If Trey Parker and Matt Stone make a South Park episode about how Hillary is just as bad as Trump and everyone who wants to vote in this election is a goddamn liberal, do you think Tumblr will decide to suddenly like them?
If Trey Parker and Matt Stone make a South Park episode about how Hillary is just as bad as Trump and everyone who wants to vote in this election is a goddamn liberal, do you think Tumblr will decide to suddenly like them?
the only thing i got out of this post is 'south park is bad' and i agree wit hthat statement
If Trey Parker and Matt Stone make a South Park episode about how Hillary is just as bad as Trump and everyone who wants to vote in this election is a goddamn liberal, do you think Tumblr will decide to suddenly like them?
Probably.
There is nothing short of recanting-and-donating-all-their-money-to-the-homeless-and-then-spending-the-rest-of-their-lives-visiting-the-elderly-and-teaching-children-to-read-and-feeding-orphans-and-doing-good-to-all-men that would make me decide to like them.
I don't really mind this song, but there's a part of me that says it's my absolute least favorite kind of thing and that I hate it so MUCH this is the sonic equivalent of a manbun I HATE IT
* adults and children, for a variety of reasons, have different emotional and intellectual priorities
* as of late, there have been people who have claimed that this is not so. these people are incorrect.
* judging Harry Potter solely from an adult perspective is short-sighted
However, Mr. deBoer, in his haste to use this most recent Harry Potter installment media to engage in thinkpiece-esque hand-wringing over the immaturity of those dang nerd millennial kids these days, has overlooked some rather key facts.
* the fact that a piece of media can have multiple intended meanings doesnt merely mean that you can look at something from multiple perspectives, it also means that it can have multiple intended reference points. Think about it: as a kid, how often did you end up engaging in media without one of your parents? Whether it was your mom reading to you, going to see a movie with the whole family, ect. all of these things were made with both you and them in mind. Hell, back in the day when you went to the movie store, there were shelves of "family" films. Now, i'm not saying that every piece of kids media has some degree of adult aim (look at any number of the bajillions of toyetic 80s cartoons, or yu-gi-oh, or whatever), but something like Harry Potter does to some degree tackle issues in a manner adult people can engage in. Not to the degree that say a Toni Morrison novel does, but it certainly is more engaging on that front than most ostensibly adult-oriented mass-market paperbacks you find at the supermarket (which are the books that most people read, despite what internet pundits would have you believe), and in a manner that is in no way a detriment to its functioning as a children's novel.
* The first Harry Potter book came out in 1997. If someone was 7 or 8 when they picked that up, they'd be almost 30. And throughout the series, I'd say JK Rowling did her best to aim each installment so that it would appeal to the original fanbase, while remaining accessible to new readers in that older child/young teen age group (and as you all know I would generally say that she fell short in this regard, but that is a thing for another post). So, as someone with no knowledge of whatever the new Harry Potter thing is beyond "it's a play", I would feel safe in assuming that it would be a thing that would try to appeal to adult audiences to no small degree.
This last point here is a more subjective one, but I do feel that this gap between the things that appeal to children and the things that appeal to adults is oftentimes overstated. While the things I like now and the things i liked then are indeed distinct from one another, they share a robust familiarity, and child me would readily understand why i like the things i like now, even if the would not grasp their nuance.
TL;DR: the post willfully overlooks the way that childrens media, and the Harry Potter franchise in particular, works in order to do Sick Internet Dunkz on Cultural Degeneracy
also i'll note that whoever he's complaining about is probably annoying and i dont blame him wrt being annoyed, it's his reach in attempt to link this to a thinkpiece-constructed paradigm that kills it
* adults and children, for a variety of reasons, have different emotional and intellectual priorities
* as of late, there have been people who have claimed that this is not so. these people are incorrect.
* judging Harry Potter solely from an adult perspective is short-sighted
However, Mr. deBoer, in his haste to use this most recent Harry Potter installment media to engage in thinkpiece-esque hand-wringing over the immaturity of those dang nerd millennial kids these days, has overlooked some rather key facts.
* the fact that a piece of media can have multiple intended meanings doesnt merely mean that you can look at something from multiple perspectives, it also means that it can have multiple intended reference points. Think about it: as a kid, how often did you end up engaging in media without one of your parents? Whether it was your mom reading to you, going to see a movie with the whole family, ect. all of these things were made with both you and them in mind. Hell, back in the day when you went to the movie store, there were shelves of "family" films. Now, i'm not saying that every piece of kids media has some degree of adult aim (look at any number of the bajillions of toyetic 80s cartoons, or yu-gi-oh, or whatever), but something like Harry Potter does to some degree tackle issues in a manner adult people can engage in. Not to the degree that say a Toni Morrison novel does, but it certainly is more engaging on that front than most ostensibly adult-oriented mass-market paperbacks you find at the supermarket (which are the books that most people read, despite what internet pundits would have you believe), and in a manner that is in no way a detriment to its functioning as a children's novel.
* The first Harry Potter book came out in 1997. If someone was 7 or 8 when they picked that up, they'd be almost 30. And throughout the series, I'd say JK Rowling did her best to aim each installment so that it would appeal to the original fanbase, while remaining accessible to new readers in that older child/young teen age group (and as you all know I would generally say that she fell short in this regard, but that is a thing for another post). So, as someone with no knowledge of whatever the new Harry Potter thing is beyond "it's a play", I would feel safe in assuming that it would be a thing that would try to appeal to adult audiences to no small degree.
This last point here is a more subjective one, but I do feel that this gap between the things that appeal to children and the things that appeal to adults is oftentimes overstated. While the things I like now and the things i liked then are indeed distinct from one another, they share a robust familiarity, and child me would readily understand why i like the things i like now, even if the would not grasp their nuance.
TL;DR: the post willfully overlooks the way that childrens media, and the Harry Potter franchise in particular, works in order to do Sick Internet Dunkz on Cultural Degeneracy
i put too much effort into this to let it pagebottom honestly
I've actually been reading the book (play, whatever) and I'm with you on the whole "this one is more of an adult thing" idea.
If anything, the reception being lackluster is probably the culprit of the medium -- being a play, there isn't nearly as much room for the prose and description that made the original books what they were. It's more talky than the other ones, which is great if you're able to see it live, but feels wrong on the page. (I think this same issue is why watching Shakespeare is so much more enjoyable than reading him.)
kill kill kill kill kill. rip them apart. break open a hole and trip out your gray matter and push that into the rest of the skull so so so so so so fake diuresis invigorates death the death the death the powder fare death death fare death powder diuresis disable negative disable negative negative death death kill kill. kill them. kill them. rot
Comments
Pewdiepie is alright.
I don't like his videos but he seems All Right
https://heapershangout.com/index.php?p=/discussion/12266/my-father-woke-me-in-the-dead-of-night
He was catte.
Amen.
cardboard boxes
If anything, the reception being lackluster is probably the culprit of the medium -- being a play, there isn't nearly as much room for the prose and description that made the original books what they were. It's more talky than the other ones, which is great if you're able to see it live, but feels wrong on the page. (I think this same issue is why watching Shakespeare is so much more enjoyable than reading him.)