and predictably the twittersphere put words in his mouth so they could punch him in it.
There was the usual "White people are racist, men prefer to read about boobs" prejudice they had to inflate with zero evidence regarding King's actual nomination choices, but my favorite was one that went something like "your assumption that quality and diversity are mutually exclusive is part of the problem."
Uh, he didn't assume that. He didn't even overtly admit it. You and your thought fascists did.
All he said was they're not the same thing. And the twittersphere proved his point by signaling to the world that they intended to make their choices of things, not by their own diverse standards of quality, but primarily by skin color and genitalia.
Sure, some of them dressed it up with "you just don't get minority art because you won't allow it to exist," but in the end, their motives were to pander rather than celebrate beauty.
This is not the old days when knowing Bruce Lee was Chinese behind his Kato mask or seeing Nichelle Nichols in a clerical position was a towering victory for representation. We know Octavia Butler's opinion on this--and her name, even--because whatever her background, there aren't fat, cigar-smoking Stephen Kings in oak-paneled salons planning her career over scotch and cigars.
Funny how these people turn around and think that if they did such things, it wouldn't just be fair play but the only morally right way to run society. They don't seem to se that these abuses can't happen--there are others, but they aren't political, and politics are all that concerns them, even above the actual victims when there are any--in a society where there are no such salons full of freemasonic string-pullers or whatever the going conspiracy theory is.
King isn't excluding the possibility of women or minorities being capable of good work. He's just not patronizing undeserving tokens because we've known for half a century that affirmative action breeds distrust and mediocrity whether backed by force of law or unwritten policy.
Because if they can be that great, they can win without you being dishonest. And if you're not honest, how will anyone ever really know?
There was the usual "White people are racist, men prefer to read about boobs" prejudice they had to inflate with zero evidence regarding King's actual nomination choices, but my favorite was one that went something like "your assumption that quality and diversity are mutually exclusive is part of the problem."
Uh, he didn't assume that. He didn't even overtly admit it. You and your thought fascists did.
All he said was they're not the same thing. And the twittersphere proved his point by signaling to the world that they intended to make their choices of things, not by their own diverse standards of quality, but primarily by skin color and genitalia.
Sure, some of them dressed it up with "you just don't get minority art because you won't allow it to exist," but in the end, their motives were to pander rather than celebrate beauty.
This is not the old days when knowing Bruce Lee was Chinese behind his Kato mask or seeing Nichelle Nichols in a clerical position was a towering victory for representation. We know Octavia Butler's opinion on this--and her name, even--because whatever her background, there aren't fat, cigar-smoking Stephen Kings in oak-paneled salons planning her career over scotch and cigars.
Funny how these people turn around and think that if they did such things, it wouldn't just be fair play but the only morally right way to run society. They don't seem to se that these abuses can't happen--there are others, but they aren't political, and politics are all that concerns them, even above the actual victims when there are any--in a society where there are no such salons full of freemasonic string-pullers or whatever the going conspiracy theory is.
King isn't excluding the possibility of women or minorities being capable of good work. He's just not patronizing undeserving tokens because we've known for half a century that affirmative action breeds distrust and mediocrity whether backed by force of law or unwritten policy.
Because if they can be that great, they can win without you being dishonest. And if you're not honest, how will anyone ever really know?
No comments:
Post a Comment