OT -- Re: random cover of a range

[John Reimer]

Hello Bill,

> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:30 PM, John Reimer <terminal.node at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hello Bill,
>> 
>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 1:02 PM, John Reimer
>>> <terminal.node at gmail.com> 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
> 



The major thing that got me worried was the /encouragement/ of this kind 
of speech in Walter's original post.  I felt that was unnecessary and exacerbating 
a problem here.  That's probably why I pursued this discussion to this degree. 
 


-JJR