[Bare Bonez]

Hey guys - time for a little philosophy.

I recently saw that new Christina Aguilera music video "Dirty". Along with Eminiem and Britney Spears, I began wondering whether these "entertainers" (or if you must, artists) should be responsible for their art forms to the public.

I know that in North America we have the freedom of speech, but where is that line drawn. These so called artists are role models for thousands for children and their message has some impact to their future. It is my belief that artists, entertainers, and parents all have some moral and social responsibility towards the youth.

Since there are many artists in this forum, I'm curious where you draw the line when it comes to your art. When you produce something, do you take into consideration whether or not a child or young adult will view your art? Are there any other moral or ethical issues that you also take into account?

[mtw]

I feel that parents should do a good job of raising their kids to know better than to imitate art. I also think that when your main age target tends to be on the young side, you shouldn't start doing risque things.

[[Shizo]]

heh, try to say that in the ghetto, mtw
Dudes all look like Ja Rule, and chicks like Jennifer Lopez. And act like them.. or wait, maybe its not the cause but a result, or maybe both!

Anyways, it really depends on the 'artist'. All of them do it for cash money, but their style is all different. Some go by "i dont give a sh*t" path, which is very popular because it's stupid.
Some go by bubble gum path, some go by "being different" path. Some go by "love and peace" path. Basically following the supply and demand rules in order to get profit. So again, it's both - the cause and result at the same time.

[Ragnarok]

Freedom of speech means to allow a person say what you most hate.

When you start cutting the freedom of speech, everybody wants to cut it more: religion extremists, puritans, etc. So you end in the mid 50s.

[Isric]

Don't go assuming that the 50's were all 'fishin with pa'and learnin 'bout bomb shelters. They were just as messed then as we are now, it's just we get it faster.

[[Shizo]]

Yeees.. and freedom of speech isn't so peechy at all. First of all there is no total freedom of speech anyway as you CAN'T do or say anything you want. And it's good that you can't. The better type of system would be real democracy where majority rules. So minority (molesters or lawers for example) wouldn't bend laws in their favor.

Think, it's not a bad idea to establish controlling laws through country-wide vote! But that, like any other government type isnt perfect and not possible. Although most fair to the majority, which is most important.

[Frost]

It's the age of immaturity and irresponsability. If it sells, keep doing it. More video games for the kids so they miss the entire meaning of their lives and grow without moral values. More infomercials for the morally and disciplinarily weak individuals. More makeup, perfumes, lotions, designer clothes and cool flashy sexy items for the insecure, shallow materialistic individuals who cannot cope with just being 'ordinary' or 'normal'. There's a market for everyone, and no one asks why as long as it's profitable. The stupider the people are, the better it is for the economy... at least for now.

I hate rap (and other derivatives) because of the lack of moral values and total and absolute disrespect for others, not to mention the breeding of egotistical worthless 'better than though or I'll put a cap in your ass' attitude. Yet, it's one of the most popular choices in music today, yo! Even yo white biatches and ho's listen to da shite, yo! -- Talk about a fucking degenerate generation. But hey, all part of being young I suppose. They'll all grow up one day and look back on their young days with shame.

Bah. I should go smoke some weed or something. I'm clearly getting old by the looks of things. =)

[ October 15, 2002: Message edited by: Frost ]

[Awetopsy]

.... Frost.....

I almost want to say "amen" :P

[atomicmonkey]

Holly shit frost! I must feel old too... and I'm only 20!

I have a lot of the same opinions as you. It's sad, cause I even see my friends follow this lame path. I mean, most of them are my age even, out of high school, supposed to be out of this bs! Yet they listen to this music and have gotten more attitude since they started to listen to it. Sad man, sad...

Yesterday I was walking down my friends street and saw two little kids... both HAD to be under ten... and guess what they were wearing? FuBu, Phat Pharm rapper getups, blingbling (plastic) chains, and they were walking with the classic "i'm a thug so you better recognize" 'limp' in their step. When I walked by they even had toughguy looks on their faces. I couldn't fucking believe it. My friend started yelling at them though... "What up Jigga? Wanna go get some 40's of chocolate milk? Hows kindergarden treatin ya homies?" Stupid kids. And yet, you can't really blame them. They're just trying to be cool. It's just sad that what is 'cool' right now is really very fucking lame.

/end rant

[balistic]

If it's on the radio, it isn't art.

None of those entertainers would hold up as musicians . . . when you market something like Eminem, you're not marketing music, you're marketing the look, the attitude . . . if it's got a face, it's not about the music.

You need to look at the major labels instead of the puppets they promote. For every shocking outfit that Britney wears there were six marketing execs deciding whether or not it'd be a good idea.

These are the same people who think they have a right to snoop in your computer to make sure you're not duplicating any of their media assets.

For every genre of music there is a creative underground. Find it, support it, and drive the major labels out of business.

[[Shizo]]

Hah, nobody knows more about gangstaz and hoes than yours truly :P
In fact i ride the bus full of scum twice a day to and from work hehe. I must admit that it disgusts me as much as it entertains me to look at it though. For example a week ago i passed about 4 little kids on the street and all i could hear was "nigga 'n shit" talk from them. And then another day 3 other little kids passed me on a bike (2 on a bike, another running around) and they were trying to sell a watch to people in cars on red light for "five dolla". Hehe, they came up to me too saying "FIVE DOLLA, FIVE DOLLA!"
BUt then, 2 days ago some high-school couple was talking about going to NYC to sell "sh*t". And yesterday some dude was talking on the phone to his "nigga" about some other "nigga" who got shot and now bought a gun, and some other "niggaz" who wanted to buy haze from him.
Oh i forgot about that guy who tried to sell me a dozen of toothbrushes (lol), another guy with stolen CDs and DVDs. And the list goes on.

ISNT THAT COO?!!! What ya'll white boyz see only in the movies, i see for real! And it's better than TV i tell you.

[ October 15, 2002: Message edited by: [Shizo] ]

[Giant Hamster]

I watched the Dirrty video on Launch.com yesterday.

I didn't see anything that objectional at all. It's an ugly girl, covered in dirt, shaking her hips, which aren't even in the camera that often, to a - I have to admit - relatively catchy chorus...I didn't catch any of the words, So I guess it's time to go download the mp3, search for a lyrics page and find out.

I feel children should be exposed to everything they can be. If they've got parents, it's the parent's duty to make sure they understand why and what is going on in what they see.

A lot of parent's don't want to though...but eh, the kid will just grow up to be an idiot...and that's that. They'll die just like everyone else(except me, of course...I don't die).

[Gort]

Hey - Tom Petty doesn't like that commercial nonsense either:
http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/Music/10/03/ew.hot.rock/index.html

[Bare Bonez]

Wow what a great response! The issue isn't about censorship or what should or should not be done, but what you as an artist take into account. Freedom of Speech has its benefits - as in we can say whatever we want - and it's downfalls - Britney Spears and Eminem. However, that is all said and done by our fore fathers.

Given that we have this freedom, we can exercise it if need be. However, there are some situations where I feel that it has been unnecessarily exercised.

On a personal level, I try not to have any nudity or violence in my art unless it is absolutely necessary to convey some sort of message. It is for the sake of being humane and respectful for other people's children. But this view is just one view. I'm curious what other's artists views are.

[in response to Giant Hampster] I find the Dirty Video somewhat unnecessary in the sense that the video (if used to enhance the meaning of the song), could have been done in a more respectful manner. I agree that children should be exposed to certain things and that the parents are responsible for it, but in this day and age most parents are not responsible and do not explain to their children what is right and wrong. Hence, we have kids killing kids because of music or video games or TV.

So I guess the problem lies in the break down of soceity's social code. However, if an individual, be it an artist or entertainer, wants to promote as much good in soceity, then I guess that individual would censor themselves to lessen what children have to see.

[in response to edraket] yeah yeah, Christina Aguilera an artist? I dunno. I'd label her an entertainer, but some may differ. My friend labels her a tool 'cause all she provides is a voice box that releases some kind of sound. Isn't the state of mainstream music sad these days... Though most of the underground stuff is still pretty good.

[balistic]

No child finds nudity remarkable until they learn that it's taboo.

If adults would stop being so frumpy and hung-up on it, the kids would do just fine.

Ultimately I don't think an artist (in the more narrow, literal meaning) has any reason to be morally responsible. Nearly every great artistic breakthrough, every masterwork was considered morally irresponsible when it was first exhibited.

"Luncheon on the Grass"
"Madame X"
"David"

Art can be purely beautiful, sure . . . but great art lures a viewer in with beauty, and then makes him think.

I've seen what happens when kids grow up wearing blinders . . . they are ill-equipped to deal with reality when it eventually thrusts itself upon them.

[Hase]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frost:
It's the age of immaturity and irresponsability. If it sells, keep doing it. More video games for the kids so they miss the entire meaning of their lives and grow without moral values. More infomercials for the morally and disciplinarily weak individuals. More makeup, perfumes, lotions, designer clothes and cool flashy sexy items for the insecure, shallow materialistic individuals who cannot cope with just being 'ordinary' or 'normal'. There's a market for everyone, and no one asks why as long as it's profitable. The stupider the people are, the better it is for the economy... at least for now.
[ October 15, 2002: Message edited by: Frost ]

---

To be honest, these people are not my problem. I don�t give a rats ass about the kids without meaning in their lives, about the morally weak and the shallow individualists.
Its the age of immaturity and irresponsibility allright, but on the consumer side. We now have possibilites like no generation before us, a thing which I find very nice to have indeed. If some can�t deal with what�s out there then they need help, for sure, but to restrict the possibilites of all, just because a select few can�t deal with reality is just plain wrong.
And since I�m part of the market I�ll just say this: I don�t care about the why. If you sell products to consenting adults, you have no right to interfere with their lives, you cannot possibly be so arrogant as to assume that YOU know better than everyone else what�s good for people. Freedom of choice? Yes. So lets start living it. If you can�t make responsible choices, deal with it. Let someone else handle your life for you, but don�t blame those who sold you the coffee for burning your tongue.


I think it�s time people started to grow up.

[wayfinder]

society is addicted to pop.

[edraket]

Well this whole discussion just illustrates the downside of freedom. A big percentage of the world has very little individual thoughts (opinions) and can easily be used for the good of others.
For instance... A true democracy could only exist if everyone would more or less study politics, economy, the environment etc. Then they could form their own standpoint on these things and vote for a political party that comes closest to their own standpoints. But how many people do that?
There is sooo many people that just vote for a person because he has good personal characteristics, because he is willing to make promises that he cannot keep or even because he is of the same religion.
Thats the free world...the people on TV have the power. And they only want one thing... (money and more power).
It's still better than a censored 1984 type world where the few individuals are suppressed by force to blend in with the masses.

Your role as an artist is to express how you see the world in a way that makes people think for themselves instead of either believing or opposing you without any actual individual consideration.

And..er christina aguilera an artist? Thats like saying Coca Cola is an artist. She's a product.

[ October 15, 2002: Message edited by: edraket ]

[[666]Flat]

Greetings, ladies and gentlemen.

All I have to add to this topic is a quote from my favorite humanist and philosopher, Mr. Duke Nukem, because it's quite speaking for itself in a highly pragmatic manner:

"Weapons don't kill mutants. I kill mutants."

And another one worth mentioning:

"So many babes. And so little time."

Never shall these words forgotten, too:

"I go where I please and I please where I go."

Well now, let me perorate my contribution by saying: 'nuff said.

[Hase]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bare Bonez:
[...] but in this day and age most parents are not responsible and do not explain to their children what is right and wrong. Hence, we have kids killing kids because of music or video games or TV.

---

Don�t you think you�re oversimplyifing just *a little*?

In response to the original post: no, I don�t feel that I have any moral obligations, I will not censor what I do for anyone. If the material is really not suited for some audiences I may indicate that, other than that I don�t care about what people do with it.

[[Shizo]]

Indication is a very good point. Films should indicate the amount of violence in it. Musicians should indicate amount of filthy language in it. But what happens when something extreme becomes popular and sells good? Then there is no point in pre-cautions since it's so popular and accessible (ex. Eminem). But anyways, as someone said "something thats popular isnt always right, and something thats right isnt always popular" hence the original topic. Although considering the sense of "right" is unique to each individual, we come back to 0 on this.

[balistic]

There are no warning labels on novels. There are no warning labels on paintings in museums.

By labeling something, you've admitted that it doesn't stand on it's own merits.

I read novels in highschool with profanity in them, but I was never assigned a comic book to read.

Why?

Because when comics were young they bowed to a few vocal extremists and started labeling themselves. All at once the perception of comic books as disposable juvenile entertainment was set in stone, and that's still the layman's idea of what comics are about.

Censors will tell you that warning labels aren't censorship, and they're right . . . labels aren't censorship, they're absolute creative poison.

[[Shizo]]

How can you compare the paintings in museums and novels in highschool to the ghetto *ghetto niggaz bling-bling* kind of entertainment entertainment?
If you want to make it fair including the low-end, then i see. But isnt the purpose of life to improve? For example suport education and help instead of promoting violence and bling.

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: [Shizo] ]

[HawkOne]

Interesting subject...

I just wanted to underline that it has never been demonstrated that violent entertainment has caused real-world harm, in the same way that it has never been demonstrated that "use" of pornography leads to rape, although there are plenty of people out there who are quick to draw this conclusion without a shred of evidence ...

It has been proven that such claims are in fact statistical fabrications. If we did a survey on 100 rapists, found out how many were smokers, and found that 72% were smokers, could we thus draw the conclusion that there is a 72% chance that smoking leads to rape ?? What do you think ? Whenever statistics are carried out on small groups of people, numbers will be unreliable, to say the least ... in order for the previous example to give an "estimate" of an accurate picture, shouldn't you do the survey of say 100,000 random people, find out percentage of smokers, say 38,000, and then number of rapistsamong them, maybe 10, in order to show that there might be a link there somewhere ??? It's still probably not right, but instead of 72% the number would then be something like 2 hundreths of a percent instead, which is statistically probably closer to the truth, and the link between smoking and rape ( for example ) can be completely ruled out.

If you care about such things, and are not scared of large numbers of words , theck this link out :The Free Expression Project : INTERACTIVE DIGITAL SOFTWARE ASS'N, et al. v. ST. LOUIS COUNTY, et al.,

also : National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) which has a lot of interesting info related to this topic, a lot of very interesting reading ...

and finally : FEMINISTS AGAINST CENSORSHIP which also have lots of juicy info regarding restriction of amongst others artistic expression.

To me it seems that some areas of "the West" in particular the USA, who with censorship nutcase and VERY Christian Ashcroft et.al. in charge, seem to be reversing their progress in liberalisation of what is being subjected to censorship or other forms of suppression.

Nothing good can come of this ...

[atomicmonkey]

In my last post I didn't really respond to the topic of this post.

I personally do not consider any moral responsibility in my work. I could give a rats ass if people find my work in bad taste, because I like it... I'm of course talking about personal artwork here. I mean, If I was doing a childrens book, of course i wouldn't put any crazy shit in there, that's obvious. But as far as worrying if my art would maybe make people worry or god forbid... "THINK"... shit, I'm all for it. We need more people to think out there... stop being fed what is given to them without question.

I'm still young... still in school. Haven't really done any work for clients yet... in the business. For teachers, yeah... but there are similarities. They tell you what they want done, any guildlines, and (hopefully) what they do NOT want to see.

When you make work for a client, guildlines will always exist. You work will be censored in one way or another. It's unavoidable. It's life.

I think a goal I'd like to shoot for, and what every other arist should shoot for, is to minimize the censorship as much as possible. Even try tricks to get around it. Some of the most amazing artwork is even more amazing because of the ways the artists got around their limits (Mike's Sistine Chapel - creation of adam, comes to mind).

Censorship can really screw up some nice art. I get so mad when I'm watching loony toons and they'll cut out a second or two when someone drops an anvil on someones head, cause it's supposedly too damn violent. Shit, they play it at 10 and 12 pm on teletoon and it's still censored, what the hell is going on!? It's bullshit.

Our society is a wussy one, and censorship can lick my balls.

that is all

[ceenda]

Art is a form of expression, at the end of the day.

Just depends whether you are trying to 'convert' people with your work, and whether the cause or ideals to which you wish to win them are worthwhile.

PS: Why is everyone so keen to beat censorship??? Can your work not survive on the basis of it's own merit without the shock value involved? Sheesh, stop taking the fucking "Turner pill".

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: ceenda ]

[balistic]

Shizo: I agree that the current state of black American culture is pretty sad, but you can't blame the music for that.

Did you know techno music was originally started by a few black kids in Detroit? For a brief period of time in the mid eighties, it was cool for a black kid to be intellectual, literate, and to think about the future. But techno had no "entertainers", and the major media won't promote a black musician who doesn't get up and dance along to his music, so techno remained regional and underground. Rap had entertainers. Rap got the spotlight, and now most black folks don't even know that techno was originally soulful black music.

The reason hip-hop went big was because some white dudes in suits knew they could make money off it. It's those guys in suits, the record labels, that you need to take down if you don't want little kids following the latest pop trends. You can talk about how much Puff Daddy sucks all you want, but he's just a puppet, and if you succeed in getting people to stop listening to him, the puppet master will just find another pawn to exploit.

A bad artist has every right to be bad. It's the people behind the scenes, who take that bad art and put a twenty million dollar advertising campaign behind it that are to blame for the fact that it now infests your life.

A warning label doesn't hurt the sales of a major CD release. It /does/ hurt the independant musician, artist, or writer who is trying to get his work taken seriously.

Turn off the radio. Turn off MTV. Find some hot underground shit and blast it as loud as you can.

I've got 1.2 kilowatts of sound in my car and I'll be damned if I'm not going to leave an impression on the thug-wannabe trendwhore ricer in the next lane.

[balistic]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ceenda:

PS: Why is everyone so keen to beat censorship??? Can your work not survive on the basis of it's own merit without the shock value involved? Sheesh, stop taking the fucking "Turner pill".

---

Sometimes shock is meritorious.

You also have to ask why something is being censored. Some people would like to censor everything that disagrees with their religion. This obviously infringes on the rights of others with different beliefs.

The core of censorship is self-righteousness, and as history plainly shows, nobody is more dangerous than the self-righteous.

Galileo was imprisoned for writing that the Earth was round. Many countries still have laws on the books barring certain kinds of thought.

What state is humanity in when ideas are deemed illegal?

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: balistic ]

[[Shizo]]

Hmm, everything is wrong. Suicide is the only solution :0

[balistic]

Nononono . . . alcahol is the only solution.