Letters to the Editor
Luna Moth
Published Letters: 12 Editor's Choice: 4
-
Thanks, blink
[Read the article: A bitch weighs in on "King Kong"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's not anti-art or anti-beauty to talk about films (or books or any other artistic production) in terms of content and context.
Yes, it's possible to be in awe of Peter Jackson's filmic skills and also be uncomfortable with LOTR: the blue-eyed men of the West vs. the mud people and the Evil Glowing Vagina of Death.
(Of course, most of that can be laid at Tolkien's door--this hippy late-Heideggerian nostalgia for the land, and the racially 'pure' peoples rooted in the land vs. technology, the city and the racial 'other.' You'd think Hitler's utilization of the Nordic myths would give somebody pause.)
When I saw that Peter Jackson was re-making King Kond, my first question was, "why does the world need yet another version of this film?" ABB's critique seems fair enough to me--this is a loaded text. If the Jackson film doesn't address that, then his effort will be brilliant cinematically (probably) and also reinsribe the conventional subtext (almost certainly).
Given Jackson's public left-wing sympathies, I think it's fair to question his choice of material in light of his stated aims. Wouldn't he want to spark a spirited discussion like this?
-
deja vu
[Read the article: Making Colbert go away]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This reminds me of the official punditry surrounding the canceling of Ellen Degeneris' sitcom after she and her character came out and the show started airing episodes about lesbian dating. Few 'liberals' at ABC or elsewhere wanted to admit that they felt either uncomfortable or dismissive about the content, so suddenly, this show that had always been based on quirky, observational humor was "not funny." Within two weeks, this 'not funny' meme was supplying mutual reassurance to people who wanted to see the last of Ellen but not be branded homophobic.
This is not to say that the peoplel who found the show suddenly 'not funny' had to hold back laughs. But was Ellen ever a belly laugh show? It was observational comedy, like Colbert's, meant to elicit grins, smiles and maybe even a few new thoughts. What changed wasn't the nature of the humor, it was the reason for the stone faces--people's comfort zones had been breached.
-
legal queston
[Read the article: Another look at top-25 lists]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Le Castor, (or anybody)
what is the legal definition of "intentional infliction of emotional distress?" Sure seems to apply here. Also, are fighting words just words that incite violence or are a likely provocation? In other words, does a fight have to result or is it enough that a reasonable person would have to restrain themselves from fighting? Cause if it's the latter, this sure seems actionable to me.
Finally, high school isn't the adult world where our right not to be annoyed by assholes is severely limited by necessary civil liberties. Young people in high school are being prepared for adulthood, not expected to assume it. These young women were attacked, albeit not physically. Why shouldn't the school, which is supposed to be one of their legal guardians, not act to protect them and punish students who create a hostile environment for other students? Especially since, by teaching them a lesson they seem to need, the school would also be protecting the young men from the consequences they'll face, if they don't change their ways, once they get out into the world. We wouldn't (I hope) allow a junior KKK chapter or Nazi party group to circulate hate speech about African-Americans or Jews; why is this different?
-
look to an earlier Broadsheet
[Read the article: When are women like "uncovered meat"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]in which the following story was posted:
http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/15834528.htm
about a young woman who (as of now) is charging that she was raped while intoxicated at a Girls Gone Wild Party. One of the most (to my mind) disgusting aspects of the story is the numbers of reader comments from people who believe that she deserved whatever she got.
Whatever is going one here, it's not unique to Islam.
-
oops should have edited
[Read the article: When are women like "uncovered meat"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]that's 'number of reader comments'
-
WhoTF are 'we?'
[Read the article: Our favorite murderer]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If I had the emotional energy, I'd despise Tony Soprano as much as I despise George Bush and for the same reasons.
-
Appreciating the artistry behind the creation of Richard and Heathcliff isn't the same as 'loving' them
[Read the article: Our favorite murderer]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]or minding that they fall. I'm not convinced that Chase wants us to love Tony, btw. Compassion and understanding aren't the same as love. It does teach us something about the world, and entertain us, to show us how gangsters are born and made, but, for this viewer anyway, understanding doesn't compel allegience, just a more informed horror.
On another matter, as Christopher pointed out, Tony isn't a working class guy, he's a rich fuck who will do anything to anyone in order to stay a rich fuck. In that way, his values are exactly those of the people whom George Bush lied us into Iraq to protect. He might affect 'regular guy' mannerisms, but he makes his living as a parasite on regular people. Come to think of it, his affectation of regular guy mannerisms reminds me of a certain pampered someone....
I really am a little baffled here. Mr. Kamiya has made some of the most persuasively argued criticisms of the road taken by the Bush administration to appear in Salon. So why all the Tony-love? (Yes,of course I read the whole article. Still don't buy the argument. I would have thought that he'd read The Sopranos as a mirror of the moral tangle we find ourselves in, not a liberation from it.)
-
Do saints cross picket lines?
[Read the article: Amma's cosmic squeeze]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In Los Angeles, despite pleas from union activists and clergypeople, Amma chose to patronize the Airport Hilton, infamous for its union-busting tactics and opposition to LA's Living Wage law. Other organizations, in respect for the union's wishes, have cancelled events at the Hilton, but Amma declined to do so, saying it wasn't her business to take sides in a local dispute. Hugs are good--and material aid to tzunami survivors is better--but what about social justice?
Something positive that Amma's hugs stand for, I believe, is a reclamation of the body, its needs and vulnerabilities, as a site for spiritual good. What about the bodies of the working poor? Isn't relieving their exhaustion from overwork and making sure that they get healthcare a spiritual imperative?