Jump to content

The Millennium Court - N4A Chat Thread - December 2020


Chrom

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Pichi said:

 

yeah i'm real fuckin sad about that rn it's like my fav place in this godless world

 

I have a friend that staffs every year so I got deets straight from the staff slack channel. It is beyond fucked.

 

It's a real shame because it was the best weekend of the year and knowing it will never happen again (in a capacity I would be comfortable supporting) is crushing.

Link to post
7 minutes ago, blcdude1 said:

Between Harry Potter, MAGfest and Minecraft, Hatsune Miku has said some horrible stuff online. Why do we keep supporting her? 

 

No, see, you've got it backwards.

 

It's not about blaming Miku for all the terrible things that creators do; it's about discrediting the creators who did those terrible things by claiming that they never actually created any of those things that people enjoy; Miku created them instead. Separating the art from the artist by attributing it to a less-problematic artist, if you will.

 

For example, Nintendo is the one who issues takedown orders to fangames; Hatsune Miku is the one who created Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc.

Link to post

And on that, we disagree. 
 

I see crediting Hatsune Miku as absolving the creators rather than discrediting them, albeit accidentally. They’re not responsible for their work, after all. 
 

Rowling, for example, deserves credit for Harry Potter and all the problematic stuff within, not Hatsune Miku. Using just one example, Hatsune Miku didn’t create a werewolf that targets children and then say in interviews that lycanthropy is a metaphor for HIV/AIDS, Rowling did. 
 

I know it’s a meme, I just see it as questionable one given it’s unintentional implications. 

Link to post

To be fair, I think a lot of the problematic stuff in Harry Potter is only problematic because of the Rowling interviews that reveal things that aren't mentioned in the books themselves.

 

For example, besides that werewolf/AIDS thing, there's also Dumbledore being outed as gay after she already killed him off, which retroactively makes him a victim of Bury Your Gays. But if you just read the books without being familiar with that interview, then it's just killing off the wise mentor figure.

 

Likewise, I doubt that Rowling intended for Snape to be an incel, given that incels didn't gain widespread attention until a decade after the books ended. But it was still a rather unfortunate coincidence that Snape just so happened to have been written with so many traits that would later become associated with incels.

 

And then there's shit like the Jewish goblins or the house elves being happy with slavery, which I ain't touching with a 40-foot pole.theydonothing;

Link to post

Most definitely. Some parts of Harry Potter simply haven’t aged well, others are far worse in hindsight given her interviews. 
 

Dumbledore is also an example of retroactive representation. Some creators are far better at discussing representation in post, rather than including said representation in their book/movie/show. 
 

It’s very easy to say a character is gay after the fact. It’s better to show a character is gay in the work rather than tell us years later.

Link to post

What actually happens is that Rowling has a dartboard of ethnic minorities taped to her wall. Whenever she wants to score woke points, she writes the name of a minor unimportant character on one of her darts and then throws it at the wall.

 

"Let's see... Cho Chang is... *thwap* Nilo-Saharan! Instead of an owl, she sends letters to her family via Bannerman's turaco!"

Link to post
1 hour ago, winterberry said:

wasn't it actually illegal in the uk to write gay characters in books when harry potter came out y;

Yes and no. 

From 1988 to 2003, Section 28 was in effect in the UK. This stated a local authority "shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality.” This would include libraries or schools. 
 

With that said, Half Blood Prince and Deathly Hallows came out after the repeal. 
 

In addition, other UK authors (such as Philip Pullman and Neil Gaiman) wrote LGBT+ characters during that time. 

Edited by blcdude1
Link to post

The shit going on with Harry Potter has been fascinating to watch unfold because it's like a younger generation having its first experience feeling conflicted over an artist and their work, and it does prompt a lot of interesting discussions surrounding how much of an artist's self is in their work to question if it feels morally right to still enjoy it.

Kanye and Morrissey fans are laughing while Lovecraft fans are awkwardly shuffling in their seats theydonothing;

Link to post
  • Chrom locked and unpinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...