Another 9/11 question

[Amanita]

The ongoing discussion about how 9/11 has colored people's views of the apocalypse touched on something else I've been thinking about, in regards to that event.

How do you feel about creative works based on, or involving 9/11, such as plays, fiction, movies, artwork, or other such expressions?

Are you totally okay with creative works that reference 9/11, or do you feel that any creative or fictionalized treatment of 9/11 is an affront, or do you fall somewhere in the middle?

For me, this is a personal subject for a few reasons. 9/11 affected me deeply, even though I'm not an American. Ever since I was a kid, I've had a serious love affair with NYC, skyscrapers, and the WTC towers. It was a dream of mine to visit them, and they inspired the hell out of me. I drew characters based on them, and on a more factual level, I also did a science project which explored how they were built, and what they were designed to stand up to. For that project, I actually talked to some of the engineering staff of the Port Authority of NY and NJ, the people who had built the place. (I still think it's hella cool that those people took time out from running two of the world's biggest buildings to talk with an awkward skyscraper-geek/high schooler like me! Needless to say, I was relieved when the names of the people I talked to were absent from the casualty list, but saddened for those who were not so fortunate)

I have done artwork and written stories featuring my skyscraper-folk for a very long time, and when dealing with subject matter like that, 9/11's bound to come up sooner or later. When it comes to fiction, I'd rather deal with it openly and honestly- have it happen, have my characters experience it, and work through the fallout, than treat it like the elephant in the room that everyone tries not to talk about, or throw it down the rabbit hole of memory and pretend it never happened. Shortly after 9/11, the writers of many tv shows set in NYC were in a similar situation, and handled it in many ways- the writers of "Friends" pretty much if not totally ignored it, while Third Watch wove it quite deeply into their storyline.

Needless to say, I am not offended by 9/11 inspired creative efforts, and when it comes to judging whether something is okay or an affront, I believe in going on a case-by case basis. For example, I've seen halloween costumes that directly reference 9/11 and the WTC towers. Some were crass and mean-spirited, accessorized by plastic figures representing jumpers, crashed planes, and in the case of one creative group of teenagers, a hidden smoke machine. (Kudos for special effects, shame they used that on something so crass) But I've also seen a few that were made as tributes- Tower angels and a pair of towers holding a "United We Stand" banner between them. I don't believe that those deserve to be lumped in with the crashed planes and plastic jumpers, the creative direction and motivation behind those costumes are nothing alike. To say that ALL of the aforementioned costumes are an insult regardless of the design or motivation of the wearers would be awfully arbitrary to me.

Likewise other creative works. If a commercial venture such as a movie or play takes on 9/11, let the free market handle it. If it's disrespectful and overall sucks, odds are it will flop and be out of the theaters PDQ.

Now, not everyone feels the same way I do- I've been accused of "making jest of 9/11", for a skit idea I mentioned, which featured a Skyscraper-avatar going up against a generic black-clad villain and kicking the villain's butt. Even though the Skyscraper was NOT one of the WTC towers, and the villain was designed NOT to look anything like the perpetrators of 9/11. I was even told that I should not portray ANY New York skyscraper, on the off chance that it might remind people of 9/11, and reminding people of anything bad would be a dick move.

So when it comes to 9/11 and creative works, would you say yes to everything, no to everything, or depends?

[csquared]

Interesting... This is the second time today that I got to use on of my favorite phrases.

You are entitled to your opinion, even if it is wrong.

To me, this says a lot. You can have an opinion. I can have an opinion. We don't have to agree. If both of us are willing to have an open discussion, we can talk about and try to convince the other to change their mind, or not.

If either one of us doesn't wish to discuss it, then the one person does not have the right to shove their opinion down the other person's throat. And this is where the world in general tends to fall apart.

You saw some things that you thought were crass. The creator doesn't agree. Just like the way you created something that someone else thought was out of line.

All of them opinions that each and every one of us is entitled to.

In everything we do, if you search the world over, you will probably find someone that will disagree. You will not find a completely unanimous decision. So what do you do?

The answer depends on what you are trying to achieve. If you are trying to market something to the masses, it is best to appease the masses. On the other hand, if you want publicity (or maybe notoriety), then you try and piss people off. Look at talk radio. They are the masters.

If you reference 9/11, someone will probably be hurt, offended, upset, you will have trigger a painful memory. Someone else will probably be touched, warmed, thankful that you have triggered a memory that brings them joy or hope. In the end, you will be taking your chances. As this is a opinionated topic, there is a higher chance that you will get an extreme opinion.

As someone who was in the WTC on 9/11, I of course have an opinion. Is my opinion any more or any less valuable than anyone else's?

In my opinion, no.

[Greenday]

Back home, we can see the NYC skyline from the beach. It's beautiful. I was in the city all the time and was just a black away a couple days before it happened. I don't mind some serious artistic stuff, but I've seen a lot of people make cheap crap just to make a quick buck and that bothers me tbh.

[Amanita]

For me, I think the intention of the creator comes into it- some people criticized that film "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close", not saying that "OMG, they talked about 9/11 how dare they!?", but rather they felt that the film was using 9/11 as Oscar-bait.
As for the costumes I mentioned- I actually have heard from the creators of some of them. One member of the couple who made the Tower Angel costumes and wore them to the Greenwich village Halloween Parade, and one of the kids who made that costume with the smoke machine in it. Mr Tower-Angel showed up on a message board where we were discussing the rebuilding of the site, and he mentioned that he was one of the people in the photo of that costume circulating around on the net. He explained why he and his wife had chosen that as their costume- it was a form of tribute as wearable art, a costume meant to convey sincere feeling and emotion. They wanted to show respect to the victims and also show how much they missed those towers.

Now, the kids who made the other costume, (there were three of them, two towers and one plane), they posted on another site, saying that they had made the costume specifically for shock value and attention, and planned to sell it on ebay to make a buck or two. Hey, controversy sells, right? To me, that's a far worse motivation, like what Greenday takes issue with.

The forum where I got chewed out tends to be (IMHO) a bit over-sensitive by times- another person said they planned to make brief mention of Pearl Harbor in a skit, and they got three pages of hate for it. The focus of the skit wasn't going to be Pearl Harbor, the tone of the skit was serious, not comedic, and the extent of the mention was going to be something like "Japan's attack on America". They got a slew of "Too soon!...No need for you to mention that!" and one person even said that if they heard so much as a peep about Pearl Harbor in a skit in any context, they would get up and walk out, and take their friends with them. It wasn't WW11 vets saying this, it was mostly teens and 20-somethings. And on that forum, nobody was interested in having any kind of open discussion, it was straight-up dogpiling. Nobody wanted to read updates or revised ideas where the touchy stuff had been changed, they just wanted to rage. And one of the mods didn't help- they could take a page from csquared, saying that no person's opinion automatically trumps another. When they locked that thread where I got dogpiled, there were lots of good reasons to do so- Thread is hopelessly derailed, people are arguing in circles, it's not a discussion anymore- it's a dogpile. Nope, the mod stated that thy were locking the thread specifically because THEY were offended by my original idea. Because their boyfriend had been in NYC on 9/11 and might have seen things, they used that as their trump card to shut down anything they disagreed with.


About anything I may do that deals with 9/11- When that event happened, I had being doing the kind of writing and artwork I do for quite a while beforehand. So when that happened, it affected the universe I had been creating too. It would seem odd to ignore it, and pretend it never happened. So I believe it's better to honestly deal with it. Now, I am aware that some people might not be ready to read such a story, or it may be triggering to some folks. Which is why if I ever get it all written, I'll include a trigger warning explaining exactly what my story deals with, so people can decide for themselves if they want to read further. And if somebody decides not to read it because they think it will be triggering or they just aren't ready for it, that's okay with me, it's why I put the warning there in the first place. Forewarned is forearmed, after all.
I've read a lot of factual books about 9/11, and one I keep coming back to is "102 Minutes", which tells the stories of what happened inside those buildings. As hard to read as some parts are, what impresses me is how so many people came together to help each other out. People love to stereotype bankers, lawyers, and corporate types as selfish people only in it for themselves. But when the chips were down, people overwhelmingly came together and helped each other. Some people had plenty of time to escape, but lost their lives because they stayed to help others, or refused to leave people who couldn't get down on their own. Others helped carry co-workers down the stairs- whether they were wheelchair bound or injured. That spirit of courage and togetherness, of people coming together even under such awful circumstance is something I want to explore in my own work.

Anyone here read Regretsy? The lady who runs that site has a lot to say on creative works rooted in real world events. To her, it's all "Tragicrafting" and therefore wrong. She's even gone on record saying that the image of the Twin Towers is as "ruined as the Nazi Swastika".
I know quite a few people who would beg to differ on that statement alone! As for her blanket condemnation of "tragicrafting", I wonder what she thinks of that painting "Raft of the Medusa"? Really, the biggest difference between that piece and some of the crafts she condemns is skill.

[Mytical]

You can please some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you can not please all of the people all of the time. Expect critics, expect people who love it, and expect people who just sit there and raise an eyebrow. However, I would say if you want to make something..comedy or other wise about 9/11 go for it. As Penn and Teller put it on their show BS. "Gilbert Godfrey told jokes after 9/11, because that is what he does, and he got a lot of criticism for it." The point being, that Gilbert Godfrey is a comedian.. what is he going to do, stop being a comedian because of 9/11? No. Some people enjoyed it for what it was.. a catharsis. Sometimes it is good to laugh after a tragedy, because then healing can start. This is just my rambling opinion. The views expressed here are not endorsed and may not be shared by the people at cs.