P-Frank wrote:...Whether it is one or the other doesn't really matter as it breaks down taboos. Taboos are all really silly and we should be able to have open dialogue about sex, politics, gender, religion and race.
It doesn't break down taboos, it just makes people argue about them more.
It does break taboos with time. Writers like Lawrence or Flaubert broke taboos back in 19 century, things that we don't even consider taboos. For christ's sake, Flaubert shocked the public by writing a novel about a woman who cheated on her husband! Nowadays, we can barely even imagine that it was ever a taboo. But take away all the great novels and films about people who cheated on their spouses, and you'd lose many great pieces of art. And it's not like any of those incouraged anyone to be unfaithful.
We can see that process in going right now. Think about how many taboos "There's something about Mary" broke when it appeared: disabled jokes, bodily fluid jokes... Nowadays, films are regularly using such jokes, and noone really argues about "American pie" and similar films. So attacking taboos is really changing the world, that is, breaking down taboos.
You can like that or not, but it lets us talk more freely about some topics. We may be unhappy that people are making movies about bodily fluids, but looking long term about people who broke taboos fifty or hundred years ago, we are only happy that they did. Well, putting it in perspective, "Dr. Strangelove" broke taboos regarding cold war. That was probably the first step in making a different look at cold war, so iun a way it helped stoping it. And we all know that at the time, many people were very unhappy that someone broke that taboo.
P-Frank wrote:...Whether it is one or the other doesn't really matter as it breaks down taboos. Taboos are all really silly and we should be able to have open dialogue about sex, politics, gender, religion and race.
It doesn't break down taboos, it just makes people argue about them more.
You know what makes people argue? Continually needling them about a subject repeatedly
P-Frank wrote:...Whether it is one or the other doesn't really matter as it breaks down taboos. Taboos are all really silly and we should be able to have open dialogue about sex, politics, gender, religion and race.
It doesn't break down taboos, it just makes people argue about them more.
An excellent point. Humor brings dialogue. They don't laugh much in Iran about religion, and look at the results.
The thing is, conflict is gonna be there. The question is how we deal with it. Some disrespectful jokes are better than festering silence.
OBS wrote:
If someone cannot express something because they worry of it's impact, or is living in fear of expressing something because they would be threatened with violence, then they probably won't have to worry about free thought either.
Well, yeah.
OBS wrote:
Yep, because then we can downplay and ignore major issues all the time simply because we used "better" judgement and decided to tip-toe around it rather than spark question or draw attention!
What are you talking about? If you absolutely have to bring up something simply because a thought formed in your mind, I'd argue you still lack freedom. That's what free will is: You make your own decisions. If you feel maybe you should let Grandpa slide for calling rap music crap, you still have freedom of expression.
I think OBS somewhat misunderstood point that he was quoting.
Freedom in this context means being free to express any idea that forms in your mind, but it is closely tied to good judgement of whether to do it. One friend of mine put it this way: we often talk about human rights, but we rarely mention human responsibilities. But those two concepts are unsepparable: with more rights, you get more responsibility to judge when to use that right. Blatant example, but with freedom to cary a gun, you get responsibility not to pull it every time someone cuts your trajectory. Similarly, if you come up with an idea for a comic about dead babies, you have to consider: why tell it? Does it make any point? Does it say something about issue of dead babies? Will it be fun to other people too, or is it fun only in your head? All in all, is your effort and reaction the comic will make, really worth it?
The only thing you're not free from is your common sence. Hopefully, noone is trying to get rid of their common sence.
ahaugen wrote:I'm of the opinion that if it is taken too seriously, it deserves to be satarized. because without pressing the button, humor will become nothing more than jokes from "Hanna Montana" and other assorted rot on the Disney Channel
There are certain things in the world that have to be taken very seriously and should not be made light of. It can be dangerous not to take them seriously.
ahaugen wrote:I'm of the opinion that if it is taken too seriously, it deserves to be satarized. because without pressing the button, humor will become nothing more than jokes from "Hanna Montana" and other assorted rot on the Disney Channel
There are certain things in the world that have to be taken very seriously and should not be made light of. It can be dangerous not to take them seriously.
im also not going to vet everything i say incase i offend some easily offended person. if we followed volkovs advice, we would never have had Life of brian, and that would be a bad thing.
Boogiebop wrote:Indeed a large part of expression is the freedom to use your own judgement, sometimes It's as important not to express something as it to express it.
Yep, because then we can downplay and ignore major issues all the time simply because we used "better" judgement and decided to tip-toe around it rather than spark question or draw attention!
If someone cannot express something because they worry of it's impact, or is living in fear of expressing something because they would be threatened with violence, then they probably won't have to worry about free thought either. I'd rather have the freedom of express than have a list of things that cannot be critiqued or analized because someone is going to get uptight about it.
You're either free to express something or you're not free to express at all. There's no grey area in the middle where exclusions are made to protect special groups from critique.
You're only considering the classic angle of public preasure urging the public not to do something. But there's a myriad of things that popular opinion expects us to express. For example we're expected to be solemn and respectful on the aniversary of great/tragic events even though we may not believe them to be so great or tragic. Nine out of ten webcomics did some kind of serious strips about 9/11, some who believed although yeah the event was tragic it was a trifle in comparison to (insert x disaster here) didn't. That silence is a statement unto itself, a refusal to follow protocol and a very valid means of expression.
personally anything you can laugh at is a good thing. However, on certain topics it takes a real know-how to address it properly. I mean how many comics don't even try? they have punchlines like "his head was cut off" "or shes naked" or what ever. this is not breaking any taboo.
<KittyKatBlack> You look deranged. But I mean that in the nicest way possible. ^_^;
::gets out the International Webcomic Artists Protocol::
see here... chapter 28, section 9, subection 13j it states that there is no such thing as an International Webcomic Artist Protocol.
As for a Protocal, i have no idea.
-D. M. Jeftinija Pharm.D., Ph.D. -- Yes, I've got two doctorates and I'm arrogant about it, what have *you* done with *your* life?
"People who don't care about anything will never understand the people who do." "yeah.. but we won't care."
"Legostar's on the first page of the guide. His opinion is worth more than both of yours."--Yeahduff
there's this bar in my town called the "Mint Bar and Bistro", and it's in an old Lutheran church building. Their slogan is "Where you can sin and repent at the same time", and that got a few people's panties in a twist here
Read The Times-Picayune
Comic Genesis' daily source for news since 2009 A Lamestream Media Company
OBS wrote:Not too many webcomic artists are going to jepordize their story to remember disasters just because public opinion expects them to. The comic has a story to tell and should not a sob fest of tears.
I put up a few of these sorts of strips for commemorative days and so forth, but only in relation to my own culture. I don't see a problem with doing so, but I agree that it's not best to put one into the middle of a story just to make a point of it. Plan your stories around those dates if you want to include one, or even better write your story around that date so the strip fits in. That's how I decided to incorporate my annual ANZAC Day strip this year.
Remember when your imagination was real? When the day seemed
longer than it was, and tomorrow was always another game away?
OBS wrote:Yep, because then we can downplay and ignore major issues all the time simply because we used "better" judgement and decided to tip-toe around it rather than spark question or draw attention!
If someone cannot express something because they worry of it's impact, or is living in fear of expressing something because they would be threatened with violence, then they probably won't have to worry about free thought either. I'd rather have the freedom of express than have a list of things that cannot be critiqued or analized because someone is going to get uptight about it.
You're either free to express something or you're not free to express at all. There's no grey area in the middle where exclusions are made to protect special groups from critique.
Why are you so OBSessesed with this thing? You act like a comet is going to smash into the earth if somehow you have to refrain from saying something at some time for some reason?
You're taking this "freedom of expression" thing far too seriously. Maybe I should joke about it in my next comic strip.
OBS wrote:Yep, because then we can downplay and ignore major issues all the time simply because we used "better" judgement and decided to tip-toe around it rather than spark question or draw attention!
If someone cannot express something because they worry of it's impact, or is living in fear of expressing something because they would be threatened with violence, then they probably won't have to worry about free thought either. I'd rather have the freedom of express than have a list of things that cannot be critiqued or analized because someone is going to get uptight about it.
You're either free to express something or you're not free to express at all. There's no grey area in the middle where exclusions are made to protect special groups from critique.
Why are you so OBSessesed with this thing? You act like a comet is going to smash into the earth if somehow you have to refrain from saying something at some time for some reason?
You're taking this "freedom of expression" thing far too seriously. Maybe I should joke about it in my next comic strip.
I'm not sure you understand why free speech is actually important. You couldn't make your comic without it.
Komiyan wrote: I'm not sure you understand why free speech is actually important. You couldn't make your comic without it.
Well free speech is important, yeah. However, out of control, unmittigated, irresponsible speech is far far over rated. I'm sure others agree...
I don't see you doing your part to curtail such speech...
-D. M. Jeftinija Pharm.D., Ph.D. -- Yes, I've got two doctorates and I'm arrogant about it, what have *you* done with *your* life?
"People who don't care about anything will never understand the people who do." "yeah.. but we won't care."
"Legostar's on the first page of the guide. His opinion is worth more than both of yours."--Yeahduff
Komiyan wrote: I'm not sure you understand why free speech is actually important. You couldn't make your comic without it.
Well free speech is important, yeah. However, out of control, unmittigated, irresponsible speech is far far over rated. I'm sure others agree...
It can never be that simple, because everyone has a different idea of what they consider to be "out of control, unmittigated [sic], irresponsible speech." Additionally, one could argue that constrained, placid, and innocuous speech is over-rated, as it's safe since it has a low risk of offending or upsetting anyone, but it stagnates cultural growth and fosters an environment where significant issues are avoided rather than confronted and solved. And plus, if you focus more on keeping your work innocent than entertaining, then you'll be trying to please everyone and as a result please no one. A clear example of this is the exceptionally bland line-up of American newspaper comics, which is often credited to cautious editors who avoid edgy material in fear of getting complaints. Although, to be fair, another explanation is that the younger audiences who seek this kind of edgier material get their news and entertainment on the internet, so the papers are more focused on keeping their elderly audience that prefers light-hearted, traditional strips.
"Seems like the only comics that would be good to this person are super action crazy lines, mega poses!"
