Acidance's latest cover issue

On 2006-02-01 23:18, floatyhippyflower wrote:

Quote:

On 2006-02-01 19:45, Evil Fucker wrote: So, Do you watch Horror movies and read Horror books ? If yes, why? Why do you read them ? or see them Are you also disgusted by them ? they contain blood and other brutal stuff don’t they !?

Difference is these are real pictures of real people suffering or dead as a result of real events, not images of horror you know in advance aren't actually happening. I'm not pro-censorship by any stretch of the imagination but I am pro-choice. And I'll tell you a true story of something this thread reminded me of that might demonstrate what I'm getting at.

When I was in my early twenties a rather horrible person I used to know showed me and my then boyfriend a movie. He was a film student who was interested in special effects and he told me before we all sat down to it that it was 'just' a horror flick, but one that had been banned for how realistic it was. The resolution of the video itself was very ropey and I assumed it was copied as a result. Anyway I sat for an hour and watched a young girl get her limbs cut off one by one before finally being decapitated. I could hardly bear to watch and spent much of it hiding behind my hands. I later found out it was a real snuff movie and the girl in the video had died before my eyes.

It took me and my boyfriend weeks to get over that; we both felt stupid and guilty for having believed it was just a horror film and the difference in my attitude towards my viewing it was very much different knowing it happened in real life. I didn't stay in touch with the guy long after the that but I still think about it nearly ten years later.

The point I'm trying to make here is that whatever "message" is being promoted by the release of this CD if any, the fact that it includes these images without a suitable level of warning means some people, who maybe don't already know of it's contents, have no choice but to view pictures of disturbing, real life events that they would otherwise choose not to see. I would think that a parental advisory sticker in the corner isn't really enough for some of the things being described here.

I understand what you say mist and I have no reason to suspect your motives were other than genuine. However I'd be interested to know if you are trying to make a statement about some of the world's ills, if any of the proceeds for this album are going to relevant charities connect with the events you depict? Were any of the families of the victims asked if it was OK to use such images of their loved ones? (I ask because I know I would be devastated if someone used pictures of someone I loved in that way, or even pictures of my own death for anything other than medical/research purposes, especially without my permission.) Do you campaign for the issues you are highlighting with your artwork in any other, external way? Or have personal experience of such events that might authenticate your message? Otherwise, with all due respect, I'm inclined to think the primary reason behind your inclusion of the photos was one of raising awareness for your new release, not awareness of the crimes themselves, by causing this kind of controversy. Clearly you're not stupid so you'll have been aware when agreeing to the contents that more people are likely to buy it just to see what the fuss is all about, like the curiosity people seem to feel when driving past a car accident for example.

Perhaps I'm wrong and just feeling a little cynical today though.

On 2006-02-01 23:59, mist wrote:
i am proud of what the label accomplished with this one

On 2006-02-02 02:03, ----Dawn---- wrote:

Everything you just said.

On 2006-02-02 01:31, woutski wrote:
Raising awareness...
Maybe it's me, but making 'hippies' aware of the fact that war is bad is kinda like preaching to the converted innit?

Do you? Read through the thread again mist; the fact that as many postees question your motives as defend them demonstrates quite clearly that this is not the case and your message hasn't come across to a large number of people for whom it was intended.

Don't you think others have a right to decide what they want to see?

To all those who say “don’t like it don’t buy it” – ordinarily I’d agree with you but in June’s case, she purchased the album for the music from a website and didn’t have any idea beforehand she’d see the photos in question. Do you think you have the right to subject people to real images of torture and death without their prior consent and an appropriate level of warning?

I think it’s patronising to assume that it’s your duty to raise awareness - that people ‘need’ to see these things before they understand that they happen. (Especially within a scene that’s so full of fluffy, left-wing, socially ‘switched-on’ hippy-types, being totally honest about the targeted demographic here.)

On 2006-02-01 22:38, DWH wrote:
I looked at those picture now, and I can't see what's the fucking fuzz is about.. For sure it looks like a bunch of vegan-al-qaida-extreme-left-protestorfucks from the middle east with their ak47's and stuff, but nothing else that really discusted me.

You wimps are fucking lucky not to know Henrik Björkk.