| Friday, February 24, 2006 |
10:57 - ...For that is confusion
|
(top)  |
Tim Blair links to this interesting Australia tourism ad, as well as to this post which quotes a prominent Australian academic who doesn't like it:
Elite lefty academic Tim Dunlop doesn't like the controversial new Tourism Australia TV ad meant to lure tourists to Australia:
The campaign is stupid not because it is offensive but because many people overseas won't understand it.
Dunlop's worried that the question, "So where the bloody hell are you?", at the end of the ad will so confound dumb foreigners that the Australians-are-friendly message and stunning visuals of the ad will both be lost, submerged in a sea of confusion. This is, of course, typical of the attitude of lefty elitists, especially when it comes to dumb Americans.
I happen to like the ad. Years of interacting with an Aussie friend and hours spent watching Lord of the Rings DVD extras have not only taught me how to understand all the lines in the ad perfectly well, but to detect which ones sound more Kiwi than Aussie.
But that's all just a minor sideline, barely worth mentioning except to point out the ad itself which is pleasant viewing and does indeed have some great visuals. But this controversy—"Americans will be confused by it"—also reminded me of something I'd seen the other day on Cartoon Brew, regarding the Chinese government's decision to ban all movies with mixed live-action and animated components, such as Who Framed Roger Rabbit? and Space Jam:
CGI and 2-D characters alongside human actors jeopardize "the broadcast order of homemade animation and mislead their development," according to a report from the state-run Xinhua News Agency.
Order comes as the Chinese government attempts to increase local production of Mandarin-language toons and cut the amount of foreign animated programming appearing on Chinese television. Chinese regulatory authorities are notoriously skittish regarding broadcast and film themes that include the supernatural or fantasy, including talking animals. "Babe" was banned on the basis that animals can't talk and some viewers would be confused.
Just imagine the mindset that directs a decision like this. Some viewers would be confused. A reason for banning art.
The thing is, it doesn't really come as that much of a surprise if we're talking about the Chinese government—it fits in well enough with all the bewilderingly counterintuitive maxims of Stalinism we've had to acquaint ourselves with over the years, all the attempts to assert equality of outcome by forcing everyone down to the lowest common denominator, to regulate creativity and entrepreneurship, and to hell with those people no longer allowed to exceed expectations or excel.
But to hear this same attitude from an "elite lefty academic"... well, I suppose that shouldn't surprise me either.
|
|
Brian Tiemann
