Support NeoGAF

[SuperStiltzkin]

It's not like the N-word. Quit making this false equivalency. And in this specific thread, we have a successful white male on his professional twitter calling a Black woman a racist all because she suggested that he chooses to be "apolitical" due to him being a White male. Do you not see the disconnect.

Yeah I edited in the fact that Greg tossed that word out too.

I didn't say they were equal. You were the one who made the comparison to downplay it. I'm just saying just because the n-word exists does not somehow make being accused of racism less shitty. Its not worse than the n-word but it still sucks.

Unless you are actually racist.

 

[Cyrano]

Racism, White Privilege & White Denial - Tim Wise

 

[mid83]

Where are the white people whose lives are being ruined because they were accused of racism that was not actually malicious racism? Show me.

It's actually not that hard to recover from a simple mistake. White people should be less afraid of having racism pointed out to them/us. It's not a venomous snake. It's a learning experience. Unless you're being malicious, in which case your downfall is almost certainly deserved.

I'm seen it happen multiple times in the real world at various jobs I've had. The simple fact is, a complaint to management or HR that you are racist often doesn't end well.

Again, I'm not saying not to call a spade a spade, but people seem to think the word isn't far above saying "your a jerk". It has far worse consequences and is used way too damn often these days.

Having your career and reputation ruined sounds like a bit more than a learning experience.

 

[lightskintwin]

Yeah I edited in the fact that Greg tossed that word out too.

I didn't say they were equal. You were the one who made the comparison to downplay it. I'm just saying just because the n-word exists does not somehow make being accused of racism less shitty. Its not worse than the n-word but it still sucks.

Unless you are actually racist.

Well I don't like using the term and labeling people it because then it becomes name calling and making an assumption of who they are overall as a person, and it can let the person off the hook for what they actually did or say. So I think it's more important in discussing whether the actual act was racist or not, rather than guess whether the actual person is racist or not.

I'm seen it happen multiple times in the real world at various jobs I've had. The simple fact is, a complaint to management or HR that you are racist often doesn't end well.

Again, I'm not saying not to call a spade a spade, but people seem to think the word isn't far above saying "your a jerk". It has far worse consequences and is used way too damn often these days.

Having your career and reputation ruined sounds like a bit more than a learning experience.

How often? Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything. Show me this data that suggests this is a big problem?

 

[JesseEwiak]

I'm seen it happen multiple times in the real world at various jobs I've had. The simple fact is, a complaint to management or HR that you are racist often doesn't end well.

Again, I'm not saying not to call a spade a spade, but people seem to think the word isn't far above saying "your a jerk". It has far worse consequences and is used way too damn often these days.

Having your career and reputation ruined sounds like a bit more than a learning experience.

Don't worry, that'll be all fixed in Trump's America. This election proved that racism isn't be called out enough, since so many white people are OK with voting for a white nationalist.

 

[call_kotaku]

If you are calling it art, then it carries the creator's viewpoint and perspective. The "political" everyone keeps talking about is the artist's perspective in relation to societal norms.

Either it's not art, or it is and it expresses a viewpoint. I don't really care which side of that equation you fall on.

I feel like he intuitively already understands this, because he needed to propose such a ridiculous situation just to create a hypothetically truly apolitical work

 

[wetwired]

I got called a faggot on twitter today because Billy Dee Williams is voicing Two-Face in the LEGO Batman movie, and he also pulled out the #whitegenocide hashtag

 

[Messofanego]

It's not like the N-word. Quit making this false equivalency. And in this specific thread, we have a successful white male on his professional twitter calling a Black woman a racist all because she suggested that he chooses to be "apolitical" due to him being a White male. Do you not see the disconnect with him just tossing that term around.

I believe that some white people try to make "racist" into a racial slur when they feel offended because they think they have no other term that they can use to describe how offended they are, even if it's often used in a misleading and silencing manner. They want to use identity politics too, in instances where "white trash" or "cracker" isn't said.

 

[Neoriceisgood]

You're actually cringing?

Fine. I have no wish to explore this any further. Apologies. Carry on as you were.

Serious question, were you actually trying to argue in good faith or what?

It's pretty obvious this topic was entirely about how it's nigh impossible to completely erase your worldview from comics in particular & people are obviously using "art" as a shorthand for comics and various other pieces of art that try to communicate something.

When I look at your posts and examples, all I see you doing is posting intentionally obtuse abstractions that seem to add nothing beyond a "HA! you're technically wrong cause goobligook!11!" & then you get seem to get upset when people try to engage with your out-of-left field examples seriously.


I'll go point by point:

1. A discussion on what qualifies as "art" is not necessarily one everyone agrees on, but when people talk about how art is inherently political this usually describes art that tries to communicate something.

2. The two examples, an instruction manual for paper planes & an A.I. excreting seeming nonsense are on the absolute edge of what can be considered "art"; but there's plenty of examples in this category:

- is a drawing made by a 2 year old political/art?

- is a painting that's just copying a natural scene political/art?

- is an abstraction that barely resembles anything political/art?

You could argue for hours about fringe cases like these, but usually they fall flat on communicating solid ideas to begin with.

On the flip side, many of those examples can suddenly get a different load to them in a different context; I think differently of child-like art by the cobra movement than actual children.

I've also wondered if Hitler's obsession with peaceful "idillic" landscapes/architecture and aversion to drawing humans tell us something about his mindset and goals.

Similarly abstract art or random noise created by an a.i. may have a political message or deeper meaning that just got lost in translation; A failure to communicate an idea isn't necessarily evidence that there was no idea there to begin with.

2. What I'm failing to grasp is actually why you search for abstraction without clear communication when the context for people saying "Art is inherently political" was clearly about much more complicated & narration-based artwork.

Do you disagree that a long form comic with a clear story is inherently political? Or do you just want to find exceptions to the rule simply for the sake of your own amusement? (and then get annoyed at people for engaging with your examples);

I can't help but picture you gluing IKEA instruction manuals on the wall in musea and angrily shouting "HOW DARE YOU DECLARE WHAT ART IS" while the museum guards drag you out.

 

[echoshifting]

I'm seen it happen multiple times in the real world at various jobs I've had. The simple fact is, a complaint to management or HR that you are racist often doesn't end well.

Again, I'm not saying not to call a spade a spade, but people seem to think the word isn't far above saying "your a jerk". It has far worse consequences and is used way too damn often these days.

Having your career and reputation ruined sounds like a bit more than a learning experience.

I realized after I posted that I came off a little too heated there which wasn't my intention, I apologize if it felt that way.

That said, I feel this is all too vague to mean much of anything, when we can't actually examine what the person did or what the consequences of their actions were. I've actually now done some searching of my own and can find little to no evidence this occurs on a regular basis.

 

[mid83]

How often? Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything. Show me this data that suggests this is a big problem?

So because this isn't something that isn't (or could easily be) tracked in any meaningful way, we all know this data doesn't exist. That doesn't change the fact that words have consequences. I just think people should think before calling people names.

 

[lightskintwin]

So because this isn't something that isn't (or could easily be) tracked in any meaningful way, we all know this data doesn't exist. That doesn't change the fact that words have consequences. I just think people should think before calling people names.

Of course that goes with any term. I agree with you there. But in this thread it's about a White guy overreacting calling a Black woman a racist. What do you have to say about that? Do you think it's becoming an epidemic of White people calling Black people racist? I've actually been called a racist by a White person before?

 

[mid83]

I realized after I posted that I came off a little too heated there which wasn't my intention, I apologize if it felt that way.

That said, I feel this is all too vague to mean much of anything, when we can't actually examine what the person did or what the consequences of their actions were. I've actually now done some searching of my own and can find little to no evidence this occurs on a regular basis.

I appreciate that.

I'm not saying there is some huge unreported issue, but just simply that based on events I've witnessed myself, there can be real serious consequences to calling people things like racist (sexist, homophobic, transphobic etc would apply as well). I guess I'd ask people to use a little caution before making any sort of accusation or using a term like that to describe somebody.

Maybe I'm just bad at explaining myself, but I'm not trying to say to ignore hateful bigots or anything. It's just I see so much needless name calling back and forth on facebook, twitter, forums and elsewhere. It's everywhere all the time.

 

[Ashes]

If you are calling it art, then it carries the creator's viewpoint and perspective. The "political" everyone keeps talking about is the artist's perspective in relation to societal norms.

Either it's not art, or it is and it expresses a viewpoint. I don't really care which side of that equation you fall on.

I see. In addition to what you said, I'd add that the discussion on what constitutes art is political in nature. No doubt. Again, this was never in doubt or in question. So, you'd be right if the inference was made and the argument is had. Then the subject becomes political, including the art piece.

If you're going to the level of a viewpoint, though, you're divorcing yourself from the piece it self. Which is just random numbers essentially. In fact you're creating a hullabaloo over something quite separate. You're discussing what the constitution of what Art is.

Meh. Maybe Aristotle was right; Man by nature is a political animal.

I see where you are coming from though. Thank you for taking the time to explain it to me.

 

[Killer Queen]

Twitter Fucking Sucks: The Musical

When are we getting Twitter on ice?

 

[echoshifting]

I appreciate that.

I'm not saying there is some huge unreported issue, but just simply that based on events I've witnessed myself, there can be real serious consequences to calling people things like racist (sexist, homophobic, transphobic etc would apply as well). I guess I'd ask people to use a little caution before making any sort of accusation or using a term like that to describe somebody.

Maybe I'm just bad at explaining myself, but I'm not trying to say to ignore hateful bigots or anything. It's just I see so much needless name calling back and forth on facebook, twitter, forums and elsewhere. It's everywhere all the time.

Well heck, if Greg Capullo had exercised a little more caution in accusing someone of racism he probably wouldn't be catching all this shit, ya know?

 

[mid83]

Of course that goes with any term. I agree with you there. But in this thread it's about a White guy overreacting calling a Black woman a racist. What do you have to say about that? Do you think it's becoming an epidemic of White people calling Black people racist? I've actually been called a racist by a White person before?

I don't think he should have called her racist. I can understand the frustration he probably felt regarding her comment, but that doesn't excuse him going straight to calling her racist. I can also see her perspective of why she made the original comment, but then again, nobody should be forced to pick a political side in public. That's their choice.

I see lots of white people call black people racist, and in most cases it's dumb and uncalled for. I've called friends out on that crap. I disagree with it greatly.

That said, based on your last comment it seems like you are asking if it's ok if a whites person ever calls a black person racist. I think it depends on how somebody perceives the word. If you think of "racist" as somebody who hates and/or feels superior to a group based on race, then anybody is capable of being a racist. I know that when looked within the context of instructional racism, the idea of anybody but the group in power, hence white people, are incapable of being racist. I think it's two definitions of the same word, but used by people in two different ways, which leads to a lot of issues.

 

[mid83]

Well heck, if Greg Capullo had exercised a little more caution in accusing someone of racism he probably wouldn't be catching all this shit, ya know?

I don't disagree.

 

[Ashes]

Serious question, were you actually trying to argue in good faith or what?

Do you disagree that a long form comic with a clear story is inherently political? Or do you just want to find exceptions to the rule simply for the sake of your own amusement? (and then get annoyed at people for engaging with your examples);

I can't help but picture you gluing IKEA instruction manuals on the wall in musea and angrily shouting "HOW DARE YOU DECLARE WHAT ART IS" while the museum guards drag you out.

I was arguing in good faith. This is why I would make a shit teacher.

I have no problem with people just randomly writing fan fiction for example. Some people just shoot the breeze - do it out of love or boredom or whatever. Can someone write an essay on the politics of that? What it - it being writing fan fiction - says about society? Of course. That's one school of thought sure. But lots of fan fiction to me still remains apolitical. And I honestly thought that was what the whole of this thread is about..

Edit:#politicalart: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/49745078/Creative Writing/political art.png

 

[lightskintwin]

I don't think he should have called her racist. I can understand the frustration he probably felt regarding her comment, but that doesn't excuse him going straight to calling her racist. I can also see her perspective of why she made the original comment, but then again, nobody should be forced to pick a political side in public. That's their choice.

I see lots of white people call black people racist, and in most cases it's dumb and uncalled for. I've called friends out on that crap. I disagree with it greatly.

That said, based on your last comment it seems like you are asking if it's ok if a whites person ever calls a black person racist. I think it depends on how somebody perceives the word. If you think of "racist" as somebody who hates and/or feels superior to a group based on race, then anybody is capable of being a racist. I know that when looked within the context of instructional racism, the idea of anybody but the group in power, hence white people, are incapable of being racist. I think it's two definitions of the same word, but used by people in two different ways, which leads to a lot of issues.

Nah, I ain't got no issue with a White person calling somebody Black racist if they say something overtly racist. My point is, you would think as a White guy, especially since you don't want to be labeled racist, is to make damn certain if you're going to label a Black woman racist that she actually said some fucked up racist shit. LOL

 

[mid83]

Nah, I ain't got no issue with a White person calling somebody Black racist if they say something overtly racist. My point is, you would think as a White guy, especially since you don't want to be labeled racist, is to make damn certain if you're going to label a Black woman racist that she actually said some fucked up racist shit. LOL

Well his first mistake was getting involved in the topic at all. Then he decides to stay neutral and gets essentially called out for it. Obviously he over reacted, as people tend to do in twitter wars.

 

[lightskintwin]

Well his first mistake was getting involved in the topic at all. Then he decides to stay neutral and gets essentially called out for it. Obviously he over reacted, as people tend to do in twitter wars.

But then he's probably better off using my advice and quit calling people racist and question the actual act he objected too. Because labeling people you don't know requires so much assumption that it renders your label meaningless.

 

[Gnome]

An apolitical story is a story without any ideology or moral message; even children's stories have political messages. To write a story without a political message? What is that? Dudes just whipping each other and shouting nonsense? Sounds like some shit storytelling if you ask me, and would fail miraculously at creating an immersive escape.

 

[Ampersands]

The term "racist" has lost all it's meaning. I will agree it's used way too much in labeling people rather than it being used on the actual act.

Privilege is the more accurate word most of the time but "privileged" is an awkward thing to call someone. I don't follow comics but this Greg guy is entirely in the wrong. Entertainment is inherently political because it is based off its creator's personal experiences. If the creator's image of beauty is a white woman, this image will be projected in their work. A reader who may not hold the same conception of beauty will have this concept of the white woman embodying beauty impressed upon them. Check out that "First Celebrity Crush" thread from a few days back for a nice example of this.

Since the majority of mainstream entertainment creators are white, white is the status quo. If it's seen as political to put a non-white or LGBT character in a role, why isn't it considered political when it's the other way around? If a white creator defines his character primarily with seemingly apolitical traits like justice and humor (which are still inherently political btw but on a large cultural scale), is it a political action to make that character white? If he's drawing from his personal experiences as a white man, it follows naturally that the character will be white. At this point, the character being white is not political. This is Greg's perspective.

But entertainment doesn't exist in a void. By distributing his work in a multi-racial world, his character is defined as white as opposed to other races. Is it Greg's intention that his character being white functions as a political statement? No, but he should be aware of the fact that his character being white is a quality of the character. His unawareness derives from his privilege of being a member of the majority race of creators in entertainment catering to an audience of the majority race. Given the opportunity to hear from a minority voice, it's a shame he responded defensively to it. I'm not going to condemn him for it (I've pretty much forgotten what the conflict was about at this point anyway) because his response came from a place of privilege rather than malice. The "R-word" should be saved for the latter.

 

[mid83]

But then he's probably better off using my advice and quit calling people racist and question the actual act he objected too. Because labeling people you don't know requires so much assumption that it renders your label meaningless.

Again I completely agree.

 

[lightskintwin]

Privilege is the more accurate word most of the time but "privileged" is an awkward thing to call someone. I don't follow comics but this Greg guy is entirely in the wrong. Entertainment is inherently political because it is based off its creator's personal experiences. If the creator's image of beauty is a white woman, this image will be projected in their work. A reader who may not hold the same conception of beauty will have this concept of the white woman embodying beauty impressed upon them. Check out that "First Celebrity Crush" thread from a few days back for a nice example of this.

Since the majority of mainstream entertainment creators are white, white is the status quo. If it's seen as political to put a non-white or LGBT character in a role, why isn't it considered political when it's the other way around? If a white creator defines his character primarily with seemingly apolitical traits like justice and humor (which are still inherently political btw but on a large cultural scale), is it a political action to make that character white? If he's drawing from his personal experiences as a white man, it follows naturally that the character will be white. At this point, the character being white is not political. This is Greg's perspective.

But entertainment doesn't exist in a void. By distributing his work in a multi-racial world, his character is defined as white as opposed to other races. Is it Greg's intention that his character being white functions as a political statement? No, but he should be aware of the fact that his character being white is a quality of the character. His unawareness derives from his privilege of being a member of the majority race of creators in entertainment catering to an audience of the majority race. Given the opportunity to hear from a minority voice, it's a shame he responded defensively to it. I'm not going to condemn him for it (I've pretty much forgotten what the conflict was about at this point anyway) because his response came from a place of privilege rather than malice. The "R-word" should be saved for the latter.

Not sure why you addressed this towards me, but I completely agree. LOL

 

[echoshifting]

An apolitical story is a story without any ideology or moral message; even children's stories have political messages. To write a story without a political message? What is that? Dudes just whipping each other and shouting nonsense? Sounds like some shit storytelling if you ask me, and would fail miraculously at creating an immersive escape.

It's just not remotely possible with a character like Batman, who is a major cultural presence and influences our thinking on a wide range of highly charged topics. It is easy to dream up abstract discussions that would reveal the political nature of the character. Some might say the artist doesn't have the same voice as the writer but that's not true either. The way that Batman is drawn and presented in every panel in relation to his allies, enemies and other characters conveys the story's message; the pictures are the vessel.

 

[Faiz]

If you're a white guy and you get offended if someone simply calls you a "white guy", you might want to take a moment and reflect on that.

What is "simply?"

If someone says I'm a white guy, that's true and isn't going to offend me. It's simply a fact.

If someone is dismissive or demeaning by pointing it out, yeah I'm probably gonna be offended. That's just not how we should be treating each other.

 

[Ashes]

I got called a faggot on twitter today because Billy Dee Williams is voicing Two-Face in the LEGO Batman movie, and he also pulled out the #whitegenocide hashtag

Are you able to report him on twitter?

I think Twitter changed their t&cs to stop homophobic slurs... no?

 

[Neoriceisgood]

I was arguing in good faith. This is why I would make a shit teacher.

I have no problem with people just randomly writing fan fiction for example. Some people just shoot the breeze - do it out of love or boredom or whatever. Can someone write an essay on the politics of that? What it - it being writing fan fiction - says about society? Of course. That's one school of thought sure. But lots of fan fiction to me still remains apolitical. And I honestly thought that was what the whole of this thread is about..

Edit:#politicalart: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/49745078/Creative Writing/political art.png

The thing is, in a broad sense of the term politicial any story can subconsciously embrace a set of values or beliefs even without the author realising it.

Most fanfiction will unavoidably be influenced by the fact that it's created within a certain culture; ideological background noise created by say ... a capitalist society, or one that values a very specific type of romantic love do add a political context to any story.

Just claiming something is "apolitical" because you don't see political undercurrents doesn't mean they're not there, it just means that a large set of them may be so ingrained or normalized to you, that you just accept a work as inherently apolitical.


Like you keep showing or giving these examples of abstractions, A.I. created noise or art in "numbers", things that may not communicate anything to anyone except perhaps the creator; but I'd be far more interested in the fanfic you described as fully apolitical instead.

fyi, that's the reason why I'm asking if you're arguing in bad faith. Despite people repeatedly pointing out your examples seem kinda detached from the actual topic (inherent political nature of comics/stories, which you seem to also disagree with) you keep bringing up these really abstract examples that don't seem really related.

Like if you actually think fanfiction, comics etc are apolitical, why not provide us an example of a comic/fanfiction you find entirely apolitical instead of random sets of numbers?


/edit

Fyi, the fact that you describe fanfiction as "apolitical to me" is kinda the point here.

Something can seem apolitical to one person, while having all sorts of unexpected baggage in the eyes of someone else. Usually culture/similarity to the creator, etc relate to this.

 

[Boney]

White boy is one of the most condescending things used in discussions.

 

[Neoriceisgood]

White boy is one of the most condescending things used in discussions.

I think it's kinda hot when somebody calls me that.

 

[NHarmonic.]

It is pretty easy to say that you and your work can be apolitical when someone of your position doesn't have much to lose in the way of privilege. Not that it's wrong to simply focus on entertainment, but you have to realize that it's easier for some to do than others.

Hell, this very thread has already demonstrated that most would rather bury/avoid the conversation altogether.

And i guess, after all, these people are responsible for Trump winning the election. When you don't stand against putrid people in politics and you want to remain neutral to that, then shit happens. Privileged people avoiding the conflict because in the end, it doesn't affect them, but funny thing is it actually does. I.e climate change topic.

 

[beelzebozo]

The first configuration is what I came to call the Vampires’ Castle. The Vampires’ Castle specialises in propagating guilt. It is driven by a priest’s desire to excommunicate and condemn, an academic-pedant’s desire to be the first to be seen to spot a mistake, and a hipster’s desire to be one of the in-crowd. The danger in attacking the Vampires’ Castle is that it can look as if – and it will do everything it can to reinforce this thought – that one is also attacking the struggles against racism, sexism, heterosexism. But, far from being the only legitimate expression of such struggles, the Vampires’ Castle is best understood as a bourgeois-liberal perversion and appropriation of the energy of these movements. The Vampires’ Castle was born the moment when the struggle not to be defined by identitarian categories became the quest to have ‘identities’ recognised by a bourgeois big Other.

The privilege I certainly enjoy as a white male consists in part in my not being aware of my ethnicity and my gender, and it is a sobering and revelatory experience to occasionally be made aware of these blind-spots. But, rather than seeking a world in which everyone achieves freedom from identitarian classification, the Vampires’ Castle seeks to corral people back into identi-camps, where they are forever defined in the terms set by dominant power, crippled by self-consciousness and isolated by a logic of solipsism which insists that we cannot understand one another unless we belong to the same identity group.

The first law of the Vampires’ Castle is: individualise and privatise everything. While in theory it claims to be in favour of structural critique, in practice it never focuses on anything except individual behaviour. Some of these working class types are not terribly well brought up, and can be very rude at times. Remember: condemning individuals is always more important than paying attention to impersonal structures. The actual ruling class propagates ideologies of individualism, while tending to act as a class. (Many of what we call ‘conspiracies’ are the ruling class showing class solidarity.) The VC, as dupe-servants of the ruling class, does the opposite: it pays lip service to ‘solidarity’ and ‘collectivity’, while always acting as if the individualist categories imposed by power really hold. Because they are petit-bourgeois to the core, the members of the Vampires’ Castle are intensely competitive, but this is repressed in the passive aggressive manner typical of the bourgeoisie. What holds them together is not solidarity, but mutual fear – the fear that they will be the next one to be outed, exposed, condemned.

more here.

 

[necrosis]

"She lives in a more real world than some white dude working on comics."

All because she is black. That's some gross stereotyping.

throwing this out once again, but if you can't accept that people of color are exposed to challenges & situations that white people are not, you are a racist

 

[Ashes]

fyi, that's the reason why I'm asking if you're arguing in bad faith. Despite people repeatedly pointing out your examples seem kinda detached from the actual topic (inherent political nature of comics/stories, which you seem to also disagree with) you keep bringing up these really abstract examples that don't seem really related.

I see.

I should clarify that I'm a bad amateur philosopher. So when you put limits on what is possible, I go straight to the edge, and ask whether the edge is really there. Are you sure this is truly impossible? What if I... etc

Thus far I see people pushing the line of what construes politics to fit stuff in. Expounding the definition of politics often as much as diluting the actual political comment a piece makes.

Let's start at the top. When I think of politics, it centres primarily around governance. So primarily speaking, for me, Ghostbusters fan fiction doesn't induce politics or talk of governance. It's fighting crime per say I guess... but really, it's just some people having fun busting ghosts. If someone were to think of Ghostbusters fan fiction as actually about fighting crime and somehow commenting on it, what do I care? For me they missed the whole point of it. I'd just disagree vehemently with this analyst. Making it political in this kind of way is absurd and unreasonable. So it doesn't fit the first primary understanding I have of politics.

Going deeper, I understand a secondary definition attributed to politics; how decisions at the highest level affect different members. Best example being in the case of the newest Ghostbusters, I can see where someone would say gender politics comes into play. And you can even apply gender politics by reversing back to the first example, e.g. you can talk about the lack of female science fiction authors, and the reversal of this in the number of female slash writers.

So yeah, from this angle the political commentary makes sense. Ghost-busters when talking about gender politics is a good example to use in an essay.

What I'm then saying is that in fiction, I don't limit the imagination. Anybody can write about a donkey wandering the desert. What's the politics there?

It only works in a political context when you want to see politics there. It's not inherent to the piece at all.

Let's try something else. If I say think of an elephant. You'd hopefully will. What's the politics at play there?

Well, being an amateur linguist interested in this field, I'll answer. You can talk about the relationship and the power the author has over the reader or the listener.. etc etc. Still, this has no real bearing on the piece. That is just one interpretation among billions of possibilities. It has no greater truth than all the billions of times somebody said elephant before and and when absolutely nothing was made of it.

Further on, I can expound this reasoning to every other piece of content in history, just as you guys expound the definition of politics to fit your frame of reference. There are some philosophers, for example who believe that life has no inherent point. At that level, how can anything have any inherent point? And if not, then nothing is political. We're just chemicals. Just one chemical hitting another one. and politics is just an illusion. Cause and effect etc...

But I don't go that far. you'd go crazy if you did. I'd just wait for somebody to show me their political slant to it. And I can say I agree in this regard. And I don't agree in that regard. And further after, it's just noise. A woman wants to write a slash rape ghost-busters fantasy, I'd just say, okay. She says, I don't mean anything by it, its just popped into my head. I'd be like, who cares, Go for it.

Admittedly, it's harder for something like batman to be apolitical, as echoshifting pointed out above, even when you don't study it closely.

For lots of people though, it's just batman. And Capullo is addressing this audience.

 

[jett]

I think that told me everything I need to know about this guy's political stance.

Just another Trump supporter afraid to come out as such.

 

[Secret Fawful]

Ha he did the Spawn KKK issue

Makes me look at it in a different light now

Jesus H. Christ, Capullo.

 

[DragonSworne]

White guy takes offensive that his white privilege was pointed out and then proceeds to call other people racist.

People really can't self reflect, can they?

 

[Rexatality]

When are we getting Twitter on ice?

If the musical makes enough bucks and becomes a huge success, that is.

Anyways, Greg should have taken his own advice and not responded. It was really dumb of him to respond that way.

 

[my name is ed]

I think that told me everything I need to know about this guy's political stance.

Just another Trump supporter afraid to come out as such.

Capullo can be a meathead but I'd be surprised if he actually was a Trump supporter.

 

[Henry Jones Jr]

Really?

Not really a discussion. Capullo had one take. The other person had another. That's Twitter. Capullo responded poorly. Simple as that.

Oh I didn't even see that response. I felt like I was missing something. Yeah that was dumb of him to tweet. Should have just left it as his initial take.

 

[Fuchsdh]

I think his original statement and the response it got in the first place (shown there) are both reasonable.

Then he had to put his foot in his mouth. Sigh.

Like most things on Twitter it started off reasonable ("hey that's a valid position to have, but I think other people see art as more escapism") and then it turned into attacks on character rather than their actual argument (enter the "white male privilege".) And in the end it turned nasty and someone deleted their tweets, but they weren't gone because this is the internet.

So yeah, microcosm of Twitter in general, indeed.


Also damn, some of these links you guys are posted are hilarious. Got my proletariat/bourgeois word quota filed up for the week.

 

[Draft]

Old man not skilled in the art of trolling got baited. Got to watch yourself out there.

 

[Kid Ying]

As someone who is not white and has already been a victim of social prejudice, i feel that was truly a mess for both sides. I understand the he felt bad, since the girl sounded a bit agressive, but he truly blew it.

I also got mixed feeling about the opinion of art without politics. Politics is something so general... But i think it's completely reasonable to do without touching hot topics and there are nothing wrong with that.

Also, people forming opinions about a guy you don't know just cause he made a bunch of tweets while angry is a bit too much. People should stop with their preconceived notions a bit.

 

[Kinyou]

Name one work that isn't political I some way

Batman and Spawn comics are hella political. There is a certain personality, belief system, morality, ideal they are putting forth as right and true when they make those comics

I believe many people think of "being political" as commenting on current issues.

 

[Sarcastic Poster]

It's not like the N-word. Quit making this false equivalency. And in this specific thread, we have a successful white male on his professional twitter calling a Black woman a racist all because she suggested that he chooses to be "apolitical" due to him being a White male. Do you not see the disconnect with him just tossing that term around.

I agree that his reaction was wrong but I don't like her suggestion either.

 

[Glass Shark]

White boy is one of the most condescending things used in discussions.

White people could stand to be talked down to every once in a while

 

[ElBoxyBrown]

I think that told me everything I need to know about this guy's political stance.

Just another Trump supporter afraid to come out as such.

Capullo is most definitely not a Trump supporter. He listens to women for starters.

 

[Byakuya769]

Social media isn't the place for these conversations, clearly.
People came in too fast and loose responding directly to his take. I think their points are likely correct, but unless your goal is to shame him, they didn't really frame it in a helpful way. He lashed out in pretty poor form also, but dogpiles can cause that.

Offesetting penalties on the play.