Jump to content

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

Djehan is part of of an international acting alternative art collective using a pretty aggressive language ( writing "manifestos", going to trash Berlin ,...) we can assume she pretty much meant what she wrote there.

Did you call her a fascist first?  If so, why?

And what exactly are they doing in Berlin?  Are you sure it's  excessive or is it within the normal bounds of activism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fionalein said:

You are cherry picking your interpretation yourself - Djehan is part of of an international acting alternative art collective using a pretty aggressive language ( writing "manifestos", going to trash Berlin ,...) we can assume she pretty much meant what she wrote there. Would fit their pattern pretty well.

 

Nice try. :) Even the text on the Indiegogo page contains rather a bit of grammatical/spelling errors; it's still quite legible, of course, but it's clear these ppl (like Lawrence too, I think) are struggling sometimes with certain nuances of the English language -- a fact which is, naturally, immediately exploited by certain ppl (/me hands you that hand mirror).

And what is this pattern of hers you are referring to? Is it making beautiful things? Then guilty as charged! And as for 'aggressive language,' you've never actually spoken with her, have you?! She's one of the gentlest ppl out there, really. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

I have her on ignore for good reason.

I did see where Djehan called others facist but only after she had been called one. That's what started the whole thing.

No.

  • Nobody ever called her fascist. Ever. Not one time.
  • Nobody ever suggested any disrespect for Anne Frank or the quote used here.
  • Nobody ever suggested it was inappropriate to use the quote.

I really do not want to revisit this all over again.

It's not necessary that this creator understood how, in a dystopian setting, the use of that particular quote from Anne Frank could have been ironic, and still be completely respectful and even very moving.

But then came the convoluted contrafactual, that if the creator had meant it that way, that creator must be fascist. That was problematic.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I have not seen the part of the sim, nor the quote, in question, so I'm not in a good position to judge which of these is the most likely reading.

Why don't you believe the creator's explanation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

And what exactly are they doing in Berlin? 

art?

no idea, really

it is the most recent post on their website at this moment: https://web.archive.org/web/20190514213311/http://www.hangars-liquides.com/ (archive link to anticipate future changes) this is the language they (even Djehan herself here) themselves chose to be represented with - not my choice - theirs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also read the quoted text and Djehan wasn't calling anyone fascist.

The blame game in this thread sounds very delirious.

OP too has been very nice and polite to every one despite he's been badly trolled here and TDD also has acted nice.

Don't you kids have any better things to do than trolling here?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Why don't you believe the creator's explanation?

I didn't say that I don't believe the creator's explanation. Where do you get that from?

As I've said, what the creator thinks the effect or meaning is, can be quite different from the actual effect produced. Arts and literature are continually being re-interpreted by succeeding generations of viewers or readers, and even in their own time, artists frequently discover that the response to their work is not what they thought it would be.

Until I see what that effect looks like, on the ground, I'm not going to judge what the impact of the juxtaposition is. The intent of the creator is not irrelevant, but it also doesn't determine what the feature actually means.

Edited by Scylla Rhiadra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

It's not necessary that this creator understood how, in a dystopian setting, the use of that particular quote from Anne Frank could have been ironic, and still be completely respectful and even very moving.

But then came the convoluted contrafactual, that if the creator had meant it that way, that creator must be fascist. That was problematic.

Yeah. I'm totally not understanding the logic of this. Although I do get it, I think, on an emotional level.

But it's a completely specious deduction.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I didn't say that I don't believe the creator's explanation. Where do you get that from?

The intent of the creator is not irrelevant, but it also doesn't determine what the feature actually means.

In this context it's very important to understand what the creator meant, because people are criticizing her over it and telling her it didn't mean what she says it does.

I understand, people interpret things different ways, but I take at face value what an artist says their intent was, even if the audience views it differently. I mean barring something absolutely ridiculous, and I've visited and it's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

You are cherry picking your interpretation yourself - Djehan is part of of an international acting alternative art collective using a pretty aggressive language ( writing "manifestos", going to trash Berlin ,...)

 

Oh, FFS, Fiona, you're a stitch! 😍 Look, ppl, this is the horribly aggressive post Djehan made there:

Parties in Berlin

Hangars Liquides to trash Berlin again, as usual, if ur around, may 7, http://bit.ly/1T0S4d5 just come naked it’s spring

nb: much parties haven’t been announced here, so we hope u follow la peste and hangars liquides on FB, cheers

Obviously she meant 'trash' in the most innocuous way possible, more like crash the party, really (and, again, ironically, a fine example of my point above, that they don't speak perfect English). Your trolling is becoming more blatant with every post, Fiona.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

In this context it's very important to understand what the creator meant, because people are criticizing her over it and telling her it didn't mean what she says it does.

No. That's not happening. None of that ever happened.

Please just stop.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
14 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

But then came the convoluted contrafactual, that if the creator had meant it that way, that creator must be fascist. That was problematic.

Yeah. I'm totally not understanding the logic of this. Although I do get it, I think, on an emotional level.

But it's a completely specious deduction.

I get it, in the context of this project.

What is a fascism? It is when power by force is used to regulate society. What Anne Frank said was that even though she was being oppressed by a fascist society she chose to have hope, to believe in a world where freedom prevailed.
If you believe force is the only way to regulate society then yes, you've chosen to believe there is no hope, no freedom, no democracy -- I would say it would be very likely you would believe in force as a way to solve societal problems. But... you could just be depressed, and so I wouldn't say one was a fascist then, but I do wonder if one just gives up and lets the fascists win if one could say you were, at the very least, supporting a fascist society in an indirect way.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kiramanell said:

Hangars Liquides to trash Berlin again, as usual, if ur around, may 7, http://bit.ly/1T0S4d5 just come naked it’s spring

That sounds like some of my Wiccan friends...lol.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

telling her it didn't mean what she says it does.

Maybe it doesn't.

I'm not saying it doesn't: I haven't seen it. But, once a work is created and in public, the artist is nothing more than a slightly more knowledgeable interpreter of her own work.

The point that I think Qie is making here -- and he can jump in if I'm wrong -- is that the artist's defense of herself is dumb and actually unnecessary, because suggesting that Anne Frank's optimism about human nature was wrong is not "fascist," nor does it represent an attack upon her. And in responding to that criticism as though it were valid and logical, she's paradoxically complicit in perpetuating the nonsense that underwrites it. And that has led to a whole lot of back-and-forth, and name calling, that is taking this out of the realm of the logical, and into the personal and emotional instead.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

If you believe force is the only way to regulate society then yes, you've chosen to believe there is no hope, no freedom, no democracy -- I would say it would be very likely you would believe in force as a way to solve societal problems. But... you could just be depressed, and so I wouldn't say one was a fascist then, but I do wonder if one just gives up and lets the fascists win if one could say you were, at the very least, supporting a fascist society in an indirect way.

I'm sorry, Luna, but as try as I might I'm not seeing how any of these things are implied by a criticism of Anne Frank's optimism.

George Orwell wrote one of the great dystopian fictions of all time. He was emphatically not a fascist, nor a defeatist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
9 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

If you believe force is the only way to regulate society then yes, you've chosen to believe there is no hope, no freedom, no democracy -- I would say it would be very likely you would believe in force as a way to solve societal problems. But... you could just be depressed, and so I wouldn't say one was a fascist then, but I do wonder if one just gives up and lets the fascists win if one could say you were, at the very least, supporting a fascist society in an indirect way.

I'm sorry, Luna, but as try as I might I'm not seeing how any of these things are implied by a criticism of Anne Frank's optimism.

George Orwell wrote one of the great dystopian fictions of all time. He was emphatically not a fascist, nor a defeatist.

I said very likely in that context -- the context of her project -- she describes her motivation well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

I really do not want to revisit this all over again.

It's not necessary that this creator understood how, in a dystopian setting, the use of that particular quote from Anne Frank could have been ironic, and still be completely respectful and even very moving.

But then came the convoluted contrafactual, that if the creator had meant it that way, that creator must be fascist. That was problematic.

 

Like Fiona, you are purposely cherry-picking one clause out of a whole sentence, to beat her with. This is what Djehan actually said:

"I am being told that some people publicly say that I used that quote "ironically", you see what is in between the lines here, and I have to make it clear that I am not a fascist, for only fascists could use such a quote ironically."

Basically, she's just saying "Look, I'm not a fascist. I use her words in the most sincere manner possible. If anything, only a real fascist would make light of her words." Something to that effect. The way she said it is probably not how I would have worded it, but, like I said earlier, I think it's pretty clear what she meant nonetheless.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

George Orwell wrote one nof the great dystopian fictions of all time. He was emphatically not a fascist, nor a defeatist.

And the he went on and wrote even another one ... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kiramanell said:

I am being told that some people publicly say that I used that quote "ironically", you see what is in between the lines here, and I have to make it clear that I am not a fascist, for only fascists could use such a quote ironically."

This is the problematic part of the sentence (although the assertion that she's not fascist -- which is completely unnecessary -- follows from it).

It is not true that "only fascists could use such a quote ironically." It just isn't. It suggests that Frank's view of human nature is somehow untouchable and sacrosanct, presumably because she was a remarkable young woman we all admire who came to a terribly tragic end.

We can respect, admire, love, and mourn for Anne Frank without necessarily agreeing with her assessment of human nature.

Now, that said . . . using Anne Frank in particular does bring a whole bundle of complicated new meanings to the table. But that suggestion that only fascists would quote her in an ironic context is just wrong.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Maybe it doesn't.

I'm not saying it doesn't: I haven't seen it. But, once a work is created and in public, the artist is nothing more than a slightly more knowledgeable interpreter of her own work.

The point that I think Qie is making here -- and he can jump in if I'm wrong -- is that the artist's defense of herself is dumb and actually unnecessary, because suggesting that Anne Frank's optimism about human nature was wrong is not "fascist," nor does it represent an attack upon her. And in responding to that criticism as though it were valid and logical, she's paradoxically complicit in perpetuating the nonsense that underwrites it. And that has led to a whole lot of back-and-forth, and name calling, that is taking this out of the realm of the logical, and into the personal and emotional instead.

Right. I didn't see that there was anything against which the creator needed to defend herself. So it all seemed ... oh, let's just not go there.

If we want to leave this whole incident behind and talk in the abstract about the way ambiguity -- even unappreciated by the artist -- can enrich the experience of art in the observer, I could be down with that. Maybe Maddy has a TED talk for that, ready to hand.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Qie Niangao said:

If we want to leave this whole incident behind and talk in the abstract about the way ambiguity -- even unappreciated by the artist -- can enrich the experience of art in the observer

YES.

You know, if there is anything really "fascist" going on here, it's the insistence that there's only one way to read this.

(I am quoting Qie ironically, of course. 😉 )

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

This is the problematic part of the sentence (although the assertion that she's not fascist -- which is completely unnecessary -- follows from it).

It is not true that "only fascists could use such a quote ironically." It just isn't. It suggests that Frank's view of human nature is somehow untouchable and sacrosanct, presumably because she was a remarkable young woman we all admire who came to a terribly tragic end.

We can respect, admire, love, and mourn for Anne Frank without necessarily agreeing with her assessment of human nature.

Now, that said . . . using Anne Frank in particular does bring a whole bundle of complicated new meanings to the table. But that suggestion that only fascists would quote her in an ironic context is just wrong.

 

I can only say what I told Fiona, that we need to keep in mind she's French, and quite possibly, ironically, misused the word 'ironically.' Because, indeed, there are several ways one could use the quote ironically (like putting it near that candy stand, amidst the dystopian city). Artists are known for use of irony, so I would not hold it against anyone if they actually thought she meant it ironically. I just don't think she really meant 'ironically' ('sarcastically', maybe? Who knows).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kiramanell said:

I can only say what I told Fiona, that we need to keep in mind she's French, and quite possibly, ironically, misused the word 'ironically.' Because, indeed, there are several ways one could use the quote ironically (like putting it near that candy stand, amidst the dystopian city). Artists are known for use of irony, so I would not hold it against anyone if they actually thought she meant it ironically. I just don't think she really meant 'ironically' ('sarcastically', maybe? Who knows).

I guess, since I was the one who first used the word "ironic" it's only fitting that I should accept some ambiguity in its interpretation.

(Still though. Fascist. That's a mighty big gun to be spinning around the card table.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, kiramanell said:

 

I can only say what I told Fiona, that we need to keep in mind she's French, and quite possibly, ironically, misused the word 'ironically.' Because, indeed, there are several ways one could use the quote ironically (like putting it near that candy stand, amidst the dystopian city). Artists are known for use of irony, so I would not hold it against anyone if they actually thought she meant it ironically. I just don't think she really meant 'ironically' ('sarcastically', maybe? Who knows).

That may well be so; I don't know. The irony is that she's defending herself completely unnecessarily against a criticism that itself makes no sense. And that's what has got her into difficulties.

I think the most important point though is that none of this actually has anything to do with HL itself, its merits or its meanings. Like so much else in this thread, it's become about personalities instead -- in this case, Djehan's.

It's a distraction. I don't care that much about the artist, one way or another. Does the installation deserve to be saved? That's the question!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...