'...he derided Middle Eastern culture for "generation after generation of incompetence, stupidity and failure."'
I did not see the original post, so maybe it is true that Mr. Davis wrote those words about "Middle Eastern culture". However, the group that claimed responsibility for the attacks was not a Middle Eastern culture group; it was the Islamic State. This was carried about by Islamic jihadists, with explicitly Muslim justifications. Euphemisms do not help. Of course, if Mr. Davis did refer specifically to Middle Eastern culture, then he was the one obfuscating the matter.
Funny how progressives cannot handle an angry facebook comment, made right after the outrageous Paris attacks, yet they are often fine with talking about Republicans, or Christians, using the same ideas and, indeed, the same specific terms used by Mr. Davis. A few days ago, I endured a little sermonette about people living in the middle of the US. The speaker stressed how "stupid" they were, not to mention cravenly fearful. This was, as we know, hardly an isolated sort of incident. You hear it all the time.
The most deserving human on the earth! Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes!!!!!
Durham's history is so rich--and unique within NC-- that our city needs its own Poet Laureate Program. This place has a vibrant identity, and I can't think of anyone who voices it more eloquently than Dasan. Durham Mighty Pen has done a lot of research about the growth of city-wide Poet Laureate Programs (and Youth Poet Laureate programs!) and has started a facebook page to gather support for a petition to the mayor and city council. If you are interested in signing the petition to create a Poet Laureate Program for Durham, please follow the movement here: https://www.facebook.com/APoetLaureateforDurham/
Mr. Burns is both hilarious and deeply moving, and I'm still thinking about it more than a week later.
Just saw Mr. Burns. I feared the play would be too dark and depressing. And although there were elements of loss, I was pleasantly surprised that the play becomes increasingly delightful and full of hope, with some wonderfully witty musical numbers.
Nicely written, Mr. Belz.
Re: "Vesper, a white person born in the 1970s..." I think this might be the same Pamela Vesper who ran for the NC Court of Appeals in 2010 (see: http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/pamela-ma…) and was born in 1966. She's almost 50 years old, and she's worked in a profession (law) that is all about research. I think she could have pieced together a few essential facts about blue-collar black comedians and the intent of this play had she wanted to. I think there's a political angle that's being buried here. She cites visual artists Serrano and Ofili, who were both used during culture war battles about what should and shouldn't be considered art. If she's tried to seriously engage with playwright Lee or with Serrano and Ofili, you can't tell from the review excerpts we see here. Vesper's writing about this play and Serrano and Ofili comes across as reactionary, and paints all of this art as a grift meant to separate decent people from their money. It all may well be mediocre art, for all I know, but it's the job of the critic to explain that a little better than "because I say so."
I believe one of the artists mentioned is actually Sally Van Gorder, not Gordon.
Damn good read. You summed up my thoughts precisely with this text:
In order to write about such negative representations, a critic must know about them. But one way in which white privilege manifests itself in our culture is by sheltering a white community from the true history of neglected adjacent communities.
I don't understand why Pamela Vesper has received the bulk of the criticism. Kurt Benrud is also credited with co-writing the review. I take it he wasn't even present, but then, why was his name attached to this review?
Also, if you visit the website, the review has been replaced with a retraction, but this retraction is also credited to Kurt Benrud and Pamela Vesper! Did they author the retraction as well?
Or... are we talking about a website that has a very tenuous understanding of the basic rules of attribution?
Oops, no, it was James Morrison (sorry Craig, if you're reading this!)
Ah, takes me back to the time an Indy reviewer (was it Craig Livingstone? I honestly can't remember) walked out on Ang Lee's Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, declaring it fascist, pro-Bush propaganda, without staying to the conclusion that undercut that exact theme.
Critics -- they're human too. Who knew?
Thank you for this insightful and incisive analysis, Byron!
Thank you for these comments, DeafBowTie. We always seek the most widely accepted, up-to-date and respectful terms for different abilities, and we appreciate advice as to what they are. I would note that we never use the phrase "hearing impaired people" in the story. We do say "patrons with impaired hearing" in the headline, a phrasing we hoped would make it clear that the patrons are not impaired as people or defined by their hearing status -- rather, it is something they have.
As arts editor, that is my standing policy: We say "people with ___", not "_____ people." I welcome feedback on this policy, and I do take your point about the word "impairment" having a negative connotation regardless of the syntax. We'll think carefully about our usage of the word in the future.
Hi Everyone,This was how me and my BF become VAMPIRES i got a guy from the internet called Mr Marc who was a VAMPIRE so i told him that me and my boyfriend would love to become VAMPIRES so he asked me of my Name ,Country, Age ,State , address and asked me to pay for just to send me his blood which i did immediately and in the next 3 days i got the blood sample through the DHL which me and my boyfriend took in the blood into your body and in the next 30 minutes i turned into a VAMPIRE so if you interested in becoming a VAMPIRE kindly contact his Yahoo Mail(HenrySmith869@YAHOO.COM) he also has a friend who is a warewolf just incase you want to be one,, Yahoo Mail(HenrySmith869@YAHOO.COM)
Please be advised that the term, “hearing impaired” is unacceptable. Here is the explanation:
The term "Hearing Impaired" is a technically accurate term much preferred by hearing people, largely because they view it as politically correct. In the mainstream society, to boldly state one's disability (e.g., deaf, blind, etc.) is somewhat rude and impolite. To their way of thinking, it is far better to soften the harsh reality by using the word "impaired" along with "visual", "hearing", and so on. “Hearing-impaired” is a well-meaning word that is much-resented by deaf and hard of hearing people. This term was popular in the 70s and 80s, however, now is used mostly by doctors, audiologists and other people who are mainly interested in our ears "not working."
While it's true that their hearing is not perfect, that doesn't make them impaired as people. Most would prefer to be called Deaf, Hard of Hearing or deaf when the need arises to refer to their hearing status, but not as a primary way to identify them as people (where their hearing status is not significant).
We are deaf, and not people with impairments (obstacles) in life!
Hope that you and your people respect by refusing to use the outdated and offensive term. Hearing loss is more acceptable for everyone who is not just deaf.
Criticizing Grayson's wife's appearance does not contribute to the conversation. The comments section is the equivalent of the INDY's bar. If you don't follow the rules, you don't get to drink here.
What rules did it violate? It was no different than some of the other comments that still stand here. Also, he can attack others in his editorial, but people attacking him is not allowed? Lame.
CJ's most recent comment was deleted because it violated the INDY's comment policy.
Thank you for your advice, CJ. I'm glad this year-old article spoke to you.
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation