The Very-Many-Questions-Not-Worth-Their-Own-Thread Thread XXXIV
- Thread starter Synobun
- Start date
- Status
sophie
Break My Heart
I think the video's remark about the way in which you browse through music is supremely important. Even if a book's cover art is profoundly iconic and beautiful, before you pull a book out, you see nothing more than words on a spine. The cover is the second (or maybe third, if you read the jacket/back blurb first) thing you see in a book. For music, the album cover is always the first thing you see.
Compounding off of this: a book cover is something you consume once; you look at it, but your eyes are largely committed to reading the text within the book. You might return to the cover art once in a while over the course of reading the book, but the cover art is always secondary to the experience of consuming the product.
By contrast, consider the act of listening to vinyl. You might put the music on and walk away or do something else. But if you are listening to the music, it's fairly natural to want to hold the jacket and look at the art while you listen. The album art is as much a part of the experience as the listening itself. Much different than with reading a book.
Last edited:
Can someone explain this protest to me? Apparently members of lesbian and feminist group Get The L Out pushed their way to the front of the London Gay Pride Parade and could not be moved. A Get The L Out spokeswoman said: "We protested to protect our rights and on behalf of all the lesbians intimidated, threatened and silenced by the GBT community everywhere.
"The GBT community today, by supporting the rights of males who "identify as lesbians" (also called "transwomen") over the rights of lesbians to choose their sexual partners (on the basis of their sex, not how they "identify") is in fact enforcing heterosexuality on lesbians.
"This is a misogynistic and anti-lesbian manifestation of the rape culture we live in."
Can someone interprite this for me?
"The GBT community today, by supporting the rights of males who "identify as lesbians" (also called "transwomen") over the rights of lesbians to choose their sexual partners (on the basis of their sex, not how they "identify") is in fact enforcing heterosexuality on lesbians.
"This is a misogynistic and anti-lesbian manifestation of the rape culture we live in."
Can someone interprite this for me?
sophie
Break My Heart
As a lesbian, this has to be the stupidest thing I've heard of in months.
Just because someone is the victim of discrimination does not mean that they cannot have their own victims to discriminate against.
And, based on Lemon's expertise as a mental health professional, I should add that people really can be stupid.
Books can be published by different publishers in different countries and in the same country.
For example, I have three different paperback editions of The Bloody Sun (one of the novels in Marion Zimmer Bradley's Darkover series). The earliest edition is shorter than the next edition, as Bradley revised it and added some content. Both of these were published in the U.S. by Ace. The most recent edition I have contains the same text as the second Ace edition, but it was published by DAW. All three were published in the U.S. and all three have different cover art.
I've seen different cover art again on foreign language editions of her books. In some cases I've wished the American editions could have that art.
In other cases, I have to wonder if the artist had even the vaguest idea of what the book was about. One of the worst offenders in this is whoever did the cover art for the UK editions of F.M. Busby's Hulzein novels. Rissa Kerguelen, at the time she leaves Earth, is 17 years old. Yet the cover art depicts a woman who's somewhere between 30 and 40. She isn't even 40 by the end of the series, let alone the first two books!
And there are plenty of instances where cover art is reused. The same art is used for the cover of Jo Clayton's novel The Snares of Ibex (in the Diadem series) as in a foreign edition of one of MZB's Darkover novels.
One reason why this happens is likely as you suggest - the publisher has a stable of artists it uses.
Another reason is the same as re-issuing a book with a different title. Fool the customers into buying it, thinking it's a new one they haven't read before. This is why, if you buy your books on Amazon, you should always read the reviews. If this is indeed a re-issue of the same text but different cover art or even a different title, chances are good that someone will have already been taken in and has posted a warning to anyone else thinking of buying this book.
I am often able to see the point of views which are opposing my own, I often can even understand the logic behind nutty views... but the logic in there is so monstrously warped, it's total bat faeces.
Back when people actually did albums, which is to a large extent ancient history now, the cover are was as much an identifier as the name. many albums didn't even actually have names.
This sold umpteen million copies, and was instantly recognizable to 2 generations of Western music fans.
It didn't have a title.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Led_Zeppelin_IV
yes
The one of Led Zeppelin of 1971
In 1968 The Beatles had an Album without even a color, that became known as the white album
Seems pretty simple to me...? Marginalized group builds their identity on victimhood, someone threatens the identity, they label them the victimizers.
Lexicus
Deity
They are Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs) who believe that the oppression women experience is based entirely on their sex organs. Consequently any sort of feminism that attacks the gender binary itself is seen as a threat.
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
I would have just called them "Lesbians for Bigotry"
There are lesbians who are bigots for other reasons, so that just seems unnecessarily unspecific. TERF is a well-known and entrenched acronym for a well-known phenomenon.
It's important to note that there's also a relevant distinction here. TERFs aren't bad because they don't want to have sex with trans women; having preferences is how humans work. TERFs are bad because they hate and ostracize trans women and misgender them out of some horrible conspiracy theory.
Na, that part makes sense.
The internal logic doesnt make sense too much sense.
“There are men who hate lesbians that much that they undergo gender reassignment surgery, to make them secretly and against their will love men (in the form of women) again.“
I follow thathat logic, but it makes the flat earth theory sound really reasonable.
Lexicus
Deity
That's not the logic, the logic is that wider society treating such people as women reflects underlying prejudice against lesbians. It's totally idiotic of course.
- Status
