***
That the author of the Yahoo Shine article on the Midwich Cuckoo/"Young Hollywood" Vanity Fair cover is getting death threats is just...wow. It's just messed up in every which way. When you get to death threats, abusive comments...it's not even about the topic anymore. It's just about wanting to get your anger out, to kick someone's teeth in for something and against someone that isn't even there anymore. It's projection.
That said, I don't believe Vanity Fair should have purposely looked for one or two people of color for that cover just to meet a diversity quota. If the editorial staff at Vanity Fair itself (yeah, and Hollywood as well) were diverse, it would have naturally carried over to their content. That's what you want. It starts in editorial, and it starts with the writers and even photographers. Diversity is something that should be organic as the result of your editorial/creative team. Of course, who hires the editorial/creative team? And who casts the movies in Young Hollywood? Does diversity need to be purposely encouraged somewhere up the ladder? Maybe.
Vanity Fair's "Young Hollywood" for 2012 The very biggest mistake Vanity Fair made with that cover, however, is that it is as boring as hell.
***
I just don't understand how persons defending a certain point of view would want to attack and make fun of the other side instead of trying to communicate with them. How is this a sane or productive tactic? I mean, do you want to seem cool to the choir and get high-fives for being snarky, or do you want to actually start changing hearts and minds? I just don't understand it. It seems so backward. There's just so few communicators that can reach both sides; there seems to be so little in it for the person who wishes to go about it this way. That's why when I see Obama attacked from both sides, I think: "He was just too damn reasonable." Reasonable doesn't "sell." Batshit insane angry sells.
And yet, I believe that the majority of persons in the United States are far more open to alternate points of view than people think. But you just can't approach them and go: "Hey, idiot: you're a fucking moron. Listen to me."
Do you want to sell a billion books and hit the top of Amazon? Write a political book called "Hey Idiot: You're A Fucking Moron." I'd be as cynical as hell about it, I'd write two versions of the exact same book, one attacking the Left & one attacking the Right:
Or I'd leave the specifics out of the book and let people think I'm supporting their cause and attacking their enemies. And I'd make a billion million dollars.
You know, that book title is way too long. Very unTwitterable. Lemmie change that:
"Hey Morans!"
There we go.
***
If Dan DiDio is pushing "Watchmen 2," then it's probably going to happen, and you should just accept it. There's just no convincing him.
***
I'm a bit of a morans, and haven't yet realized The Beat has moved over to ComicsBeat.com. Adjust your bookmarks accordingly.
***
Well, the mail is here with the used pair of jeans I bought off of eBay. Hoping for no bloodstains. I'll let you know how it goes. I really want to save money and help the environment by shopping "vintage," but honestly I'm getting a little skeeved the fuck out.
"The middle ground is reasonable by virtue of being the middle ground" is bullshit. Birthers are mocked because they're nuts, just as Flat-Earthers are mocked because they're nuts. In other words, specifics matter. The general claim that "both sides must be equally bad" is the hallmark of a self-satisfied intellect that wants to pass off its apathy or laziness as wisdom.
ReplyDeleteOf course, sometimes the reasonable position is in the center, but simply claiming the center is not a valid argument for your position, and to pass it off as such is being just as knee-jerk partisan (in this case, biased towards the center) as you claim the other sides to be.
If the details of in issue are too icky for you to want to get your hands dirty with, then that's fine, but then you relinquish the right to throw out such blanket statements about how both sides are so unreasonable.
The blood-stained shoes purchased on eBay sounds like a pretty cool start to a murder mystery where the killer has sold all of the clothing worn during the crime on eBay to disperse the evidence.
ReplyDeleteBoy, that Anonymous guy is really angry.
ReplyDelete"Birthers are mocked because they're nuts, just as Flat-Earthers are mocked because they're nuts."
ReplyDeleteGood: you keep telling them that they are nuts and dangerous. That feeds right into their persecution complex. Then they will tell you that you are going to hell, or are a Socialist, or both, and that will push all *your* buttons. And then you will tell them that they're nuts. And then they will tell you you're going to hell and/or a Socialist. And all both of you are doing is screaming NAHNAHNAH with your fingers in your ears.
*That's* the icky truth: that this sad dance goes on every day all over the Internet, on every forum you can think of, and it doesn't solve a DAMN THING. I mean: it's certainly entertaining to watch, the daily bloodbath of opinions. but constructive? Nah.
And this idea of a "center" is a myth. There is no center. There are individuals who do not immediately take a "party line" on one side or the other, but consider each issue on an individual basis. Obama may be a Democrat, but he really tried to take each issue on an individual basis. And he got kicked in the teeth for it from each side.
Because knee-jerk reactions SELL. More than sell: I believe our brains are hard-wired to respond/be attracted to such extremities. I think that sort of Us vs. Them mentality is a primal, animal instinct. To that extent: I almost respect it. But in terms of actually making any sort of real positive change: No. That instinct's final conclusion is the wiping out of the other side, the blotting out of their unsightly opinions, the caveman smashing the other caveman with a rock. Or, if you believe in Creationism: Cain smashing Abel over the head with a rock. I'll take either.
great post.
ReplyDeleteGood: you keep telling them that they are nuts and dangerous. That feeds right into their persecution complex.
ReplyDeleteI didn't say I was telling them they're nuts, I said that I mock them for being nuts. Whether or not they are aware of my mocking, I don't care. There sometimes comes a point when you have to say "these guys are hopeless". Otherwise, you're helping to mainstream crazy by legitimizing it over and over with a rational response. And by starting with the premise that both sides are equally bad, you're going to end up trading in false equivalencies.
And how do you expect to win hearts and minds yourself, Val, with phrases like "Batshit insane angry?" That's a clear sign of middle-of-the-road partisanship and it's also a fine example of the holier-than-thou attitude coupled with hypocrisy found in middle-of-the-roaders. It's non-productive for me to mock Birthers, but it's plenty productive for you to say "batshit insane angry?"
And all both of you are doing is screaming NAHNAHNAH with your fingers in your ears.
Again, icky details matter and you are forced to use a false equivalency. To stick with the Birther example, I listened to the charge that Obama is not a citizen, I saw the clear evidence that he is indeed a citizen, and I know that the evidence is readily available. It is factually wrong to say my fingers are metaphorically in my ears, but it is factually correct to say that the Birthers are conspiracy theorists. Are you saying that there is value in indulging their paranoia?
*That's* the icky truth: that this sad dance goes on every day all over the Internet, on every forum you can think of, and it doesn't solve a DAMN THING. I mean: it's certainly entertaining to watch, the daily bloodbath of opinions. but constructive? Nah.
I thought you were talking more about mainstream media and real life. Of course, "internet" and "productive" rarely belong in the same sentence together. Whenever you start thinking that humanity might be worth a damn, spend five minutes on the internet to dispel that little delusion.
There are individuals who do not immediately take a "party line" on one side or the other, but consider each issue on an individual basis.
That's true, with a few caveats: 1) There really are precious few such people. 2) Sometimes such rational consideration does indeed lead one to a position that some would like to label extreme or as part of a "side", which earns you a "batshit angry insane" from the likes of Val. 3) Most people who claim this really do just seek the middle and proclaim it wise just for the sake of being the middle.
Obama may be a Democrat, but he really tried to take each issue on an individual basis. And he got kicked in the teeth for it from each side.
Kicked in the teeth by an equal extent from each side? Was each side equally justified in their Obama teeth kicking? That's sure how you made it sound. So either you conveniently found each of Obama's proposals and policies independently to be the most reasonable course (which sounds improbable to me), or you approve of each of Obama's proposals and policies simply because you believe them to be centrist.
"I didn't say I was telling them they're nuts, I said that I mock them for being nuts. Whether or not they are aware of my mocking, I don't care"
ReplyDeleteHey, if that's your point of view, and if you feel that's important/cathartic to do.
"And how do you expect to win hearts and minds yourself, Val, with phrases like "Batshit insane angry?""
Oh please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying "Batshit insane angry" is wrong. It is very entertaining, and is the cornerstone of much of our news/opinion print, broadcast, and digital media. I would have nothing to do on my lunchtime if I didn't have so many forums to read where they all feel the need to mock people who think differently than themselves. I would have to start reading books again. It would be tragic.
"Whenever you start thinking that humanity might be worth a damn, spend five minutes on the internet to dispel that little delusion."
Oh come now, it takes at *least* 10 minutes.
Seriously, the only good to come out of those sneakers was blogging about them. Not worth $7, in my estimation.
ReplyDeleteWhat's wrong with blood-stained shoes? Most of mine are blood-stained. It's my blood, though.
ReplyDeleteI think it says a lot about the lack of diversity in Hollywood when an article about the hottest young stars runs a photo as pale as this. I mean, really, where are the new actors of color that are getting promoted as highly as Kristin Stewart and the like? Do they even exist? Not judging by the biggest, most hyped movies. Hell, you've got to be a blue space elf to get any press these days if you're anything other than white.
Or, alternately, you can get a LOT of negative press by daring to interrupt the whitest white girl of them all on an awards show.
To me, this continued invisibility for people of color is a bigger issue than an article inadvertantly making this point with such a photo.
Death threats, on the other hand... totally unnecessary and unwelcome.
Val,
ReplyDeleteI understand what you are saying, but it's a little more nuanced than that.
Certainly, casting insults at one side, no matter how objectively accurate they are, is not going to sell your POV. I usually try to start with common ground, and work outwards from there.
"There is no center. There are individuals who do not immediately take a "party line" on one side or the other, but consider each issue on an individual basis."
Here is where Anonymous is somewhat correct. To suggest that people in the center are more thoughtful or reflective is silly. Everyone's opinion is going to vary on the Left-Right scale depending on the issue. For myself, it happens to be that the majority of my opinions fall on the Left side of the aisle, and the ones that don't tend to be libertarian in nature. But they are all considered.
There are many (and from my perspective it appears that there are many more on the Right) who have a "my side" attitude. They will stand by whatever a pundit, or a political party states and oppose anything the opposition states on principle. However, there are many on both ends who do not share this attitude.
"There are many (and from my perspective it appears that there are many more on the Right) who have a "my side" attitude. They will stand by whatever a pundit, or a political party states and oppose anything the opposition states on principle. However, there are many on both ends who do not share this attitude."
ReplyDeleteTrue, but often those thoughtful people from either side who do not share the "my side" attitude get criticized roundly for it. And that gets old fast.
Meh, I'm not terribly surprised that the whitest of white magazines is touting the whitest of white actresses as "New Hollywood." Hollywood is notorious for its gross disrespect for diversity. From miscasting minorities in movies to flat out ignoring them for anything but character parts, Hollywood has never paid minorities the respect they deserve. So, this Vanity Fair cover is anything but news to me.
ReplyDelete...But Kristen Stewart? Really?? Did they even SEE Twilight? It sucked and she was the worst part. That she's on the cover ahead of other talented actresses of ANY color pisses me off royally.
Am I the only one who thinks Kristen Stewart looks like she's trying to get more attention than the other actresses in that picture?
ReplyDeleteIt's funny, because Twilight aside, Kristin Stewart is considered to be one of Hollywood's most promising. Thirteen gave her a lot of cred and she is in a few of the more acclaimed films from thisn year's Sundance festival.
ReplyDelete