to do so you have to be talented enough to make it good. This is exactly it. It doesn't have to even be very good. Look at the misogyny portrayed by the characters in the Big Bang Theory and how successful that show was. As concerns comedy specifically, it also matters who is the subject of the joke, versus who is the object of the joke. This is why no one gives a gently caress that George Carlin said the n-word in certain routines, and yet whenever you watch a re-run of Seinfeld and you see Kramer, a part of you thinks "....oh right... him."
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 05:07
|
|
|
Thanks to our capitalist dystopia hellscape, any network or streaming service out there would buy a chud-flavored show in a heartbeat if it was any good. They all want to reach as many demographics as possible because that means more viewers and thus more money. So go for it, chuds! The only thing stopping you from making a successful show is your lack of creativity! Find some! Edit: Hell, Netflix has proven that with their disgusting Dave Chappelle specials and all his transphobic poo poo. The Netflix CEO has vigorously defended Chappelle from all the backlash and is still shoveling millions of dollars at him to make even more of his garbage specifically because they want *something* that will bring in chud dollars. ...! fucked around with this message at 09:31 on Mar 21, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 09:23
|
|
|
PT6A posted:As concerns comedy specifically, it also matters who is the subject of the joke, versus who is the object of the joke. This is why no one gives a gently caress that George Carlin said the n-word in certain routines, and yet whenever you watch a re-run of Seinfeld and you see Kramer, a part of you thinks "....oh right... him." It's also interesting watching right-wingers try to include people like Carlin as ideological allies by saying they'd be cancelled today, and how great it would be to have them around. They usually don't have much of a response if you post a link to something like Carlin's rant on "pro-life" people, he doesn't exactly pull any punches in that one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 13:42
|
|
|
...! posted:Thanks to our capitalist dystopia hellscape, any network or streaming service out there would buy a chud-flavored show in a heartbeat if it was any good. They all want to reach as many demographics as possible because that means more viewers and thus more money. I've seen a few reactionaries on Twitter straight up admit this. George Alexopoulis (guy who makes a 'Stonetoss' like webcomic) often points out how uncreative the old guard is and implore them to encourage the proliferation of creative right wing artists.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 14:13
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Archie was the butt of the jokes most of the time, but even so he was written as a deeply flawed but still human character. Edith's Crisis of Faith was, by today's standards, perhaps a slightly insensitive treatment of trans identity and trans issues, but holy gently caress, it aired on network TV over Christmas and near enough two decades later people were still okay with Ace Ventura: Pet Detective. They also don't understand that Archie wasn't really getting ahead of anyone so all his blustering about conservativism and how things are being ruined are in the backdrop of him also not being successful following those ideals. And Archie, while flawed, still was a caring person. Unlike an Eric Cartman who they said wanted to be Archie Bunker. But Cartman gets to live in relative luxury and is framed as the one who tells the truth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 14:46
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:encourage the proliferation of creative right wing artists. I think I see the problem: Capitalists generally only listen to the already-successful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 14:55
|
|
|
Related to this conversation; Some More News put out an episode on YouTube tearing apart Lady Ballers on a lot of the "mechanics" of film making and comedy. Modern conservatives generally can't be funny to normal people because what their adherents see as funny is hate and malice causing the suffering of out-groups, and SMN outlines how that constantly shows up in their "art". They don't have jokes, they have cruelty and bullying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 14:57
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:Related to this conversation; Some More News put out an episode on YouTube tearing apart Lady Ballers on a lot of the "mechanics" of film making and comedy. Modern conservatives generally can't be funny to normal people because what their adherents see as funny is hate and malice causing the suffering of out-groups, and SMN outlines how that constantly shows up in their "art". They don't have jokes, they have cruelty and bullying. The scene where the dad tells his little girl that "You're right, men are better at everything. Women should nurture children" is loving wild. Big laughs in your everyman sports comedy when your protagonist tells his child to give up on her dreams.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 15:13
|
|
|
Willatron posted:The scene where the dad tells his little girl that "You're right, men are better at everything. Women should nurture children" is loving wild. Big laughs in your everyman sports comedy when your protagonist tells his child to give up on her dreams. And that was the payoff for his "redemption arc"! The wife that had left him was overcome with her newly rekindled love and they got back together again. He was so nice and gentle when he said the facts that don't care about the daughter's feelings that girls should do the baby stuff and nothing else and that he, as the man, was right all along. The SMN episode is just a wild loving ride through the minds of truly hateful people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 15:24
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:Related to this conversation; Some More News put out an episode on YouTube tearing apart Lady Ballers on a lot of the "mechanics" of film making and comedy. Modern conservatives generally can't be funny to normal people because what their adherents see as funny is hate and malice causing the suffering of out-groups, and SMN outlines how that constantly shows up in their "art". They don't have jokes, they have cruelty and bullying. Adjacent: they also really seem to love slapstick and "ow my balls" humor. Also: Foreign people speaking funny
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 15:38
|
|
|
Because their humor is directly connected to making their enemies upset. Their entertainment and humor is indirect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 15:55
|
|
|
It's kinda like how there are plenty of movies out there with Christian themes, hell even explicit ones, that manage to be well received by both critics and the general public, but the moment you say something is a "Christian Movie", you know it's a piece of poo poo. They aren't made to entertain, they're made to edify an insecure worldview. People don't watch the God's Not Dead movies because they care about the plot, they just want a big, expensive movie to reassure them that gaytheists burn in hell and also Muslims are bad. Plenty of movies are released each year that could easily be read as promoting conservative values, but that wasn't enough, so they had to go and try making Conservative Movies, and who would have thought, they're all bad!
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 18:09
|
|
|
Crunch Buttsteak posted:It's kinda like how there are plenty of movies out there with Christian themes, hell even explicit ones, that manage to be well received by both critics and the general public, but the moment you say something is a "Christian Movie", you know it's a piece of poo poo. They aren't made to entertain, they're made to edify an insecure worldview. People don't watch the God's Not Dead movies because they care about the plot, they just want a big, expensive movie to reassure them that gaytheists burn in hell and also Muslims are bad. Absolutely right. One of my favorite movies of all time is The Prince of Egypt, it is a movie about a religion not for a religion
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 19:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
Hihohe posted:Absolutely right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2024 21:42
|
|
