The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

A place to discuss politics and things related to Govts
Post Reply
Message
Author
PHXPhlyer
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 8335
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 2:56 pm
Location: PHX
Gender:
Age: 69

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#121 Post by PHXPhlyer » Thu Dec 24, 2020 3:29 pm

barkingmad wrote:
Thu Dec 24, 2020 8:07 am

Am I allowed to wish everyone a Happy Christmas, or is that racist and religiously biased against minorities?! :-s
Thanks to free speech there's nothing stopping you or any of us,
So:
Merry Christmas
Happy Hanukkah
Merry Kwanzaa
Happy Holidays
Festivus for the rest of us
A belated Happy Solstice to the Druids and whomever else.

PP
:YMAPPLAUSE: ^:)^ :YMHUG: :YMPARTY:

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#122 Post by barkingmad » Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:24 am

More on free speech from the land of freedom, democracy, cupcakes and good old mom’s apple pie;

Here is the tragic story of a young American girl who lost her college place when a vengeful classmate released an embarrassing SnapChat video she’d posted when she was 15 in which she used a racial epithet. The New York Times has more;

“Jimmy Galligan was in history class last school year when his phone buzzed with a message. Once he clicked on it, he found a three-second video of a white classmate looking into the camera and uttering an anti-Black racial slur.

The slur, he said, was regularly hurled in classrooms and hallways throughout his years in the Loudoun County school district. He had brought the issue up to teachers and administrators but, much to his anger and frustration, his complaints had gone nowhere.

So he held on to the video, which was sent to him by a friend, and made a decision that would ricochet across Leesburg, Va., a town named for an ancestor of the Confederate general Robert E. Lee and whose school system had fought an order to desegregate for more than a decade after the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling.

“I wanted to get her where she would understand the severity of that word,” Mr. Galligan, 18, whose mother is Black and father is white, said of the classmate who uttered the slur, Mimi Groves. He tucked the video away, deciding to post it publicly when the time was right.

Ms. Groves had originally sent the video, in which she looked into the camera and said, “I can drive,” followed by the slur, to a friend on Snapchat in 2016, when she was a freshman and had just gotten her learner’s permit. It later circulated among some students at Heritage High School, which she and Mr. Galligan attended, but did not cause much of a stir.

Mr. Galligan had not seen the video before receiving it last school year, when he and Ms. Groves were seniors. By then, she was a varsity cheer captain who dreamed of attending the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, whose cheer team was the reigning national champion. When she made the team in May, her parents celebrated with a cake and orange balloons, the university’s official colour.

The next month, as protests were sweeping the nation after the police killing of George Floyd, Ms. Groves, in a public Instagram post, urged people to “protest, donate, sign a petition, rally, do something” in support of the Black Lives Matter movement.

“You have the audacity to post this, after saying the N-word,” responded someone whom Ms. Groves said she did not know.

Her alarm at the stranger’s comment turned to panic as friends began calling, directing her to the source of a brewing social media furor. Mr. Galligan, who had waited until Ms. Groves had chosen a college, had publicly posted the video that afternoon. Within hours, it had been shared to Snapchat, TikTok and Twitter, where furious calls mounted for the University of Tennessee to revoke its admission offer.

By that June evening, about a week after Mr. Floyd’s killing, teenagers across the country had begun leveraging social media to call out their peers for racist behavior. Some students set up anonymous pages on Instagram devoted to holding classmates accountable, including in Loudoun County.

The consequences were swift. Over the next two days, Ms. Groves was removed from the university’s cheer team. She then withdrew from the school under pressure from admissions officials, who told her they had received hundreds of emails and phone calls from outraged alumni, students and the public”.

This is an appalling story, revealing just how petty and spiteful the woke can be. Worth reading in full – although bear in mind that the New York Times calls what happened to this teenage girl “a reckoning”, as though she got her just deserts. Chilling. [-X

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#123 Post by barkingmad » Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:06 am

More from you know where?

Here is the list of naughty words proscribed by the University of Michigan, expect things to become even more insane under the watchful eyes of Biden/Harris;

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... nsive.html

Good news: the inmates are running the asylum.

Bad news: they’ve also got the keys to the pharmacy!

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#124 Post by barkingmad » Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:16 am

This brilliant source of essential info lies somewhere between this thread and BLM Bollocks but I’ll place it here so we can understand more clearly WTF THEY are talking about and might even be able to respond in the same language;

“Cultural appropriation.” This adjective-noun phrase must include contextualisation to be an effective tool in the anti-racism effort.

It does not mean, as the ignorant may infer from its dictionary entries, merely “the adoption of an element or elements of one culture or identity by members of another culture or identity.”

Asian Americans do not appropriate “white” or “European” culture by ballet dancing or playing the violin; “whites” or “Europeans” surely do appropriate Asian culture by using non-Asian actors in Japanese kabuki dance-drama.

For non-African Americans, dreadlocks or playing jazz are cultural appropriations; dying darker hair blond is not. A black opera soprano is hardly a cultural appropriationist. Wearing a poncho, if one is a non-Mexican-American citizen, is cultural theft; a Mexican-American citizen wearing a tuxedo is not.

Only a trained cultural appropriationist can determine such felonies through a variety of benchmarks. Usually the crime is defined as appropriation by a victimising majority from a victimised minority. Acceptable appropriation is a victimised minority appropriating from a victimising majority. A secondary exegesis would add that only the theft of the valuable culture of the minority is a felony, while the occasional use of the dross of the majority is not.

“Diversity.” This term does not include false-consciousness efforts to vary representation by class backgrounds, ideologies, age, or politics. In current Wokespeak, it instead refers mostly to race and sex (see “Race, class, and gender”), or in practical terms, a generic 30% of the population self-identified as non-white – or even 70% if inclusive of non-male non-whites.

“Diversity” has relegated “affirmative action” – the older white/black binary that called for reparatory “action” to redress centuries of slavery, Jim Crow, and institutionalized prejudice against African Americans – to the Wokespoke dustbin.

“Diversity” avoids the complications arising out of past actionable grievances, or worries about the overrepresentation or underrepresentation of particular tribes, or the class or wealth of the victimised non-white.

The recalibrated racially and ethnically victimised have grown from 12% to 30% of the population and need not worry whether they might lose advantageous classifications, should their income and net worth approximate or exceed that of the majority oppressive class”.

The full article is available here for those enthusiastic enough to probe further;

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/ ... wokespeak/

What a wonderful way to sign off from your job as a writer?! :YMAPPLAUSE:

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#125 Post by barkingmad » Sat Jan 02, 2021 10:58 am

More ‘woke’ gobbledegook from our cousins west of 30W, who else?
Today, it’s the turn of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has just unveiled some new rules for the next Congressional term: the elimination of gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, and daughter”. Breitbart News has more.

“Within the proposals are the creation of the “Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth”, which would require Congress to “honour all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral”.

In clause 8(c)(3) of rule XXIII, gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, or granddaughter” will be removed.

In their place, terms such as “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, stepsibling, half-sibling, or grandchild” will be used, instead.
Something to look forward to next Christmas: being able to see your “parent’s sibling”, your “sibling’s child” and your “sibling-in-law”. ~X(

PHXPhlyer
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 8335
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 2:56 pm
Location: PHX
Gender:
Age: 69

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#126 Post by PHXPhlyer » Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:10 pm

BM:
Hadn't seen that here yet. :-o :-s :-q
What's next? :-? ~X(

PP

G-CPTN
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 7635
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 11:22 pm
Location: Tynedale
Gender:
Age: 79

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#127 Post by G-CPTN » Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:13 pm

Why is 'first cousin' on the list?

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#128 Post by barkingmad » Sun Jan 03, 2021 11:09 am

Well, 2021 has got off to a great start for the ‘woke’ PC brigade just when we thought there were more important things about which we should worry;

Today, we bring you the reaction of woke viewers to the BBC’s screening of Grease on Boxing Day. The Mail on Sunday has more.

“In the film’s final scenes, student Sandy ditches her good- girl image for skin-tight PVC trousers and takes up smoking so she can impress Danny.

It prompted one outraged Twitter user to write: “Grease is far too sexist and overly white and should be banned from the screen. It is nearly 2021 after all.”

Another furious viewer complained: “Grease sucks on so many levels and the message is pure misogyny.”

A third user agreed, saying: “Grease is just the most sexist piece of s***.”

One scene that caused particular offence to youthful viewers was when Putzie, one of Danny’s friends in the T-Birds gang, positioned himself on the floor to look up the skirts of two female students at the fictional Rydell High School.

Other viewers complained about the lyric “Did she put up a fight?” in the hit song “Summer Nights”, when Danny describes seducing Sandy.

“So turns out Grease is actually pretty rapey,” wrote one aghast viewer, while another said: “Misogynistic, sexist and a bit rapey.”

Sensitive viewers also targeted female characters for criticism.

Rizzo was accused of being a bully when she ridiculed Sandy’s good-girl image as she sang “Look At Me I’m Sandra D” in front of her friends in the Pink Ladies gang at a slumber party.

Others were angry that Rizzo was ‘slut-shamed’ for sleeping with various men, particularly when she had sex with T-Bird Kenickie without a condom.

After thinking she might be pregnant, Rizzo was ostracised, prompting the character, as played by Stockard Channing, to sing about the reaction: “There are worse things I could do than go with a boy or two.”

The ‘snowflakes’ were also unimpressed with Vince Fontaine, the radio announcer who hosted the dance-off at Rydell High.

As the character flirted with Pink Lady Marty, he told all dancers that there were no same-sex couples.

The film is, after all, set in 1958 – 45 years before homosexuality was universally decriminalised across the United States.

Nevertheless, the glaring lack of LGBT awareness angered one young Twitter user, who complained: “All couples must be boy/girl? Well Grease, shove your homophobia.”

Another simply wrote: “Grease peak of homophobia.”

The lack of non-white faces in the cast angered some.

One went so far as to question the broadcaster’s decision to air the film and expressed surprise that it was shown without a disclaimer.

One viewer wrote: “I caught the end of Grease, the movie, and noticed there were no black actors or pupils at the high school.”

Another added: “Watched Grease on the BBC, surprised they let it go, full of white people.”

On and on it goes. It’s just as well the BBC didn’t show Zulu instead. ~X(

I’m sure at the end of one of the Peter Cooke/Dudley Moore shows, the comment was made regarding children: “What vile beelezebub(s) have we spawned in our moment of pleasure?!” but alas I’m unable to locate the sketch. Maybe I made it up, but I doubt that.

User avatar
TheGreenGoblin
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 17596
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2019 11:02 pm
Location: With the Water People near Trappist-1

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#129 Post by TheGreenGoblin » Sun Jan 03, 2021 11:19 am

PC blah... Covid wah..., outraged... bleh... woke meh...

Gibber, gibber...

bm, two tickets to nowhere on the outrage bus... :p

Though you remain
Convinced
"To be alive
You must have somewhere
To go
Your destination remains
Elusive."

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#130 Post by barkingmad » Sun Jan 03, 2021 1:29 pm

Now Prof Karl Sikora is feeling the full broadside of cancel-culture from the meeja, as this leak from the Branch Covidians relates;

Owen Jones launched a vicious attack on Professor Karol Sikora in the Guardian a couple of days ago. His sin? To be a lockdown sceptic. That’s “dangerous”, according to Jones, who has been an enthusiast for placing the entire country under house arrest since March.

The rebuttal from the Branch is as follows;

"It isn’t only COVID-19 that is mutating. So is cancel culture. This nasty strain of censorship is spreading, intensifying, becoming ever-more poisonous and harmful to the body politic. The more coronavirus spreads, the more the virus of cancellation spreads too, with packs of censors and neo-Stalinists now demanding the silencing and punishment of anybody who deviates even slightly from the consensus on COVID-19. Just consider the current efforts to destroy the reputation of Karol Sikora.

Professor Sikora is the cancer expert who has been questioning the Covid consensus for the past few months. He has queried the need for harsh lockdowns and kicked up a necessary fuss over the NHS’s suspension of various forms of medical treatment, including for cancer. In the fog of fear about COVID-19, Sikora has shone a light of hope. We’ll get through it, he says. Don’t live in dread, he counsels. Let normal life, and normal medical treatment, continue as much as possible, he’s advised. Has he always been right? Of course not. Show me the man who has. He suggested there wouldn’t be a second wave. In May he said that, come August, things will be ‘virtually back to normal’. That was wrong. String him up! Get out your rotten tomatoes. Pelt this speechcriminal who made a prediction that was not correct.

For the supposed crime of not being entirely right about the course coronavirus would take, Professor Sikora is now public enemy No1 in the eyes of the lockdown fanatics. Leading the mob, as is so often the case these days, is Guardian columnist Owen Jones. From the very start of the Covid crisis, Mr Jones, like many other privileged millennial leftists, has relished the authoritarianism of the lockdown. In March he expressed delight at being ‘placed under house arrest along with millions of people under a police state by a right-wing Tory government’. Yes, if you are well-off, middle class, capable of working from home and cancer-free, lockdown was probably a riot. For other people, however, it wasn’t. Professor Sikora’s chief sin was to express this truth – to say that lockdown will exact a wicked toll on many people – and now privileged beneficiaries of lockdown like Mr Jones are out to destroy him for it.

Dissent is always good; but in an era of unprecedented authoritarianism it becomes essential. When officialdom assumes control over every aspect of our lives – our social lives, our family lives, whether we can go to work, even whether we can leave the house – then it is absolutely right to question things, constantly, unflinchingly. No one should ever feel comfortable with the suspension of freedom. They should be talking about it and challenging it every hour of every day. Whether their challenges are ‘correct’ or ‘incorrect’ is not the most important thing here – the most important thing is that we maintain a culture of criticism in response to the most extraordinary climate of authoritarianism any of us has ever experienced.

Dogma is the enemy of progress. Dissent – however irritating the police, the government and the Guardian might find it – is the guarantor of progress. It is the means through which all of us, including society more broadly, entertain the possibility that we are wrong. That lockdown is a mistake, that giving teenagers puberty-blockers is an error, that the Earth is not in fact at the centre of the solar system. Dogma protects even immoral policies and incorrect thinking from criticism by demonising dissenters; dissent, on the other hand, helps to shine a light on the wrongness of certain political strategies or ideological beliefs by encouraging criticism and scrutiny. Even where dissenters are wrong, factually, the climate they help to create is of enormous benefit to society and to mankind.

We must defend freedom of speech in this crisis. Our lives are locked down – and many people accept that as a temporary measure – but our minds should never be locked down. Free thought and free speech are the great guards – our only guards, in fact – against the ossification of public debate and the creation of new, potentially damaging orthodoxies and policies. If we allow free thinking to die alongside the economy, millions of people’s jobs and those cancer patients who were neglected for months on end, then society will be the poorer for a very, very long time. So carry on, Positive Professor. Dissent is now the duty of every individual who wants to ensure that freedom is still breathing when this cursed lockdown is lifted".

My question to O-N members is, do you agree with this assessment of the dark road down which we are being forced or do you whole-heartedly concur with 'guvvment guidelines, rules and laws' on the topic??? :-? :-w

User avatar
ian16th
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 10029
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 9:35 am
Location: KZN South Coast with the bananas
Gender:
Age: 87

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#131 Post by ian16th » Sun Jan 03, 2021 2:48 pm

Professor Sikora is the cancer expert
Is he losing fees because he isn't working?

If so, this is a biased/self interest opinion.
Cynicism improves with age

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#132 Post by barkingmad » Sun Jan 03, 2021 4:37 pm

Alternative lyrics to post # 129 melody;

Ooh dear, what can the matter be
What can have happened to poor Lady Chatterly
She and her lover got locked in the lavatory
Nobody knew they were there...

A golden oldie from my skule days daze!

User avatar
TheGreenGoblin
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 17596
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2019 11:02 pm
Location: With the Water People near Trappist-1

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#133 Post by TheGreenGoblin » Sun Jan 03, 2021 4:45 pm

barkingmad wrote:
Sun Jan 03, 2021 4:37 pm
Alternative lyrics to post # 129 melody;

Ooh dear, what can the matter be
What can have happened to poor Lady Chatterly
She and her lover got locked in the lavatory
Nobody knew they were there...

A golden oldie from my skule days daze!
D H Lawrence would not have been amused. Free love, not free speech bm! [-( =)) ;)))
Though you remain
Convinced
"To be alive
You must have somewhere
To go
Your destination remains
Elusive."

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#134 Post by barkingmad » Sun Jan 03, 2021 4:53 pm

TGG sez: "Free love, not free speech bm!"

I'm all for both, but at present nil experience of either vice. Perhaps you could direct me to the nirvana where they exist, at a reasonable price and timescale, but preferably somewhere in the Solar System?

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#135 Post by barkingmad » Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:00 am

Oh FFS, it gets worse! This one popped up and was reported by a Branch Covidian out on watch for infected particles;

Today, we bring you the news that The Merchant of Venice is a bit too much for Michael Morpurgo’s new book Tales from Shakespeare. The Sunday Times has the story.

Sir Michael Morpurgo is refusing to include The Merchant of Venice in a new children’s book based on Shakespeare’s plays because of its “antisemitic” and “offensive” attitudes.

Morpurgo, 77, who was knighted in 2018 for his services to literature and charity, admits his 21st-century sensibilities also grappled with male “bullying” towards women in The Taming of the Shrew, and the “little Englander” prejudices against the French in Henry V.

The War Horse author is retelling and modernising the stories of 10 Shakespeare plays for children aged from six to 18 in a book called Tales from Shakespeare, which will be published next year. His aim is to ensure that a generation of youngsters “switched off” Shakespeare, because they are drilled and crammed on compulsory texts for exams, grow up to love his stories.

The list of plays includes staples of the school syllabus such as Romeo and Juliet, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, King Lear, The Taming of the Shrew and Macbeth. But Morpurgo said that when he reread Shakespeare’s plays last year he decided he could not “honestly” retell the story of The Merchant of Venice, even though the play appears on A-level syllabuses.

“I did not tackle Shylock. I avoided [the play] because it worried me too much if I am honest about it… there are assumptions right the way through about what it is to be a Jew, and how Jews are thought of, which are so important for our society that, for me, it was best not to go there,” he explained.

“The play can be antisemitic… I did feel this was Shakespeare’s play and I could not tell it honestly. It would be offensive.”

Morpurgo’s squeamishness about Shakespeare is not unique. His Tales from Shakespeare is intended as a modern version of Charles and Mary Lamb’s Tales from Shakespeare (1807), which he said “children used to grow up with” before they were old enough to appreciate Shakespeare in the original.

The Lambs rewrote the works for children, leaving out the bawdy and sexual aspects, among other things.

Thomas Bowdler also edited the plays in 1807 as The Family Shakespeare, to make them acceptable for women and children. It is from his acts of excision that we get the verb “bowdlerise”.

Chris McGovern, chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, said: “This is the dead hand of political correctness. It is cowardly not to face up to great literature. Of course there is going to be plenty to be offended by in Shakespeare, as well as in the Bible and the Quran. Children do not want to be protected all the time against great literature.”

At least if children discover that what they’ve been given is censored it might just encourage them to reach for the unexpurgated originals.

Apparently “War Horse” was a brilliant piece of literature and theatre but it would appear Mr M has been infected by a serious dose of ‘woke’, for which there is yet no known effective treatment!

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#136 Post by barkingmad » Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:11 am

PHXPhlyer wrote:
Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:10 pm
BM:
Hadn't seen that here yet. :-o :-s :-q
What's next? :-? ~X(

PP
PP here is the link to that item on Pelosi, enjoy reading and Monday’s greetings to you and all west of 30W!

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021 ... use-rules/

P S If one was to refer to one’s dead relation in the ‘wrong’ terms would that be an indictable offence under US law and would the Statute of Limitations apply or not? This one could keep me awake at night...

User avatar
TheGreenGoblin
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 17596
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2019 11:02 pm
Location: With the Water People near Trappist-1

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#137 Post by TheGreenGoblin » Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:13 am

barkingmad wrote:
Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:00 am
Oh FFS, it gets worse! This one popped up and was reported by a Branch Covidian out on watch for infected particles;

Today, we bring you the news that The Merchant of Venice is a bit too much for Michael Morpurgo’s new book Tales from Shakespeare. The Sunday Times has the story.

Sir Michael Morpurgo is refusing to include The Merchant of Venice in a new children’s book based on Shakespeare’s plays because of its “antisemitic” and “offensive” attitudes.

Morpurgo, 77, who was knighted in 2018 for his services to literature and charity, admits his 21st-century sensibilities also grappled with male “bullying” towards women in The Taming of the Shrew, and the “little Englander” prejudices against the French in Henry V.

The War Horse author is retelling and modernising the stories of 10 Shakespeare plays for children aged from six to 18 in a book called Tales from Shakespeare, which will be published next year. His aim is to ensure that a generation of youngsters “switched off” Shakespeare, because they are drilled and crammed on compulsory texts for exams, grow up to love his stories.

The list of plays includes staples of the school syllabus such as Romeo and Juliet, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, King Lear, The Taming of the Shrew and Macbeth. But Morpurgo said that when he reread Shakespeare’s plays last year he decided he could not “honestly” retell the story of The Merchant of Venice, even though the play appears on A-level syllabuses.

“I did not tackle Shylock. I avoided [the play] because it worried me too much if I am honest about it… there are assumptions right the way through about what it is to be a Jew, and how Jews are thought of, which are so important for our society that, for me, it was best not to go there,” he explained.

“The play can be antisemitic… I did feel this was Shakespeare’s play and I could not tell it honestly. It would be offensive.”

Morpurgo’s squeamishness about Shakespeare is not unique. His Tales from Shakespeare is intended as a modern version of Charles and Mary Lamb’s Tales from Shakespeare (1807), which he said “children used to grow up with” before they were old enough to appreciate Shakespeare in the original.

The Lambs rewrote the works for children, leaving out the bawdy and sexual aspects, among other things.

Thomas Bowdler also edited the plays in 1807 as The Family Shakespeare, to make them acceptable for women and children. It is from his acts of excision that we get the verb “bowdlerise”.

Chris McGovern, chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, said: “This is the dead hand of political correctness. It is cowardly not to face up to great literature. Of course there is going to be plenty to be offended by in Shakespeare, as well as in the Bible and the Quran. Children do not want to be protected all the time against great literature.”

At least if children discover that what they’ve been given is censored it might just encourage them to reach for the unexpurgated originals.

Apparently “War Horse” was a brilliant piece of literature and theatre but it would appear Mr M has been infected by a serious dose of ‘woke’, for which there is yet no known effective treatment!
It is fattist too, I mean its primary motif is "a pound of flesh!" =))

I am apt to agree with bm. Totally pathetic... shame on Morpurgo...
Though you remain
Convinced
"To be alive
You must have somewhere
To go
Your destination remains
Elusive."

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#138 Post by barkingmad » Tue Jan 05, 2021 12:21 pm

More 'woke' PC bollocks from the Land of the Free;



You couldn't make it up for a political satire program?!

User avatar
TheGreenGoblin
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 17596
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2019 11:02 pm
Location: With the Water People near Trappist-1

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#139 Post by TheGreenGoblin » Tue Jan 05, 2021 12:30 pm

TheGreenGoblin wrote:
Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:13 am
barkingmad wrote:
Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:00 am
Oh FFS, it gets worse! This one popped up and was reported by a Branch Covidian out on watch for infected particles;

It is fattist too, I mean its primary motif is "a pound of flesh!" =))

I am apt to agree with bm. Totally pathetic... shame on Morpurgo...
It seems I didn't fully understand the basis of Morpurgo's actions... a case of "The Daily Wail" misguiding the unwary and the perpetually aggrieved again... I should have known better.
Morpurgo said the book, which will be published next year and was only intended to include 10 of Shakespeare’s plays, was focused on plays that had “very strong storylines, and plays that children would be most likely to see at the theatre or study at school”. Starting on 8 January, performances of his retellings by the Royal Shakespeare Company will be made available to schools around the UK for free for five weeks.

“There are certain plays, and The Merchant of Venice is one of them, that I believed would not resonate with eight-year-olds. Yes, there was some worry that this might be the first time an eight-year-old reads about a Jew. A story that the Nazis used to portray Jewish people in a bad light – that is not something you put in front of an eight-year-old as their first example of an extraordinary group that has contributed so much to the world and suffered so much,” he said. “Now, that is not to say the play does not have merit. But this is not censorship, children will come to this play later, when they’ll have some sense of what Jewish people have endured over centuries.”

“The point of this project is to bring Shakespeare to the eyes, ears and hearts of children in our time,” said Morpurgo, who grew up reading Charles and Mary Lamb’s retellings, also titled Tales from Shakespeare, which was published in 1807. “You have a writer and the RSC trying to encourage children to go to the theatre - I fail to see how that is offensive or censorship.”
Morpurgo responds...

Sorry Mr Morpurgo, I withdraw my previous comment
Though you remain
Convinced
"To be alive
You must have somewhere
To go
Your destination remains
Elusive."

User avatar
barkingmad
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:13 pm
Location: Another Planet
Gender:
Age: 75

Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?

#140 Post by barkingmad » Tue Jan 05, 2021 12:56 pm

TGG sez: "It seems I didn't fully understand the basis of Morpurgo's actions... a case of "The Daily Wail" misguiding the unwary and the perpetually aggrieved again... I should have known better."

I'm sure I saw the 'Sunday Times' mentioned in Morpurgo's response, or have I misread the article in the Grauniad as per your reference?

Meanwhile, closer to home, the following slipped under most radars which were full of screen clutter from Christmas tinsel, an excellent form of WW2 "Window" when trying to bury unwelcome news;

20 DECEMBER 2020
by The Free Speech Union, Organiser
The Free Speech Union's barrister had an opportunity to put our case to a High Court judge on December 9th, but our application to judicially review Ofcom's 'coronavirus guidance' was denied.

We have decided not to appeal because Ofcom has conceded most of the points we were seeking to make. Since we brought this case, the regulator hasn't censured any more broadcasters for challenging the official Covid narrative, and at the High Court hearing Ofcom’s barrister assured the judge that it would no longer penalise its licensees for broadcasting material that undermined public confidence in the advice being disseminated by the UK Government or the public health authorities in connection with Covid-19 apart from in truly exceptional circumstances, such as if a broadcaster advised viewers to drink bleach to protect themselves from infection.

While the judge denied us permission to proceed, he praised the Free Speech Union for bringing the case. “The claimants are quite right to emphasise the importance of freedom of expression,” he said.

How much skill is required to convert a face nappy into a gag?

Post Reply