On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:30 PM, John Reimer <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Bill, > >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 1:02 PM, John Reimer <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hello Walter, >>> >>>> John Reimer wrote: >>>> >>>>> Walter, I've heard a lot of arguments for defending the expression >>>>> of "art", but this one's a doosie. >>>>> >>>> Ever watch Monty Python? I asked a brit about the accents they use >>>> in their skits, because there are many different british accents. He >>>> laughed and said the accents were a parody of the british upper >>>> class accents. >>>> >>>> I suspected that, not being british, I was missing half the jokes >>>> <g>. >>>> >>>> There's also Spongebob Squarepants. It's ostensibly a kid's show, >>>> but at least in the early episodes there are a lot of digs at >>>> Jacques Cousteau's 70's tv series "The Undersea World". What kid >>>> would get those jokes? >>>> >>> I tend to care a lot about things and think a lot about implications >>> and idea and how they affect people, including the manner and >>> language used when one expresses oneself to another. I don't >>> particularly care for a lot of the humour available on television >>> today (I don't watch it anymore, anyway). However, it seems that a >>> lot of people enjoy lampoons because it acts as a balm to their mind >>> to help /avoid/ taking most things too seriously. I can appreciate >>> that, but I think there's also a caution involved there. >>> >>> The main problem with many of the new television shows is that, like >>> fashion decides the fad in clothes, someone is deciding for us what >>> is fair game to be laughed at. The limits are pushed continually. >>> For all the talk about religion's apparent control of people's minds, >>> I think there's a whole lot more to be worried about as people feed >>> on the what the boob tube serves up. With long time exposure, I'd say >>> there is possibly a strong influence on their tolerance for what they >>> consider acceptable behavior. Humor, of course, is only one aspect >>> of this. It used to be that the productions in television tried to >>> model the real world. I think the opposite is now happening to some >>> extent as we derive more relevancy from the fantasies and culture >>> created in the imaginary worlds portrayed to us from television. >>> >>> Concerning profanity and swearing. I think many forms of expression >>> should warrant more careful thought. I don't believe profane or >>> irreverant expression has a neutral effect on hearers. We've already >>> seen plenty of evidence of that in here. You may think it's cute and >>> artsy, but I think it does any combination of the following: creates >>> a language barrier, trivializes the original meaning of certain >>> anglo-saxon words, shows general disrespect in communication, >>> demonstrates poor vocabulary, reveals carelessness in thinking of >>> others feelings, etc and on and on. It's like throwing dirt in >>> somebody's face and thinking that's a normal way to interact. We can >>> stamp a "art" sticker on it and call it funny when it is clothed in a >>> comedic role (or any situation really), but this is just as effective >>> as sticking an "ice cream" tab on a pile of manure; there's no way to >>> make it pretty. >>> >>> It's a very pervasive view that swearing is a non-issue these days, >>> and a person is just being prudish and silly if he disaproves. But >>> I've been keenly aware of how the same profanity is expressed with >>> ever so much force and rancor when a person is angry. Then it becomes >>> very clear that the words fit the role perfectly with the malice that >>> expresses them (not to say person should swear when he is angry :) ). >>> It's no wonder that the expression of them becomes confusing when >>> they merge back into everyday speech for no apparent reason. >>> >> Very thoughtful piece there, John. I agree with you pretty much >> completely. I think the issues you speak of are particularly >> pervasive in American culture these days. Can't speak for other parts >> of the world, but things definitely don't seem as bad to me over here >> in Japan. Then again it could be just that my Japanese just isn't >> good enough to pick up that level of nuance, but I really don't think >> Japanese culture has taken a heavy hit from the sarcasm bucket yet. >> >> --bb >> > > > Thanks for the encouragment, Bill. You just might regret it later, though. > ;)
I agree with your assessment that there's an issue, and it concerns me too. But I may not agree with you on how it should be addressed. :-) Seems Walter is reading your observations as a call to direct action to control people's speech. I didn't read it that way. --bb
