Original AFD Artwork Debate

[wasted]

16 minutes ago, killuridols said:

I am not obtuse for refusing to acknowledge the presence of a robot and a monster. I have good eyes. I see them both in the picture but I dont give a fuck about them. I've already explained this 10 times and you keep suggesting that the problem is with me.

I'm not censoring jack shit  and the ones who protested about it have a right, I guess.

I am not up for censorship of any kind but you have to admit not everybody got the intellectual tools to see beyond the breasts of that girl. There are all kind of people in society, there are teenagers and children. Believing that everybody has achieved the level of understanding you are aiming for here is certainly pretty naive.

If I was in charge of educating persons I'd pick this painting and have it dissected in school. Now, there are lots of people who do not go to school, you know?

I dont see any tendency to outrage.... I see people scared for the fear of having a new generation of kids who do not want to hurt others and be respectful of diversity and other human beings.

I am not worried at all. When I say I will not sing OIAM I am not being "PC", I am being the way I always was... I respect others and have compassion for their situation and problems. When I say I will not hang that picture in my walls, Im saying that I dont want to have the image of a raped woman permanently stuck in front of my view because I dont enjoy none of it, regardless of the rapist being a useless robot or her avenger being a useless monster.

It is very simple and you complicate it.

I think we agree on personal freedom and cersorship. And I understand what you are saying. You can look or judge whatever you want but I’m suggesting that’s not how you should censor.  

I’m talking about how institutions and corporations will use our better instincts to control us. They will take one bad element of a good message and use it to cancel it. 

This specific example is not so cut and dry, because the message is not so worthy, it’s more like this is a reality. 

But the main thing is to not censor it because that goes to bad places. Not in this instance but in general. But I think you agree, you just don’t  want it hanging in your bedroom or in schools. 

Edited June 28, 2018 by wasted

[wasted]

1 hour ago, ZoSoRose said:

You guys are all idiots

I might be an idiot but at least I’m right. 

[ZoSoRose]

Just now, wasted said:

I might be an idiot but at least I’m right. 

Id never call YOU an idiot, Wasted! 

[wasted]

2 minutes ago, ZoSoRose said:

Id never call YOU an idiot, Wasted! 

Today I ate Skittles. 

[Scream of the Butterfly]

2 hours ago, wasted said:

Axl said relatively recently the “Dead” poster was used because that line up was dead at the time. 

That might explain the theme of death but not why that specific picture was chosen out of all the pictures out there that depict death in one way or another.

[wasted]

3 minutes ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

That might explain the theme of death but not why that specific picture was chosen out of all the pictures out there that depict death in one way or another.

Maybe we’ll have to wait for the next lifetime. 

[SoulMonster]

I am not going to pass any judgment here. Maybe she really, really deserved it.

[Blackstar]

5 hours ago, wasted said:

Axl said relatively recently the “Dead” poster was used because that line up was dead at the time. 

Yeah, I think that has been the only "official" explanation given, but probably there's more to it.

Vicky Hamilton says that when the band lived in her house, Axl was watching a cult horror semi-documentary film series which contained clips of violent deaths, executions and other macabre scenes, some of them real footage. He particularly watched an electric chair execution scene over and over like he was studying it, and Vicky believes that the "electric chair" scene in the WTTJ video was an emulation of that scene.

Maybe the poster had to do with that obsession combined with the fact that it was the first ever published picture of an electric chair death as well as a case study of yellow journalism (which of course had to do with the executed person being a woman).

Edited June 28, 2018 by Blackstar

[RussTCB]

I have a serious question for those offended by the original AFD cover:

How do you justify having paid for that piece of art? Sure, the cover itself was banned but that artwork is still included in every version of AFD that's ever been produced on any format. 

So if that piece is incredibly offensive, how it is OK to own an album that still features it on the cover or inside? 

 

[soon]

5 hours ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

On a related note (sort of), was there ever any explanation given as to why the picture of Ruth Snyder in the electric chair was used as the background for the band group shot on UYI? I suspect it was because after the rape picture on Appetite they thought it clever to "go further" and show a woman being killed, but was there anything more to it?

First, I have to admit that I never noticed the person in the chair. I only saw the word "Dead." So thats embarrassing for me, lol.

I dont know the woman's story so I'll have to learn more. I can google, but if anyone has some highlights of her story that would be awesome too!

In addition to what others have said about it, I wonder if its being 'bad ass' by going one further then Metallica's Ride the Lighting. Maybe just one minor aspect of how they landed on that image? I dunno, probably not.

[killuridols]

4 hours ago, wasted said:

I think we agree on personal freedom and cersorship. And I understand what you are saying. You can look or judge whatever you want but I’m suggesting that’s not how you should censor.

I am not censoring anyone, man. I am not part of any pressure group. I just choose things for my life and I'm sure you choose things for your life as well.

4 hours ago, wasted said:

I’m talking about how institutions and corporations will use our better instincts to control us. They will take one bad element of a good message and use it to cancel it. 

You need more education, better programs. When you develop critical thinking censorship cannot get there. Teach the kids to read between the lines, teach the kids to thinking outside the box, teach them how to exercise their freedom so they can make choices for themselves. Censorship would not exist if we had everybody reaching an intellectual level where they can see beyond the graphics, the text, the images...... it's an utopia, so maybe that's why we have censorship.

4 hours ago, wasted said:

But the main thing is to not censor it because that goes to bad places. Not in this instance but in general. But I think you agree, you just don’t  want it hanging in your bedroom or in schools. 

At this point, you have to censor it because you have idiots out there thinking they can do whatever they want to women and that's ok. Not that an image will directly push you to become a rapist, but if your psyche is wired that way, if your upbringing is shit, if your parents suck, if everything around you is so difficult and you get no help, then probably you will see something and say "hey, I can do that". Why can't this person get themselves a woman without resorting to violence? I have always wondered about that...... maybe images, movies, songs enable some sort of entitlement to hurt others.... it's really hard to tell, I don't think art should be blamed but it certainly could/might contribute in the development of a certain type of individual.

The effects of media on people have been studied and they are real..... so why not?

 

[Blackstar]

1 hour ago, soon said:

I dont know the woman's story so I'll have to learn more. I can google, but if anyone has some highlights of her story that would be awesome too!

From what I've read, the woman was convicted of murdering her husband with the help of her lover. They were both sentenced to death. The story, which took place in NY in the late 1920s, was widely and sensationally covered in the press of the time. The film noir Double Indemnity was based on it.

Pictures of the moment of the execution were generally prohibited, but a photographer recruited by the New York Daily News managed to sneak a small camera strapped to his ankle under his pants and take a picture using his toe. Then the blurry picture of the woman dying was printed on the front page of the tabloid, covering the biggest part of it, under the sensational title "DEAD!".

Edited June 28, 2018 by Blackstar

[killuridols]

16 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

From what I've read, the woman was convicted of murdering her husband with the help of her lover. They were both sentenced to death. The story, which took place in NY in the late 1920s, was widely and sensationally covered in the press of the time. The film noir Double Indemnity was based on it.

Sounds like the story behind UTLH? Izzy listening on radio about a woman beating her husband or killing him?

I don't think it is coincidence all this hate for women and taking revenge with imagery, songs, messages....

[Blackstar]

Just now, killuridols said:

Sounds like the story behind UTLH? Izzy listening on radio about a woman beating her husband or killing him?

I don't think it is coincidence all this hate for women and taking revenge with imagery, songs, messages....

I don't think it had anything to do with the story behind UTLH. Izzy said he had heard a song on the radio and its lyrics were about a guy suffering because of his girlfriend or something and he thought it was "pathetic".

I also don't think that the UYI "dead" poster had anything to do with hatred for women, but rather with a fixation with violent death imagery (specifically executions, and the fact that it was historically the first published picture of an execution on the electric chair) as well as with how the media operate (as UYI was a lot media themed lyrically).

[killuridols]

20 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

I don't think it had anything to do with the story behind UTLH. Izzy said he had heard a song on the radio and its lyrics were about a guy suffering because of his girlfriend or something and he thought it was "pathetic".

I also don't think that the UYI "dead" poster had anything to do with hatred for women, but rather with a fixation with violent death imagery (specifically executions, and the fact that it was historically the first published picture of an execution on the electric chair) as well as with how the media operate (as UYI was a lot media themed lyrically).

Im not saying they are related. Im just highlighting the pattern of "listening things" or "watching things" in media, like sensasionalist stories about women mistreating men (or murdering them) and then using those news to either create a song or a photoshoot.

[killuridols]

25 minutes ago, tremolo said:

But the “problem” actually is in you. Although I wouldn’t call it a problem.

You shouldn’t use the lowest common denominator as a standard. Under that perspective, things like alcohol should be banned because there are morons who just cannot handle their booze. Why should everyone get screwed up because a few don’t have the ability or will to keep themselves under control?

I agree. I was only explaining how I think the censorship works and why we have censorship. There are substances that are still prohibited in some countries, places.... why is that?

25 minutes ago, tremolo said:

The artwork... despite what the author says (wheter it was for really reals or just to save face), every single interpretation is valid, including yours. You choose to focus on the raped/assaulted girl and you choose to see it as a depiction that glorifies the abuse of women. But that’s you running the whole picture through your filters: your childhood, values, flaws, desires, fears, ego, etc. Although I find your view to be a very simplistic reduction, it’s valid since it’s your interpretation, but that intepretation is only valid for you.

Uh-uh. That's what I've been saying all this time. Didn't you read? Do I have to post it in Spanish maybe?

Yes, it's simplistic. I have ALREADY explained it more than once that I have made a choice. Go back or scroll up and check it.

25 minutes ago, tremolo said:

The painting could be dissected and analyzed in virtually infinite ways. Take the girl and the robot. Take a look at the context, a woman (what does a woman represent (as a symbol)?) that was beaten up/assaulted/raped by a robot (what could a robot symbolize?). Also it looks like she was selling... ROBOTS! before the attack. Maybe she wasn’t attacked because she was a woman (that one interpretation would completely evaporate the idea of mysoginy), but because she was selling robots. Take all of that into consideration and the outcome might be very different.

Yes. I have also come up with the selling robots issue on Page 4. Go check:

 

25 minutes ago, tremolo said:

Your 5th paragraph is absolutely idiotic. It implies that there is a generation (or more than one) that glorifies disrespect towards others, and that they wish things stayed the same, and that moving towards becoming a more tolerating society with values such as respect at the core scares them... do you realize how idiotic that is? It just doesn’t make any sense.

Wow. Calm down, dude. You don't need to insult me... or am I triggering you?

Nope. I did not imply there is a "generation that glorifies disrespect" (read that in old-man voice)..... I think there are people who grew up in a different set of rules, customs, values, etc. who are feeling shocked by some changes that are happening in societies. All of a sudden, you say something to someone and since you still live in your bubble you do not realize you have offended them and you receive a backlash for that.

Some people are reacting to this, overreacting sometimes and others resisting to the change. It is natural that people resist to change and have fear of this juncture.

25 minutes ago, tremolo said:

Time to drop the victimhood and start using the same tolerance that gets waved as a flag by all these “groups”. Also time to start using that not-so-common common sense instead of that reductionism that is pretty stale and doesn’t provide any food for thought, au contraire... all it does is provide very strict guidelines that reduces every single thing and its complexities into a stupid matter of black-or-white. Give humans more credit, we are more complex than that simplistic one-dimensional caricature that some are trying to use to portray us.

Awesome. But i don't know what this got to do with anything...

Who is victimizing themselves here?

 

Edited June 28, 2018 by killuridols

[wasted]

5 hours ago, killuridols said:

I am not censoring anyone, man. I am not part of any pressure group. I just choose things for my life and I'm sure you choose things for your life as well.

You need more education, better programs. When you develop critical thinking censorship cannot get there. Teach the kids to read between the lines, teach the kids to thinking outside the box, teach them how to exercise their freedom so they can make choices for themselves. Censorship would not exist if we had everybody reaching an intellectual level where they can see beyond the graphics, the text, the images...... it's an utopia, so maybe that's why we have censorship.

At this point, you have to censor it because you have idiots out there thinking they can do whatever they want to women and that's ok. Not that an image will directly push you to become a rapist, but if your psyche is wired that way, if your upbringing is shit, if your parents suck, if everything around you is so difficult and you get no help, then probably you will see something and say "hey, I can do that". Why can't this person get themselves a woman without resorting to violence? I have always wondered about that...... maybe images, movies, songs enable some sort of entitlement to hurt others.... it's really hard to tell, I don't think art should be blamed but it certainly could/might contribute in the development of a certain type of individual.

The effects of media on people have been studied and they are real..... so why not?

 

I’m for censorship at a certain point. Like you said it’s not a utopia. 

What I’m saying is that don’t censor to control the political narrative. Censor if it’s inciting with no real worth. 

But you have to put it in context, a ttuthful context. There were calls for blaming videogames for school shooters. 80% have no fathers, and 50% are on anti depressants. And in a hostile environment of bullying  at school. What do all those have in common? Failure of the state. Videogames are made the scapegoat because it’s gun

related. Meds are known ro have dissociative effects. So a kid has no discipline, bullied at school, wants to kill his enemies and given meds that make him feel invincible. But all those factions have state backing. Videogames is a bunch nerds. So they get censored. Everyone can keep making money. 

There’s no point teaching kids critical thinking if political forces censor corruptly. 

But as a base level you don’t want a culture showered in violent sexual imagery.

But does it even have to be overtly violent to be damaging. Every ad on tv is designed to cause sexual thought. If you don’t buy this you won’t get laid. A whole culture based on being winners, so why be surprised when kids who feel like losers want to murder suicide. 

So in context, is the image of this kind of situation, the reflection of society, to blame. A situation caused by real socio economic problems is blamed on a representation of it so we can’t discuss it’s true causes. 

Edited June 28, 2018 by wasted

[wasted]

7 hours ago, RussTCB said:

I have a serious question for those offended by the original AFD cover:

How do you justify having paid for that piece of art? Sure, the cover itself was banned but that artwork is still included in every version of AFD that's ever been produced on any format. 

So if that piece is incredibly offensive, how it is OK to own an album that still features it on the cover or inside? 

 

Also the somgs inside all take place in a world of dog eat dog, appetite for destruction. To live life to max in this dangerous seedy world. Axl still found love and compassion in this world. So there was hope and it was real. Bad and good exist simultaneously. 

There’s definitely “rape” lines in Easy, Jungle, Rocket Queen. You could ban the album as much as the painting/cover. 

 

Edited June 28, 2018 by wasted

[wasted]

6 hours ago, Blackstar said:

Yeah, I think that has been the only "official" explanation given, but probably there's more to it.

Vicky Hamilton says that when the band lived in her house, Axl was watching a cult horror semi-documentary film series which contained clips of violent deaths, executions and other macabre scenes, some of them real footage. He particularly watched an electric chair execution scene over and over like he was studying it, and Vicky believes that the "electric chair" scene in the WTTJ video was an emulation of that scene.

Maybe the poster had to do with that obsession combined with the fact that it was the first ever published picture of an electric chair death as well as a case study of yellow journalism (which of course had to do with the executed person being a woman).

Axl also wanted a pardon for the Idonesian drug mules. He wrote a letter to the prez of indo. I’m not sure how they were executed. They were women drug mules forced to do it. 

Maybe Axl felt like the UYI line up was creatively dead but he was anti death penalty. So he carried on trying. 

[killuridols]

9 minutes ago, tremolo said:

What that means is that you seem unable to see things from a different perspective... “my way or the highway” kinda thing. That’s what idiocy is, it doesn’t imply a lack of inteligence, just an unwillingness to take perspective.

Nobody is reacting the way you mention. That is more of a weird generalization based on... not sure what, but clearly it is not based on the observation of reality. Sure, there are people out there who were born 60-80 years ago who still refer to women, gay, or black people in a derogatory manner, but they are such a tiny fraction that suggesting it’s out there, and it’s happening all over the place is completely laughable.

Isn't that exactly what you are doing here? Unable to see it from the point of view of someone other than yourself?

You use words like "nobody" and other wording that makes you sound like you are trying to impose your truth over mine.

"What you say is idiotic. What I say is the shit because mine is bigger than yours". Seriously, you have many good points but you are using an aggressive tone and sort of patronising. 

Who are you to say that what I say "is not based on observation of reality". What would you know about my reality? Do you live in my place? Do you interact with me and my community? Do you know my circumstances of life?

Besides, I didnt say anything remotely close to the reduction you've made of my comments. So I will not bother anymore with this argument.

 

 

[Blackstar]

10 minutes ago, wasted said:

Axl also wanted a pardon for the Idonesian drug mules. He wrote a letter to the prez of indo. I’m not sure how they were executed. They were women drug mules forced to do it. 

Maybe Axl felt like the UYI line up was creatively dead but he was anti death penalty. So he carried on trying. 

Maybe. But the U.S. has the death penalty too and it would have made more sense if he'd written a letter to the president of his own country.

Edited June 28, 2018 by Blackstar

[wasted]

20 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

Maybe. But the U.S. has the death penalty too and it would have made more sense if he'd written a letter to the president of his own country.

That case was big, there was s long time between capture and execution. It was a running story. So they cases draw you in. 

As a metaphor for the UYI line up were drug mules who had been imprisoned for years. They should have been fired. But Axl forgives. 

So he puts up the anti death penalty poster up and hits the road. 

[killuridols]

7 minutes ago, tremolo said:

There is no “tone” in writen words. The tone you hear is in your own head and your own interpretation, it’s not mine. (...)

Feeling patronized is how YOU choose to react, please don’t throw that at me cause it’s not on me.

How does one read "what you say is idiotic" in a sweet tone of voice inside your head? 🤔

Sure, I must be held responsible for your choice of words. 

[Scream of the Butterfly]

14 hours ago, tremolo said:

The painting could be dissected and analyzed in virtually infinite ways. Take the girl and the robot. Take a look at the context, a woman (what does a woman represent (as a symbol)?) that was beaten up/assaulted/raped by a robot (what could a robot symbolize?). Also it looks like she was selling... ROBOTS! before the attack. Maybe she wasn’t attacked because she was a woman (that one interpretation would completely evaporate the idea of mysoginy), but because she was selling robots. Take all of that into consideration and the outcome might be very different.

If it's not about the woman, if she's merely a symbol for something different, then I find it hard to believe that the same thing could not have been expressed without the woman and without sexualizing the whole thing. If the artist was trying to convey some kind of a complex message, then I think he ruined his own work by making the assaulted woman such a central part of it that many are unwilling to look past her.

I'm sure the painting is open to interpretation. Then again, if you have a good enough imagination, you could spit on a piece of paper and then come up with an infinite number of interpretations for the result. Not everyone is going to find those interpretations interesting or see it as anything but spit on paper.

Edited June 29, 2018 by Scream of the Butterfly

[MrMojo]

An original AFD Artwork debate, this shouldn't take lon..