Culture Shock: The Web Site
Please share your comments, questions, and ideas about the themes addressed in the Culture Shock Web site.
Indignant mother
I missed the final seconds of the Twain film--what did the girl's mother do after she was arrested and handcuffed. Did she sue the school dist (again?). The words didn't stay on the screen long enough to finish reading, as is usually the case with most credits.
ONE IS CORRECT IN STATING THAT VIOLENCE, RACISM, AND GRAPHIC IMAGES HAVE BEEN USED TO EXPRESS THE HUMAN CONDITION SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME. ONE MUST ALSO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE EFFECT THAT HAS HAD ON SOCIETY. AS WE'VE EVOLVED, THERE HAS BEEN NO GREATER TOLERANCE, NO MOVEMENT TOWARD COMMUNITY AND SERVICE, ONLY MORE EXPRESSIONS OF HATE AND DEPRESSION. DELVING INTO NEGATIVISM CREATES MORE OF THE SAME. CONCENTRATE ON HOPE, HIGHER STANDARD, EXPRESS JOY AND CONCENTRATE ON REAL BEAUTY-THIS WILL BRING ABOUT A CHANGE FOR THE BETTER- WHICH IS THE PURPOSE OF ANYTHING CONSIDERED ART.
I have only seen the two shows dealing with literature and art so far and am looking forward to movies and music. This is a fabulous series. Being from Phoenix I distinctly recall the push to remove "Huckleberry Finn" from the required reading in the Tempe High School. While I appreciate that certain areas of talk and attitude are hurtful to certain people in certain circumstances (and I'm not just talking about people of color-- this includes everyone at some time or another), I feel that there is a rush to negative judgment of the arts by people when they don't bother to fully investigate what it is they are judging. There are areas of the arts that I find repulsive and offensive and choose not visit. But I don't feel that it's my place to demand that everyone else be denied those areas, for the simple reason that I would resent it hugely if someone who didn't like my taste in the arts told me to follow only their tastes. As for whether or not something should be taught in schools, how are we expected to raise children who are objective and open-minded if we don't expose them to many different facets of the arts and let them decide after hearing or seeing the entire story. Parents, your children are not your property and what you think may not be what they think, unless you try to keep your children's minds as narrow as your own. My mother tried her best to make me be her, and if anything, she failed more miserably than she was destined to, because her attempts at brainwashing only make me want more urgently to know the whole story and see the entire picture before deciding what I thought. Today I see horizons and hear choirs that she never experienced in her narrow little world.
from its beginnings, art -- just like history -- has been an expression of both the depths and the heights of the human spirit. we cannot deny the existence of works of art that at the time were meaningful but are no longer "politically correct" any more than we can rewrite the history books to reflect past events the way we would like them to be remembered (although, ironically, we often do both). sometimes the artist presents his or her work without context. in the case of the posthumous artist, this is almost always the case. the discovery of context is left to the viewer. this requires the viewer to be able to look with a critical eye. but the critical eye comes from education in the human condition, not from taste in artwork. the solution cannot be censorship...the human spirit (has continuously proven that it) will not be censored. the solution is irradicating ignorance. every person on this planet deserves the chance to learn and to experience the world in its full human context, and to have intelligent, critical dialog with others to reveal to them the difference between those things that inspire and enrich the human race and those that debase it. and to understand that this measure will always be different for every person, but it is something that only the individual can determine. lastly, the question you present here to the website visitor is incomplete: should these works be displayed on the homepage? what IS the context of the homepage? a random collection of art from the annals of human experience? an online discussion about the merits of various types of art? then yes...they all deserve to be included. but without context, we run the risk of letting the uneducated eye decide what the significance of that artwork is: does presenting a film about the third reich mean the producers of the site promote anti-semitism? does the walters cutout insinuate that the website producer is inherently racist? only education and critical thinking can help the viewer understand the context and make the choice. ignorance is the enemy, not taste.
I agree (in part) with Robert, who suggests that the work of Kara Walters is not "artistically worthy". I agree to the extent that it does not appeal to me personally a great deal - and that it doesn't represent the concept of "Culture Shock" as well as many other images would. So really, my complaint is that the question should be phrased differently: "Should this image not be displayed because it may offend someone, or may be controversial?" perhaps. It should be your decision as to whether display the image(s) in question - after all, you did warn of the nature of the content. But I couldn't honestly answer that it should be displayed. The subsequent questions (e.g."What if you knew the artist was African-American?") were indeed somewhat maddening. No, it doesn't matter whether the artist is black. If it illustrates the message you want (or begins a dialogue such as this, as you perhaps intended) then it should be displayed even if it was created by a white-supremacist. So... should this image be displayed? If it is relevant, or if you simply want to display it - yes. Is it artistically worthy? That has to be determined by each viewer independently.
Since current hostile environment harassment law (at state and federal levels) involves many protected categories - e.g., race, gender, ethnic or national origin, religion or creed, disability status, age, veteran status - there are serious, unresolved questions about the current extent of First Amendment protections, and it would be useful to have this acknowledged more fully on this site.
I thought your question about whether some art should appear on your homepage was flawed. You gave no context whatsover for using the art. One could have no objection to the art per se but have no idea why you might want to use it on your homepage and therefore decline to vote affirmatively, wondering for what purpose you wanted to use the art.
Throughout history, art has been provocative, and above all controversial. It is not our place to decide what is appropriate for others, and we would resent it if others attempted to decide what was appropriate for us. There has always been racism and violence, and to pretend that they do not exist, or that by censoring art that we can make them go away is an exercise in self-delusion. To hide these truths from our children and show them only a socially constructed reality--one that we would LIKE the world to be like--would be irresponsible on our part, and unfair to them.
The difference in picassos work and that of video games is this...Picasso didn't target our children! Innocence lost?
How can anyone possibly question the right of a game maker to use violence in its product? A game developer can create any product it wants to. If the consumer wants to send the message that a product is not acceptable there is no better way than to refuse to purchase the product. The truth is that in today's society, or in any society for that matter, violence sells. I personally feel much better knowing that if someone wants to see a little violence a videogame is acceptable. If this is one of our greatest problems dealing with violence then we have come a long way. A person once got his/her fill of violence by attending a public hanging, or even participating in a stoning. Whats worse, destroying a digitally rendered alien or taking enjoyment from the loss of a real human life? Violence is on the decline and will continue to be until the next world war. Why is it that shootings and almost any violence in a school gets soo much attention? The answer is simple, shootings in schools are rare. If two school shootings a year make the national headlines for weeks at a time that means they must not be everyday occurences. Millions of children play violent games every day and only one or two of those millions will ever shoot a classmate. It sounds like the odds are rather good that if a child plays violent games he/she will not be prone to violence. When something is rare it is always taken out of proportion and that is exactly what has happened in the case of violence in schools. Unfortunately the result has been attact after attack aimed at game makers because in this case they were handy.
Every generation has upped the ante. What seems benign to us now ( Elvis the Pelvis, Little Richard) was truly upsetting to another generation. Much like some videos and music lyrics are to us now. Will the ante continue to be upped, or will there be a step backward, in protest to some of the legitimate vulgarities our kids are exposed to every day? We all know that sex and violence have been around since the beginning of time and has been expressed through art and war. What's different now is the accessability to things that may be fine for an adult but that kids can see when they turn on the computer or tv, or go to a video arcade.
I have had something nagging at my mind ever since I saw (heard) the episode on Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn. I heard a very familiar song, (a favorite of mine) but I can not seem to find the composer or title of the song anywhere. I am guessing it was written in during the romantic period, it is slow, sounds chopin-esque. I would LOVE it if someone-- the person who chooses mucic for Culture Shock --or anyone on the culture shock team who might be able to help, to send me a list of the music that was played during the Huckleberry Finn edition. It would finally settle this for me, as I have been looking for this song for a very long time. I had no idea where else I could ask! Hopefully someone will reply and enlighten me. Thanks.
I understand the purpose of the What if's in between the censorship questions. It is a good way to interject some information into the activity rather than simply proposing a loaded question like "Is this image suitable for the homepage of the web site?" The what if's show that you want people who take the time to participate in the voting activity that you have taken into consideration various points of view on the images and have done some research. I personally believe that violent behavior directly or indirectly affects people's (especially children) behavior. Sure the world isn't always a bowl of cherries but gosh do we really need to broadcast violent images all over the whole damn place.....Especially in children's toys and "games". I think it is important for children to understand that life is not always fair and that sometimes unfortunate things happen to good people for no understandable reason but I don't think it is neccessary to encourage violent behavior by providing them with violent images. Children are like sponges. They are eager to learn new things that help them establish themselves and especially the way in which they relate to their "world". Knowing this, let's be a little more tactfull in what we expose them to. It's not really about censorship when it comes to kids...its moral obligation to our future generation. Thanks and Good Day.
Let me start by saying that the reason I watched this program was because I'm doing a project in English about Mark Twain. I may be just 17, but I do have some opinions that have some credit to them. I find that people put way to much focus in the use of the "n-word" in the context of "Huck Finn." Some people seem to think that this word is encouraging other people to use this word to an individuals face. It is not the books fault, nor is it Mark Twain's. It is the own person's choice to use this word. If we are worried about our children, than Amerca must teach its youth that the word is inapropriate. We must also remember that this book was written, and took place in a time where slaver still existed. Mark Twain did not grow up in a world that believed in being politically correct, so we shouldn't expect the book to be.
tom - 11:04am Jan 27, 2000
one man's art..
mother - 11:06am Jan 27, 2000
Literature and art
azjudyann - 07:43pm Jan 28, 2000
education, context and the critical eye
greta - 05:17pm Feb 2, 2000
Artistically Worthy
Michael - 12:38pm Feb 3, 2000
Hostile Environment Harassment Law
David F. Austin - 10:45pm Feb 3, 2000
Art on the Homepage
Al - 10:45pm Feb 3, 2000
Works of art are subjective
Julia Hudson - 05:13pm Feb 8, 2000
Violent games
marge - 04:31am Feb 10, 2000
Violent Games
Eric - 11:24pm Feb 10, 2000
what a great series
joan saffer - 08:31am Feb 15, 2000
Music Query
Jessie S. - 11:55pm Feb 16, 2000
Voting on "violent" images, should certain images be on the homepage of the web site?
I'm a female) Nick Marie (and yes - 03:26pm Feb 24, 2000
A 17-year-olds opinion about "Huck Finn"
J. Lane - 03:19pm Feb 25, 2000