Karohemd&#39;s World

I am, yes but quite honestly, I can't understand what the huge fuss is about. I do get that it's controversial but some critics blow it out of all proportion.

Er, the "perfect fusion" was completely coincidental. I wouldn't have twigged it if you hadn't pointed it out...

From:

... not even the faked history of child abuse?

From:

"faked" is a far more emotive word than "fictional". Yes, it was in questionable taste, but the media reaction has been completely hysterical. That in itself is interesting.

Would she do it again that way? - I strongly doubt it.

From:

Was there actual media reaction? I thought people just discussed it on the net.

From:

I thought I'd seen stuff reporting the frenzy, and where does blogging cross over with journalism these days?

From:

The reactions I've seen and read haven't been an amorphous "media" and haven't been "hysterical"; they've been written by people with disabilities or survivors of child abuse who are angry about use of their experiences as a gimmick by someone who, well, doesn't have those experiences, and is treating them lightly.

I'm (temporarily) able-bodied and am not a survivor. I'd like to like AFP for a variety of reasons (including the Rebellyon and the fact that Gneil likes her); however I'm also coming from a position of being deeply unimpressed about her performing simulated rapes onstage. So: in summary I am torn, but on balance I am thoroughly inclined towards believing that I should listen to the expressed anger (which strikes me as reasonable); I'm also inclined to give time to the notion that "crip drag" is about as inappropriate as blackface.

She might not do it that way again, but ripping the piss out of people who point out that what she's done is problematic is still problematic IMO.

From:

Very well put.

I've put it into my head space as no worse than her being a dead/murdered girl too. There is a big tradition of over the top cabaret, but what is acceptable does have an increasing degree of self-censorship these days.

Should the fact that a topic distresses some people prevent it from being explored? - I'd have to say that if you believe in free speech, no, unless it is actually an attack on those people, designed to hurt them. You don't have to pay to go and see it.

I dislike historical revisionism - so for instance, there are groups in Wales who both dragged and blacked up. These are now effectively banned, because of the connotations of doing so, despite the history being clear - it was a disguise, not a racial emulation.

I've also watched the career of Tori Amos, for whom "Me and a Gun" was a song that reduced people to tears for the experience, and many fans needed it to be the literal truth. When it became more widely known that it was changed somewhat, she was turned upon. Does that knowledge devalue the catheris? The years of working, because of her actual experiences, with RAINN?

Going back to AFP, I thought the back-plot crass, and a cheap shot; it looked to me to be deliberate exaggeration. But I'm very wary about saying you can't go there.

From:

Should the fact that a topic distresses some people prevent it from being explored?

No, absolutely not, but I'm much more interested in it being explored by people with those experiences than by people without them (especially who dismiss the concerns of people with them) - not least because it's likely to give me a more accurate (and therefore useful!) portrayal.

[I note that I'm *also* not saying here that artists should never try to describe experiences that they haven't had - but I am saying that I think that in order for it to be useful it needs to be approached with a lot more thought than seems to have happened here.]

I'd have to say that if you believe in free speech, no, unless it is actually an attack on those people, designed to hurt them. You don't have to pay to go and see it.

I do believe in free speech; I'd also really like it if people avoided perpetuating harmful cultural memes - and it's really important to understand that it's possible to cause damage without intending to.

You're quite right that I don't have to pay to see it: I've made the conscious decision to not do so unless I manage to square giving her money with myself. However I'm equally at liberty to explain to other people why I'm making that decision and to engage in discussion with them on the matter! It might after all convince me that it *is* okay to spend the money. :)

I don't know enough about Tori Amos - or indeed the Welsh groups - to engage in a meaningful conversation on the subject.

From:

For ref:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/society/politics_rebecca_riots.shtml
www.pandys.org/escapinghades/toriamos.html

And again, well said.

From:

Thank you for the links and for the discussion! :)

From:

My main objection are to those who complain on behalf of others.
On the DramaDrama blog post, there were quite a few comments along the lines of "Hey, I'm [insert disability here] and I don't find it offensive at all."
The main problem is that there was overreaction on both sides.

From:

And then again there is this posting by a disabled AfP/Jason Webley fan - who got viciously attacked by other fans for saying the things she was saying, even though Jason is engaging in ongoing discussion with her about the issues raised. (That's not her original posting on the topic but does have a very great many links to a very great discussions by people more articulate than me with personal experience of disability etc.)

Postings on that blog (and similar postings) are the bulk of the reaction I've seen, and I don't think it was an overreaction on their part; I do think AfP is behaving very badly in this (and is doing so again, alas, over Lady GaGa :( ). The repeated refusal to apologise after she's had time to think about the appalling things she says and does also really doesn't play well.

From:

What happened with Lady GaGa? I was under the impression Palmer liked her.

From:

So was I; the posting I've seen on the subject is this [contains images of lynchings], which gives links to the tweets (but I haven't looked into it *very* deeply).

From:

(edited) Until your comment with the link, I had no idea where that KKK thing came from because @replies to others don't appear on the feed, only on the web interface.

I have yet to see an American who understands the correct use of irony and when too much is too much. :/
It's always the same problem, she doesn't think things through and expects people to get her throwaway references (she later posted a link to the KKK bit in the Jerry Springer Opera).

Edited Date: 26/3/10 01:28 pm (UTC)

From:

While I understand the use of sick/dark humour, I don't even KNOW what she meant by that. I fail to see any "irony."

From:

I don't understand it, either.

From:

She complained about GaGa's commercialisation and the product placements in the Telephone video. That was the main discussion.

From:

I just saw the tweets. She's actually being pretty horrid about the whole thing. X(

What is the point of writing a sweet song about how female artists should respect each other and then completely throwing it in the trash because GaGa did something she didn't like (from what I can see it's not just the product placement. She's saying all kinds of things about the woman.)

From:

I was really surprised at her trying to make Gaga look bad, too. Probably a huge attack of envy as the the two aren't that dissimilar in what they're doing when you strip them down to their basic personalities. They are both extremely extroverted artists who care little about what image they actually portray in public.
After Gaga's bit on Jonathan Ross last week I completely revised what I thought of her. She's far from being the deliberately constructed pop diva most people think she is. If she made away with all the mad costumes and stripped down her music to just her on the piano, she could wipe the floor with a lot of people.

From:

Exactly! It was amusing to watch everyone (myself included) have a sucession of LJ posts going "I take back what I said, GaGa is awesome!"

From:

ginasketch says below, it could have been handled better and I don't agree with everything but that's no reason to not like the music. I'm not going round saying "Haha, child abuse" or whatever. It's not even in a song, just in the backstory.
I assume you don't like "Oasis", either, because it allegedly makes fun of day rape and abortion?

Strictly speaking, and I'm exaggerating here, if you argue that way, no songs, books, plays or whatever could be about anything bad happening to anyone. How boring would that be?
If authors couldn't write something just because they could possibly offend someone out there, it would be a sad state of affairs indeed.

From:

I don't think Oasis was so much making fun of date rape and abortion but people's attitudes to how women should "just shake it off/getoverit" and the pitiful argument I see anti choicers use all the time: "You were just using abortion as birth control!". Also I think I didn't have a problem with Oasis because it was based on stuff that had actually happened to her.

From:

I know you don't as you see it as it was intended.
I wouldn't be surprised if the same people who got Oasis wrong at the time are now screaming about EE.

From:

Most of the people I see expressing reasoned and legitimate anger about EvelynEvelyn were thoroughly in support of Oasis and utterly unimpressed by attempts to ban it, actually.

From:

No, it isn't a reason not to like the music, but given that her product is performance art and I take issue with parts of that package, I'm currently leaning towards thinking it's a good reason to not give her money.

I agree with

ginasketch on the subject of Oasis: it's different because it draws on her actual lived experience.

It's not just "possibly offend[ing] someone out there", though - she has actually offended real people and laughed at them about it, which is... not a nice thing to do, and another reason to not give her money.

I have nowhere argued that people shouldn't avoid writing things for fear of causing offence, though. I would, however, argue that people "should" avoid writing things that perpetuate harmful stereotypes and cultural memes, e.g. use of "gay" as a perjorative.

From:

*nods* As already stated, it wasn't handled well. Two factors play into this, first the format/medium. It's hard to express views properly online, even more so in her random and haphazard style, especially on twitter.
The other factor is one of the aspects that make her the great artist she is: her spontaneity. This, sadly, can also be her downfall when she's simply not thinking (enough) before doing something.

I'm not defending her but I'm saying that everyone screws up royally once and it was AFP's turn when she first reacted to the EE criticism. REALLY bad timing.

I'd be with you if she'd continually go round being offensive to various people (other than her record company and other bigwigs who deserve it). I admire her for the things she does, how she stays connected with her fan base, things like her ninja gigs, and so forth.

Edited Date: 24/3/10 08:13 pm (UTC)

From:

I still like Amanda Palmer, I just wish she had handled the whole thing better.

I think the people who didn't realize it was her and Jason Webley dressed up are being silly and overreacting (durrr who did you think it was?), but I will admit her back story about the twins being rescued from a child porn ring made me uncomfortable.

From:

sea-of-flame.livejournal.com

Shall look out for you on the Saturday - was planning to blag guestlist for the Thursday as well, but we're not in London that day (and it would be cheeky for me to try to get tickets for others if I wasn't going myself)

From:

Bad planning!

From:

Are you going?

From:

On the Friday. If some guest tickets had been available for Thursday, I'd have been very happy to have helped provide a full show....

From:

No no I'm going on the saturday with Ozzy. I wondered if you had the same day.

From:

I decided that the cross-london trip was easier with most tubes running....

From:

That's why I'm going down on the Friday and staying at a hotel off Sheperd's Bush Green for two nights. :)

From:

sea-of-flame.livejournal.com

Yep, we suddenly realised we both had the same week clear workwise and booked before anything could change...of course the lovely Ms Palmer wasn't in my little black book becausea guestlist is always last minute...

From:

My calendar supports tentative appointments!

From:

Cool!
For AFP, I very happily pay my 20 quid or even a whole lot more. For big name acts, not so much. I would absolutely love to see Clapton and Winwood but 120 pounds is ridiculous. For a seat centre front, possibly, but not somewhere up in the rafters.

From:

Geeze. I wouldn't pay 120 quid to see anybody. £30 stretches it for a concert ticket IMO

From: