Skip to main content

With knights like this, maybe you could get used to trolls (5 March 2009)

Paltrow writes a blog and the corporate and financial elites go nuts. Ms. Redmond writes favorably about Ms. Paltrow's blog, and certain Tyee readers go nuts.

Hmmm, what does this tell us? Actually, quite a lot. The phenomenon of both events is well studied in the field known as sociology, which remains the cutting edge of intellectual analysis and thought. And for good reason. It's scholars seek to critique what ACTUALLY influences societal trends to happen.

Authors such as Naomi Klein, Edward Herman, Noam Chomosky, Ben Bagdikian, Marc Edge and others have significantly educated millions of us about how societal elements operate. And once we understand how the 'template' works, each of us can in turn apply this analysis to almost any event involving powerful entities for better understanding.

Speaking of which, Paltrow and/or ANY celebrity are NOT permitted to enter the realm of written discourse. Particularly female celebrties. It is overstepping their bounds and they will face significant 'flak'. It they persist, they will incur even more wrath and ultimately be black listed. It's how things work. I salute Ms. Paltrow's courage in taking this step, and only time will tell whether she can resist her critics.

As for Ms. Redmond, one sees a similar reaction to her work on the Tyee. Flamers and trolls who normally stick to undermining independent political critiques, lash out at her columns. Why? Likely the combination of being female (easier to attack females in pubic as per their perceived lack of power (which ties into the bullying nature of those with more power)) coupled with her courage in writing about non-male dominated topics.

Which is exactly why I love the Tyee. Keep rocking that boat. It will take continued courage and character for all of you, but we're standing behind you 1000%." (Jeffrey J.)

(completion of title) . . . and their flaming farts?

Well Vanessa, your current effort has earned you Jeffrey J as your knight in templated armor. He thinks you wrote favorably about Paltrow's blog -- which does make one wonder how well he'd appeal to someone who reads, but no doubt he's stalwart, and with his "the phenomenon of both events is well studied in the field of sociology," he shows some co-sympathy with your talk of memes and evolutionary psychology: So maybe even if you don't initially subscribe to the particular service he is offering, continue writing as you do and maybe his blockish "coos" will ultimately ram a way into your heart and soul. But as he is away fending off us ugglies, "educating [us] [. . .] as to how societal elements operate," converting us while spawning a meming army set to "apply [. . .] analysis to almost any event involving powerful entities for better understanding," maybe for sanity's sake you'll finally decide to jump ship for the ewy-gooey, isle of trolls.

We might eat you alive, but who's to say that's the worse fate? And besides, if you change your mind, try clicking your heels three times while chanting "Great article, Tyee" (the chanting's probably the important part), and no doubt you'll find him once again by your side, devotedly your one, one hundred thousand percent of the time.

Link: Is the Future of Journalism Goop (The Tyee)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Superimposing another "fourth-wall" Deadpool

I'd like to superimpose the fourth-wall breaking Deadpool that I'd like to have seen in the movie. In my version, he'd break out of the action at some point to discuss with us the following:
1) He'd point out that all the trouble the movie goes to to ensure that the lead actress is never seen completely naked—no nipples shown—in this R-rated movie was done so that later when we suddenly see enough strippers' completely bared breasts that we feel that someone was making up for lost time, we feel that a special, strenuous effort has been made to keep her from a certain fate—one the R-rating would even seemed to have called for, necessitated, even, to properly feed the audience expecting something extra for the movie being more dependent on their ticket purchases. That is, protecting the lead actress was done to legitimize thinking of those left casually unprotected as different kinds of women—not as worthy, not as human.   


2) When Wade/Deadpool and Vanessa are excha…

"The Zookeeper's Wife" as historical romance

A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.

The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …

Full conversation about "Bringing Up Baby" at the NewYorker Movie Facebook Club

Richard Brody shared a link.Moderator · November 20 at 3:38pm I'm obsessed with Bringing Up Baby, which is on TCM at 6 PM (ET). It's the first film by Howard Hawks that I ever saw, and it opened up several universes to me, cinematic and otherwise. Here's the story. I was seventeen or eighteen; I had never heard of Hawks until I read Godard's enthusiastic mention of him in one of the early critical pieces in "Godard on Godard"—he called Hawks "the greatest American artist," and this piqued my curiosity. So, the next time I was in town (I… I was out of town at college for the most part), I went to see the first Hawks film playing in a revival house, which turned out to be "Bringing Up Baby." I certainly laughed a lot (and, at a few bits, uncontrollably), but that's not all there was to it. I had never read Freud, but I had heard of Freud, and when I saw "Bringing Up Baby," its realm of symbolism made instant sense; it was obviou…