He did seem to take issue with the Israeli state murdering Lebanese. Anyone that would criticize Israeli state action is outrageously evil.
One hundred years from now, the esteemed authors of our time will be universally maligned for reasons we can’t even begin to imagine today. I suspect some will be “edited” because they ate meat.
hey guys did you hear that Pac-Man stopped calling the ghosts {checks notes} “trifling little bitches”?
Anyhow, the reason I know all of this is bullshit is because The Chronicles Of Narnia is still in print, and that shit is basically a Christian Identitarianism manifesto.
Even the ladies, just big old fat muslim terrorist beards.
HOLY FUCK.
Imagine the absolute disconnect with reality you must possess to think you can just talk to me like you’re people.
wut
He means you’re subhuman because you don’t see things the same way he sees things. Because this is a really great message board.
1 Like
No wonder you mfs believe this shit will take over the world.
it’s so nice talking to an actual person
ChatGPT tries to cop out but I don’t blame it after I pull the bush league “many are saying” gambit:
Speak for yourself buddy
1 Like
Wow, using GPT-3.5 like a literal caveman.
Prompt: Do you have any thoughts about sensitivity readers in regards to works of fiction and addressing “problematic” parts? Do you think this is an ideal solution, as opposed to outright censorship or simply finding different books to read that don’t contain “problematic” parts?
GPT-4: As an AI language model, I don’t have personal thoughts or opinions. However, I can provide you with a balanced perspective on sensitivity readers in regards to works of fiction and addressing “problematic” parts.
Sensitivity readers can be a valuable resource for authors and publishers to identify and address potential issues related to the portrayal of diverse characters, cultures, or experiences. They can help ensure that these portrayals are accurate, respectful, and do not reinforce stereotypes or misconceptions. By doing so, sensitivity readers can contribute to the creation of more inclusive and diverse literature.
However, it’s important to consider some potential drawbacks or concerns regarding the use of sensitivity readers:
- Overemphasis on political correctness: Some argue that relying on sensitivity readers might lead to excessive political correctness and self-censorship, hindering artistic freedom and creative expression.
- Homogenization of literature: There is a concern that sensitivity readers may contribute to a more homogenized and less diverse literary landscape if they encourage authors to avoid challenging or controversial themes.
- Subjectivity: Sensitivity is a subjective matter, and what one reader finds problematic, another may not. This could lead to inconsistencies in the feedback authors receive and the changes they are encouraged to make.
In terms of alternatives to sensitivity readers, there are other options to consider:
- Self-education: Authors can take the initiative to educate themselves on the subjects they write about, engaging in research, and consulting with primary sources to ensure accurate representation.
- Open dialogue: Encouraging open dialogue and discussions around literature can help authors and readers better understand different perspectives and develop empathy for experiences that differ from their own.
- Reader choice: Readers can choose to engage with books that align with their values and avoid those they find problematic, allowing for a diverse range of voices and opinions to coexist in the literary landscape.
In conclusion, sensitivity readers can be a useful tool for authors to create more accurate and respectful portrayals in their work. However, it’s essential to balance this with creative freedom and the need for diverse perspectives in literature. Alternatives such as self-education and promoting open dialogue can also help create a more inclusive literary landscape.
Prompt: Thank you so much. I have a trickier question however that is a face of the “sensitivity reader” discussion. How should we approach books by authors that are deceased, when they no longer have any say in the artistic process? In practice, obviously the owners of the copyright decide, but, do you think that disrespects the artistic integrity of the written work regardless of how problematic some parts might be?
GPT-4: The question of how to approach books by deceased authors with problematic content is a complex and nuanced issue. While I don’t have personal opinions, I can offer some perspectives on this matter for you to consider.
Historical context: It’s essential to recognize that literature is a product of its time, and cultural norms and values evolve over time. Reading these books within the context of the era they were written can provide valuable insights into the attitudes and perspectives of that period, even if they are no longer considered acceptable today.
Artistic integrity: Altering a deceased author’s work without their consent might be seen as disrespecting their artistic vision and integrity. It’s important to weigh the value of preserving the original work against the potential harm or offense it might cause to contemporary readers.
Educational opportunities: Problematic content in older books can be used as an opportunity for learning and discussion. Instead of altering or censoring these works, educators and readers can use them to engage in critical thinking and conversation about historical and cultural contexts, as well as the evolution of societal values.
Annotations and supplementary materials: One way to approach these works while maintaining their artistic integrity is to provide annotations, introductions, or supplementary materials that address and contextualize the problematic content. This can help readers better understand the historical context and engage with the material critically.
Curating collections: Libraries, bookstores, and educators can make conscious choices about which books to include in their collections or curricula, ensuring that they provide a diverse range of perspectives and avoid perpetuating harmful stereotypes or outdated views.
Reader choice: Ultimately, readers have the power to choose the books they engage with and can decide whether or not to read works with problematic content. Encouraging open discussion and promoting diverse voices in literature can help create a more inclusive literary landscape.
In conclusion, the question of how to approach books by deceased authors with problematic content is complex and depends on the values and priorities of the individuals and communities involved. Balancing artistic integrity, historical context, and the potential harm caused by problematic content requires thoughtful consideration and open dialogue.
Prompt: OK, but what if the no-talent hacky heirs of prominent deceased authors feel empowered to take a blue pencil to anything in their predecessors’ works that strikes them as inappropriate in any way?
GPT-4: When heirs of prominent deceased authors take it upon themselves to edit or alter the original works in response to changing cultural norms, it raises several concerns:
Artistic integrity: As previously mentioned, altering an author’s work without their consent can be seen as a violation of their artistic vision and integrity. The original work should ideally be preserved as a reflection of the author’s intent and the time in which it was written.
Subjectivity: Determining what is considered “inappropriate” can be highly subjective and vary significantly between individuals. Allowing heirs to make these decisions based on their personal views may not accurately represent the author’s intentions or the broader cultural context.
Historical context: Editing or altering older works to fit contemporary norms can erase essential historical context and hinder our understanding of how cultural attitudes and values have evolved over time.
Potential backlash: Such alterations can lead to backlash from readers and literary critics who argue that the changes are unnecessary, heavy-handed, or motivated by personal or political biases.
To address these concerns, it might be more constructive to consider alternative approaches, such as:
Providing context: Rather than altering the original work, heirs or publishers could provide introductions, annotations, or supplementary materials that address and contextualize the problematic content. This can help readers better understand the historical context and engage with the material critically.
Encouraging dialogue: Promoting open discussions about problematic content can foster understanding and empathy among readers, allowing for a more informed and inclusive literary landscape.
Curating collections: Heirs, publishers, and other stakeholders can make conscious choices about which works to republish, promote, or include in collections or curricula, ensuring that they provide a diverse range of perspectives and avoid perpetuating harmful stereotypes or outdated views.
Ultimately, the most effective approach will depend on the specific circumstances and the priorities of the individuals and communities involved. It’s essential to balance the preservation of artistic integrity and historical context with the potential harm caused by problematic content, and this often requires thoughtful consideration, open dialogue, and a willingness to explore alternative solutions.
That there is one damn smart robot.
1 Like