Lyndon Hood - Not sorry, Wellington
Thursday, January 22, 2009
The Perils of Satire
Part of an ongoing series
Perhaps the worst part is that I knew I was selling the situation short when I wrote the thing - and encouraging the kind of moral malaise Ryan talks about here. It's harping on about exactly the kind of trees that get in the way of the wood.
Mostly it was that I found the people who actually spoke up for either side to be not helping, so I wanted to make the point anyway.
As I said in the comments, I tried to nod in the direction of how much I was omitting. But I suppose you need a proper grasp of the situation in order to understand just how much omission and since nobody agrees what facts are relevant we start going round again.
So the project was potentially unhelpful and the best I could hope for was that some people might take a moment to get just a little perspective. If this happened, it did not leave much evidence.
On reflection, the worst part is the at least one person appears to have understood, and is carrying on anyway.
I actually thought about assuaging my conscience with companion piece.
But then I saw this on Kiwipolitico and stopped feeling like I had a novel idea.
There was also one about John Key being satisfied with the size of his stimulus package. I've shelved that too.
I digress.
I wasn't unduly proud of this piece - you might notice it hasn't had the lead slot on Scoop - partly because of the above caveats and also because the observation was so trite.
Almost as trite as noting that Israel is the one with the most power (and support) to change the status quo and currently seems hellbent on making it worse.
But the question isn't whose fault it is. The question is what you do about it.
Part of an ongoing series
Perhaps the worst part is that I knew I was selling the situation short when I wrote the thing - and encouraging the kind of moral malaise Ryan talks about here. It's harping on about exactly the kind of trees that get in the way of the wood.
Mostly it was that I found the people who actually spoke up for either side to be not helping, so I wanted to make the point anyway.
As I said in the comments, I tried to nod in the direction of how much I was omitting. But I suppose you need a proper grasp of the situation in order to understand just how much omission and since nobody agrees what facts are relevant we start going round again.
So the project was potentially unhelpful and the best I could hope for was that some people might take a moment to get just a little perspective. If this happened, it did not leave much evidence.
On reflection, the worst part is the at least one person appears to have understood, and is carrying on anyway.
I actually thought about assuaging my conscience with companion piece.
AN ALLEGORY
Precis: Sort of simmering sibiling rivalry bursting into violence except one of the has a baseball bat and has cut of the other's food supply. Mum tells them to stop fighting but Dad doesn't - not until Mum gets a finger broken trying to put a band-aid on one of Junior's fresh contusions. Etc, Ad lib.
But then I saw this on Kiwipolitico and stopped feeling like I had a novel idea.
There was also one about John Key being satisfied with the size of his stimulus package. I've shelved that too.
I digress.
I wasn't unduly proud of this piece - you might notice it hasn't had the lead slot on Scoop - partly because of the above caveats and also because the observation was so trite.
Almost as trite as noting that Israel is the one with the most power (and support) to change the status quo and currently seems hellbent on making it worse.
But the question isn't whose fault it is. The question is what you do about it.
Labels: gaza, israel, self-commentary
