Am I Right To Be Feeling This Way?
Family Life0 min ago
9/11 - Time To Make Light Of It?
Answers
First off - it is too soon to try and 'make light' of a tragedy like this,but it begs the question, why would you want to 'make light' of it in the first place? ""The idea was to depict a modern-day horror that happened in our lifetime and was not intended as a joke." //" If it's not intended as a joke, why put on these constumes for a fancy dress party? By definition -...
11:22 Wed 06th Nov 2013
First off - it is too soon to try and 'make light' of a tragedy like this,but it begs the question, why would you want to 'make light' of it in the first place?
""The idea was to depict a modern-day horror that happened in our lifetime and was not intended as a joke." //"
If it's not intended as a joke, why put on these constumes for a fancy dress party?
By definition - the word 'party' in the title is a bit of a giveaway - this is not the forum for a serious social comment, so maybe someone with a degree more maturity and experience of life should have advised these young ladies that their idea was unliely to be received in the manner in which they claim to have presented it.
It is a simple case of immature people without any concept of the grief and offence they are causing being allowed to behave badly -albeit innocently.
Hopefully those with a similar mindset will understand that we do not live in isolation, and just because something is not meant to hurt and offend people, does not mean that it won't.
""The idea was to depict a modern-day horror that happened in our lifetime and was not intended as a joke." //"
If it's not intended as a joke, why put on these constumes for a fancy dress party?
By definition - the word 'party' in the title is a bit of a giveaway - this is not the forum for a serious social comment, so maybe someone with a degree more maturity and experience of life should have advised these young ladies that their idea was unliely to be received in the manner in which they claim to have presented it.
It is a simple case of immature people without any concept of the grief and offence they are causing being allowed to behave badly -albeit innocently.
Hopefully those with a similar mindset will understand that we do not live in isolation, and just because something is not meant to hurt and offend people, does not mean that it won't.
the thing is, andy, it doesn't seem to have been badly received - they won a prize - until the press got wind of it.
Perhaps it's we who need to take note of the possibility that younger people feel differently about this (and no doubt about much else). I'm not sure their views are any less valid than my own.
After all, the establishment view - it's an outrage, a cowardly assault on the American people - brought only two long, bloody wars that have both been lost, and that both killed far mroe innocent people than died on 9/11.
That response was understandable enough, and yet where has it got us?
I think there's much to be said for getting over the trauma. We can take WW2 seriously and still laugh at Allo Allo.
Perhaps it's we who need to take note of the possibility that younger people feel differently about this (and no doubt about much else). I'm not sure their views are any less valid than my own.
After all, the establishment view - it's an outrage, a cowardly assault on the American people - brought only two long, bloody wars that have both been lost, and that both killed far mroe innocent people than died on 9/11.
That response was understandable enough, and yet where has it got us?
I think there's much to be said for getting over the trauma. We can take WW2 seriously and still laugh at Allo Allo.
jno - "But those not directly affected, or those too young at the time, are entitled to take a more detached view of it."
If that were the case, then lessons from history would never be learned.
I was not born until nine years after World War Two occurred, so it is inevitable that my view of it cannot be the same as that of my parents, who lived through it.
But it is a massive leap from being unable to empathise directly with a trauma, to treating it as a subject of humour and ridicule, and one does not automatically preclude the other.
I have never see the inside of a Nazi death camp, but that does not prevent me from thinking that a Nazi 'fancy dress' is offensive.
If that were the case, then lessons from history would never be learned.
I was not born until nine years after World War Two occurred, so it is inevitable that my view of it cannot be the same as that of my parents, who lived through it.
But it is a massive leap from being unable to empathise directly with a trauma, to treating it as a subject of humour and ridicule, and one does not automatically preclude the other.
I have never see the inside of a Nazi death camp, but that does not prevent me from thinking that a Nazi 'fancy dress' is offensive.
// just because something is not meant to hurt and offend people, does not mean that it won't. //
People were offended by the Sex Pistols. They are offended by Slipknot. If something has to pass the 'it mustn't offend anyone test' before it is accepted, then there will be no creativity. No films. No books. No music. No jokes.
People were offended by the Sex Pistols. They are offended by Slipknot. If something has to pass the 'it mustn't offend anyone test' before it is accepted, then there will be no creativity. No films. No books. No music. No jokes.
oh, I disagree, andy. Personal experience in the heat of the moment gives valuable insight, and yet things may look very different a few years later.
Consider all those fine statues to generals around Trafalgar Square. They were great men in their day - and yet who now remembers even the wars, never mind the men who fought them?
Trying to be as objective as possible, I think WW2 will always remain one of the great struggles that Britain has faced (but, perhaps, less important than 1066 or the Roman invasion?). But in the present case, I wouldn't mind betting that in 50 years 9/11 will still be remembered - politicians and news media will make sure of that - and yet the subsequent Aghan and Iraq wars will not.
Not everything that excites us today will excite our descendants.
Consider all those fine statues to generals around Trafalgar Square. They were great men in their day - and yet who now remembers even the wars, never mind the men who fought them?
Trying to be as objective as possible, I think WW2 will always remain one of the great struggles that Britain has faced (but, perhaps, less important than 1066 or the Roman invasion?). But in the present case, I wouldn't mind betting that in 50 years 9/11 will still be remembered - politicians and news media will make sure of that - and yet the subsequent Aghan and Iraq wars will not.
Not everything that excites us today will excite our descendants.
Gromit - your point is a fiar one.
But in a culture like ours, there are a number of significant events that are so huge in terms of their negative impact, that they simply defy efforts to dilute their effect with humour, and for that reason, it is generally accepted that it is better not to try.
For that reason, no-one is doing Jimmy Saville impressions any more. No British radio stations play Gary Glitter records. No-one makes jokes about the Holocaust, or Lockerbie - and so on and so on.
I firmly believe that some tragedies are of sufficient magnitude that they defy any concept of levening by humour, and 9/11 certainly fits into that catagory.
Yes, some aspects of modern culture, certainly including music, are designed with an inbuilt 'shock' concept.
But that is an absolute world away from dressing up (just think about that concept for a moment) as a recent tragedy. That does not equate with humour as I understand the term, and I think I am far from alone in that view.
But in a culture like ours, there are a number of significant events that are so huge in terms of their negative impact, that they simply defy efforts to dilute their effect with humour, and for that reason, it is generally accepted that it is better not to try.
For that reason, no-one is doing Jimmy Saville impressions any more. No British radio stations play Gary Glitter records. No-one makes jokes about the Holocaust, or Lockerbie - and so on and so on.
I firmly believe that some tragedies are of sufficient magnitude that they defy any concept of levening by humour, and 9/11 certainly fits into that catagory.
Yes, some aspects of modern culture, certainly including music, are designed with an inbuilt 'shock' concept.
But that is an absolute world away from dressing up (just think about that concept for a moment) as a recent tragedy. That does not equate with humour as I understand the term, and I think I am far from alone in that view.
Andy
// But that is an absolute world away from dressing up (just think about that concept for a moment) as a recent tragedy. That does not equate with humour as I understand the term, and I think I am far from alone in that view. //
Firstly, the girls have said their costume was not meant to be humorous. They were making a serious point about what is horror. Is it someone in a mummy costume or real people killed by terrorists?
Apparently they beat someone dressed as Savile to win the £150 prize.
It isn't really recent, it was 12 years ago. These students were 6 years old at the time. That may explain why they are less sensitive about it than us.
A more recent horror, the nearly 7,000 US dead in the two resulting wars is already forgotten. There was no big 10th Anniversary of the start of the Afghanistan war.
// But that is an absolute world away from dressing up (just think about that concept for a moment) as a recent tragedy. That does not equate with humour as I understand the term, and I think I am far from alone in that view. //
Firstly, the girls have said their costume was not meant to be humorous. They were making a serious point about what is horror. Is it someone in a mummy costume or real people killed by terrorists?
Apparently they beat someone dressed as Savile to win the £150 prize.
It isn't really recent, it was 12 years ago. These students were 6 years old at the time. That may explain why they are less sensitive about it than us.
A more recent horror, the nearly 7,000 US dead in the two resulting wars is already forgotten. There was no big 10th Anniversary of the start of the Afghanistan war.
jno - you say that you disagree with me - which is fine - but your post does not gainsay any of the points I have made.
This issue is not about appropriate remembrance of major historical incidents, as you discuss in your post - it is about using a recent tragedy as the subject of a fancy dress costume, which is nothing to do with remembrence, present or future.
It is about seeing a tragic recent incident as a subject for humour - which is clearly inappropriate.
The defence of the two students involved - that they were 'highlighting' the tragedy only shows how far off the mark they are when it comes to effectively highlighting something.
If you want to highlight a tragedy (and why would you in this context?) - a fancy dress party is not the venue to do so.
This issue is not about appropriate remembrance of major historical incidents, as you discuss in your post - it is about using a recent tragedy as the subject of a fancy dress costume, which is nothing to do with remembrence, present or future.
It is about seeing a tragic recent incident as a subject for humour - which is clearly inappropriate.
The defence of the two students involved - that they were 'highlighting' the tragedy only shows how far off the mark they are when it comes to effectively highlighting something.
If you want to highlight a tragedy (and why would you in this context?) - a fancy dress party is not the venue to do so.
andy, a fancy-dress party isn't a "humorous" occasion as such and people don't generally use their clothing as "jokes". Fancy dress functions in all sort of different possible ways - fashion, political statement, stereotyping, whatever. Humour is one possible element, but doesn't actually seem to have been so in this case.
But the real point I was trying to make is that whatever I may think of 9/11, it's clear other people think differently. Not just the students in question, but the other people there, who don't seem to have objected (the Sun would have quoted them if they did), and those who awarded them the prize.
So we need to cope with this evidence that some at least of the next generaton have different views from their parents - as they have always done. And I don't think "urgent investigation" and "utter condemnation" are of the slightest use.
They mocked and belittled nobody. They went to a party and won a prize. The spectacle of US newspapers throwing up their hands in horror over a party in Chester is ludicrous.
But the real point I was trying to make is that whatever I may think of 9/11, it's clear other people think differently. Not just the students in question, but the other people there, who don't seem to have objected (the Sun would have quoted them if they did), and those who awarded them the prize.
So we need to cope with this evidence that some at least of the next generaton have different views from their parents - as they have always done. And I don't think "urgent investigation" and "utter condemnation" are of the slightest use.
They mocked and belittled nobody. They went to a party and won a prize. The spectacle of US newspapers throwing up their hands in horror over a party in Chester is ludicrous.
jno
But The Producers wasn't making fun of the Holocaust? In fact, as far as I recall, the Holocaust isn't even mentioned.
The point I think the film was making was that it was taking the mickey out of us - out of our own shock and outrage at what could be acceptable as a musical, and ultimately the characters' failure to grasp that the audience could find humour in the story.
It's like 'Allo Allo' - that too had comedy Germans, but it wasn't saying that war was funny.
But The Producers wasn't making fun of the Holocaust? In fact, as far as I recall, the Holocaust isn't even mentioned.
The point I think the film was making was that it was taking the mickey out of us - out of our own shock and outrage at what could be acceptable as a musical, and ultimately the characters' failure to grasp that the audience could find humour in the story.
It's like 'Allo Allo' - that too had comedy Germans, but it wasn't saying that war was funny.
jno - "andy, a fancy-dress party isn't a "humorous" occasion as such and people don't generally use their clothing as "jokes". Fancy dress functions in all sort of different possible ways - fashion, political statement, stereotyping, whatever. Humour is one possible element, but doesn't actually seem to have been so in this case."
Are you serious?
It's students.
In a night club.
In fancy dress.
Are you really trying to spin this as some sort of social commentary?
Really?
Are you serious?
It's students.
In a night club.
In fancy dress.
Are you really trying to spin this as some sort of social commentary?
Really?
I can see both Gromit's and andy_hughes' points, but I think that situations like this are useful because we can determine exactly what our 'borders of acceptibility are'.
I'm not saying that there should be an outright ban on anything that offends anyone, but a degree of thought.
For instance, what if I went to a fancy dress party dressed up as Lee Rigby with a papier mache head in a box?
Or dressed up as Mick Philpott with burned dolls attached to fake ball and chain around my ankle?
What's the actual point?
Who's laughing?
And why?
I'm not saying that there should be an outright ban on anything that offends anyone, but a degree of thought.
For instance, what if I went to a fancy dress party dressed up as Lee Rigby with a papier mache head in a box?
Or dressed up as Mick Philpott with burned dolls attached to fake ball and chain around my ankle?
What's the actual point?
Who's laughing?
And why?
sp1814 - an excellent point.
Obviously people's boundaries of acceptability vary, but, as i pointed out, there are some cultural touchstones that really don't lend themselves to humour, and I believe that 911 is one of them.
i am happy to accept that other people think the inventiveness of these costumes deserved a prize, however inappropriate I may feel that to be.
What i cannot swallow is the ludicrous back-pedalling taking place where some people are trying to pass this off as serious socio-political comment.
I was born at night - but it wasn't last night!!!
Obviously people's boundaries of acceptability vary, but, as i pointed out, there are some cultural touchstones that really don't lend themselves to humour, and I believe that 911 is one of them.
i am happy to accept that other people think the inventiveness of these costumes deserved a prize, however inappropriate I may feel that to be.
What i cannot swallow is the ludicrous back-pedalling taking place where some people are trying to pass this off as serious socio-political comment.
I was born at night - but it wasn't last night!!!
I agree with andy and sp1814 on this. It's distasteful.
All this guff about highlighting a 'serious modern day horror' is just nonsnse to try and mitigate what was clearly an error of judgement.
They're not artists attempting to make a serious point about man's inhumanity to man. Neither are they mocking or criticising anything. It's just a couple of girls who wanted an original and 'fun' idea to go to a halloween fancy dress party as a pair.
jno's point is reasonable. The way we look at things does change with time, and it's easy to make light of the Norman and Roman invasions, and Vikings raping and pillaging - horrific as it must have been at the time.
However, this was 12 years ago, not 1,000. The people who died have living friends and relatives. The wars that resulted are still ongoing. It's too soon.
Let's not make more or less out of it than it is though. A couple of thoughtless girls did a stupid thing. Then the Sun got hold of it and now they look like a right pair of planks all over the front page.
All this guff about highlighting a 'serious modern day horror' is just nonsnse to try and mitigate what was clearly an error of judgement.
They're not artists attempting to make a serious point about man's inhumanity to man. Neither are they mocking or criticising anything. It's just a couple of girls who wanted an original and 'fun' idea to go to a halloween fancy dress party as a pair.
jno's point is reasonable. The way we look at things does change with time, and it's easy to make light of the Norman and Roman invasions, and Vikings raping and pillaging - horrific as it must have been at the time.
However, this was 12 years ago, not 1,000. The people who died have living friends and relatives. The wars that resulted are still ongoing. It's too soon.
Let's not make more or less out of it than it is though. A couple of thoughtless girls did a stupid thing. Then the Sun got hold of it and now they look like a right pair of planks all over the front page.
