| I know I was getting out of my literary circles but come on, I just found this out.
|
| |
| I read this web post today and responded and figured I would post my response here too because I haven't been very active on the xanga these days.
But first off, the new york post cartoon.
I agree with you about your postmodern text interpretation, that the author has no control over the meaning, but I believe there is a better question here that you ignored: Is an interpretation which says the text is racist overly sensitive to racial issues?
Let’s look at the two prominent interpretations and their structures of the text:
The Racial Structure:
1. The monkey has been used as a metaphor for black people to subjugate their race.
2. The new president is black.
3. The new president created and signed into law the new stimulus bill.
4. Certain racially charged killings have occurred in the past which have involved white police and a black person.
The Non-Racial Structure:
1. The monkey has been used as a metaphor for stupidity as in, “even a monkey could do that.”
2. Many people have criticized the stimulus bill for being stupid.
3. The congress and the president wrote the above stimulus bill.
4. In recent news a monkey was gunned down by police because the monkey attacked a woman.
So the question stands is the racial structure too racially sensitive? I would answer yes and no. The answer would be no if it is clearly recognized that both of these structures exist and hold some merit because they have a logical reasoning. The answer would be yes if you claim as Al Sharpton has that this cartoon is “clearly racist” or can only be, “racist,” because clearly two very possible structures for the meaning of this text exist one of which has nothing to do with race. The fact that many people have jumped on board the racial structure without acknowledging the existence or merit of the non-racial structure would be the definition of being too racially sensitive because they are ignoring the non-racial for the racial.
Also you attack the New York Post for being, “irresponsible,” which I think is interesting because you have said that the author’s intent doesn’t matter when it comes to creation of meaning. By your first logic the author isn’t at fault for the creation of the racial interpretation because the author has no control over it and can’t control the meaning making process. I think it would be wiser to be upset that certain racial metaphors still exist in today’s society which lend themselves toward racial meaning making. I’m upset that people like, Al Sharpton whom still give so much merit to those metaphors as to make them more important than non-racial metaphors.
Finally I believe that both interpretations have merit to them, although I tend more to the second interpretation because it is more relevant to the current news cycle.
Anyway, I read your post and thought I would add my two cents. If you would like, I would like to hear your response.
For the readers on my blog:
Just in case you don't understand what I'm talking about when I'm talking about the postmodern text interpretation take a look at this cartoon. Now assume that the author had created this cartoon with pro-Hitler intentions. The author believed that Hitler was an angel and the savior of humanity and the author thought that the world was going to unjustly start a war with Hitler. Now imagine that the author published this cartoon on an American billboard in 1938. His intention wouldn't matter because people would see it as Hitler starting the war and trying to pose as an angel. Or look at this cartoon. How do you interpret it? You probably see this as a symbol of the evil that was Hitler but it wasn't intended that way. It's a Neo-Nazi propaganda cartoon. See what I mean when I say the author's intentions don't matter.
|
| |
| I may not agree with his policies but tonight I'm all joy to see what is truly historic.
|
| |
| if you want some kind of idea about what's going on with this crazy market check this out. zoom in on today. Now go back to yesterday. yesterday was one of the biggest losses in a day in the history of the stock market so it was considered a day of very high volatility or change. now go back to today. see how much the line goes up and down. it's pretty crazy. what that should tell you it people really don't know what the heck is going on. they don't really know what to price stocks at. that's what is going on.
today was a big deal in a very different way than the previous days.
also if you've been wondering what really happened when all this stuff with the bail out package happened a few weeks ago listen to this last weeks this american life which walks you through why people were panicking. the beginning about commercial paper is worth your time.
oh, and an old friend of me has this band U.S. Royalty that you should check out. they're pretty nice.
|
| |
| I'm leaving for Spokane on Nov. 15.
|
| |
