Re: Re: tastelessness at unicon
From Arnold the Aardvark:
> You might as well shout at the sky.
I agree with this, in terms of expecting people to be able to detect whether something they are doing might be seen by others as either political or offensive. The banners in China were thought by their owners to not be political, and one of the writers here is saying Jamey’s act was not political. I’m saying they both were. Not overtly in either case. Jamey was putting on a performance, but his performance had political overtones. If a quote from a President about going to war is not political, you need a new definition of what is.
But before I go on, I’d like to re-advocate my own position on all of this. Though I believe political stuff should be left out of sporting conventions, I do not intend to apply this to Freestyle performances.
I did try to get a proposal passed on “offensive material” last year, but it had a lot of difficulty. It’s hard to define such things, but the idea for it arose from offensive lyrics in a performer’s music, which were obvious enough. In any case, “judgment” would have to be used. If such a rule were to exist, I still would not have applied it to Jamey’s performance. His main message, as I saw it, was a tribute. The “ass” thing was borderline, but if it passes on TV (which it currently does, in the US, I’m not going to make noise about it.
> freedom has a price called responsibility.
It does indeed. But telling people to be responsible doesn’t work if they don’t realize the issues. I doubt that you could have explained to Jamey that some people might be offended by his performance. Or perhaps I don’t give him due credit, but in either case, I think he would have gone ahead with it anyway, to present what he felt.
That is part of what art is about. In this case, using a unicycle to tell a story and express a feeling. Competition-wise, we should judge the art based on its merits as they relate to the judging criteria. Yes, the various judges will have different impressions based on their own native countries and personal feelings. But that’s all part of subjective judging.
> I would like the sport itself to clearly state that it is
> apoliltical - no boycotts, no banning entrants from
> <pick country not on US A-list>.
I agree. What are others’ thoughts on this, applying it to the conventions, not to Freestyle performances?
> On the other hand, artistic performances can
> only successfully be subject to guidelines regarding
> taste, morality, politics and so on. Recall that
> some of the greatest art in the world comprises political
> statements.
Any restrictions we attempt to place on Freestyle performances will have to be relatively vague, as the one that was proposed last year. Unless people have other ideas. Think in terms of how you’d write it, and how it will be interpreted by people in the US, China, UK, Germany, and Japan, for example.
> Basically: a performer should try not to offend; the
> audience should try not to be offended.
You need a little of both. The definition of “offensive” is hard enough to get close to. The rule I was trying to draft applied to things like known offensive words or concepts, overt sexuality, etc. It would not be applicable to Jamey’s performance, nor to a performance by people supporting the Vieques cause.
> I’m sorry I missed JM’s performance. It sounds by all
> accounts to have been a truly memorable exercise in
> poor judgement.
I think Jamey would disagree with you. He may have failed to consider how non-Americans would view his act, but I don’t think that would have stopped him from doing it the way he did. He put up a very powerful message, and created this interesting controversy and discussion. We are all learning something from it.
From Sendhair:
> Do we need political demonstrations at Unicycling
> events?
A better question would be do we want political demonstrations. And who should decide whether we can have them or not. Should the hosts and/or IUF decide? Or should this be left up to attendees who show up after two or more years of planning and work by the hosts? The answer is obvious enough. If you want to campaign or influence public opinion about stuff outside of unicycling, fine. Do it outside of someone else’s unicycle convention. That’s not what the convention is for.
> while I’m there… I want to have FUN.
That’s right. And whatever else we’re supposed to have at a unicycle convention. We have fun, we forget our cares, we challenge ourselves artistically and athletically.
And there’s more to that. We’re on vacation. We’re surrounded by people of other nations, religions, and ways of thinking. At a convention we all get together and share. We learn from each other.
There’s only one “political” message I would like a UNICON to convey, and my hope is that they will continue to do it, as the first 11 have. That is the message that it doesn’t matter where you’re from, we can all get together, share, and have a good time, IN PEACE.
Yes, that’s political, but it’s not the primary message of a UNICON so I hope nobody minds. But it’s one of the “off-topic” messages I hope every attendee take home with them.
From Yoopers:
> Instead of all of us surmising the purpose of Jamie’s
> routine and what message, if any, he intended to
> convey, it would be nice to hear directly from him.
Yes it would, though not necessary. He is like the artist who presents his work, then steps back to see what people think of it. Some artists like to explain what they did, while others prefer that you form your own opinions.
The one question I’d like to ask Jamey is if he has a personal connection to the 9/11 events. That was the impression I got. Or was it just a theme he chose to use, and then used it very strongly?
Stay on top,
John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone
It makes people wonder what you’re up to!