Guts Cosplayer With An Impossibly Huge Sword On His Shoulder Inspires Redraws
-
-
What's Up With Memes About A 'Leopards Eating People's Faces' Political Party? Memes About Face-Eating Leopards Explained -
What Is 'OCDA,' AKA 'Occupational Cares Diversity Affairs'? TikToker Calimar White's Boss-Hating Complaints Company Explained -
What's A 'Cleveland Steamer'? The Gross Slang Term Popularized By 'Family Guy' Explained -
What's The 'You Digging In Me' Meme? The TikTok Sound From A LoveAndLightTv Video Explained
![996 Pristine Condition Member Originally Posted by jschreier: D Yesterday, 11:32 PM) I'm just baffled at how many people dont see why people like me consider it problematic. As someone who has made his living entirely in the arts for almost fifteen years, (If I don't make my work, I quite literally don't eat.) I'm baffled by people like you who have such unevolved and disrespectful attitudes towards art and artists I work in photography. I thank God that in my industry critics and journalists covering my medium don't act like you and your lot. If we did, perhaps the chilling effect would have meant no one would see important work by the likes of Arbus ("Oh, she exploits poor people and freaks!"), Saudek (oh, look at how he sexualizes women!!!",) and Helnwein COMG!!! Nazi imagery!!!"). If people like you lot were placed in a position to have a significant voice in photography, Robert Mapplethorpe would have been stuck taking "those pretty pictures of flowers, and Steven Meisel would have been told by his rep to stick to taking "pretty" pictures of models, without any of that troubling "social commentary stuff No, in my medium, critics and journalists by and large would stand up for the artist, and want the art to speak for itself, and want to promote art to the widest audience possible, even if it is work that may be controversial or even downright disturbing. See, art that is not stifled is healthy art. Let the art speak for itself, and let the people (and the market) ultimately decide. Criticism is done, but it is done with a conscience for how such criticism should never stifle free expression. As video games become more sophisticated in terms of visuals, perhaps you aren't cut out for being in this position as a commentator on a medium inching ever closer to fine art. Perhaps you should move into writing about politics, if you thing a large-breasted figure is so dangerous that it needs to be labeled "a harmful work of art. I think the art and artists who want to do interesting, personal work and not just cookie-cutter, committee-approved s--- would thank you for exiting the field you are so clearly not committed to the future of. For this medium to grow artistically, it will require dvocates of artists, not judgemental folks offended so easily, and so eager to throw labels on artists. Last edited by Pristine Condition; Yesterday at 11:40 PM Pristine Condition Member Today, 01:15 AM) Quote #1182 Originally Posted by jschreier: Jesus. What a nasty post. Go back to your twitter fans stroking your ego if you think that was a nasty post. If my post was "nasty" then what is calling an artist a 14-year-old boy, accusing him of homophobia, and saying he produces "harmful work[s] of art?" Methinks you simply like to dish out the criticism, and can't bear a little aimed at you in return. ginally Posted by j And this idea that I want to "stifle free expression" is just blowing my mind. I really want to know why so many people think that it's impossible for me to criticize a piece of art - or call it harmful to video game culture - without wanting to censor it. Let me make this clear: I do not want to censor anything. Calling something "harmful" does not equate to saying "This should not be allowed to exist. I would love it if Dragon's Crown didn't have such tasteless designs. That doesn't mean I'm going to tell George Kamitani how to make the game he wants to make. Gee. Where would we have gotten that idea? Oh yeah. The title of your original piece and pretty much all your subsequent writing on this subject, including your attempted character assassination of the artist whose work you think is so harmful. Or perhaps the content of the article, when you suggested the artist should not be hired by the studio. Originally Posted by jschreier This week, someone made a video game to make fun of the Boston bombing. I think most of us would agree that something like that is in poor taste. I'd even say it's harmful to video game culture. That doesn't mean I'd want it censored, or banned, or removed from the Internet. Good for you. But we're talking about stuff that you wrote. I understand that you want to deflect our attention away from that now, but I'm not going to take the bait. Originally Posted by jschreien As for the direct comparisons between photography and gaming, well, if your industry had the same sort of issues with sexism and exclusion that the video game industry does, then that might be more apt. But as I've said before and I'll say again, this is part of a bigger problem. The shocking amount of actual ignorance on display with this statement is simply mind-boggling. It's embarrassing, really You're talking about a medium in photography that was a rich old boys club for at least the first fifty years of it's conception. The medium wouldn't even be available to the middle class for decades. And for example, in photojournalism, a female, Margaret Bourke-White, wouldn't break into the field until after around 30 years of male domination. You're talking about a medium that was also the most popular form o p---------- for about 150 years, with all the free speech, sexual, homosexual and race politics that goes along with that. Exclusion? You're talking about a medium where photographers have been threatened with death for their art, and many have indeed been killed. You're talking about a medium which has produced artists like Mapplethorpe and Serrano for goodness sake. And the industry still has problems with stereotypes. Men are usually thought of as more generally technically proficient photographers, while women are thought to be more sensitive to capturing emotion. It's b------- on both ends. but it exists.](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/list/000/826/635/8d7.png_large "A photographer gives his feedback on the current attitudes on display...")
Top Comments
Imperator-Rex
Jun 06, 2015 at 10:53PM EDT
Crazy Guy With An Eddystone
Jun 07, 2015 at 07:43PM EDT