Dirty Cancer Rat
Dec. 1st, 2006 08:52 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
talktoolooseAfter going over it from every angle, it's impossible to interpret last night's excoriation of Jonathan on Survivor as anything other than anti-semitism.
Bad mouthing people in Survivor is normal, especially when, as it happened last week, an alliance that thought they were in control is suddenly reduced into underdogs. But the level of hatred and, in particular, the language used was notable. Jonathan's behaviour made Parvati "nauseous". She said it over and over again how she wanted to "throw up in his face". Then he was called "dirty rat" and finally a "cancer". The invective being thrown at him during tribal council was horrendous and the former Raro members on the jury were eating it up as if finally the ultimate evil had been exposed for what it is. The words used and the tone of them looked like nothing more than Nazi propoganda -- the Jew is the thing the thing that must be cut out for the good of the society. In fact, the remaining Raro three were talking about willingly being sacrificed if this cancer could be cut out first.
Compare Jonathan's behaviour with that of Candice. Jonathan feeds his tribe dilligently. He's a player, but he's also pretty straightforward in his dealings. Candice, on the other hand, turned on Jonathan behind his back the minute he made an alliance with her and, after Jonathan fucked himself over by joining her in the mutiny to support this alliance, immediately tried to blacken his name within the new tribe.
I identify with Jonathan (for some obvious reasons). I have a large personality that overwhelms some people (I can't have a conversation with![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
mentalmakeup without being told to stop interrupting at least twice). There are some people who just can't stand me (she's not one of them; that was just a handy example) and the level of their anger always catches me totally off guard. Like Jonathan, I perceive myself as mainly kind and giving.
Like me, Jonathan makes social miscues as he did during and after he dominated the food auction. He was perceived as being too greedy and arrogant about having won. In fact, his behaviour is no more aggressive and competitive than Jenny, Candice, Yul or Ozzy but the perception is that he is a DIRTY CANCER RAT.
I think the level of hatred finally made Yul sit up and notice that something was morally off and led to Aitu supporting Jonathan in the vote. But man, it was hard to watch and I applaud Jonathan for his restraint.
Part of me wanted him to name the anti-semitism for what it was, but in our culture which denies the existence of racism, classism, etc., you have to be very careful about saying things like that lest they boomerang back on you and you get called paranoid.
That is why we love jumping on people who use the wrong WORDS! Nigger! Kike! Fag! We can't really go after any underlying systemic hatred so we glom onto words. The whole Michael Richards scandal is moronic. An insecure comic gets heckled and calls the hecklers "niggers" as he has his onstage meltdown. This was some pretty bad judgement, but I believe him when he says, "I'm so sorry; I was upset and I didn't know where that came from." But NO! Jesse Jackson is on a campaign against him and against any use of THE WORD!
Change the words all you like, PC police; until we can look inside ourselves and recognize our own prejudices, we are not really acting for justice. It's not a horrible thing to harbour feelings of misogyny, homophobia, racism, etc. These are the cultural baggage of centuries and they are woven into the fabric of our society. It's really a question of whether we are willing to accept that we aren't WONDERFUL, PERFECT, NIIIIIIIICE BEINGS all the time. Because unless we accept that, we can't really act responsibly and make decisions that lead to justice and love.
We are racists. The question is whether we are going to act on these feelings or oppose them.
Bad mouthing people in Survivor is normal, especially when, as it happened last week, an alliance that thought they were in control is suddenly reduced into underdogs. But the level of hatred and, in particular, the language used was notable. Jonathan's behaviour made Parvati "nauseous". She said it over and over again how she wanted to "throw up in his face". Then he was called "dirty rat" and finally a "cancer". The invective being thrown at him during tribal council was horrendous and the former Raro members on the jury were eating it up as if finally the ultimate evil had been exposed for what it is. The words used and the tone of them looked like nothing more than Nazi propoganda -- the Jew is the thing the thing that must be cut out for the good of the society. In fact, the remaining Raro three were talking about willingly being sacrificed if this cancer could be cut out first.
Compare Jonathan's behaviour with that of Candice. Jonathan feeds his tribe dilligently. He's a player, but he's also pretty straightforward in his dealings. Candice, on the other hand, turned on Jonathan behind his back the minute he made an alliance with her and, after Jonathan fucked himself over by joining her in the mutiny to support this alliance, immediately tried to blacken his name within the new tribe.
I identify with Jonathan (for some obvious reasons). I have a large personality that overwhelms some people (I can't have a conversation with
mentalmakeup without being told to stop interrupting at least twice). There are some people who just can't stand me (she's not one of them; that was just a handy example) and the level of their anger always catches me totally off guard. Like Jonathan, I perceive myself as mainly kind and giving. Like me, Jonathan makes social miscues as he did during and after he dominated the food auction. He was perceived as being too greedy and arrogant about having won. In fact, his behaviour is no more aggressive and competitive than Jenny, Candice, Yul or Ozzy but the perception is that he is a DIRTY CANCER RAT.
I think the level of hatred finally made Yul sit up and notice that something was morally off and led to Aitu supporting Jonathan in the vote. But man, it was hard to watch and I applaud Jonathan for his restraint.
Part of me wanted him to name the anti-semitism for what it was, but in our culture which denies the existence of racism, classism, etc., you have to be very careful about saying things like that lest they boomerang back on you and you get called paranoid.
That is why we love jumping on people who use the wrong WORDS! Nigger! Kike! Fag! We can't really go after any underlying systemic hatred so we glom onto words. The whole Michael Richards scandal is moronic. An insecure comic gets heckled and calls the hecklers "niggers" as he has his onstage meltdown. This was some pretty bad judgement, but I believe him when he says, "I'm so sorry; I was upset and I didn't know where that came from." But NO! Jesse Jackson is on a campaign against him and against any use of THE WORD!
Change the words all you like, PC police; until we can look inside ourselves and recognize our own prejudices, we are not really acting for justice. It's not a horrible thing to harbour feelings of misogyny, homophobia, racism, etc. These are the cultural baggage of centuries and they are woven into the fabric of our society. It's really a question of whether we are willing to accept that we aren't WONDERFUL, PERFECT, NIIIIIIIICE BEINGS all the time. Because unless we accept that, we can't really act responsibly and make decisions that lead to justice and love.
We are racists. The question is whether we are going to act on these feelings or oppose them.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 02:53 pm (UTC)Also it would be unfair of me not to point out that I have a thing about being interrupted since days of yore. That is just one of the many dynamics that keeps our friendship so goshdarned exciting.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 02:59 pm (UTC)I have the episode taped if you want to see it. You should see it especially to watch Yul squirming when Candice confronts him about Jonathan. Yul does not know how not to be NICE. It's an interesting season and I'm glad you're watching! More intelligent players on the whole and the race thing at the beginning has actually played out in rather subtle ways.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 03:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 03:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 03:05 pm (UTC)He is the true stealth player at this moment. The biggest threat.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 03:08 pm (UTC)I don't think he's all that stealth. The others know he's a threat, they have from the start.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 03:10 pm (UTC)Jonathan actually has the longest IMDB entry with lots of bit parts on TV and a bunch of writing and producing.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 03:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 03:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-01 03:18 pm (UTC)UNreality bullshit
Date: 2006-12-02 06:07 pm (UTC)The people who are on these reality shows are probably coached and probably "open scripted" which means they are told the outlines of the conversations and positions they should take in each episode. Even if they are voted off, I think they are ALL paid off a pretty large amount. And I think the grand prize at the end is a total ruse.
These kinds of shows are a copy of what has been being broadcast in Japan for decades and it is common knowledge over there that they are staged. I think that North American TV is no different.
Anyway, this week, it was probably time to pick on "the jew", in the next few weeks it will be "the gay". Every so often this is likely scripted to get the audience riled and then then watercooler conversations and the bloggers going :) But we're just being played by TV corporations - for ratings - and to be distracted from things like the Iraq War.
In effect, I think all of these (non)reality shows are a TOTAL bullshit from REAL reality!
I don't forgive Michael Richard's "meltdown". He is a public figure and he was being paid a LOT of money to do this act. While all of us harbour internalized racism etc, it is INexcusable to show it on the job and we MUST have control of our actions and expressions on the job in a public capacity. If we lose that control, we lose the gig. That's it. Had it been me in the classroom, I would have been fired. Being an entertainer doesn't make it any less important.
But it is nothing compared to the killing of hundreds of Iraqi citizens last week and it should be an insignificant blip on the radar compared to that BUT...American racism is sexier for the ratings...
Jessie Jackson should launch a campaign against all the back gangsta rappers as well if he is going to go after this one guy. What he should really be concentrating his energy on is pushing for the ending the Iraq occupation by his US government and comparing it to past imperialist colonization of Africa...but he too is caught up in the UNreality bullshit of the American Culture Wars.
A famous Jewish man (Lou Reed) once said something like this:
"Some landlord is laughing until they piss their pants".
CODY
Re: UNreality bullshit
Date: 2006-12-03 03:54 am (UTC)I disagree with you about Michael Richards. The entire basis of his popularity... the reason he was catapulted to $1000000 a week fame was because he was a crazy, out-of-control character. Uta Hagen says we expect actors to get up onstage and open their deepest emotions to us and then we lambaste them for not being closed and conservative offstage.
HE FUCKED UP! PEOPLE DO THAT! And in the past, their wasn't portable video and instant Youtube uploading to catch us all at our worst.
Good point about Jesse Jackson and Gangsta rappers, btw.
When working - gotta be professional not egotistical
Date: 2006-12-03 10:42 pm (UTC)This is not about an artist having the freedom to be gregarious and real; it is about a famous guy being a complete asshole to an audience on PURPOSE because his EGO couldn't take that his audience TALKED through part of his show.
This same thing happened to me at Numbers three weeks ago. People screamed and laughed all through my set. One guy heckled me as a "dyke in a fag's body". So did I start calling my audience a bunch of shallow fags with their fag hags straight chicks in tow who didn't like anything other than club music? Though the thought went through my MIND, I managed to keep my mouth SHUT, cut short my set by a song, and gracefully finish.
NOT even getting paid, being an amateur, I still respected that the audience didn't want to hear folk rock tunes, instead they wanted to party, to unwind.
Richards, a well paid, experienced performer, CHOSE to respond not by just walking off stage, not even by just ranting out at his audience about talking; but by attacking his audience because of their RACE.
Richards attitude demonstrates that in that moment he considered his art superior to the needs of his audience to unwind and relax with their friends - that the gig is all about him.
And he clearly gave the message that further, the white famous male performer on the stage is more important than the black audience who came to unwind with their friends in a bar with alcohol.
I don't know if that is enough to say the guy is uniformly racist. It is a pointer in that direction, but I don't know the man; haven't hung out with him, so I wouldn't judge that far. Just like, I know I like women who are friends of gay men and I only think of them as "fag hags" when my ego about trying to play a tune is interrupted by a straight girls screams. :)
But, when an artist is working they HAVE to have professional rather than egotisiical about their art. Being wild and crazy as part of their art or performance has little to do with controlling your pressures as a performer IMO.
I say if this seasoned performer dude can't handle a bad gig by now; without totally denigrating his audience when it goes bad, then he should get the hell off the stage.
Hugs,
Cody