Posts made by Pandora

End of the day, circling back to the original point, I mostly just feel a bit of exasperation toward people that can't separate art from the artist. Every artist that has the good fortune of releasing multiple and varied works into the mainstream will inevitably transgress against pop morality, and its up to us as rational, thinking people (citation not forthcoming) to determine whether or not their works can stand alone to be appreciated divorced of the artist's beliefs - and in the case of modern artists, if in fact their beliefs are actually at all problematic as a logical conclusion as opposed to because the Twitter mob said so.

@Auspice That just seems like a really easy way for batches of ballots coming from troublesome zip codes to mysteriously disappear. I prefer things done electronically.

Election day should be a federal holiday and the fact that it isn't smacks of a contempt for the right to vote for the poorer working class who have less control over their work schedules.

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora I feel dirty being upvoted in this thread, honestly.

Conceding defeat is still LOSING, loser.

@Tinuviel I'm going to bed, PM me if I get more upvotes than you and/or OP, that's all I really care about obviously.

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

anything useful has been beaten out of it with sticks

True, but historically, when has that stopped a conversation on MSB, ever.

This is a strange derail, guys. But since we're here, let me just add this real quick: I live in England now, and just before this recent vote, I got the most CHARMING mailer, on glossy paper with bold colors and bold all-caps print advising me that if I was considering voting lib-dem, just DON'T, because every election they say they're close, and they never are, so ffs don't split the vote and just VOTE LABOUR unless you like losing to the Tories so goddamn ALWAYS. Obviously the language is hyperbole, but that's basically what it said, with helpful charts and graphs that showed how terribly the liberal democrats always lose after lying and saying they're polling well.

I can't vote here as a non-citizen, but it tickled me to death; American mailers are much less abrasive, usually.

@Tinuviel Party registration, IIRC. Nothing about your actual ballot is public, that'd be madness. I read about some Republican politician whose campaign would send out a mailer with names and voting records of people who hadn't voted yet and a friendly 'reminder' that if you don't vote, your name and party affiliation will be added in the next one, and it'll be sent to all your neighbors. Savage.

Who you voted for is not public unless you tell someone. Whether or not you voted, and whether you lean Democrat or Republican, can be part of the public record.

@Kestrel I'll keep it brief so no one gets confused: I don't care what you read. I don't care what anyone reads. This is part of why I detest Cancel Culture, because it presumes to dictate what people are 'exposed' to, as if people are incapable of consuming anything without internalizing and then celebrating it.

@GreenFlashlight Your opinion is so noted.

@Tinuviel It actually doesn't happen whenever I enter the fray, my conversations outside of the Hogpit are usually pretty civil, but that doesn't mean I'm going to let you call my opinions stupid and put words in my mouth unchecked.

I shall leave you to your expert knowledge of censorship, it's not like anyone else could possibly be well-versed in it as well, of course.

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

Censorship also takes power and enforcement.

Why are you bringing up what it would take to enforce censorship if you're not claiming that I stated/implied that @Kestrel can cause it?

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

you practice Cancel Culture and would happily see authors that you politically disagree with censored if anyone could get away with it

That pretty damn clearly falls under 'advocacy for censorship.'

Yes, Cancel Culture advocates for social censorship and the wholemeal cancelation of an individual. Accusing someone of advocacy for censorship is a far cry from saying they can enact or enforce it.

This is such a sad derail, and so typical of a conversation on MSB, where instead of debating the issue at hand, it's devolved yet again into a semantics quibbling match about an alternative reading of what someone wrote. If I'm saying 'THIS IS WHAT I SAID AND HOW I MEANT IT' why can't you take that at face value?

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Ghost said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

ETA: Like, I added that preface to the sentence because I thought to myself, "Self, someone is going to make the nonsensical accusation that I am saying OP can single-handedly rain down book-burnings and op-ed bannings, better make sure to close up that loophole." I am a failure.

No, we're not saying that. Stop groping that straw man.

You're the one equating personal views with advocacy for censorship.

No, Pandora added that ETA because they thought someone was gonna think they were saying that.

And then they go and say it.

At no point have I said 'omg, @Kestrel is going to get books banned'. Try harder.

@Kestrel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

@GreenFlashlight said in Separating Art From Artist:

I really hope I'm misinterpreting you here

You are, and that's okay. People who understand the words I typed get it.

Oh, no, in that example you're just being stupid. I agree with the general idea that people shouldn't seek to ban or otherwise prohibit works, but the quote you offered doesn't attempt to do that.

Your opinion is noted.

There's a difference between "It's not a name I intend to pass on to future generations" and "Nobody should ever at all ever mention this person again ever." The former is fine, if stupid. The latter is bad.

Censorship begins with someone's personal views on a work or body of works. Like I said though, your opinion is noted. We're not in the Hog Pit, I'm not going to derail the conversation getting into why arguing with someone calling everyone's opinions stupid is not a great use of my time.

I happen to think Margaret Atwood is an overrated writer, and I like the show adaptation better than the literary original version of the Handmaid's Tale. I share her political views, I just find her prose and plot unengaging.

Do you think this personal opinion is cause for concern that I might want to censor her?

I also think Twilight and EL James are overrated writers, for entirely different reasons. I think their works are misogynistic.

I didn't like the new Ghostbusters, not because it was feminist, but because it was a bad film.

I'm not trying to censor any of these things. I don't enjoy them, each for entirely different reasons. Some out of disgust, some out of boredom, some because I have a different sense of humour.

Sounds to me like the one trying to censor people is you. No one's allowed to have opinions if those opinions are political?

OK, Boomer.

I'm not going to divorce your empathy-seeking sentiments here from the fact that you practice Cancel Culture and would happily see authors that you politically disagree with censored if anyone could get away with it. You're either being facetious, disingenuous, or dishonest here, and I'm not for it. Unlike @Tinuviel, I don't find your opinions stupid, I find them disagreeable and yet alarmingly popular.

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

Censorship begins with someone's personal views on a work or body of works.

Censorship also takes power and enforcement. I have my personal views on art, and I wouldn't make recommendations that go against those views. That is not, in any way, the same as saying that nobody can view art I disapprove of.

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

Obviously OP is not the gatekeeper of the world's literary access, but this is the sentiment expressed and espoused by those who celebrate Cancel Culture and pretend they haven't seen in oppressive regimes what the end result of such behaviors is.

Emphasis mine.

ETA: Like, I added that preface to the sentence because I thought to myself, "Self, someone is going to make the nonsensical accusation that I am saying OP can single-handedly rain down book-burnings and op-ed bannings, better make sure to close up that loophole." I am a failure.

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

@GreenFlashlight said in Separating Art From Artist:

I really hope I'm misinterpreting you here

You are, and that's okay. People who understand the words I typed get it.

Oh, no, in that example you're just being stupid. I agree with the general idea that people shouldn't seek to ban or otherwise prohibit works, but the quote you offered doesn't attempt to do that.

Your opinion is noted.

There's a difference between "It's not a name I intend to pass on to future generations" and "Nobody should ever at all ever mention this person again ever." The former is fine, if stupid. The latter is bad.

Censorship begins with someone's personal views on a work or body of works. Like I said though, your opinion is noted. We're not in the Hog Pit, I'm not going to derail the conversation getting into why arguing with someone calling everyone's opinions stupid is not a great use of my time.

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

@GreenFlashlight said in Separating Art From Artist:

I really hope I'm misinterpreting you here

You are, and that's okay. People who understand the words I typed get it.

Oh, no, in that example you're just being stupid. I agree with the general idea that people shouldn't seek to ban or otherwise prohibit works, but the quote you offered doesn't attempt to do that.

Your opinion is noted.

@GreenFlashlight said in Separating Art From Artist:

I really hope I'm misinterpreting you here

You are, and that's okay. People who understand the words I typed get it.

@GreenFlashlight said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

The point, and this is where I roll my eyes because I don't respect the idea at all, is to promote the idea that these works should be erased from the future.

Wait, whose point is that? Like, what are the names of the people advocating for that?

@Kestrel said in Separating Art From Artist:

I don't judge people who grew up on Lovecraft not knowing all these things about him who enjoy his works and I wouldn't dare take it away from them. I know, though, it's not a name I intend to pass on to future generations. I'd rather they read good ideas.

Obviously OP is not the gatekeeper of the world's literary access, but this is the sentiment expressed and espoused by those who celebrate Cancel Culture and pretend they haven't seen in oppressive regimes what the end result of such behaviors is.