lol this thread made me login for the first time in like a year to inb4 someone bringing up freedom of speech.
also
Cpt9Ball wrote:
wscbhg wrote: So if someone writes a book in which the main character is a naziskin would you all assume the writer is a nazi?
I think the difference is being able to tell if it's clearly a fictitious character or if the character appears to be a medium for the author's personal beliefs, statements, etc. For example in Kurt Vonnegut's Slapstick, when the protagonist and his sister have an incestual orgy, no one thinks it's Vonnegut saying it, as it's clear it's the character speaking. Meanwhile, Soren Kierkegaard writing as Victor Heremita in Either/Or, is still associated with the sexist thought present in the work, as Victor is seen as Kierkegaard himself. Likewise, people think Saetia V-Neck Dude is an extension of you, whether or not it actually is. And you seeming to take personal offense on behalf of Saetia guy's statements isn't exactly differentiating between the two of you. And if you have to outright state the character is "clearly a parody," it probably isn't clear. I also don't understand if Saetia guy is supposed to be a caricature of the type of person you dislike why you wouldn't agree with people being upset toward him. If he's supposed to be a character worthy of hate, disgust, etc. shouldn't you encourage it? The main issue is that people aren't seeing the difference between creator and created, and if you don't want to be the butt end of hate, you need to make the difference more clear and be able to separate yourself from your creation.
wscbhg wrote: So if someone writes a book in which the main character is a naziskin would you all assume the writer is a nazi?
I think the difference is being able to tell if it's clearly a fictitious character or if the character appears to be a medium for the author's personal beliefs, statements, etc. For example in Kurt Vonnegut's Slapstick, when the protagonist and his sister have an incestual orgy, no one thinks it's Vonnegut saying it, as it's clear it's the character speaking. Meanwhile, Soren Kierkegaard writing as Victor Heremita in Either/Or, is still associated with the sexist thought present in the work, as Victor is seen as Kierkegaard himself. Likewise, people think Saetia V-Neck Dude is an extension of you, whether or not it actually is. And you seeming to take personal offense on behalf of Saetia guy's statements isn't exactly differentiating between the two of you. And if you have to outright state the character is "clearly a parody," it probably isn't clear. I also don't understand if Saetia guy is supposed to be a caricature of the type of person you dislike why you wouldn't agree with people being upset toward him. If he's supposed to be a character worthy of hate, disgust, etc. shouldn't you encourage it? The main issue is that people aren't seeing the difference between creator and created, and if you don't want to be the butt end of hate, you need to make the difference more clear and be able to separate yourself from your creation.
wscbhg wrote: So if someone writes a book in which the main character is a naziskin would you all assume the writer is a nazi?
I think the difference is being able to tell if it's clearly a fictitious character or if the character appears to be a medium for the author's personal beliefs, statements, etc. For example in Kurt Vonnegut's Slapstick, when the protagonist and his sister have an incestual orgy, no one thinks it's Vonnegut saying it, as it's clear it's the character speaking. Meanwhile, Soren Kierkegaard writing as Victor Heremita in Either/Or, is still associated with the sexist thought present in the work, as Victor is seen as Kierkegaard himself. Likewise, people think Saetia V-Neck Dude is an extension of you, whether or not it actually is. And you seeming to take personal offense on behalf of Saetia guy's statements isn't exactly differentiating between the two of you. And if you have to outright state the character is "clearly a parody," it probably isn't clear. I also don't understand if Saetia guy is supposed to be a caricature of the type of person you dislike why you wouldn't agree with people being upset toward him. If he's supposed to be a character worthy of hate, disgust, etc. shouldn't you encourage it? The main issue is that people aren't seeing the difference between creator and created, and if you don't want to be the butt end of hate, you need to make the difference more clear and be able to separate yourself from your creation.
I almost climaxed because of this intellectual, well reasoned argument. Thank you.
wscbhg wrote: So if someone writes a book in which the main character is a naziskin would you all assume the writer is a nazi?
I think the difference is being able to tell if it's clearly a fictitious character or if the character appears to be a medium for the author's personal beliefs, statements, etc. For example in Kurt Vonnegut's Slapstick, when the protagonist and his sister have an incestual orgy, no one thinks it's Vonnegut saying it, as it's clear it's the character speaking. Meanwhile, Soren Kierkegaard writing as Victor Heremita in Either/Or, is still associated with the sexist thought present in the work, as Victor is seen as Kierkegaard himself. Likewise, people think Saetia V-Neck Dude is an extension of you, whether or not it actually is. And you seeming to take personal offense on behalf of Saetia guy's statements isn't exactly differentiating between the two of you. And if you have to outright state the character is "clearly a parody," it probably isn't clear. I also don't understand if Saetia guy is supposed to be a caricature of the type of person you dislike why you wouldn't agree with people being upset toward him. If he's supposed to be a character worthy of hate, disgust, etc. shouldn't you encourage it? The main issue is that people aren't seeing the difference between creator and created, and if you don't want to be the butt end of hate, you need to make the difference more clear and be able to separate yourself from your creation.
OATH!!!
CharlieBronson wrote: ↑
Things truly are sucklical in music