smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Michael Bennett" <mrhonorama@hotmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: Nelly, Whoa Nelly, please..... |
| Date | Wed, 26 Feb 2003 10:33:24 -0600 |
[Part 1 text/plain (4.7 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Steve, if anyone could offer a well thought out response to what I wrote, it
would be you. This isn't a right or wrong issue. And I may not have been
clear -- I don't know if I was offended by Nelly, but I thought it wasn't
the best decision to go pyro that night.
I am struck by the tremendous dichotomy that at one level, it seems that
contemporary society is more callous than ever, whether it's violent video
games or reality TV, et al. Yet when some signifying tragedy occurs, it's
round the clock media coverage, microphones thrust in crying faces and
hairshirts electronically distributed across the country, so we can sit
paralyzed for a while. I wonder if people reacted so drastically to similar
events even 40 or 50 years ago. What was it like during World War II when
so many were dying each day?
Mike Bennett
Record reviews and more at http://fufkin.com
>From: "Durben, Steven" <Steven.Durben@cignabehavioral.com>
>Reply-To: audities@smoe.org
>To: "'audities@smoe.org'" <audities@smoe.org>
>Subject: Re: Nelly, Whoa Nelly, please.....
>Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 10:21:11 -0600
>
>Mike said,
>On the other hand -- did the Rhode Island incident require an absolute
>prohibition on: a) pyrotechnics at shows and/or b) fire metaphors in songs?
>If I were DJing, should I stay away from XTC's "Great Fire" and "Burning
>with Optimism's Flames"? (snip)
>
>Hi Mike,
> I didn't see Nelly (nor do I ever watch the Grammies). However, I can
>see how one might find the use of pyrotechnics offensive given the recent
>loss of life. It is the same act or at least a similar act, that caused
>the
>fire. Thus, it's very act is in close relationship to the fire itself
>which
>caused the loss of life. I could see how some, especially family members
>of
>the victims, might find this show in very poor taste and lacking in
>compassion. It may not have offended you but isn't the question of if it
>might be understandably offensive to some for whom this wound is still so
>fresh? Where as your examples of song lyrics regarding fire might cause
>emotional stirs in some, there is no other true connection and thus no
>"ban"
>is warranted.
>
>
>You went on.....After 9/11, I disagreed with the NFL's decision to cancel
>games six days
>after the attacks. I thought that the diversion would be helpful, after 5
>days of constant coverage. Obviously, that was a minority view. (snip)
>
>Well, I respectfully disagree with you here too. I again can see how
>those
>who are directly impacted by this event might feel our need for a diversion
>to be difficult. Clearly, a football game could have offered the direct
>victims of 9-11 nothing so soon after this tragedy. I would imagine for
>many of them it might feel like "how can they act life is back to normal
>and
>disregard what has happened to us". I won't belabor this per I'm sure
>you've heard these arguments.
>
>Mike said...
>Nelly's performance, viewed on tape 20 years from now, would not be
>considered offensive (perhaps boring...). It was only in this extremely
>limited context.
>
>The question is, what is the statute of limitations for performers to
>refrain from pyrotechnics and make references to fire? (snip)
>
>But isn't death and loss all about context? As a boy, was I right to be
>upset that my cartoons were not on when JFK's funeral was on every channel?
>There is not "statue of limitations", there is only respectful amount of
>time to allow for some healing. It is all shades of grey. It seems to me,
>it is all about context, proximity of the event and the degree of the
>tragedy. For me, these are important moments that bond us as people and
>there is a need for at least some sensitivity and understanding.
> I work with companies all the time related to what to do after an
>employee's sudden death due to an accident or whatever. I'm often
>reminding
>them to think about the little things...for example....don't clear the
>deceased employee's desk off right away (believe me, it happens) per the
>added pain and anger such an act would have for some of his coworkers.
>Does
>it mean they never clear off this person's desk. Of course not. Is their a
>absolute right time to clear off the desk. No, but with time and a little
>healing people get closer and usually after a few days they are ready and
>able to separate out such acts from the pain of the loss they are
>experiencing.
>Anyway, all this said, I hope I'm not sounding like I'm moralizing but just
>wanted to share my thoughts and well, you asked....
>Not aiming for controversy : )
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.