|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
Turk Inner circle Portland, OR 3546 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-09-09 05:34, Vlad_77 wrote: In my original response to Vlad's above post, I was attempting to make the point that, at least from a conceptual standpoint, I find it hard to be for freedom of speech if you believe that there are topics or events that "should NOT be the subject of a "humorous" doodle"." To me, "freedom of speech" and "except for" seem to be mutually exclusive concepts. Its very easy to be for freedom of speech for subjects or ideas that we like or endorse; it is far harder to accept the concept of freedom of speech for subjects that we abhor or despise. But such is the true test of what the concept of freedom of speech encompasses. Now that said, there are certain free speech utterances that are illegal and/or not protected. The most famous example is a person yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. And the reason is obvious, to-wit, in such instance(s), such utterance causes immediate physical danger to the people in close proximity of the utterance. Such does not seem to be the case in this discussed instance. From the many posts in this topic thread, I'm beginning to understand somewhat the nature of the cartoon is about. I can envision (and see?) many levels of thought that the cartoon might be trying to convey. As others have suggested, I can certainly "see" the (intended?) irony in this person's eventual "success" and personal triumph against his inhumane ordeal and his stark personal permanent reminder (ie., his holocaust tattoo) of such ordeal. That said, upon seeing the actual cartoon, I might come to the conclusion that a line of civility, taste or sensitivity might have been crossed. Is such was the case, I would probably, albeit reluctantly, still defend the person's right to express that thought in the manner portrayed. However, if I felt the subject matter particularly intentionally vile or onerous or expressed with an intentional and malicious desire to hurt someone or a group of people, I might try to express my feelings economically by not supporting that author in future endeavors. After all, freedom of speech is not free on many levels. Those before us fought and died for our right to be free and to have such freedom of expression. Conversely, a person must always bear the consequences of his/her actions and, as such, is not "free" to express such thoughts with impunity. Such consequences might include 1) societal shunning, loss of reputation and disdain, 2) economic sanctions such as purchasing boycotts, and, 3) published scorn derision or outrage. At the very least, such person should be prepared for civilized discussion of such acts...as is being demonstrated by this very discussion on this thread. Again, all the foregoing is just IMHO; your mileage might vary...and probably does. With respect to all...
Magic is a vanishing Art.
This must not be Kansas anymore, Toto. Eschew obfuscation. |
|||||||||
Vlad_77 Inner circle The Netherlands 5829 Posts |
I appreciate the intelligent discussion all. I still hold to my position that this cartoon is distasteful but I am heartened by the positive discourse we've had about it; my deepest thanks to all.
To Nerdini, my debate was essentially an extension to the eloquent - and true - words of George Santayan concerning history. It seems as though I was unclear. I get quite passionate about certain subjects and thus my verbiage becomes so bloody confusing. Again, thanks everyone. Namaste, Vlad |
|||||||||
Martino Special user Manchester, UK 928 Posts |
I've seen the cartoon and I see it for exactly what it is, a joke, albeit an amusing rather than outright laugh out loud one (IMO). In almost all forms of comedy there is a victim, whether it be a person, race, gender, idea, accepted social norm or whatever. Whether or not a joke crosses the line is down to the individual reading, seeing or hearing it based on their own life experiences, morals and beliefs at that point. I am absolutely in no way a predjudiced person (and will certainly fight against predjudice and bigotry where it exists) but can also appreciate jokes about race, sex, religion, age and so on because I see them for exactly what they are, jokes. But I too have personal lines that I don't like to have crossed, it just happens in this case this particular cartoon isn't one of them. I agree with Vlad in that all of these historical atrocities should NEVER EVER be forgotten lest we forget the lessons we should have taken from their happening but sometimes the passage of time makes it OK to laugh at things that we originally found shocking, repulsive, whatever. There's a fascinating book by the British comedian Jimmy Carr about humour which covers this particular ground in one of it's chapters. The book is quite a heavy read considering it's about humour but worth the effort. It also happens to contain some REALLY funny jokes. It's called "The Naked Jape". I believe the chapter is headed "Too Soon?" I think Sankey's cartoon actually sides with the Holocaust victim and sticks two fingers up (or one middle finger for my US friends) at those who committed the atrocities upon him. He ends up the winner as a direct result of what happened to him in the past.
As an aside what I have noticed from having watched a lot of comedy in my 40+ years is that Canadian comedians seem to push the boundaries of taste and decency more than comedians from other countries (that I have seen and that speak English). I wonder why that might be? I recall one particular occasion a Candian comic was pushing the boundaries at the Comedy Store with a number of jokes of a sexual nature but they were being accepted. It was when he joked about raping a wheelchair bound disabled girl that he lost the room completely in one fell swoop. In fairness to him, he immediately acknowledged this, apologised for it and and went on to conclude his set successfully (and quickly!) There's a very funny Iranian comedian on the UK circuit (whose name unfortunately escapes me) who jokes frequently about terrorism, the muslim faith and so on. He gets away with it because he is the one who is the victim of our social stereotypes and he uses that against us. Peace.
"There's a difference between not knowing how something is done and knowing it can't be done!" - Simon Aronson
|
|||||||||
Martino Special user Manchester, UK 928 Posts |
I forgot to mention, the concluding point to this comes down to this simple fact. The suitability of a joke (I.e. whether it crosses the line of taste and decency) comes down completely to context. Who is telling it? To whom? What are the circumstances?
In the instance of the Sankey cartoon, I believe it, and the others in the book were included to try to give us an insight into Sankey as a person therefore rounding out the collection and making it in some way about more than just the tricks. Personally I think they are an irrelevance in a book on magic. I think they were all originally published in his book "Zen and the art of stand up comedy" and should probably have stayed there.
"There's a difference between not knowing how something is done and knowing it can't be done!" - Simon Aronson
|
|||||||||
Magiguy Inner circle Seattle, WA 5467 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-09-10 03:43, Caliban wrote: Precisely why I found it so funny. |
|||||||||
duanebarry Special user 883 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-09-10 20:10, Magiguy wrote: Yeah, that's really hilarious. Those numbers were tattooed on his arm in the service of a project to completely exterminate his culture and its population. They came at immeasurable cost. But hey, a winning powerball ticket erases all of that! Big win! Maybe his lottery winnings will even include gold coins made from the melted-down fillings extracted from the teeth of his family and friends who were gassed in the camps. Yeah, that's a real funny cartoon. Real funny. |
|||||||||
Magiguy Inner circle Seattle, WA 5467 Posts |
Wow, Duane... over the top, my friend.
Are you Jewish? I am, with quite a bit of relatable family history, and I still see the humor. He gets the last laugh (which was obviously lost on you). Oh well... thanks for the attack. I "appreciate" it. So much for "intelligent discussion." |
|||||||||
damien666 Special user canada 513 Posts |
It's a pretty old joke.. I havent seen the drawing, but the premise of having winning lotto numbers tattoed on a holocaust survivors arms has probably been around since before ww2 was over.
Humor comes from tragedy.. And yes, there were 9-11 jokes pretty much right after it happened.. Laughing in the face of adversity and horrific events is a coping mechanism. .. For some it's funny; for some it's tasteless - like a south park episode. |
|||||||||
Bobbycash Special user Australia 694 Posts |
One of the greatest things a comedian can do is to make someone laugh, and then to hear them go 'oh...' with that awkward silence. It requires you to function on an intellectual level, if it doesn't appeal to the intellect, then your beliefs are not being challenged.
|
|||||||||
Vlad_77 Inner circle The Netherlands 5829 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-09-11 02:25, Bobbycash wrote: Shades of Lenny Bruce of course and a valid point but I would ask what belief in this specific case is being? I am asking the question in a sincere and non-threatening manner. Is my belief that we should avoid certain subjects as fodder for humor being challenged? Am I not functioning already on an intellectual level because I have studied The Holocaust extensively and the result of that study has led to my outrage at this doodle? I will hasten to add that yes, I am also functioning emotionally as well; dispassion is not my thing. British comedian Eddie Izzard has one of the most side splitting acts I have ever witnessed. And much of his act in the late 90s and early 2000s concerned history. Playing in America, he did not hold back in using humor to challenge his audiences to face the uncomfortable realities of not only America's past, but the past of Britain and indeed the rest of the world. Yet, I fail again to see the challenge in Sankey's cartoon. Maybe Jay Sankey himself would be kind enough to educate me as he created it. I am certainly open to listening. Namaste, Vlad |
|||||||||
Bobbycash Special user Australia 694 Posts |
The intellectual challenge here is finding a lighter side of a tragic effect, is it a worthy or noble challenge? Probably not. If an individual found this amusing, it would require self reflection and deeper understanding of just how horrific the events actually where. Should we never joke about horrible events? No! In order for an art form to progress you have to challenge it. Some of these challenges may not be positive, but some will be. Do I think the Holocaust is funny? No, I've visited a large proportion of them in my travels of Europe, and as a secular student I couldn't imagine anything worse that these events. Do I think the cartoon was funny? For it's time it might have been revolutionary, but personally I've read much bluer jokes that have challenged my understanding of why I laughed at a situation and have actually made me study it more.
|
|||||||||
duanebarry Special user 883 Posts |
Yes, it can be a worthy goal. If the tragedy is soul-crushing, then finding a fleeting moment of laughter within it can help people not sink and drown in the mire of despair. See Vonnegut, Heller, et al.
As a couple of others have pointed out, context is the main problem here. In a book full of magic tricks, the serious matter here is unexpected. The horror is abstracted, represented only by the numbers on the arm, so its weight is easily missed or shrugged off by the quick reader. As a result, the cartoon appears light and flippant. In this context, the cartoon doesn't do the work to summon up the horror which causes people to be desperate to laugh again. Some have lived lives where the horror has been constantly impressed upon them. They may well laugh at this cartoon for deeper reasons than others who give it a much more shallow read. |
|||||||||
ixnay66 Inner circle Denver 1525 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-09-10 12:52, duanebarry wrote: I didn't think it was "embarrassingly shallow." I do find it embarrassing that in a discussion you can't bring yourself to act like an adult and discuss my points and instead feel the need to stoop to personal attacks. Grow up. |
|||||||||
duanebarry Special user 883 Posts |
Q.E.D.
|
|||||||||
Magiguy Inner circle Seattle, WA 5467 Posts |
F.Y.T.
|
|||||||||
Bobbycash Special user Australia 694 Posts |
Ah context, surely an examination of Jay's context as an old stand up comic has to come into play there. Would it be a Definitive Sankey if there was no reference? What's that now famous saying by Gervais, 'just because you are offended doesn't mean you're right'
|
|||||||||
IanL New user Washington State 84 Posts |
This is an interesting topic in light of my visit with Joshua Jay this past Saturday at a lecture in Seattle. As he was signing my copy of Definitve Sankey and asking my opinion on it, I was telling him about how I thought the index should have been formatted differently. Had the topic of this cartoon been raised earlier, I would certainly have asked him about including it, especially since he was scheduled to speak about "Jews, Magic, and Houdini" at the Jewish Community Center the next day.
|
|||||||||
Darwin Ortiz V.I.P. 486 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-09-10 01:01, ixnay66 wrote: Yesterday’s New York Times ran a story of some relevance to this question: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/01/world/......20121001 Here is a quote from the story: “After the war, some Auschwitz survivors rushed to remove the tattoos through surgery or hid them under long sleeves. But over the decades, others played their numbers in the lottery or used them as passwords.” Sincerely, Darwin Ortiz |
|||||||||
John Long Inner circle New Jersey 2826 Posts |
I know I'm late to this.
First, when I pulled out the book and looked, and looked... I did not get it. After someone mentioned "Jews", I sort of under stood, but it just seemed dumb After reading someones interpretation that the person is a Holocaust Survivor, I didn't see any humor (but not in the offensive sense). After thinking a bit more about the cartoon, I thought of the person as currently being imprisoned, not an escapee/survivor. At that point it seemed "funny" in the line of Mel Brooks films. The irony of winning, AFTER being imprisoned, is the humor. To Vlad's point, In general, I don't think we should make light of a wrong that was done to someone. There were other tasteless cartoons, but I didn't buy the books for Jay's cartoons (or for his profanity in Revolutionary Coin Magic - as a Christian, I would not speak like that). I can see the humor in certain things (even though in poor taste), but I don't want to be the perpetrator of something that some still (rightly) find hurtful. John Long
Breathtaking Magic;
Not Breath Taking |
|||||||||
Vlad_77 Inner circle The Netherlands 5829 Posts |
Thank you John for your thoughts. To answer ixnay - again I realize this is six years on - I was NOT looking for something to get "upset about." Grow up.
Millions of my sisters and brothers in the Orthodox Catholic faith were slaughtered under Stalin. Over 600,000 were murdered in World War II at a camp called Jasenovac. It was run by the Nazi allied Czechs and the camp was so cruel, even the Nazis found the methods at Jasenovac distasteful. So you see ixnay - and others who jumped me about Sankey's cartoon, I am not speaking as a dispassionate observer. While it may well be true that Holocaust survivors used their tattoos to play the lottery or whatever, Sankey's often juvenile humor makes me even more suspect of such a cartoon as I feel it besmirches the memories of ALL who were silenced by systematic state killing. And if those dark periods in history DON'T upset you, you simply don't get it and that is sad. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Books, Pamphlets & Lecture Notes » » The Definitive Sankey: Freedom of Expression? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |