Stuck on Repeats

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

To me, this seems like the real point. At least on some level, when Gingrich leads off his rally with a Melt Banana tune, he is suggesting that there is an endorsement there and that Melt Banana fans should feel in sync with his campaign. Melt Banana should be able to stand up, without judgment from the Angry Attici of the world, and say, "Hey, to the extent this Gingrich chap is trying to suggest that we are part of his movement, it is not true. When we 'sing' the lyrics 'I see a Plastic Moon shining...Won't you lead me?', we want you to know we were referring to Herman Cain. Cain is the Plastic Moon." I also would like to know what Melt Banana eat and drive, but I don't think this makes me less smart than GWNC and Thurgreed.

Whoa. I think I just went through a black hole.

[greatwhitenorthchick]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

I also would like to know what Melt Banana eat and drive, but I don't think this makes me less smart than GWNC and Thurgreed.

This is why Thurgreed and I are smarter than you: we know that they drive "vehicles" and eat "food." Or perhaps drive "golf clubs" and eat "pussy."

Either way, smarter.

I am sorry.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by greatwhitenorthchick

This is why Thurgreed and I are smarter than you: we know that they drive "vehicles" and eat "food." Or perhaps drive "golf clubs" and eat "pussy."

Either way, smarter.

I am sorry.

Melt Banana is Japanese and IIRC Flower had 8 years of itamae training, so wttw, I'd be careful about arguing with him about what Melt banana eats.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

It's horseshit. Say how you'll vote and see if people care, but claiming a monopoly on how and where your art is interpreted and used, aside from copyright law, is net bad for discourse.

You miss the point. The artist isn't commandeering anything. He simply doesn't want his hard work being used as a soundtrack to something he doesn't like.

Suppose Rick Warren started using "God" to open his services, suggesting its an affirmation of faith. You think Yoko might have a valid claim this is a raging insult to John's work?

There are lines. "It's in the public sphere... We can interpret it any way we like" is not a total license to warp any art you like into campaign ads.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

You can't possibly be serious.

I assure you I am. But because this debate is now and has only ever been about whether I should like it or dislike it when an artist says the words "They're playing my song at this rally and I object to it", it was a pretty low-stakes controversy at the outset, so any mental health problems you infer from it are probably still curable. My overall happiness is affected by it only one out of every four years, and not much at that, while you are looking at a lifetime of being mad at David Simon trying to tell you what to think about "The Wire."

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

There are lines. "It's in the public sphere... We can interpret it any way we like" is not a total license to warp any art you like into campaign ads.

Now this is the most bizarre thing I'm likely to read all day. Yes, it absolutely is. Total license. What good is art if you can't misinterpret it? Who decides? Are politicians specially prohibited from making the case that a work of creative imagination supports or challenges a worldview?

Keep in mind both left and right will be making apologies to the estate of George Orwell if you're right.

ETA I see you said "campaign ads." I don't know whether licensing rules would allow that or not, but it hampers the debate. The issue is more clear when it's a candidate who always takes the stump to "Born in the USA" over the PA.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

To me, this seems like the real point. At least on some level, when Gingrich leads off his rally with a Melt Banana tune, he is suggesting that there is an endorsement there and that Melt Banana fans should feel in sync with his campaign. Melt Banana should be able to stand up, without judgment from the Angry Attici of the world, and say, "Hey, to the extent this Gingrich chap is trying to suggest that we are part of his movement, it is not true. When we 'sing' the lyrics 'I see a Plastic Moon shining...Won't you lead me?', we want you to know we were referring to Herman Cain. Cain is the Plastic Moon." I also would like to know what Melt Banana eat and drive, but I don't think this makes me less smart than GWNC and Thurgreed.

I agree with every word of this post. Every. single. word.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

...it was a pretty low-stakes controversy at the outset, so any mental health problems you infer from it are probably still curable. My overall happiness is affected by it only one out of every four years, and not much at that, while you are looking at a lifetime of being mad at David Simon trying to tell you what to think about "The Wire."

And just like that, I'm back to thinking you need to get your head examined. Good luck!

TM

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

To me, this seems like the real point. At least on some level, when Gingrich leads off his rally with a Melt Banana tune, he is suggesting that there is an endorsement there and that Melt Banana fans should feel in sync with his campaign. Melt Banana should be able to stand up, without judgment from the Angry Attici of the world, and say, "Hey, to the extent this Gingrich chap is trying to suggest that we are part of his movement, it is not true. When we 'sing' the lyrics 'I see a Plastic Moon shining...Won't you lead me?', we want you to know we were referring to Herman Cain. Cain is the Plastic Moon." I also would like to know what Melt Banana eat and drive, but I don't think this makes me less smart than GWNC and Thurgreed.

I am fairly certain that I saw the Angry Attici* open at a Take Back The Night rally headlined by Michelle Shocked back in the day.

*Not to be confused with The Attican Bedshitters, of course.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I agree with every word of this post. Every. single. word.

I have only seen one other post that was its equal.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

Now this is the most bizarre thing I'm likely to read all day. Yes, it absolutely is. Total license. What good is art if you can't misinterpret it? Who decides? Are politicians specially prohibited from making the case that a work of creative imagination supports or challenges a worldview?

Keep in mind both left and right will be making apologies to the estate of George Orwell if you're right.

ETA I see you said "campaign ads." I don't know whether licensing rules would allow that or not, but it hampers the debate. The issue is more clear when it's a candidate who always takes the stump to "Born in the USA" over the PA.

Can I use Botero in anti-obesity campaigns? I'm fairly certain he'd sue, successfully, to stop such appropriation. If he can do that, what's objectionable about the lesser act of commenting on why he found my use of his work offensive?

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I agree with every word of this post. Every. single. word.

Whoa. I can't even read every single word.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Can I use Botero in anti-obesity campaigns? I'm fairly certain he'd sue, successfully, to stop such appropriation. If he can do that, what's objectionable about the lesser act of commenting on why he found my use of his work offensive?

But now you're talking about copyright. If I buy a Botero, and display it behind me on an easel while I talk about obesity, he has no legal claim and a weak-sauce moral objection since he sold his painting and I bought it. He can call his own press conference, but he can't stop me from displaying it alongside a message to which he is opposed.

[bold_n_brazen]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

But now you're talking about copyright. If I buy a Botero, and display it behind me on an easel while I talk about obesity, he has no legal claim and a weak-sauce moral objection since he sold his painting and I bought it. He can call his own press conference, but he can't stop me from displaying it alongside a message to which he is opposed.

Did you really just say "weak-sauce"?

[ThurgreedMarshall]

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...&postcount=957

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...&postcount=958

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...&postcount=959

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...&postcount=960

TM