OT: Do politics and humour mix?

[Rich Grise]

I guess that's kind of a dumb question. I was interested to note my
own reaction to the trailers for this new movie, "Team America: World
Police" by Trey Parker and Matt Stone. From what I've seen in trailers,
and heard from Parker and Stone on some talk show, the movie sounds really
dumb. But it's by Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the creators of South Park.
It has to be gut-splittingly funny - I saw "South Park: Bigger, Longer,
and Uncut" five times before I finally heard all the jokes through the
laughter.

But what I'm worried about is that I get a feeling that it's going
to come out on the neocons' side. Parker and Stone on TV the other
night looked, and sounded, like Young Republicans. And all they
talked about was making a movie using marionettes - very non-
controversial.

And it would destroy the fabric of the space-time continuum if
Trey Parker and Matt Stone turned out to be for the neocons.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Mac]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 01:48:47 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:

I guess that's kind of a dumb question. I was interested to note my
own reaction to the trailers for this new movie, "Team America: World
Police" by Trey Parker and Matt Stone. From what I've seen in trailers,
and heard from Parker and Stone on some talk show, the movie sounds really
dumb. But it's by Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the creators of South Park.
It has to be gut-splittingly funny - I saw "South Park: Bigger, Longer,
and Uncut" five times before I finally heard all the jokes through the
laughter.

But what I'm worried about is that I get a feeling that it's going
to come out on the neocons' side. Parker and Stone on TV the other
night looked, and sounded, like Young Republicans. And all they
talked about was making a movie using marionettes - very non-
controversial.

And it would destroy the fabric of the space-time continuum if
Trey Parker and Matt Stone turned out to be for the neocons.

Thanks,
Rich

I haven't seen the movie, but how can you have a movie called _Team
America: World Police_ and be pro-neocon?

The title of the movie itself ridicules one of the tenets of faith nearest
and dearest to neocon hearts? Doesn't it?

Anyway, for what it's worth, the reviews I've read say that it mercilessly
makes fun of everybody.

The reviewer for my hometown Newspaper hated the movie, though, and my
wife thinks it looks stupid. So I may have to wait for it to come out on
DVD.

--Mac

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 04:42:10 +0000, Fred Bloggs wrote:

Mac wrote:
....
The reviewer for my hometown Newspaper hated the movie, though, and my
wife thinks it looks stupid. So I may have to wait for it to come out
on DVD.

Sean Penn dissed those two idiots and invited them to accompany him to
Iraq later this year so that they could see real life close up. They
have yet to respond.

Yeah, I'd like to see the likes of Sean Penn in the middle of the carnage
of a real war.

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Clarence]

"Rich Grise" <rich@example.net> wrote in message
newsan.2004.10.16.10.26.58.50903@example.net...

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 04:36:06 +0000, Mac wrote:

snip

About the only thing they talked about on the talk show was getting
marionette sex past the censors. But if a reviewer didn't like it, that's
always a good thing, and I'm not surprised that practically anyone would
find a piece of their work stupid.

Stupid, but hilarious. Also either deeply bitingly satirical, or quite
inane - I don't know if anybody's ever really determined which. ;-)

BTW, here's a review of their first movie - the neocons would probably
agree with the analysis here:
http://www.capalert.com/capreports/southpark.htm

Wasn't this British Humor?

 

[Mac]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 10:25:09 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 04:42:10 +0000, Fred Bloggs wrote:

Mac wrote:
...
The reviewer for my hometown Newspaper hated the movie, though, and my
wife thinks it looks stupid. So I may have to wait for it to come out
on DVD.

Sean Penn dissed those two idiots and invited them to accompany him to
Iraq later this year so that they could see real life close up. They
have yet to respond.

Yeah, I'd like to see the likes of Sean Penn in the middle of the carnage
of a real war.

Actually, he went to Baghdad recently. I think that was the whole point
behind his offer to show them around.

Cheers!
Rich

In general I think it is utterly pointless to criticize irreverent and
rebellious humorists, because they always just blow it off or ridicule
it. You would think Sean Penn would know this by now.

--Mac

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:44:12 +0000, Scott Stephens wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:

I guess that's kind of a dumb question. I was interested to note my
own reaction to the trailers for this new movie, "Team America: World
Police" by Trey Parker and Matt Stone.
...
But it's by Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the creators of South Park.
It has to be gut-splittingly funny - I saw "South Park: Bigger, Longer,
and Uncut" five times before I finally heard all the jokes through the
laughter.

Pornography may be funny, but the fact it is sick and disgusting still
makes it pornography. In fact, being funny is like excellent camouflage
on a predator. The humor is the vehicle the poison uses to contaminate
your mind. After I'm finished laughing, it leaves me feeling disgusted
my culture would tolerate it, and I didn't spend my time thinking about
something, if not edifying, at least horribly real.

Are you these guys' internet spokesman?
http://www.capalert.com/capreports/southpark.htm

Just FYI, it's not "pornography", because it's not "writing about harlots".

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:44:12 +0000, Scott Stephens wrote:

If they want to be seen and heard from, they must conform to societies
norms.

You, sir. are the problem.

 

[Scott Stephens]

Rich Grise wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:44:12 +0000, Scott Stephens wrote:


If they want to be seen and heard from, they must conform to societies
norms.


You, sir. are the problem.

Now why am I the problem? I'm not advocating censorship. I am saying
that only certain kinds of media are likely to find acceptance and get
broadcast, because of the cultural bias of the liberal elite. Blame them
for censorship.

For instance, an "artist" named Maplethorpe put a cross in a bottle of
urine and called it "art", and the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts)
gave him kilobucks to do it, and the elite celebrated his genius.

I dare you to put a model Menorah (sp?), the Jewish religious symbol, in
a bottle of urine and call it "art". The ADL would call you a Nazi,
perhaps rightfully so. It is illegal in some states to burn crosses on
your own property - some African Americans might be intimidated. Some
want to make it illegal to burn the American flag, because it makes them
feel degraded, intimidated.

Haven't you heard of "Political Correctness"? Orwell in Animal Farm
expressed it as "some are more equal than others". In other words, some
are blind to double standards that favor them. Perhaps you are one of
those who only are only sensitive to that which offends only you?

--
Scott

**********************************

DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

Those who sow excuses shall reap excuses

**********************************

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:56 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

Robert Maplethorpe (1946-1989) was the photographer with the explicit
homoerotic art- including flowers.

And he died of AIDS. Nature has the last vote.

John

 

[Scott Stephens]

Spehro Pefhany wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:15:41 GMT, the renowned Scott Stephens
scottxs@comcast.net> wrote:


For instance, an "artist" named Maplethorpe put a cross in a bottle of
urine and called it "art", and the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts)
gave him kilobucks to do it, and the elite celebrated his genius.


That artist was Andres Serrano, the piece was called "Piss Christ",
and it was a crucifix, not a cross, and, BTW, the urine was said to be
his own.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/annenberg/asc/projects/comm544/library/images/502bg.jpg

Robert Maplethorpe (1946-1989) was the photographer with the explicit
homoerotic art- including flowers. Perhaps the the flip-side to
Georgia O'Keeffe's paintings? David Hockney is about as far as I like
to go in that direction.

Obviously you're not an art aficionado.

;-)

Oops, thanks for the correction.

--
Scott

**********************************

DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

Those who sow excuses shall reap excuses

**********************************

 

[Fred Bloggs]

John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:56 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:


Robert Maplethorpe (1946-1989) was the photographer with the
explicit homoerotic art- including flowers.


And he died of AIDS. Nature has the last vote.

John



Better to have lived 43 years as a Maplethorpe than 100 as a Larkin-

damned boring idiot.

 

[Fred Bloggs]

John S. Dyson wrote:

In article <7c584d27.0410172301.6c542cdf@posting.google.com>,
bill.sloman@ieee.org (Bill Sloman) writes:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message news:<ior5n09t0mduvndnjub204u82c83l4vo26@4ax.com>...

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:56 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:


Robert Maplethorpe (1946-1989) was the photographer with the explicit
homoerotic art- including flowers.

And he died of AIDS. Nature has the last vote.

John

Nature ensures that we all die eventually, and it has lots of
different ways of rendering the biological mechanism non-viable.

That is a good way to
try to make AIDS and the nowadays errant/irresponsible behaviors a more
acceptable situation/outcome.

In the case of Maplethorpe, he most likely contracted the infection
before AIDS was even a name.

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 11:26:24 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:56 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:


Robert Maplethorpe (1946-1989) was the photographer with the
explicit homoerotic art- including flowers.


And he died of AIDS. Nature has the last vote.

John



Better to have lived 43 years as a Maplethorpe than 100 as a Larkin-
damned boring idiot.

I'm not bored, and I'm glad I'm still alive.

How are you doing?

John

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 17:24:54 +0100, the renowned Paul Burridge
<pb@notthisbit.osiris1.co.uk> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:56 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:15:41 GMT, the renowned Scott Stephens
scottxs@comcast.net> wrote:

For instance, an "artist" named Maplethorpe put a cross in a bottle of
urine and called it "art", and the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts)
gave him kilobucks to do it, and the elite celebrated his genius.

That artist was Andres Serrano, the piece was called "Piss Christ",
and it was a crucifix, not a cross, and, BTW, the urine was said to be
his own.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/annenberg/asc/projects/comm544/library/images/502bg.jpg

ahem> Isn't this a little blasphemous?

The Catholic Church made a fuss, at least when it visited Oz:
http://artslaw.com.au/reference/piss974/

Maybe that's why he never did obvious sequels such as "Piss Mary" or
"Piss Ganesh".

Wasn't there an outcry from
the Religious Right over a grant of taxpayers' dough for such a
questionable "work of art"?

Yes. I think Maplethorpe was "discovered" by that lot as a result of
the stir cause by Serrano's work.

How much can I expect to get for
photographing myself taking a shit?

If you're not a critically-acclaimed artist, probably nothing. It
might work as performance art. How about "Voice of Fire", the
"important" Barnett Newman American Expressionist painting bought in
1990 for the bargain price of $1.75 million Canadian taxpayer dollars:

http://temagami.carleton.ca/jmc/cnews/22101999/Gvoice.jpg

A visit to your local home improvement store for rollers and paint and
you could be done duplicating it in maybe half an hour.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Frank Bemelman]

"Spehro Pefhany" <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> schreef in bericht
news:a7v7n09i5hgc61upeki7l9ncou9p925mhj@4ax.com...

If you're not a critically-acclaimed artist, probably nothing. It
might work as performance art. How about "Voice of Fire", the
"important" Barnett Newman American Expressionist painting bought in
1990 for the bargain price of $1.75 million Canadian taxpayer dollars:

http://temagami.carleton.ca/jmc/cnews/22101999/Gvoice.jpg

A visit to your local home improvement store for rollers and paint and
you could be done duplicating it in maybe half an hour.

Daniel Goldreyer needed a bit more time to restore the damaged
"who's afraid of red, yellow and blue". Initially he asked
$500.000 for the job.

http://www.artnet.com/Magazine/reviews/esman/esman4-10-97.asp

--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)

 

[Rich Grise]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 17:24:54 +0100, Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:56 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:15:41 GMT, the renowned Scott Stephens
scottxs@comcast.net> wrote:

For instance, an "artist" named Maplethorpe put a cross in a bottle of
urine and called it "art", and the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts)
gave him kilobucks to do it, and the elite celebrated his genius.

That artist was Andres Serrano, the piece was called "Piss Christ",
and it was a crucifix, not a cross, and, BTW, the urine was said to be
his own.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/annenberg/asc/projects/comm544/library/images/502bg.jpg

ahem> Isn't this a little blasphemous? Wasn't there an outcry from
the Religious Right over a grant of taxpayers' dough for such a
questionable "work of art"? How much can I expect to get for
photographing myself taking a shit?

Probably a lot, if you find the right internet clientele. ;-)

Actually, this hullaballoo about funding blasphemous shit - the
fundamental problem that needs to be corrected is government funding
of _anything._

All taxation is theft.

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Bob Stephens]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 13:58:09 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote:

f you're not a critically-acclaimed artist, probably nothing. It
might work as performance art. How about "Voice of Fire", the
"important" Barnett Newman American Expressionist painting bought in
1990 for the bargain price of $1.75 million Canadian taxpayer dollars:

http://temagami.carleton.ca/jmc/cnews/22101999/Gvoice.jpg

A visit to your local home improvement store for rollers and paint and
you could be done duplicating it in maybe half an hour.

Boy am I in the wrong racket


Bob

 

[James Arthur]

On 10/18/04 jeffm_@email.com (JeffM) wrote:

an "artist" named Maplethorpe
Scott Stephens

If you look at art as having no intrinsic utilitarian value
--as only something that stirs the emotions--his work
passes the test.

My favorite artwork? Schematics, oftentimes. A clear
drawing of an elegant analog circuit, fer instance. Art *with*
intrinsic utilitarian value... Performing art?
--James Arthur

 

[Nicholas O. Lindan]

"James Arthur" <arthurj@aol.comet.net> wrote

My favorite artwork? Schematics, oftentimes. A clear
drawing of an elegant analog circuit

Have you read the SF novel "A Canticle for Leibowitz?", you
might enjoy it. The novel has monks illuminating schematics
with gold leaf.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

 

[Clarence]

"Nicholas O. Lindan" <see@sig.com> wrote in message
news:4cXcd.660$ta5.114@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...

"James Arthur" <arthurj@aol.comet.net> wrote

My favorite artwork? Schematics, oftentimes. A clear
drawing of an elegant analog circuit

Have you read the SF novel "A Canticle for Leibowitz?", you
might enjoy it. The novel has monks illuminating schematics
with gold leaf.

Along with the "Pope's children" eating the brains of travelers.

Nice book, I have tried to finish it five times, maybe some day I will try
again.