I'm firmly of the opinion that if you think there are topics comedy cannot be written about you don't grasp comedy from the get. I am not speaking to the subjectivity held within the form, I'm speaking to you not understanding the form in the first place. You say you support criticism but that's reductionist based on my past brushes with you, when you say "criticism" you don't mean critique in the artistic sense; you mean criticism in the sense of expressing disapproval and pressure. You support exerting pressure to get a certain type of content, that you dislike, off the market so to speak.
If you supported critique of comedy overall I'd be on board but you support critique, specifically of that content which doesn't align with your narrow world view and explicitly for the purpose of decreasing its prevalence.
first, I edited the post you responded to. I don't know if this changes anything but especially since this is different page it's possibly of interest to you. the words that are in your post that belong to me should still be there.
Anyway, you're supporting similar stances that I've responded to in the past. This talk about art is just a variation on absolutely protected freedom of speech, in the form of creative expression. All art can be related to a social or personal aspect, whether from the audience or the author. It's highly presumptuous to think that in art if someone cannot appreciate some unspecified, fundamentally subjective barometer of craftmanship, predicated on accepting all subject matter, they just don't understand art at all. There's painting technique, there's the horizon line, the warm and cool, etc., and then there's just art appreciation - which is possible with or without prior knowledge or intense post-viewing reflection. I criticize craftmanship of games based on mechanics and sometimes social implications. I don't need to accept everything creative at face value. I don't need to accept a piece of art on a personal level to understand it. Especially when at times, personal expression has real consequences that can be reasonably protected against. This is the point of, among other things, certain Triggers, and moderation teams in forums.
I still don't see how you don't grasp the irony of insisting that all expression be absolutely protected while saying social criticism is harmful. They are all forms of speech. If one form of speech can compete with another in a market (i.e. comedians competing for attention) and affect the...competitive viability of something, so to speak, it's effectively no different to criticize any sort of character of a piece of art, whether it be social character or craftmanship character. It is just as natural and fair. Your position about what speech can be protected is internally inconsistent.
Ehh...referring to things as a market didn't sit well with me. Anyway - of course people
can make art of whatever they want, and somebody can find something funny. That's the variation in tastes and personality. You can also create elaborate or implied rape jokes, rape jokes that show off "delivery technique." This isn't shocking. The point is, there are certain situations or jokes when moderation is desirable, especially when they presuppose slighting other people. I mean, I don't mind jokes about how I suck at basketball or would lose an arm wrestling contest to a ferret, etc. The point is, not everyone separates art or fiction from reality because the influence of fiction can be either conscious or subconscious, and while checking out all sorts of things is good to learn about what kinds of different things are out there, people often gravitate to art that reflects their tastes. The social criticism that I'm interested in is primarily interested in promoting more positive portrayals of things related to social justice, but if there are certain pieces or forms of speech that are harmful to social justice or are just plain
unreasonably insensitive ("Fox rapes on Final Destination!"), so be it. Especially since society can prove itself slow to social change. Some claims in the name of progress or sensitivity I could see as unreasonable, and some are not unreasonable, in any case it is more desirable to have that radar than to operate without it.
By the way, you and I have never talked about art before, I don't know if you're familiar with me critiquing things from a crafting standpoint at all...=P we talked only politics as I recall.
