5 ms·

> Conservatives have responded by telling Mr Miyazaki to stay out of politics. The nexus of creative entertainment and politics alienates many. If one of your

> Conservatives have responded by telling Mr Miyazaki to stay out of politics. The nexus of creative entertainment and politics alienates many. If one of your well respected entertainers makes a political statement that you don't agree with it can come as a shock. This attitude of "Stay out of politics and stick to entertaining us you court jester" is present probably in every country, and the most saddening because it has an implicit attitude of "I'm allowed to state my opinion, but you are not."

sixbrx 13y ago
Probably because most of the "entertainers" are just people famous for pretending to be other people who are worthy of attention/respect (or would be, if they existed). Which makes their leveraging of this to push theirs views something of a hack attempt on the pychology of the viewer.
otakucode 13y ago
I don't understand this. It is impossible to create anything without making a political statement. How you form the world, what consequences you have to actions, everything is a political statement. Can anyone give me an example of any film that does not constitute a political statement? I'm a bit of a film buff but I don't know of any at all. Even action movies that seem utterly brainless are backed by political notions like the virtue of the soldier or the unimportance of innocent bystanders. Childrens movies usually communicate very definite ideas about gender roles. Nearly every science fiction movie seeks to convey that intellectuals are dangerous and only follows-their-heart heroes with a gun can save us. I think if you don't believe there is a political statement in something you're watching, you're just not paying attention... or else you agree with the ideas presented as so fundamentally true that you can not understand anyone questioning them.
rhizome 13y ago
I think there's an implicit bias against entertainers expressing politics because politicians are jealous: entertainers haven't had to compromise their politics in order to become public figures, and in many cases their popularity is directly related to these principles. The vast majority of politics is populated by people who have mastered the art of selling out, and indeed diplomacy is the art of compromise. When someone who has been able to retain their youthful idealism is able to communicate it to large segments of the public, the knives come out.
GuiA 13y ago
Generally, it's dismaying to discover that someone whose work you respect holds worldviews that you disagree with. An example that many readers of HN will relate to is the one of Orson Scott-Card, whose books are pretty great, but who holds some pretty outdated views towards homosexuality* *: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-becker/orson-scott-card-homophobia_b_3569146.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-becker/orson-scott-card-h...
- a_bonobo 13y ago
  Neil Gaiman wrote something pretty great on enjoying the art of people whose worldview you disagree with: http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2006/06/in-wee-small-hours-of-morning.html http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2006/06/in-wee-small-hours-of-... Scroll down to the third question (questions are in bold).
- xenophonf 13y ago
  His books are entertaining, but "great"? Speaking as someone who suffered through Speaker and Xenocide and couldn't get past the first chapter or so of the first Thomas Covenant book, I beg to differ.
  - bennysaurus 13y ago
    (The Thomas Covenant series was by Stephen Donaldson by the way) Card definitely has his own style with his work. Whether it's great or not is dependant on the reader - http://one-starreviews.tumblr.com/ http://one-starreviews.tumblr.com/ gives some fantastic examples. If you can, try the Seventh Son series though. easier read than Speaker or Xenocide, and very interesting IMO.
    - xenophonf 13y ago
      Whoops! I meant Alvin Maker. Well, I'm not a huge fan of Donaldson either, for whatever that's worth.
michaelbuddy 13y ago
this needs to be read by everyone.

sixbrx 13y ago

Probably because most of the "entertainers" are just people famous for pretending to be other people who are worthy of attention/respect (or would be, if they existed). Which makes their leveraging of this to push theirs views something of a hack attempt on the pychology of the viewer.

otakucode 13y ago

I don't understand this. It is impossible to create anything without making a political statement. How you form the world, what consequences you have to actions, everything is a political statement. Can anyone give me an example of any film that does not constitute a political statement? I'm a bit of a film buff but I don't know of any at all. Even action movies that seem utterly brainless are backed by political notions like the virtue of the soldier or the unimportance of innocent bystanders. Childrens movies usually communicate very definite ideas about gender roles. Nearly every science fiction movie seeks to convey that intellectuals are dangerous and only follows-their-heart heroes with a gun can save us. I think if you don't believe there is a political statement in something you're watching, you're just not paying attention... or else you agree with the ideas presented as so fundamentally true that you can not understand anyone questioning them.

rhizome 13y ago

I think there's an implicit bias against entertainers expressing politics because politicians are jealous: entertainers haven't had to compromise their politics in order to become public figures, and in many cases their popularity is directly related to these principles. The vast majority of politics is populated by people who have mastered the art of selling out, and indeed diplomacy is the art of compromise. When someone who has been able to retain their youthful idealism is able to communicate it to large segments of the public, the knives come out.

GuiA 13y ago

Generally, it's dismaying to discover that someone whose work you respect holds worldviews that you disagree with. An example that many readers of HN will relate to is the one of Orson Scott-Card, whose books are pretty great, but who holds some pretty outdated views towards homosexuality* *: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-becker/orson-scott-card-homophobia_b_3569146.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-becker/orson-scott-card-h...

a_bonobo 13y ago
Neil Gaiman wrote something pretty great on enjoying the art of people whose worldview you disagree with: http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2006/06/in-wee-small-hours-of-morning.html http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2006/06/in-wee-small-hours-of-... Scroll down to the third question (questions are in bold).
xenophonf 13y ago
His books are entertaining, but "great"? Speaking as someone who suffered through Speaker and Xenocide and couldn't get past the first chapter or so of the first Thomas Covenant book, I beg to differ.
- bennysaurus 13y ago
  (The Thomas Covenant series was by Stephen Donaldson by the way) Card definitely has his own style with his work. Whether it's great or not is dependant on the reader - http://one-starreviews.tumblr.com/ http://one-starreviews.tumblr.com/ gives some fantastic examples. If you can, try the Seventh Son series though. easier read than Speaker or Xenocide, and very interesting IMO.
  - xenophonf 13y ago
    Whoops! I meant Alvin Maker. Well, I'm not a huge fan of Donaldson either, for whatever that's worth.

michaelbuddy 13y ago

this needs to be read by everyone.