on censorship and sensitivity

akairiot:

There’s a certain attitude that scares the shit out of me – let’s call it destructive sensitivity.  It’s the philosophy that, if an idea is uncomfortable, it needs to go away.  If an image upsets you, or reminds you of a bad experience you had, then not only should you not have to look at it, no one should be allowed to look at it.  And if you can’t eradicate it completely, it should at least be buried so deep that a casual viewer would never stumble upon it.  This kind of censorship is nothing new, but I feel like it’s becoming more and more common.  So, why do I think it’s a problem?

FICTION

An important question we need to ask ourselves first is, what is the purpose of media, and particularly of fiction?  Why do we read, why do we look at artwork, why do we watch movies?  To only see happy things?  As escapism?  That’s certainly a valid interpretation, but it’s not the only one.

For the artist or creator, fiction can be a way to communicate the inner self to the outer world, through the use of symbols.  It’s a means of expression.  What they express might be deep, might be simple, might be beautiful or disgusting, might be for a niche audience or the whole world, but in the end, it is the artist taking pieces of their own experience and creating something new.  

For the viewer, fiction is a way to understand things that are outside their experience, and a way to expand their experience safely.  Fiction allows us to go places and do things that we can’t or wouldn’t in our own lives, without risk, without physical harm, and without causing harm to others.  Fiction can teach us what we fear, what we love, what we’re missing.  It can show us how others live, how others see us, how we see ourselves, and we’re free to engage with it as shallowly or as deeply as we want.

But fiction is not equal to reality. Watching Friday the 13th doesn’t make you a murderer, and it doesn’t kill you.  Reading Lolita doesn’t make you a pedophile.  Writing a story where a character is raped is not the same as committing rape, and reading that story is not the same as being raped.  Thought is not crime.

CENSORSHIP

Censorship is a way to force your interpretation of material on others, to reduce or destroy another’s experience by prejudging it as harmful to them.  But part of becoming a well-rounded human being is accepting that not everyone has the same sensibilities, and not every experience needs to be positive.  

What you find offensive, some might find enjoyable.  What you find traumatic, some might see as an exercise in empathy, or a means of catharsis.  Sad songs can be beautiful.  Horror stories can be fun.  When you decide to silence the things you don’t like, you’re cutting off others from that same experience. You’re making decisions for others, and you’re essentially saying that your feelings (and the feelings of people who agree with you) are more valid than anyone else’s.  I find this darkly ironic, because the audience that holds these particular sensitivities also tends to be the first to champion acceptance and non-traditional viewpoints, while organizing witch hunts for those they feel disrespect them.

So, why is this important to me?  Why does it scare me?  Well, as an artist, the complaint of one sensitive viewer can erase my work in an instant.  When complaints are made, content is removed first and questions are asked later.  Artists are guilty by default, and viewers are treated as victims.  No content host wants to be the one to stand up for freedom of expression at the risk of being seen as supporting offensive material.  Most alarming of all, this is all seen as totally acceptable, or even justified.  When an artist’s work is taken down, I see comments like, “Well, that’s the risk you take when you post stuff like that.  Can’t be helped.”  Even the people who disagree with censorship just shrug their shoulders.

SENSITIVITY

To those who are sensitive, I’m not trying to say, “just get over it”.  Emotional hurt is real, traumatic experiences are real.  I would never belittle someone else’s pain.  But you have to realize as well that your experience is not the be-all, end-all of the world.  Not all content is made with you in mind.  It is inevitable, if we want to exist in a world with other people in it, that we’ll be exposed to things we don’t enjoy.  The answer is not to destroy or degrade those things, but to try to understand them – and if that fails, at the very least, we can allow them to exist on equal terms.  It is that frightening desire to homogenize the world, to eliminate that which we fail to understand or which causes us emotional distress, that can lead as to real prejudice, to real violence and real crime.  Please understand that allowing content you dislike to exist is not the same as advocating it.  

THE ANSWER

What I would love to see is a perspective shift.  I want to see a world where responsibility is on the viewer, not the creator or the content host.  If you have a problem with something, it’s up to you to not see it, not for the artist to hide it for you, or add unavoidable warnings that prejudge a work.  I want a world where, rather than censorship by default, censorship is a conscious choice for those who want it.  No work is hidden until a user hides it themselves.  Artists are not punished for merely posting content that some find offensive, only for not tagging it correctly.  Freedom of expression and variety of content is seen as more important than protecting viewers from fiction, from discomfort, from viewpoints that don’t mesh with their own.

Accept others.  Take responsibility for yourself (and only yourself).  Understand that not all content is meant for you.  Understand that fiction is not crime, and fiction does not equate to real-world harm.  That’s all I’m asking.

(please don’t let this become a shitstorm… TT _ TT)

Rallying battle cry before PL drops.

i-want-my-iwtv​: I *am* i-want-my-iwtv​! And I see a whole army of the VC fandom, People Off the Page, here in defiance of tyranny. You’ve come to fight as free readers… and free readers you are. What will you do with that freedom? Will you fight? Will you stay with the fandom and continue making fanworks?

Veteran: Fight? Against the new book? No! We will leave the fandom. And our favorite characters will live.

i-want-my-iwtv​: Aye, fight and your favorite characters may die. Forget the VC, and they’ll live… at least a while. And dying in their fictional beds, many years from now, would you be willin’ to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and prove to Mater Glorioso that she may take our favorite character’s lives, but she’ll never take… OUR HEADCANON!
[VC fandom army cheers]

i-want-my-iwtv: J’en ai rien à foutre!
[“I do not give a fuck!”]

VC fandom Army: J’EN AI RIEN À FOUTRE! J’EN AI RIEN À FOUTRE!

Gallery

this one dedicated to vampchronfic

Lestat here. Many of you have asked me whether or not I have any regrets. At first I ignored this question, because I am constitutionally opposed to the very idea of regret. But the more I saw the question, the more I thought about the whole matter. And I think there is indeed one thing in my life that I actively regret. I regret that during the 19th century when I lived in New Orleans with my vampire companions, Louis and Claudia, I did not tell them more about our origins, and about the vampires of the old world. I thought at the time that I was protecting them from secrets that could only hurt them, sheltering them in a wilderness and paradise that belonged exclusively to the three of us. But this was all wrong. I should have known that Louis and Claudia needed to know about the origins of our kind, needed to know where we’d come from, needed to know whether or not there were others out there, and I should have anticipated and encouraged their questions rather than keeping them at a distance from myself. Of course one reason I made this awful mistake is that I did know secrets about vampires that I was bound by an oath not to reveal. But I could have told Louis and Claudia more than I did. I could have respected their need for knowledge. I truly regret that I did not. As many of you know, our little coven family came to disaster, and I think I had a hand in that disaster, by not giving my beloved fledglings more information and insight into what we were. —- I’ll be back later to answer more questions.

Another Fan Question for Lestat answered.
Gallery

supersonicart:

Nimit Malavia at Hashimoto Contemporary.

Brand new works from Nimit Malavia for his participation in the three person show, “Lore,” which is on display currently at the brand new Hashimoto Contemporary Gallery in San Francisco, California.  The show also features work by Sam Wolfe Connelly and Karla Ortiz, where together all three artists delve into the mystery of what might be lingering in the darkness, expounding on the metaphysical and surreal.

Read More