since we all are as dry as deepfried watermelons, lets talk about current affairs. ie gulliver's travels and lit class. yeah this is gonna be about my viewpoint on satires.
i think satires are a rather crude form of art. that's why im not particularly enjoying my gulliver's travels lessons currently. its a form of art that does not deal very much with feelings, with real emotion. instead, it is an almost wholly intellectual past time. the whole thing about specific references to parallel situations, and how the writer wants to make fun of this group of people, that group of people. its all so very technical and intellectual.
its like the use of symbolism in art. how thewhiteclock-represents-the-passing-of-purity and the-red-cloth-signifies-the-repression-faced-by-the-bride. this is what satires are doing. being so very specific that emotions becomes intellectualized. using the same art anology, instead of putting just symbols, one should manipulate the emotions DIRECTLY ie overall shading of the painting, general feeling that one gets upon looking at the work.
linking this back to satires - art should never be just about the intellect. then the artists get reduced to a bunch of people trying to prove how smart and witty they are by being able to draw a parallel situation yada yada. its a game of wits and reason and intellect. is that what art should be?
and again. the purpose of satire is to educate and inform the masses about some kind of stance the writer is taking towards a certain issue. wouldnt it be much better if you just do so directly, instead of under the cover of art? if you want to push for something, writing satires arent exactly the way to go about it. especially in the more-open-and-liberal world today. there ARE other ways to go around things. if not u just end up with a bunch of discontent people laughing and poking fun at things around them. thats cynicism.
in the societal context, satires are only gonna make the gap between the governing body and the people wider. people are going to enjoy laughing with the satires (ie talking cock) written about the government. and that makes the government seem more detached from the society. there isn't much of a real purpose to satire - to me it just seems like the satirist is petty about issues in society, and wants to communicate ideas about them in a seemingly profound way which the masses enjoy because they can relate to it, and share his viewpoint. period.
its the whole thing about ART. most people see art as something they cant really relate to, so when the opportunity jumps up at them, they're all big-eyed and hungopen-mouthed at all this 'art' that they take everything in without much thinking (its like music composition creative projects in school lol - ure sure to get high marks for it because everyone thinks its so difficult to write good music).
if you want something to be changed, id rather you be direct about it. all that highbrow maneuvering is not going to work when practical things are at stake. dont write a story, write an essay to persuade. post it up on the internet, print it out and mail it to letterboxes. and of course, do take a certain degree of self-protection. be neutral in your argument as much as possible, adjust the tone of the writing. etc. and remain anonymous, if circumstances really are that restrictive.
haha okay fine maybe its just me. because it seems the rest of the world do buy into the whole satire business. yawn. i'd better go finish my chinese hw. and i would appreciate some dialogue about this subject? haha.
