Raven's Log | Stardate: 6.9.05
Time flies when you're too lazy to write
Yeah, yeah, I know its been a while. Remember, how I said I wasnt going to fall behind anymore? Well, who told you to believe everything you read? In fact, the only thing that got me off my lazy keister and writing is the blog from Joey Styles commenting on my crucifixion angle. See, I'm not lazy when it comes to things I want to do, but I'm really not a big fan of writing or else I would've done so much more than just one comic book in that field. For some reason, I just don't find writing to be all that fun, which is kind of sad because its one of my 3 best skills. My two other best skills I actually enjoy that is if movie/TV watching and banging whores count as skills. Because then I've got three mad crazy skills. However, unless I'm hired as a Nielsen family or a gigolo, the only lucrative one is the one I don't enjoy doing. Some other skills include, but are not limited to, being late, not getting enough sleep and conversely sleeping 10 hours a night, as well as not hitting the seat while urinating, flatulence, both lengthy and loud, blowing my nose while eating, making fun of Disco, poor handwriting, reading comics at Waffle House, bragging about my IQ and cock size, both very large as well as other esoterica I don't believe I can make a living from. And last but not least, starting projects I never finish, like guitar lessons, the A/V Club, the Ms. Raven Effect contest (which will be completed either at the end of this entry, because I already know who's won or the next one depending on how long this day's weeks months year's rant is). I attribute this to a deadly combination of ADD, perfectionism (if I can't do it at an extremely high level or master it quickly, I lose interest), apathy, laziness and my constant need to be always entertained or in a state of bliss which these don't engender. But don't be sad, boys and girls, your boss still does extremely well wrestling, which luckily for him, he still enjoys performing as much, if not more, than he ever did. In fact, I read something interesting today in David Mack's 'Kabuki The Alchemy,' which is a part of a continuation of a truly novel original and revolutionary comic book series. The first trade of six Kabuki titles is Circle of Blood, which is absolutely brilliant and is the new A/V choice offering. Anyway, a character says that, basically, what we love as nine to eleven year olds is what we were meant to do because "at that age, your personality is sophisticated enough to know what you like to do and internally motivated to do but is right before the age when you begin to submerge your natural identity to accomodate the expectations, preconceptions and rigid categorization of the adult world ... that you become increasingly sensitive to as you enter adolescence. Think back to what you enjoyed before they squeezed your dreams into a box of practicality. Before they were minimized or channeled into a cookie cutter. Before you were labeled or groomed for your family or your society's expectation of you." I wanted to be a wrestler at age nine through eleven and now I am. Yay me! In fact, my infatuation with wrestling was going to be my first article for Powerslam Magazine, which had hired me to write a column, but then, Fin Martin, the publisher said that it wasn't printable and gave no reason for it but said I'd still be sent a check, which I wasn't. Anyway, I thought it was a damn fine article as did Vic and I'll let Vic put it up on the site in the near future. Now, without further adieu-doo, here's the actual reason I worked up the energy to write a journal entry.
There was a blog about Styles responding to an interview with me about the crucifixion angle. He said the apology was justified because I had horribly offended Christians and equated it to doing a bit where I tattooed numbers on The Sandman and marched him and all the babyfaces into a gas chamber. He said Paul claimed the idea was all mine, which it was. He also said it was tasteless and stupid, so I would like to respond. First, let me say that Joey Styles is a brilliant commentator and I would put him as one of my 4 all-time favorites, along with Gordon Solie, Jim Ross and Lance Russell. Secondly, if he is a man of integrity, he will continue to judge my work as objectively as I judge his, no matter how much I write in the following passages. Thirdly, I hope he doesn't break an ankle falling off his pedestal. Now, his initial point is that I was wrong in justifying the apology and later he decries me doing the angle at all, where actually that is two different points and shall be defended separately. First, for argument's sake, let's say the angle was a bad choice, which I don't remotely believe, but let's say it was. I still would have to maintain the apology was a poor choice: strictly because we were the rebel promotion. The fans knew and came to expect us to cross the line. They came to be entertained, aroused, enlivened and to see things the other two weren't doing, to put the art back into wrestling and to put the intelligence back into wrestling. They expected us to push the envelope and were upset if we didn't. By that reasoning alone, if we did push the envelope too far, the last thing they would want is for us to apologize for it. In fact, no matter how offended they potentially may have been, there is no way they would've wanted us to say, "Oops I'm sorry, we tried to be controversial and now we're sorry because we were too controversial." According to you, those assumptions would be incorrect. However, I'm reasonable enough to understand that that, is a point of contention neither of us can prove 100% accurately unless we poll our constituency, so let's take what the main thrust of your argument is, that we horribly offended Christians, and move onto that. First of all, you say it is tasteless and stupid, I maintain it is neither. The definition of stupid is something marked by a lack of intelligence or care; the angle wasnt. The angle was actually quite creative. My character has said time and time again that he is a martyr for society's dysfunction, and has, since day one, put his arms out in a Christ-like pose to symbolize this. By crucifying the Sandman, I was using artistic license, to literally make the Sandman feel as my character was feeling figuratively. I wasn't mocking Christ, there would be no point: he wasn't in my angle, nor did he have anything to do with it, other than symbolically. I assume that appropriating his iconography emblematically, to convey an artistic point, is probably light years less offensive than all the wars that Christians themselves have started in Jesus' name to "convert the heathens." I'm sure Christ himself would be much less offended by what I did artistically, than what some of the people have done in his name, by forcing entire societies of people to convert at gunpoint, at least I hope so. This is merely an assumption by me. To quote a friend, Vic, who has a double B.A. in English Lit and History from UCLA and is now currently going to law school at Arizona State University, "the use of religious imagery as allegory or metaphor is common in art and culture" and comparing it to a Holocaust bit, Styles' analogy doesnt hold up at all. "There is a difference between appropriating religious iconography/symbolism to draw a point and re-enacting historical events for the purpose of being offensive." I wasn't trying to offend Christians. I was trying to offend Sandman fans. Martin Scorsese wasn't trying to offend when he made "The Last Temptation of Christ," nor was Kevin Smith in "Dogma," but thats not what church higher ups chose to believe even after admitting that they had not seen the films. If you missed my point or didn't look for it or it wasn't obvious enough for you, then I feel bad. But this had nothing to do with insulting Christians, and I didn't feel I should have to apologize for my artistic choice. I don't feel Baron Von Raschke owes me an apology, for a choice he made, to play a Nazi, even though I'm Jewish. If I would've thought that artistically there was material in a bit similar to your Holocaust idea, I would've used it. To quote another friend, envy, "Comparing the crucifixion of Christ to the Holocaust is like comparing a banana to a pomegranate: it is assumptive, suppositionary, and irrelevant. It is also subjective and irresponsible." Not to come across too farcical, but even though Jesus died, he did come back: you can't say that for the Holocaust victims. Besides Jesus supposedly died for our sins, the Holocaust victims died for the whims of a madman. What irks me more than anything is your position, Joey Styles. You sit on your soapbox pontificating from your high and mighty perch, but if you were so offended, why didn't you quit right there instead of drawing a paycheck for the next five or so years? Why didnt you quit in the name of all Christians you claim were horribly offended. That doesn't sound like conviction to me. At least when I told newspapers and radio hosts I was sick of WCW and proceeded to bury them publically, I stuck to my convictions. So when Eric Bischoff called me on it, in front of a locker room and said, "If you're unhappy with the company, theres the door," I stuck to my guns and quit. It is well known Paul E., while not coming up with the angle, approved of it lock, stock and barrel. you may have deluded yourself into thinking Paul E. knew nothing about it, but if you were aware that he was in on it, I guess your righteous anger only applies when money doesn't change hands. Furthermore, I may have used religious imagery iconography to convey a point that sadly you missed, but at least I'm not using the Lord's name in vain as a catch phrase. I don't know how many times a show you yell, "Oh My God!" for something as trivial and mundane as a high spot. Hey, personally, it doesn't offend me, I could care less, but it sounds slightly hypocritical to me, and the three Christian pastors I actually went to see upon writing this response agreed as well. Ultimately, we'll see what kind of conviction you really have. You have buried and lambasted the WWE for so long, even going so far as stating on November 1, 2004 concerning the Hassan/Daivari/9-11 angle that, "I sincerely hope this latest tasteless attempt to capitalize on the worst tragedy in American history backfires in disastrous proportions on WWE. I strongly encourage any WWE stockholders who find this desperate attempt at ratings as offensive as I do to sell their stock immediately." But with the ECW PPV, do you still hope people sell their stock? And, by inference, if you want people to sell their stock, would you want people to not order the ppv as well? Or would you? Since you are going to be on it! Joey Styles, what a brilliant tactic! You must be appearing on the live show to publically tell everyone to sell their stock! Then again, maybe you wont be on it. Maybe you'll stand by your convictions since WWE never apologized for the UnAmericans response to 9-11 because in a quote you say, "I will never forget everything I saw on September 11, 2001 and I will never forget that WWE saw the worst tragedy in American history as fodder for a pro wrestling promo. WWE never apologized for the promo. My anger towards WWE is justified." Joey Styles, if I personally found things as offensive as you and publically proclaimed it, I don't know if I'd be able to look in a mirror if I worked for that company. I claim to be a man of conviction and I stand by my beliefs, just as you claim to. So I guess if we see you at the ECW PPV working for the WWE, we'll know where your convictions lie, right near your wallet. Just like all those years ago with the crucifixion angle.
- Scott Levy
View the original Joey Styles piece by clicking here
<< back to top | comment on entry | back to main >> |
|
|