Friday, April 25, 2008
Comic Description (and Pictures)
It's looking increasingly likely that the Daily D won't be putting the aforementioned comic online. In the interest of bringing our readers as much news as possible on this front, here is Jake Baron's '10 description of the cartoon.
The central idea of the comic is that Dartmouth is now “outsourcing propaganda” to “somewhere in Asia,” where Ms. “Bone-Y-Ram” toils away “for Dartmouth Undying.” The comic depicts Ms. Lam’s face in a stereotypically Asian way, and the crudely drawn object representing Ms. Lam is unable to pronounce the English letter “L.” In the final frame, an object apparently representing a Dartmouth student asks “Who is Bone-Y-Ram,” to which an adjacent object replies, “Aonther self proclaimed hooker… I mean leader.” Taking the piggy-backing one step further, I'm also fully endorsing Mr. Baron's conclusion:
Though I agree with the anti-Board Packing sentiment that the comic expresses, and though it goes without saying that the artists have the right to publish such work, it goes equally without saying that the work is tasteless, nasty, obnoxious, petty, and offensive.
I reject this comic in the strongest possible terms. I can only hope that the artists’ extreme imbecility will not derail the valiant anti-Board Packing efforts of the more level-headed thousands, courageous leaders all, who fight day in and day out to maintain Democracy at Dartmouth. The full post, here.
UPDATE: Someone just sent in pictures of the comic taken with their cell phone. They're below the fold.
UPDATE 2: Katy O'Donnell's mea culpa, here.
  
Posted by A.S. Erickson at 1:17 AM
Comments
Why would you agree with the sentiment expressed in the comic? The comic states that Dartmouth is outsourcing its propaganda, which is incorrect.
It completely overlooks the fact that Dartmouth's opponent, the Alumni Association, really is outsourcing its propaganda. The "survey" and letters sent to alumni by the lawsuit's proponents have been funded, produced, and mailed by the Hanover Institute, which has succeeded in planting a man inside the Alumni Association leadership. So when the pro-lawsuit propaganda with which these two Phrygians agree really is "outsourced," they don't see any problem with that?
Posted by — April 25, 2008 7:44 AM
I suppose there's arguably an anti-board-packing sentiment buried in there somewhere.
Posted by — April 25, 2008 8:43 AM
You're right, there is an anti-board sentiment in there somewhere, or what the spinmeisters call an "anti-board-packing" sentiment. But the main political sentiment is this myth that Dartmouth is outsourcing propaganda... Do the authors really believe and care about that? It is so out of touch with reality that it's hard not to imagine that it was just a veneer for the personal attack that occupied most of the comic.
Posted by — April 25, 2008 9:23 AM
Best part of today's opinion page:
...How could you have let this happen — or do you consider this acceptable as an example of free speech? Do you intend to meet your responsibility or are you joining the ranks of The Dartmouth Review as the scum of print media?...
Posted by W. Aubin — April 25, 2008 9:24 AM
But the main political sentiment is this myth that Dartmouth is outsourcing propaganda.
Ratster, I don't think you completely get it. It's a bit distasteful to explain, but I'll give it a shot anyway. The "outsourcing" thing is a slur against Ms. Lam's ethnicity. Ms. Lam is Asian, in the comic strip "artist's" mind, Asian = overseas sweatshop worker. Therefore Asian woman writing letter in support of board = board outsourcing propaganda to Asian sweatshop.
The comic strip is basically a slur against Ms. Lam. The motivation for it is clearly that the "artist" disagreed with the content of her letter, so in that sense there's anti-board-packing sentiment in there somewhere, but it's really beside the point.
Posted by — April 25, 2008 9:59 AM
Zak Moore moronically adds to Jacob Baron's post:
I could not agree with Jake more, he expresses above my feelings about the cartoon to a T. I post this addendum only to the highlight the point that the message against Board-packing should not get lost. That students are being paid to support the Board-packing effort and these students “initiatives” are being passed off as grassroots rather than acknowledged as artificial, is deserving of disdain.
What is "deserving of disdain" is blatant falsehood. It's already amazing that Moore takes advantage of this sad situation in order not to defend Lam against racist attacks but rather to add fuel to the fire with the outright lie that she is being paid for her activities, which, actually, supports the the racist "outsourcing" statements of the comic. What a dolt. If, judging from his other writing, I didn't think that he were a bit slow, I'd be upset. He should retract his false statement.
Bonnie's letter, unlike the other letters being circulated by various Smurfs and toads, is abundantly clear about who it speaks for (not all students, as this blog claimed in error) and who is helping it get to people. So, his statements are not only false, but they don't even make sense.
As an aside, with Malchow now an "editor emeritus," I wonder if Dartblog will have the balls to allow readers to comment on its entries. At the moment, as ever, it stands as nothing more than a smarmy monument to staggering stupidity.
Posted by — April 25, 2008 12:19 PM
Though I agree with the anti-Board Packing sentiment that the comic expresses...
@Ratster. I didn't say anything about agreeing that Dartmouth Undying had outsourced its propaganda, though in a trivial sense both sides of this argument have.
Posted by A.S. Erickson — April 25, 2008 12:48 PM
Yes, I understand the implications of "outsourcing" etc. I interpret the cartoon to say that the authors believe that the board or the administration actually asked or encouraged Ms. Lam to write her letter. If you believe that this occurred, then one way to disparage it would be to compare it to sending work you should be doing yourself to overseas sweatshops instead, a sort of copout.
The problem is that the board or administration is not actually outsourcing its public relations under any sense of the term. It is not even clear that Dartmouth Undying, which states that it is independent of the administration, actually solicited this letter. The letter claims it did not. The cartoon appears especially myopic because the plaintiff in the lawsuit, i.e. the pro-litigation side the cartoon authors are attempting to support, is in fact "outsourcing" its propaganda.
A.S., I understand that you support the anti-board [-"packing"] sentiment. That's why it's worth pointing out that the more obvious sentiments, at least among those of a legitimate nature, are anti-"outsourcing" and pro-lawsuit.
Posted by — April 25, 2008 1:28 PM
@ratster
I think your missing the point I'm trying to make: nowhere in Baron's clip that I reproduced on this post did he conclude that the College outsourced its propoganda. He said he agrees with the anti-board packing sentiment expressed in the cartoon but not how it was expressed.
Posted by A.S. Erickson — April 25, 2008 2:17 PM
Looks like Malchow et al. changed the post without indicating that they've made a correction.
One more for the memory hole!
I guess that their appeals to honesty and integrity only go so far.
Posted by — April 25, 2008 2:22 PM
I'm far more offended by how awful those comics look. I thought you Ivy folks had high standards...?
Posted by — May 02, 2008 8:39 PM
(we enforce our comments policy)
|
