Oh hey, remember when I was shutting up? *g* IT IS SO MUCH EASIER TO DO THIS OVER HERE THAN IN MY JOURNAL, SORRY. :p
As soon as it's something that's going to get a "Fail" appended to the end of its name, it's like there are rules to follow in how it should be talked about which I'm not sure is a good thing? Yes, this is why I find it uncomfortable. There's this shutting-down-of-conversation that happens on *both* sides. I don't doubt that there are probably fans saying "you don't get it/get over it/omg censorship/etc." stuff right now somewhere, but people engaging in good faith get dismissed right alongside them if they don't accept all the rules and jargon and rightness of your position as a baseline. There is NO middle ground.
On the specific "did she mean to be OTT or not?" issue... I preface this by saying I'm not taking any 'side' here and Palmer's done things before that I respect and others that I find tasteless. At first glance, it seemed like a misaimed joke, not intended to shock and offend as much as be wacky, and I think it's *very* obvious she didn't expect it to be conflated with mocking real people with disabilities (and apparently every kind of disablity ever), probably because conjoined twins are so rare in reality but popular as a cultural image.
Two of the released songs are campy and cute Americana-type stuff. However, listening to "A Campaign for Shock and Awe", I can sort of see where the album/project as a whole might be going? That's where you can hear the 'darker' elements creeping in and the exploitation angle, and to me points to a more active attempt to be audacious and subversive. I'm personally withholding judgment on how compassionate vs. offensive it is until I get a better idea of WTF is going on.
Edit: Not sure if this makes sense, I'm not saying it might turn around and be totally justified and awesome, but I'll be more interested in taking a close look at it and attacking its substance and how it fails from there, rather than just speculating? I'm not the person going "JUST GIVE DOLLHOUSE A CHANCE", I'm the person going "Dollhouse didn't inherently HAVE to suck, there were elements of good and elements that went horribly wrong."
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-02-21 09:35 pm (UTC)As soon as it's something that's going to get a "Fail" appended to the end of its name, it's like there are rules to follow in how it should be talked about which I'm not sure is a good thing?
Yes, this is why I find it uncomfortable. There's this shutting-down-of-conversation that happens on *both* sides. I don't doubt that there are probably fans saying "you don't get it/get over it/omg censorship/etc." stuff right now somewhere, but people engaging in good faith get dismissed right alongside them if they don't accept all the rules and jargon and rightness of your position as a baseline. There is NO middle ground.
On the specific "did she mean to be OTT or not?" issue... I preface this by saying I'm not taking any 'side' here and Palmer's done things before that I respect and others that I find tasteless. At first glance, it seemed like a misaimed joke, not intended to shock and offend as much as be wacky, and I think it's *very* obvious she didn't expect it to be conflated with mocking real people with disabilities (and apparently every kind of disablity ever), probably because conjoined twins are so rare in reality but popular as a cultural image.
Two of the released songs are campy and cute Americana-type stuff. However, listening to "A Campaign for Shock and Awe", I can sort of see where the album/project as a whole might be going? That's where you can hear the 'darker' elements creeping in and the exploitation angle, and to me points to a more active attempt to be audacious and subversive. I'm personally withholding judgment on how compassionate vs. offensive it is until I get a better idea of WTF is going on.
Edit: Not sure if this makes sense, I'm not saying it might turn around and be totally justified and awesome, but I'll be more interested in taking a close look at it and attacking its substance and how it fails from there, rather than just speculating? I'm not the person going "JUST GIVE DOLLHOUSE A CHANCE", I'm the person going "Dollhouse didn't inherently HAVE to suck, there were elements of good and elements that went horribly wrong."