Comments for Diversity Conversations

Comment on Who Gets to Say What’s Funny? by SEO

SEO — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:50:53 +0000

Whats funny today is not acually funny there is just to much coverd up humor.

Comment on General Comments by Bob60

Bob60 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:58:04 +0000

Clay Shirky has made it trite to say that the cost of organizing has gone through the floor. ,

Comment on Music, Authenticity and Appropriation by Chris MacDonald-Dennis

Chris MacDonald-Dennis — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 01:12:51 +0000

I would say the “gatekeeping”, as you call it, happens because art/creative output has been stolen–literally as well as figuratively. The creative work is “unconscious” because we have not been told where things come from and have been taught that it is our “right” to consume whatever we wish without understanding where it comes from. For me, this is the ultimate hubris.

Too often, forms of entertainment would be taken from devalued groups and repackaged for the masses..would anyone acknowledge it? No. The groups that were the original creators of the work were still being seen as “less than” but their cultural contributions would be taken.

For me, it is important to note where creative products come from, if we know. I think we should share culture—look at Leontyne Price (the African American opera singer) or Third Bass (late 80s white/Jewish rap group) but we should realize/ackowledge the long history of exploitation and theft.

Comment on Music, Authenticity and Appropriation by Anne Dalke

Anne Dalke — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 15:38:05 +0000

For me the real questions have to do with this language of property and ownership: once you’ve named any cultural form as a thing which can be “owned,” then you’ve set yourself up to feel either angry or guilty, depending whether you are inside or outside the fence. Seems to me that there must be other, more productive ways to talk about culture…

and about creativity. So much of the creative and intellectual work we do happens unconsciously: there are so many inputs we are not aware of; how can we be held responsible for them? Why is the gatekeeping so important?

Comment on Lessons on Civic Engagement and Diversity–Starting with THIS side of the fence by Nell Anderson

Nell Anderson — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:52:46 +0000

I know that there is a sense that off-campus community involvement through Praxis courses or volunteer activities helps students to learn about diversity and develop multicultural competencies…but I would like to propose that such learning should start in our own community. Perhaps it is easier to be aware of and open to difference in an off-campus community. It may be that some of that ease comes from the “helper” role that often goes along with volunteering. Are we more comfortable “helping” people who are different than us than just getting to know and working with our “different” peers, teammates, colleagues, classmates, staff and professors?

I hear students talk about the transformative experiences that they have in their off campus involvements and I don’t doubt that they are very powerful. Still, I think that dealing with diversity and difference on our own turf has the potential to even more powerfully transformative.

Recently, I heard a panel presentation by staff and student participants in the Empowering Learners Program and was so impressed with the community-building power of this program. I would love to hear from other people about experiences with community-building and diversity-learning on this “side of the fence.”

Comment on Who Gets to Say What’s Funny? by chuckles

chuckles — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:18:29 +0000

Hi, guys. It looks like the OIA (along with the Women’s Center and Zami) is addressing that issue head-on next Friday, Nov. 16, with a screening of the documentary Hip Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymes, to be followed by a panel discussion with three scholars of hip-hop culture.The show starts at 7:30 p.m. in Carpenter 21. See you there?

Comment on Who Gets to Say What’s Funny? by Darla Attardi

Darla Attardi — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:08:11 +0000

I wonder about this a lot. When I used to watch MTV, which I no longer do, I would regularly find myself angry or offended. But is it really MTV’s fault if they’re mirroring what their research shows “we” want? If individuals change their sensibilities about what is offensive and what is funny, will MTV and other media giants eventually be forced to reflect that change in order to maintain high ratings?

But what gets that to happen? And why does it feel like we’re moving in the opposite direction as a culture?

Just more (unanswerable?) questions to add to Wil’s…

Comment on Who Gets to Say What’s Funny? by Wil Franklin

Wil Franklin — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 14:00:00 +0000

A closely related issue that was highlighted in a recent NYTimes article “Protesting Demeaning Images in the Media” (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/05/arts/05enou.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) is who get to say what’s cool?…Viacom, BET, or MTV? The vast majority of all images and programing glorify “gangsta’s” and misogyny - “get on the floor so I can smack that #@%”. It’s offensive to almost everyone’s sensibilities, but what can we do about it? Does Freedom of Speech apply to mass media or only the marginalized? Does Viacom have the same rights to be ignorant and vulgar as an individual? Is it hypocritical to silence individuals, but do nothing to stop MTV? Needless to say, the article is very provocative and brings up much to talk about.

Comment on Who Gets to Say What’s Funny? by Claudia Ginanni

Claudia Ginanni — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:09:56 +0000

thanks for hosting this discussion on a very important topic — and for getting the blog set up so we can continue it! It occurred to me after the conversation that we spent a good deal of time discussing offensive language that doesn’t really qualify as humor at any level. For instance, when someone says, “That’s so gay,” or “She’s a retard,” it isn’t really a joke; it’s simply an insult. An utterance isn’t made funny simply by virtue of being insulting, even if you accept, as some hypothesized, that humor always has an aggressive or offensive edge. I don’t agree that humor is by definition aggressive, although I grant that it often is.

Humor is important to me; I think my life would be terribly impoverished without it. As a couple of people said during the conversation, it can have both therapeutic and subversive functions. In some cases (like, perhaps, Eddie Murphy’s “Mr. Robinson’s Neighborhood” sketches from Saturday Night Live, also mentioned in the discussion), subversive humor invokes stereotypes in order to ridicule the stereotypes themselves, not the victims of stereotyping. That’s a fine line to walk, and it’s easy to stumble; nevertheless, I’d hate to think nobody is willing to take the risk. But I’m perfectly happy to be rid of “that’s so gay” or “he’s a retard.” Those things aren’t funny in any case.