Leaderboard

yes @Mel Hopkins I have nothing against Justine or fiyah magazine but. a black writer, suggesting that a white writer is not warranting the fandom or the support cause the content in work from said white writer or perception to the value in said work is negative, is no other than what white media do to black artists all the time. I don't want white people to change. I want black people to be free from white physical assault. White people writing books or making movies or producing paintings where they depict their interpretation to black people as negative or positive is not a physical assault, it is emotional, pride based, but not physical. Some in the black community seem to want whites to speak well to blacks and I oppose that position. Donald Trump speaking ill to the central park five was negative, was ill, but the central park five suffered cause the assailed white woman who lied and the NYPD who interrogated, Trump is not the one who led to the pain the central park five went through. Birth of a nation, the original, is a vile movie to Black people, but that film was not hanging black people or incarcerating black people falsely, or financially entrapping black people through tricks, all supported through government initatives or actors, in 1915. That was city councils, mayors of cities, state legislators, state governors, federal representatives, federal senators, the president, white owned private enterprise. are the cause. The napir of american race relations, what I call the burning of southern black folk, was the fault of the us federal military leaving the south, which oddly enough they would had to return 100 year later, not the confederate flag, or statues or books written from whites.

Bravo! Art is often commentary and commentary reflects a perspective. Eliminating that perspective or the one who perceives it is akin to censorship ... and similar to what happens in war. Removing artwork and the artist is an attempt to silence. Not cool. I rather be offended than to be a witness someone losing the right to express themselves.

Justina Ireland, an editor at FIyah magazine , stated the following: Are people really that mad that they stripped Laura Ingalls Wilder’s name from an award? That’s silly. She’s dead. It’s not like she cares. And it’s not like her books changed the world for the better. ... The Little House on the Prairie books reinforce the idea of white exceptionalism and the inherent benefit of colonialism without contending with any of the moral and physical drawbacks of such exploitation. Also, they are boring as fuck. Someone replied: First of all not true. And if you find them boring as F*&#.....maybe that says more about your attention span. Now, while the personal attack toward ireland is unwarrant or a false claim, the reality is, ireland's original position has flaws. First, Art does not have to be liked or admired by all to be admired by many. IReland ask, are people really that mad? yes. fans of wilder's work are. Some fans to any artist like said artist to be adored, admired, honored in ways like titling awards. IReland is an editor to a writing magazine and stated, that wilder's book didn't change the world for the better OR it reinforced idea's of white exceptionalism and amendments. Her first point is artistically sinful. The artist creates. The artist create from the soul, the charlatan does not. Wilder created from her soul. And like any artist, I include myself or Ireland side Wilder, it is up to others to feel beauty or wisdom or an infinite set from other states to anything we create. Not everyone likes the sistine chapel ceiling, but Michelangelo emitted his soul. And like mein kampf, the declaration of independence, or the revolution will not be televised, did these artistic entries change the world or were reflections to the world changed. If people like your work, they do, and your lucky. Poe died penniless, his art did not change the world when published. yet, after his death, epiphany amongst the readership. In similarity to the work from phillip k dick. If Wilder's soul wanted to emit white exceptionalism and inherent benefit of colonialism without contending with any of the effects from exploitation toward others... then she may have succeeded. But, that is her soul's business. I don't like little house on the prairie, mein kampf but others have the right too. Art is not meant to reflect one viewpoint or one lifestyle, art do reflect all lifestyle. USA is over 300 million people, ten percent is 3 million. I imagine wilder can get 9 million. I recall a show that was on tv for a long time called little house on the prairie, which i was not a fan to either, so many liked the books. ... In the end, Ireland's argument is to question why the uproar, but her position, at least the position i read, is absent any value. WIlder's work has fans who are mad at her name being treated as unworthy, or to said fans her work has influenced their life to various grades, or from her soul emitted a culture that many <enough to make a media uproar> like. In the USA organizations from private to public are trying to please a growing populace that has historically been bereft honor from private or public organizations and want to see those who emit what they do not like or who have insulted them be taken from acclaim, through naming buildings, statues, award names. If I had power over the award I would had replaced Wilder's name a while back, cause she is not the best in my view. But, an argument does exist. Is it wise to change these labels now? It is not true to state that a large populace in the usa is white and do not like non white. That is an honest statement. And, most people in the usa are white. Are these delabelings values from the collective soul or a lie covering truth? What say you? ... If I had my choice I would call the award, Association for Library Service to Children for best children's book, call me silly but why give one artist the title to an award that will be throughout time. it is not a one off. https://twitter.com/justinaireland/status/1011251924757352456