Galaxy Saved from James Gunn?

Image result for guardians of the galaxy

I just find this odd:

Well, there's much that I find odd in the news about James Gunn, but it starts with the popularity of the two G of the G movies. Marvel seemed to be scrapping the bottom of its barrel of comic book titles to greenlight them in the first place.

This is a group of superheroes that includes one vaguely humanoid tree (or vaguely tree-like humanoid) and one talking squirrel.

Anyway, they are a huge hit. The director, Peter Gunn, has been working on a third movie in the series. Somehow, some non-entities desiring entity-ness searched Gunn's old twitter feeds and found tweets (from years ago) about how great it is or would be to have sex with children. The conservatives who recently came to embrace Roseanne (Barr and Connor) as one, or two, of their own wanted to have a tweet-storm scalp to balance out her loss, so Gunn became It.

Sample awful tweet, Gunn suggested a Hardy Boys mystery, "The Hardy Boys and the Mystery of What it Feels like when Uncle Bernie Fists Me."

Moving on: Disney complied with outraged demands and dropped Gunn from the Galaxies project 3.

So former Presidential candidate Ted Cruz decides to weigh in here. Cruz tweets, "Child rape is no laughing matter. As Texas AG, I handled far too many child sexual assaults ... I'm glad Disney fired him, but if these tweets are true, he needs to be prosecuted."

By "if these tweets are true" I gather he means, "if he was actually raping children, rather than just fantasizing/joking about it."

I gotta say, I'm not sure whether the job of Texas AG involved "handling child sexual assaults." Typically an AG is at some distance from the prosecutors' offices.

There is just too much oddity here. I'll just post this as a marker in case something more profound occurs to me....

Comments

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge. We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere. At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave. First, Plato is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability. I only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

Search This Blog