I just read something stupid… and believe it or not, it was on Fox News.
Anyways, I’m not going to rehash how we arrived at the moral outrage surrounding Will Ferrell’s possible role as Ronald Reagan suffering from dementia…
But what I am going to do it nit pick at the stupid things ‘Dr Manny’ has to say.
You can find the original article archived here:
To make a so-called comedy or parody about Alzheimer’s while refusing to acknowledge what a toll this disease takes on patients and their families is the lowest form of existence. I would never call anyone who chose to star, film, write or produce that kind of junk a true talent. It’s cheap, it’s lazy, and it sends a horrifying message to today’s youth about the ethics of our country
Artists are under no obligation to make things you find personally funny. Who finds what funny is quite irrelevant. The fact of the matter is, somebody somewhere will always find something funny.
Artists are also under no obligation to acknowledge the toll of anything. An artist creates to create, not always for a specific cause… the thought that all artists should create all facets of everything in their work is ridiculous.
A true talent… alright then. This is a wonderful example of how people dismiss things that they personally do no like. They dismiss the person in an attempt to sabotage how others understand what that person is doing.
“He’s not a real artist”, “he’s just a graphic designer”, “he’s just a writer”, “real artists do/don’t *insert personal preferences*”.
It’s all bullsquirt. An artist is an artist regardless of your personal feelings over what they create. As an artist, that’s a common trope you’ll come across and have to face one day.
While I know and understand that beauty and art is in the eye of the beholder, a so-called piece of work that inflicts pain on society can only be called torture.
Yeah, aesthetics as well as understanding are personal things. Very good Dr. Manny.
Oh but wait… a so-called piece of work? Its being a meanie and you don’t like iT SO ITS NOT rEAl.
An emotional reaction to a piece of art may in fact be part of the artist’s intent OR it may not be relevant to the artist’s intent.
Regardless, artists are under no obligation to only make things that you personally enjoy. Many people found the piss christ to be torture, they found it painful to see somebody do that to something they hold dear, but it’s art nonetheless… aND GUESS WHAT… some people actually enjoy the piss christ.
Instead of making money on these ridiculous shock-value gimmicks, how about creating a piece of art that would raise funds or research and awareness about the disease? How about, Rosolio, instead of producing vile films that you call work, you spend a day caring for a patient with Alzheimer’s, and then maybe you’ll rethink about what qualifies as funny.
That first part is stupid and I’m sure you can guess why (*coughs* artists, people, aren’t obligated to serve other’s interests).
I like that last part though. Caring for somebody else may be quite beneficial to not only the patient but the artist as well. Such an experience can provide perspective… not to mention all of the more basic human benefits of doing such a thing. Anyways, it’s definitely something to think about.
To wrap this up…
I do not give a crap. People make stupid sh*t all the time, people can behave poorly, people make bad decisions. It’s a fact of life and who makes what cruel sketch is really unimportant. There’s always going to be that one person who can’t stop making cruel jokes (case and point, The Big Bang Theory).
However that does not mean we get to sit here and arbitrarily say “this thing isn’t real art“.
Art goes beyond personal preferences, desires, thoughts.
Your reality is irrelevant.
Just accept that, call him a jackass, and move on.