Renowned University of Michigan professor who has taught at the school since 1995 is removed from his post after woke freshman complains about him showing Oscar-nominated acting legend Laurence Olivier in blackface in 1965 film Othello

[TBoneTX 46,331]

If Kommie Harris Jr. thus decrees, so shall it be done.

[laylalex 7,300]

Happy to talk aesthetics in a thread about aesthetics. Where my political leanings are really has nothing to do with it. I'm not the topic of this thread.

 

To repeat: art should be difficult and uncomfortable, and offensiveness and art are bedfellows. If you're rubbing people the wrong way, you might be doing it right. On the other hand, when you don't set out to be provocative and you're accidentally offensive, you might want to think about what you're doing. The professor here wasn't fired or prodded towards retirement -- he stepped away after considering the impact of his decision. I personally think he was wrong, but that's immaterial. He's still teaching. And Olivier's Othello still sucks and everyone should watch the Welles version instead.

 

This isn't a left/right issue, as much as the press seems to want to make it. If everyone is so sure about my political leanings (and wow, I'm flattered! ) you can see mine don't necessarily fit into a stereotype. I think you'd be surprised to see how very many people who align themselves left/center left have very broad ideas of what is patently and unacceptably offensive when it comes to art in comparison to the stereotypically right/center right. Olivier's Othello is turgid and stagey -- why watch something like that when you can have something more supple and watchable? I say this as someone who has watched the film in question -- how many of its casual proponents have? Watch it and draw your own conclusions before saying its a great example of the play. 

[Dashinka 24,933]

5 hours ago, laylalex said:

Happy to talk aesthetics in a thread about aesthetics. Where my political leanings are really has nothing to do with it. I'm not the topic of this thread.

 

To repeat: art should be difficult and uncomfortable, and offensiveness and art are bedfellows. If you're rubbing people the wrong way, you might be doing it right. On the other hand, when you don't set out to be provocative and you're accidentally offensive, you might want to think about what you're doing. The professor here wasn't fired or prodded towards retirement -- he stepped away after considering the impact of his decision. I personally think he was wrong, but that's immaterial. He's still teaching. And Olivier's Othello still sucks and everyone should watch the Welles version instead.

 

This isn't a left/right issue, as much as the press seems to want to make it. If everyone is so sure about my political leanings (and wow, I'm flattered! ) you can see mine don't necessarily fit into a stereotype. I think you'd be surprised to see how very many people who align themselves left/center left have very broad ideas of what is patently and unacceptably offensive when it comes to art in comparison to the stereotypically right/center right. Olivier's Othello is turgid and stagey -- why watch something like that when you can have something more supple and watchable? I say this as someone who has watched the film in question -- how many of its casual proponents have? Watch it and draw your own conclusions before saying its a great example of the play. 

Except in today’s environment if you make art offensive or uncomfortable to certain political identities you face severe blowback.  If you think this professor stepped down purely of his own volition, I have a bridge for sale.  Now he may have considering his history with the Chinese Cultural Revolution and seeing similarities with what is happening today in the US and especially in acedemia, but more than likely he was forced by over woke administration types bowing to the Leftist mob.

Edited October 12, 2021 by Dashinka

[laylalex 7,300]

I can point you towards all sorts of uncomfortable art if you're interested in learning more.  

 

We don't know any more than what the professor and the university have said, so it's just making presumptions. Also, he didn't step down. He decided not to continue teaching the class this semester. There's a real difference. 

[Dashinka 24,933]

4 hours ago, laylalex said:

I can point you towards all sorts of uncomfortable art if you're interested in learning more.  

 

We don't know any more than what the professor and the university have said, so it's just making presumptions. Also, he didn't step down. He decided not to continue teaching the class this semester. There's a real difference. 

Not really, never saw any benefit in art, seems more of an elitist time wasting venture.  The simple fact that he was forced to even stop teaching this class is in effect an admission that he did something wrong in offending the woke regressive snowflakes.  If I were him, I would leave this venerable institution of "higher" education instead of trying to impart his knowledge on those that are closed minded.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,386]

4 hours ago, laylalex said:

I can point you towards all sorts of uncomfortable art if you're interested in learning more.  

 

We don't know any more than what the professor and the university have said, so it's just making presumptions. Also, he didn't step down. He decided not to continue teaching the class this semester. There's a real difference. 

How very  MOR of you, to just stick to facts.

[Boiler 46,325]

Prescient

 

[laylalex 7,300]

18 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Not really, never saw any benefit in art, seems more of an elitist time wasting venture.  The simple fact that he was forced to even stop teaching this class is in effect an admission that he did something wrong in offending the woke regressive snowflakes.  If I were him, I would leave this venerable institution of "higher" education instead of trying to impart his knowledge on those that are closed minded.

Hey, he decided he wants to be there still. Maybe you wouldn't want to be there, but he does. 

 

Art isn't elitist unless you see it as being elitist. Most artists are not exactly rolling in it. If you don't enjoy art, that is obviously your preference but art -- and the appreciation of art -- is one of the things that makes us most human. I don't think I've ever met anyone who said that all art wasn't to their tastes but now I have. You have broadened my horizons.  

[Skyman 327]

Shakespeare should be striken from history. 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,386]

4 minutes ago, Skyman said:

Shakespeare should be striken from history. 

Cause men portrayed chicks or sumthing like Dat huh ? 

 

Brilliant point

[Dashinka 24,933]

7 hours ago, laylalex said:

Hey, he decided he wants to be there still. Maybe you wouldn't want to be there, but he does. 

 

Art isn't elitist unless you see it as being elitist. Most artists are not exactly rolling in it. If you don't enjoy art, that is obviously your preference but art -- and the appreciation of art -- is one of the things that makes us most human. I don't think I've ever met anyone who said that all art wasn't to their tastes but now I have. You have broadened my horizons.  

I did not say the artist themselves were rolling with it (except for certain artists with high level connections).  My point was that I never really saw the point.  Of course I am more of the type of person that enjoys nature by being in nature, not by looking at a painting or picture and trying to discern what the artist was thinking.

[LIBrty4all 3,754]

4 hours ago, Dashinka said:

I did not say the artist themselves were rolling with it (except for certain artists with high level connections).  My point was that I never really saw the point.  Of course I am more of the type of person that enjoys nature by being in nature, not by looking at a painting or picture and trying to discern what the artist was thinking.

Agree 1,000%.  And no, art is NOT what makes us most human.  

[Ban Hammer 13,682]

5 hours ago, Dashinka said:

not by looking at a painting or picture and trying to discern what the artist was thinking.

i never wonder what the artist was thinking - what the artist was smoking, yes, that does cross my mind.

[laylalex 7,300]

9 hours ago, LIBrty4all said:

Agree 1,000%.  And no, art is NOT what makes us most human.  

Please don't twist my words. I said it is one of the things that makes us most human. As you just said last night, werds mean things. Use mine when you're trying to capture what I've said.  

 

We are of course free to disagree, but I cannot imagine a world without art in any form. No music, no paintings, no photography, no sculpture or design. Sounds really dreary to me.

[LIBrty4all 3,754]

1 minute ago, laylalex said:

Please don't twist my words. I said it is one of the things that makes us most human. As you just said last night, werds mean things. Use mine when you're trying to capture what I've said.  

 

We are of course free to disagree, but I cannot imagine a world without art in any form. No music, no paintings, no photography, no sculpture or design. Sounds really dreary to me.

Nature is far more beautiful than man-made art.  But people who choose to live in cities will never fully comprehend real art.