5 ms·

>with multi cultural inclusive visual banality Lumping in cultural inclusivity with your critique is quite revealing. There's nothing in the article or about t

>with multi cultural inclusive visual banality Lumping in cultural inclusivity with your critique is quite revealing. There's nothing in the article or about this style of illustration that hints at cultural values, why include it in the tirade?

jjoonathan 5y ago
I see representation as a positive thing, but it's definitely part of the style.
lupire 5y ago
Anti-racism is on trend this year.
- TchoBeer 5y ago
  I think it'll stay for next year too, considering how many years anti-racism has been on trend.
  - olivermarks 5y ago
    Racialization - making everything about racial characteristics and pitting races against each other - is what has been 'on trend' recently and the world is a poorer place for it. Anti racism has been around forever and always should be, because drawing attention to and excluding people due to their race is completely unacceptable in liberal democracy merit based societies.
    - TchoBeer 5y ago
      I don't see how putting people with darker skin in art could possibly be seen as "pitting races against each other". Would the artstyle be improved if it only depicted white people?
      - olivermarks 5y ago
        No.
      - hedora 5y ago
        The pictures in the article include skin tones such as purple and fuschia. To me this visual style screams: “Of COURSE we’re totally ok with…those people we cannot correctly enumerate, even superficially. That doesn’t mean we’d include anything too controversial like those <insert racial epithet here>‘s.” To each their own, I guess. At least they’re trying?
    - wayoutthere 5y ago
      That’s actually not what racialization means. Racialization is the creation of race as a social construct. “Racial characteristics” aren’t fixed; the Nazis considered Jewish people a “race” despite what they looked like. Race isn’t a real thing. It’s something we made up because it was a justification for why it was ok to oppress people with the characteristics we dislike (we tried enslaving people with lighter skin; turns out they were able to escape and blend in with the population).
      - olivermarks 5y ago
        @wayoutthere In sociology racialization/ethnicization is ascribing ethnic or racial identities to a relationship, social practice, or group that did not identify itself as such. You will find lots of groups of people who aren't happy about being categorized then defended or attacked by people who are 'speaking for them'. The obvious current example is the overwhelmingly white US #BLM movement. If you go to a California black neighborhood and talk to people they are v suspicious of BLM's motives. Another new one is the latest acronym #AANHPI (Asian American Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander). I don't enjoy being categorized, pigeon holed and criticized like any other sane person but we appear to be in the midst of a mania for people speaking on behalf of others to push their own agendas. I heard Tulsi Gabbard (an'#AANHPI POC') use the term racialization of everything recently and think she is sensible and spot on with her one love messaging and pointing out the endless divisions currently being created in societies. Regarding slavery, I'm sure you're aware there are more slaves in Africa now than there were in the brief era when european and US maritime merchants bought slaves off slavers along with other 'products'? The current specious rewriting of history to imply slavery was invented by colonial white people is so far off base it is a huge danger to society and ignores today's realities. It is also a powerful tool for feeding racialization paranoias.
        8fGTBjZxBcHq 5y ago
        > If you go to a California black neighborhood and talk to people they are v suspicious of BLM's motives. Have you done this? I live in a majority black neighborhood but not in California and I talk to my neighbors. I have heard a lot of skepticism and hostility towards _the organization calling itself by that name_. But not towards the movement itself or the phrase it uses to represent itself.
olivermarks 5y ago
I was an art director and a creative director last century - mine was not a tirade, more observation of cowardly corporate clients. Regarding 'multi cultural inclusive visual banality' this is a cultural low tide that is dropping all boats IMO: portraying everyone as mediocre little personas with cute skin colors and different simplified costumes like a cast of playmobile people.

jjoonathan 5y ago

I see representation as a positive thing, but it's definitely part of the style.

lupire 5y ago

Anti-racism is on trend this year.

TchoBeer 5y ago
I think it'll stay for next year too, considering how many years anti-racism has been on trend.
- olivermarks 5y ago
  Racialization - making everything about racial characteristics and pitting races against each other - is what has been 'on trend' recently and the world is a poorer place for it. Anti racism has been around forever and always should be, because drawing attention to and excluding people due to their race is completely unacceptable in liberal democracy merit based societies.
  - TchoBeer 5y ago
    I don't see how putting people with darker skin in art could possibly be seen as "pitting races against each other". Would the artstyle be improved if it only depicted white people?
    - olivermarks 5y ago
      No.
    - hedora 5y ago
      The pictures in the article include skin tones such as purple and fuschia. To me this visual style screams: “Of COURSE we’re totally ok with…those people we cannot correctly enumerate, even superficially. That doesn’t mean we’d include anything too controversial like those <insert racial epithet here>‘s.” To each their own, I guess. At least they’re trying?
  - wayoutthere 5y ago
    That’s actually not what racialization means. Racialization is the creation of race as a social construct. “Racial characteristics” aren’t fixed; the Nazis considered Jewish people a “race” despite what they looked like. Race isn’t a real thing. It’s something we made up because it was a justification for why it was ok to oppress people with the characteristics we dislike (we tried enslaving people with lighter skin; turns out they were able to escape and blend in with the population).
    - olivermarks 5y ago
      @wayoutthere In sociology racialization/ethnicization is ascribing ethnic or racial identities to a relationship, social practice, or group that did not identify itself as such. You will find lots of groups of people who aren't happy about being categorized then defended or attacked by people who are 'speaking for them'. The obvious current example is the overwhelmingly white US #BLM movement. If you go to a California black neighborhood and talk to people they are v suspicious of BLM's motives. Another new one is the latest acronym #AANHPI (Asian American Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander). I don't enjoy being categorized, pigeon holed and criticized like any other sane person but we appear to be in the midst of a mania for people speaking on behalf of others to push their own agendas. I heard Tulsi Gabbard (an'#AANHPI POC') use the term racialization of everything recently and think she is sensible and spot on with her one love messaging and pointing out the endless divisions currently being created in societies. Regarding slavery, I'm sure you're aware there are more slaves in Africa now than there were in the brief era when european and US maritime merchants bought slaves off slavers along with other 'products'? The current specious rewriting of history to imply slavery was invented by colonial white people is so far off base it is a huge danger to society and ignores today's realities. It is also a powerful tool for feeding racialization paranoias.
      - 8fGTBjZxBcHq 5y ago
        > If you go to a California black neighborhood and talk to people they are v suspicious of BLM's motives. Have you done this? I live in a majority black neighborhood but not in California and I talk to my neighbors. I have heard a lot of skepticism and hostility towards _the organization calling itself by that name_. But not towards the movement itself or the phrase it uses to represent itself.

olivermarks 5y ago

I was an art director and a creative director last century - mine was not a tirade, more observation of cowardly corporate clients. Regarding 'multi cultural inclusive visual banality' this is a cultural low tide that is dropping all boats IMO: portraying everyone as mediocre little personas with cute skin colors and different simplified costumes like a cast of playmobile people.