I guess it’s true: Today’s audience can’t handle the classics. Blazing Saddles and Its Horrors :smack::eek:
Poe’s law at work.
It is hard to tell if that “article” is wind-up or not. Mind you, unlike Blazing Saddles it is short on even apparently unintentional laughs so I’m going for “serious…but missing the point by a fucking mile”
If it is intended as humour then full marks for subtlety but C- for actual laughs. If serious then the author is a fucking idiot.
I’m pretty sure she’s serious. a depressing number of (younger) people seem to believe the only way to address -isms is to bully and shame anyone they think is guilty of something into groveling and self-flagellation until they’re satisfied you’re sorry enough. Joking about it means you’re not taking it seriously.
:rolleyes: Blazing Saddles had a very high user score on IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, etc; but you found one bad review, so it’s this huge problem with “Today’s Audience”. Well, guess What? The Washington Post published a negative review… in 1974. :eek::eek::eek: Yesterday’s Audience just can’t appreciate a good laugh! Political correctness runs wild! Oh, the Humanity!
The author fails immediately:
It is a parody of a classic western full of social satire. The article is clearly written by someone looking for something to be offended by.
And a depressing number of (various) people seem to believe that the only way to address -isms is to double down on them. And an even more depressing number of people like to pretend that this isn’t happening.
You’re right. But the OP fails immediately by claiming that this is some huge problem with Today’s Audience rather than one stupidly written essay.
yes, and?
In the grand scheme of things, I prefer people who get offended a little too easily to either the people who double down on the -isms and the people who cover for them.
Before that, even:
Even Wikipedia would require that to have some sort of citation.
The OP (me) was simply quoting a commonly-held belief. I have heard it said in many places that today’s “snowflakes” are unable to appreciate older works because they don’t have the experience or knowledge of the culture during the time a work was made. Yes, it’s confirmation bias. It was also a joke.
Um, it’s an article on medium. What will OP bitch about next? Their second cousin’s facebook post?
Also the author is clearly a college student so good job shitting on someone literally learning how to do media criticism. Real classy.
You’ve got to remember that Bethany is just a simple farmer.
I realize that, but this commonly held belief is a destructive misconception that lets those who actually ARE racist slide under the radar.
Um, why does “being a college student” make one immune from criticism?
Although Blazing Saddles is jolly amusing, I think there is one scene that means it should be banned instantly. :eek:
In these worrying days of climate change, consider the cowboys eating beans around the campfire.
These people are putting methane into the atmosphere! :smack:
Meh, it seems like she just posted online something she wrote for a class:
“In one scene she uses the classic “let me go slip into something more comfortable” quote that we’ve talked about in class.”
I don’t see any criticism in the OP. I see a bunch of old guys making fun of someone in her late teens/early 20s for not being familiar with the western genre tropes Blazing Saddles satirizes. Is her essay worth reading? Not really. Would reading this thread help her understand how her article falls down and what she could do to improve it? No.
You wanna shit on people trying to improve themselves, at least be honest with yourself about it.
I don’t see anyone shitting on her for being a college student, I see people shitting on her for having and sharing an ill-informed, ignorant opinion about a movie she clearly completely misunderstood.
I gotta see her review of Huckleberry Finn.