Subversive?

[Funt Solo]

Ah, so an irony here is that an older generation complaining about a lack of subversion are failing to recognize that the Regened experiment is itself subversive.

Our ability to register shock and awe at amazing artwork or stories might also be dulled by a lifetime of lived experience. Perhaps the reader is less punk, not the content.

[Tiplodocus]

Same here. My kid had a little think about Fatty vs Freddy and surmised that “even if Freddy didn’t mind, it’s still mean to call him fat”. On Scotty/Spotty, she thinks the same. She also wants “more girls in the glass”, which is fair enough. (I hope the Beano renames Plug and Toots also, although I suspect those will be a bigger ask. Frankly, I still wonder whether Bash St. Kids is salvageable. It’s always come across as a relic and has so many problems. Or perhaps they just need a writer to do a smart soft reboot, such as with Dennis, which is a much, much better strip now.)

This is great!

[Richard]

This has been the most interesting thread in a while.

[milstar]

The quest for what means subversive today sounds like a deep rabbit hole, for what I guess increasingly polarizing politics, of which is eerie that the both sides of the political spectrum grow far and close, and of which I am no fan of. Far left - far right; thus strenghtening my belief in the horseshoe theory. With no apologetics. It's no big secret that things go increasingly sensitive and PC in today's climate, for good and bad. Paradoxically, 1971 film The Devils (my favourite Ken Russell's film) is a film that could only be made in those years and it was way ahead of its time, and it was subversive as hell! Perhaps the film resonates better with the contemporary audience in mind, but I see no chance in making that type of film today.

Apropo 2000ad, the Dr. Rock's comment reminded me on a bloke I personally know bloke, who was a regular 2000ad fan. I guess him being some 10-15 years than myself and being the kid of the 80s (opposed to me being the kid of the 90s) left him feeling let down a bit by the recent output of 2000ad progs. To paraquote "progs lack edginess and Rebellion name couldn't be more distant from the truth."

[Funt Solo]

Is Ron Desantis ban on wokery subversive?

No, because it's not what it says on the tin. "Woke" is just a buzz-word that suggests an enemy to rail against. What Ron Desantis is doing is trying to ban the teaching of Critical Race Theory in Florida schools. Critical Race Theory is the study of racial inequality and is, itself, trying to help subvert a status quo that accepts racism. 

Desantis is trying to maintain a racist status quo - he's trying to maintain a system, not subvert one.

If Woke-ism existed, and was indeed subjecting people to onerous conditions, then there could be a movement to subvert it. It doesn't (except as part of a right-wing dog whistle), therefore there can't be.

[Tjm86]

If Woke-ism existed, and was indeed subjecting people to onerous conditions, ...

Ironically the idea of being 'woke' has been subverted over recent years.  Originally it was coined as a term to describe individuals who had become aware of and responsive to issues.  Over time it became associated with 'hip' individuals (predominantly celebrities, hyper-affluent youngsters etc ...) and began to attract negative connotations. 

In the last few years though it has become a variant of 'political correctness' and used as an attack.  As you say, it is primarily deployed against groups or causes considered antithetical to the so-called dominant culture.  Be it environmentalism, racial awareness, disability rights, trans rights, feminism ... it is now deployed as a means of demeaning legitimate concerns and issues.  As you say, a "right-wing dog whistle".

So I think to argue that there isn't a movement to subvert so to speak.  I would suggest that there is either an idea or usage that can be 're-subverted' or 'reclaimed'. 

[Barrington Boots]

As someone who has been quite involved in the underground music scene, in my experience with any kind of evolution of counterculture stuff, if old fans of the genre don't like it then that's probably a plus.

Violence is commonplace in media nowdays, but if younger people today are embracing diversity and that's pissing off old men everywhere, I'd say that's still got a rebellious edge to it.

[IndigoPrime]

Violence is commonplace in media nowdays, but if younger people today are embracing diversity and that's pissing off old men everywhere, I'd say that's still got a rebellious edge to it.

That sums things up perfectly. Most of what we see is white men in their 30s and above whining that not everything is about white men anymore. Heck, even that classic period of 2000 AD was mostly white men in their 30s and above, with a few exceptions (the odd alien, a blue soldier, some black sportsmen).

As for milstar’s friend arguing 2000 AD lacks edginess, it would be interesting to know what edginess means for him. Is it just violence? It surely can’t be rallying against authority, because 2000 AD is still packed with that.

And on woke: exactly what’s said above. It’s a word/concept that’s been weaponised. There is no ‘woke agenda’. What we have in reality is a bunch of people—mostly younger—arguing for more inclusivity, acceptance and equality, and a bunch of white men getting really fucking angry at the thought of women and minorities having something even approaching the same level of influence that they’ve enjoyed for countless generations. We see this so much in UK politics. Raab is trying to rewrite the Human Rights Act to counter ‘wokery’. What this means is trying to make things less equal.

In short, when someone says “We need to deal with woke”, imagine them saying “Know your place”. That’s what it boils down to. Fuck those people.

[Mister Pops]

Same here. My kid had a little think about Fatty vs Freddy and surmised that “even if Freddy didn’t mind, it’s still mean to call him fat”. On Scotty/Spotty, she thinks the same. She also wants “more girls in the glass”, which is fair enough. (I hope the Beano renames Plug and Toots also, although I suspect those will be a bigger ask. Frankly, I still wonder whether Bash St. Kids is salvageable. It’s always come across as a relic and has so many problems. Or perhaps they just need a writer to do a smart soft reboot, such as with Dennis, which is a much, much better strip now.)

I'm just imagining a grimdark Dennis the Menace reboot that explores the cycle of abuse starting with his father's slipper, leading to him lashing out and victimizing Walter, which his teacher reports back to his father and starts the whole thing off again, forcing Dennis out on the streets to live an almost feral existence with his vicious dog. All done in black and white, with just a splash red from the stripes on Dennis' jumper and occasionally... the blood...

No doubt that's not the case, and they've got rid of all the casual child abuse and bullying.

[IndigoPrime]

Well, yes. Dennis was a horrible little shit right through to the mid-2010s in some formats. The ‘softies’ were positioned as weak primarily because they liked stereotypical girlie things. Beyond that, there was the casual sexism (ugh: girls).

The change isn’t huge, but it does cleverly shift the entire strip. Dennis is now mischievous and streetwise but not a bully. Walter has been changed into a fun-hating spoilsport, taking after his father, the mayor (and wannabe supervillain). The gang has been updated too. Curly has gone and so Dennis’s gang now comprises himself, Pie Face and two girls, JJ and Rubi (who also have their own strips elsewhere, with Rubi usually getting a page in every issue). His dad has spiked hair (suggesting he’s the original Dennis, something further suggested by his granddad looking like the original Dennis’s father).

It’s not like Nigel Auchterlonie binned everything. The changes are all quite subtle. But they add up to something I’m happy for my daughter to read and that’s significantly more inclusive, without diluting the rebellious edge that has always been at the core of the strip.

[Jim_Campbell]

What we have in reality is a bunch of people—mostly younger—arguing for more inclusivity, acceptance and equality

I don't have kids, but what's been really striking for me talking to the teenage children of my friends is this: they really don't care about sexuality, or gender identity, or any of that stuff. And it's fantastic. I mean, it's amazing.

I think about my school years — if someone called you "gay" there was a real, gut-wrenching terror that it would stick. Kids would genuinely kill themselves over shit like that. And now, seriously, they just don't care.

For all the crushing, depressing, atmosphere that exists in post-Brexit Britain with the Gammon Ascendent™… stuff like this actually gives me hope for the future, and makes me rage against the Mail/Express/Telegraph arseholes waging their war on "woke".

[milstar]

Since the topic slipped into "woke" notion, I can't but not to notice that it was probably natural digression. As folks say, one thing lead to another. But I think wokery does exist, because if doesn't, we wouldn't be talking about it. In empirical way that is. The only problem is, we never sat around in order to give it a proper definition. But it exists, considering that more and more people step forward with labelling someone or something as "woke". Tim86 post however, might be the closest to the truth. Sure, it might be weaponized against political opponents of the far left, but aren't all phrases like that? The one "bleeding heart liberals", might is as well replaced with "woke". We usually came spontaneously and it sticks like a movie phrase. Then, if people feel they are threatened by their government, or dominant culture, with perception they have no voice in it, it gets another layer of meaning. In that case, subversion and woke have action-consequence position. This, ironically, might be the only thing that has united both sides of the spectrum. Aversion and anti-trust toward the government. Anti-lockdown protests, BLM, you name it. Either way, these are bleak times to live in.

As for milstar’s friend arguing 2000 AD lacks edginess, it would be interesting to know what edginess means for him. Is it just violence? It surely can’t be rallying against authority, because 2000 AD is still packed with that.

I have no idea really. I was left with the mystery in my hands.

[Funt Solo]

Labeling things doesn't make them real, it just applies a label. You might label someone a subhuman - and so the label exists, but the subhuman doesn't (except perhaps in the minds of people applying or witnessing the label). It's a lie, you see.

Yes, woke exists as a label but (as I explained up-thread) it gets used to cover up the real action. Your friend Desantis isn't some kind of heroic culture warrior, he's a racist. Openly being racist doesn't play well across a wide enough demographic, so he's hiding his racism behind the "woke" label.

Of course, there's a whole thread about what woke does or doesn't mean...

[milstar]

Woke can be a lot of things, doesn't mean they are less relevant. Ofcourse subhuman doesn't exist, but we are comparing antropology and social interactions here. It's not a lie when someone accuses a person for being woke on the grounds of that other person's (probably far left) politics, which is real. Same thing when labeling someone as arsehole because he is an arsehole because he does or did some arsehole stuff. On the basis of our actions we get labeled and when it becomes a norm...well... Besides, anyone who falls in depression over being called woke has some personal issue. Woke...meh.

DeSantis is not my friend.

[Funt Solo]

DeSantis is not my friend.

Are you for or against his bill (which you brought up and described as a "ban on wokery") to stop schools from teaching their students about racial inequality?