>
>>my own personal response in all such cases would be that if you are
>>desirous of helping fight the oppression of particular groups, then you
>>should take the cue from these groups in how such a fight should be
>>carried out (i admit there are difficulties in ascertaining the wishes
>>of a "group").
>>
> Does this mean submitting one's material to a political or ethnic group and
> allowing them to "correct" what they deem racist or insensitive? That's what
> Guy Aoki suggested last night to Silverman. He began to lecture her on the
> role of "proper" satire, and Silverman, who is a professional comic, rightly
> objected. "You're telling me how to do satire?" she asked of a guy who
> didn't show one ounce of humor in his bones.
>
i dont want to argue for aoki, whom i have no knowledge of, but the right response would be to say "i am not telling you how to do satire. i am telling you how to talk about chinese americans. if you cannot do satire without referring to chinese americans using words that are offensive to them, then you should reconsider whether your satire is worth the harm, especially if you wish to help chinese americans".
again, the reasoning against this response might be that such usage and satire is intended exactly to parody and delegitimize the racism of those who do use the term in a serious racist sense. but the problem with such reasoning is that you then make an implicit claim that you know what is best for chinese americans and solving their problems than they do, or so it seems to me.
all "you"s above are hypothetical, of course.
--ravi
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- man is said to be a rational animal. i do not know why he has not been defined as an affective or feeling animal. more often i have seen a cat reason than laugh or weep. perhaps it weeps or laughs inwardly - but then perhaps, also inwardly, the crab resolves equations of the 2nd degree. -- alasdair macintyre.