Randall Revolution Art Proposal

[sgtyayap]

I'm considering posting up some art to support the campaign. Problem with me attaching it to this post, and also the reason I'm only considering, is: it's a little graphic: think of that immature person who showed Randall decapitating Boo. This time it's Randall already decapitated, albeit Mike holding his head.

The purpose of this art is to raise the point about how gruesome a death Pixar seems to desire out of Randall, not just in terms of the banishment, but also in terms of the ride in Tokyo.

[pitbulllady]

Nov 19, 2009 15:14:32 GMT -5 @sgtyayap said:

I'm considering posting up some art to support the campaign. Problem with me attaching it to this post, and also the reason I'm only considering, is: it's a little graphic: think of that immature person who showed Randall decapitating Boo. This time it's Randall already decapitated, albeit Mike holding his head.

The purpose of this art is to raise the point about how gruesome a death Pixar seems to desire out of Randall, not just in terms of the banishment, but also in terms of the ride in Tokyo.

I've got an even better idea...how about Mike AND Sulley dressed in KKK robes, with Randall's limp body hanging from a noose in a tree behind them, with Mike's quote, "...and he is OUTA here", followed by the statement, "A lynching is STILL a lynching"? Yeah, some folks won't get it, and some will be offended, but sometimes, you gotta offend people to get their attention and make them THINK. What Mike and Sulley did WAS a lynching. "Lynching" is defined as a violent act perpetrated upon one person by two or more other persons, which was intended to punish the individual for some crime, alleged or otherwise, without the benefit of due process in a court of law. That is exactly what Mike and Sulley did. While they themselves might not have been the ones to actually cause the most physical harm to Randall, I cannot, not for one second, believe that they did not INTEND for some sort of harm to come to him, which is the same as if they'd beaten him with a shovel themselves.

pitbulllady

[mistica0christina]

Why does something tell me that this is not going to go well.

[mentalguru]

I would object to that idea no end PBL...

I mean there is NO indication Sulley is 'racist' for one thing and I take offense to that- HINTS for Mike of course. But even so...

Plus, the KKK might be taking it too far- cause more people to be against the campaign then for it and draw it as a bad example of us to bite us in the butt later. And to be honest, they did it not because they hated his RACE but because Mike, and Sulley in that instance, hated HIM and what he did. They were VIGILANTES in this instance, it WAS NOT a 'race hate' crime in any way shape or form for them: They are NOT the KKK. They were still wrong, but they are not THEM.

Even though Mike can be seen as bigoted- the fact that Randall looked different didn't play a part in why in terms of Sulley's characterisation- he ended up banishing Randall at all.

I support the campaign myself of course... but you know what I mean right? It would turn more people against it then for the campaign probably in the end.

I think the first idea (S's) might be okay but I'd have to think more on it. But the KKK has little to do with it at all really even as an example.

Because- it was REVENGE for them pure and simple. And as mentioned still wrong. But the KKK? No. I can't back that idea or that example of them, not even Mike who I dislike. Just becuase someone is a bit of a bigot even, does that mean they are the KKK when they ingage in vigilante 'justice' in their eyes. No it does not. It would be an unfortunate thing however that if Mike is bigoted in this instance- such a thing would simply be 'icing on the cake' in the end probably if he is.

Once again, not like the KKK, who basically do it PRIMARILY only on the basis of what people look like.

[sgtyayap]

Nov 19, 2009 18:31:38 GMT -5 pitbulllady said:

I've got an even better idea...how about Mike AND Sulley dressed in KKK robes, with Randall's limp body hanging from a noose in a tree behind them, with Mike's quote, "...and he is OUTA here", followed by the statement, "A lynching is STILL a lynching"? Yeah, some folks won't get it, and some will be offended, but sometimes, you gotta offend people to get their attention and make them THINK. What Mike and Sulley did WAS a lynching. "Lynching" is defined as a violent act perpetrated upon one person by two or more other persons, which was intended to punish the individual for some crime, alleged or otherwise, without the benefit of due process in a court of law. That is exactly what Mike and Sulley did. While they themselves might not have been the ones to actually cause the most physical harm to Randall, I cannot, not for one second, believe that they did not INTEND for some sort of harm to come to him, which is the same as if they'd beaten him with a shovel themselves.

pitbulllady

I agree with mentalguru in regards to the KKK reference.

There also seems to be some misunderstanding: the purpose of my art isn't so much about the glorification of Mike and Sulley, especially as they committed several other wrongs as well, as it is about the demonization and the constant killing-off of Randall; hence, why I used only one of the two; Mike, in my art, wasn't quite so much meant to be himself as it is him representing Pixar and "Ride and Go Seek."

[pitbulllady]

Nov 19, 2009 18:57:26 GMT -5 mentalguru said:

I would object to that idea no end PBL...

I mean there is NO indication Sulley is 'racist' for one thing- HINTS for Mike of course. But even so...

Plus, the KKK might be taking it too far- cause more people to be against the campaign then for it and draw it as a bad example to bite us in the butt later. And to be honest, they did it not because they hated his RACE but because Mike, and Sulley in that instance, hated HIM and what he did. They were VIGILANTES in this instance, it WAS NOT a 'race hate' crime They are NOT the KKK. They were still wrong, but they are not THEM.

Even though Mike can be seen as bigoted- the fact that Randall looked different didn't play a part in why in terms of Sulley's characterisation- he ended up banishing Randall at all.

I support the campaign myself of course... but you know what I mean right? It would turn more people against it then for the campaign probably in the end.

I think the first idea (S's) might be okay but I'd have to think more on it.

Lynching does NOT have to be racially-motivated. In fact, most cases of lynching which have been successfully prosecuted have been White-on-White crimes. Viglilantism, carried out by more than one person, IS synonymous with lynching under US Federal law.
Having lived in the South all my life, I can vouch for the fact that many of the KKK's victims were White, as well. They were just folks who might have been suspected of breaking some law, however minor, or of having some issues with one of the good ole' boys. Those white robes were simply there to conceal the identities of those seeking their own brand of "justice". I can promise you that many a Caucasian has met their fate at the hands of the KKK. People who do not actually live here, or who are too young, only know what that popular media tells them, and the media leaves out a lot or makes up a lot, just like they do when it comes to "pit bulls" or "killer pythons" . In perpetrating an act of violent vigilantism against Randall, Mike and Sulley are certainly no better than the KKK, regardless of whether they were racially motivated or not, although I remain convinced that Mike certainly was motivated by racial issues.

Do what you want, Sgtyayap, but I'll agree that it will probably take some shock value to wake some people up.

pitbulllady

[sgtyayap]

I actually DID use a little shock value. I'll PM you the art so that you see what I mean.

[RandallBoggs]

*raise hand* There's no need to be graphic in the artist sense Sgt. I have already a project in mind to facilitate this matter. The good news is it will take such a short time.
---------
And I agree, a KKK referrance will do us more harm then good.

[sgtyayap]

I'm glad SOMEONE else is willing to help out.

The art, basically, is a result of my frustration of not many people helping us out COMBINED with the grim reminder about "Ride and Go Seek." I was very stressed, then; I probably won't do something like that again.

[mentalguru]

Thing is PBL, even so the KKK were a GROUP a group who did that ALL THE TIME- Sulley and Mike have a one off occurence, and that is not who they are. They are probably not going to round up other people they can find- who just bug them or are committing minor crimes and try to chuck them through a door. And the fact is, that people are going to take THAT from the picture no matter what.

There have been 'vigilantes' who strike out on their OWN PBL- people who after seeing someone they care about in danger and having that person who was the threat at their mercy... well who here wouldn't be even the slightest bit tempted?

Think of it PBL- at this stage in the game... neither of them knew Randall would get ANY 'punishment'- for admittaedly BAD crimes. Personal ones at that. They do not know Waternoose's and Randall's relationship- they just see a guy who tried to kill them, tried to hurt them as well as (esp. for Sulley), take Boo away- and Sulley has the parental thing going down. They are working in their own limited perspective, and while it was still wrong (indeed like Randall was wrong) we have to consider this- the monster world and it's laws do not protect Boo for her, the fact that Waternoose showed he could probably 'get away' with banishment himself of Sulley and Mike perhaps shows he could help cover Randall in Sulley's own eyes- it seems very likely, that even subconciosuly someone from a limited perspective with out knowing the full story should think that Randall might get off 'scot free!'

Even when later finding perhaps he could get a sentence, for alot of people this wouldn't be ENOUGH, and they'd convince themselves, for a while that they even 'did the right thing'. When they didn't.

There have been quite a few people who have taken a 'pop' over known criminals even when they are caught. Either because they have personal stakes in the matter or not.


Yes, I would be tempted myself from this persepctive. In the end I hope I wouldn't- but I've never been put in that position before. Sulley and Mike are HAPPY to get rid of Randall. But then how many parents would not be? It's a frightening emotion to feel such an intense hatred to someone who hurt or tried to hurty someone you care about and know that justice may never be served in any shape or form. I've know it. I'veve FELT it. And not the little kind of 'hurt' either! It was what an adult tried to do to a friend of mine as a child. Use your own imagination. Sometimes I wonder what I'll do if I ever meet the person who did it. I've never been given the position of power over this (unknown) person- I know how they got into that position of trust though, trust me, and if I worked my butt off... I probably could track him down. What stops me is various reasons. And I don't honestly know WHAT I'd do if my friend was there and pointing her finger saying it was HIM at the same time, even if she wasn't in immediate danger. Rage wouldn't even come close to it. Not many people can think about this- some people will take the shotgun and pop a shot in the guy who is tied to the chair. The one who terrified them for the safety of a loved one or themselves, if even only for a short time. It is wrong, and they can't use self-defense in the argument.

But they are not the KKK.

Alot of people would not be sorry for it, at least at first, and maybe for a long time afterwards. Ordinary people. I know I would seriously be tempted myself!

Are THEY automatically JUST like the KKK?

The thing is showing them as the KKK is NOT going to gather sympathy for the cause in any way shape or form and is misrepresentative IMO.

The KKKs are vigilantes... and more, worse of course.

But to say that ALL vigilantes are like the KKK.... it's like when Killroy said that all terroists are muslim.

(As I'm from N.Ireland, you can imagine the laughter THAT got. They thought he must have been joking. But he wasn't.)

[mistica0christina]

Oh good, at least that's over with.

[sgtyayap]

Nov 19, 2009 19:39:24 GMT -5 @mistica0christina said:

Oh good, at least that's over with.

Yes, I've decided not to post it. Apparently you beat me to the punch.

[mentalguru]

Perhaps instead, you could draw a picture about general vigilantism...though unsure how to represent that myself.

My own biology and ethics porfessor once (more or less) said: that before every action as well as analysing specific laws we must follow, we must first (if possible) ask ourselves- if everyone had the 'right' to do this action- would we feel safe and happy living in such a society? That could be a theme to draw upon... don't know if that helps?

Perhaps them instead of chucking Randall through a door... someone else. I don't know.

My own reasons for not undergoing my OWN version of vigilant justice are various reas ns- there are selfish ones, like the fact I do NOT want to go to jail.

There's the fact I don't believe in any afterlife, so such a thing would be considered the 'easy way out' to kill someone,and I could NOT torture in my own mind- that requires continual maintenance of my rage which I think would eventually come to it's senses after the first punch- I am not a violent person by NATURE- but like I said, having NEVER been given this position of power so I don't really know. They do after all, say power corrupts.

If I was a christian, odds are I'd just go ahead and do it without thinking. NOT because christianity fosters immoral behaviour automatically. Of course not. But although hell was a constant fear for me and later on I'd have selfish thoughts regarding myself as well as fearing for most other people again, for that short moment and for some time afterwards even, it would be a comfort to think of him suffering. I now realise how sick and twisted that is. There is no chance for parole, no chance of anything ever- for something as strange as not accepting a 'gift' which they either are unware of being offered or it is invisible.
When I forgive someone, they are forgiven, period, they don't have to 'accept it'. They are already forgiven and that's THAT.

There's also the fact he was definitly no spring chicken at the time from what I've been told. If he is already dead there is the fact I would have psyced myself up/prepared for nothing. Not a good idea perhaps.

There's the fact that to dig up this information and heck when I got caught (hardly and if, I doubt I'd get away with it), it would be dredging up old memories SHE had tried to put behind her and moved on from and cause her more harm then good.

There's the fact that in the end- it is my FRIEND'S choice. The one he wronged most of all. My anger must come second to her happiness in the end particulary when the issue is COMPLETELY related to her. Of course like I said, if he was immediately there in the vicinity... I might not think about this before I curl my fist. Perhaps I WOULD think. I hope I would.


But without all this- what if after all I became in this position anyway?

Would I stop if this person begged? Pleaded? Perhaps. But perhaps not. Would I CARE if this person, it turned out, had gone through something SIMILAR as a child? Perhaps later on, but probably not at the time even if I knew. I do not WANT to sympathsise with this person!

There is of course also the fact- would I be able to look myself in the mirror afterwards? What would I feel then? Would I fear in essence, myself? Would OTHERS fear me? I do not want that. Nor the guilt. I do NOT want to feel guilt surrounding this person in general. I do not want my friend to feel any guilt eithert- what a disgraceful thing in my eyes, that she could (possibly) be made to feel guilt surrounding someone who did that!

For a time I would possibly convince myself I had done the right thing if I DIDN'T/HADN'T think or thought about these things earlier. If would probably be easy in THAT instance. But I did think it through- I have many reasons not to teack him down. It would be even easier if I was still a believer if I didn't think about this, and then I would be overshadowed by SELFISH fears later on about having broken a commandment and being sent to hell probably rather then ANY guilt for a much longer period of time.

It a way I am angry also abotu being angry at this person. I DO believe in forgiveness. But sometimes... you meet or hear aboust particular people which make this philosophy incredibly difficult. Whether or not you know or do not know the full story or the person in question.

We have to instead I feel, show people WHY what they (Sulley and Mike) did as wrong, without demonising them- that understanding the reasons for both the bad things certain characters do is a two way thing, and that although there can be a certain level of understanding WHY they did it, while drawing from real world examples, it doesn't make it right. Like Randall's actions. Because this is the ACTUAL PROBLEM with alot of people who don't like Randall or see him as pure evil- they say to me in certain arguments that THEY'D want to do the same thing in Sulley's position. Hey, join the club mate! ALOT of people would from his perspective at the time! And probably for quite a while afterwards they might try and convince themselves that it was justice! But just because you FEEL and RELATE in this way, does that make the action right? Please note, I try and tell people that this is like RANDALL- we can find his position and the reasons he did (less then steller) actions RELATEABLE and think perhaps we would make the same choice if in the same position or not. THIS right here is what makes them real, and human, so to speak- we see Randalls and Sulleys every day in our life- they exist, and in a way, they work well as a representation of the darkness in everyone of us- the darkness of the every day man. They can represent in the sequel perhaps if it goes well, with the previous movie in combination, both the great and terrible things people can do.

Just my two cents.

[mentalguru]

Not to beat a dead horse of a topic, but I have other reasons for objecting to the idea of protraying Sulley and Mike as the KKK other than reasons I have stated, as well as even simply liking Sulley myself. But I'll even defend Mike against this, and you know I don't like him- he reminds me of a friend who used to treat me like he treats Sulley with just a hint of how he treated Randall in order to undermine my selfconfidence, and being pretty sensitive as a kid this wasn't good. But even so I would defend HER against such a thing as being compared to the KKK as well even if she engaged in a vigilante act. Because it isn't true.

The fact is, you COULD make inferences they are like the KKK... if you are SELECTIVE over the facts you choose that is and don't look at the others we also see.

Points for it: Randall it seems is a minority, perhaps even ostracised partly for this reason. One of the pair expresses at the very least some form of bigotry. Both of them engage in a vigilante act.

But then to make them automatically like the KKK, we'd have to ignore the fact that Sulley and Mike have VERY valid reasons for being angry/wanting revenge. Randall tried to kill them, tried to take Boo away. In the end, it was an ordinary vigilante attack- illegal, wrong but they are not on the same level as the KKK. It was also a one off occurence it seems, and the pair are NOT involved with any group which does this on a regular basis. It was wrong and legally could not be supported- but saying ALL vigilantes are like the KKK... is like saying all christians are young earth creationists. That all people who do not subscribe to any religious belief are communist etc. It just doesn't work. Creationism in of ITSELF is an example of people being selective over the facts- you can see their 'logic'- a world of great intricacy and detail filled with beauty!

True, but you have to ignore the fossile record, carbon dating, the UGLY parts of the world and the fact that things aren't perfect and in some parts even fragile, the fact that evolution has observable/has been observed, the fact that the domestication of a dog from the wolf PROVES that a new species can result from the offshoot of another, 'ring species', human cultures which predate alot of young earth's own believed dates. And other things I cannot be bothered to list right now.



Sure if we IGNORE the other facts- yes you could prop Sulley and Mike up as like the KKK,. But we can't ignore them and we shouldn't- it is flawed like the fact that so many vague young earth creationists are selective over facts themselves. We can't be selective over the facts we want and don't want to acknowledge. It doesn't work that way.

If we posted them up as the KKK, well... what does that look like? Please look at one character in a more favourable light and with understanding despite the bad acts committed but completely derail the others you prefer into something unrecongnisable for their own bad acts? How could we say that without sounding hypocritical?

Look at Randall- if WE were to instigate the same 'selective' methods of facts haters sometimes seem to use- what do we get?

We see a guy trying to kill and harm a pair of men. We see him try to experiment on a person wherein he does not believe them to be equals.

So what horrible group would he be set in if we only take certain facts and ignore the rest?

I'm thinking the Nazis.

But this ignores the fact that Randall was probably under high stress conditions, that he has a history and background that is less then desirable and complicates things more, that the thing with humans is- they weren't simply downtrodden people who it was OBVIOUS were equals, but were literally for hundreds of years merely seen as animals- not even SIMPLY in the deogratary sense, but absolutely and literally it seemed acknowledged as not being possible to be equal. There were no 'freedom groups' to see for humans, which you think would have been shown when a human got in- not even like those freaks PETA even seemed to be shown to exist in their world. You'd think the news would have shown that.

If we call Sulley and Mike the KKK, we are inviting people, by use of the same selective use of facts and ignoring of other facts and the perspectives and situations which make them in fact differ- to call Randall a Nazi. And we'd deserve it. Double standards are not on. That's partly what the campaign is about for me! It's not even just about Randall getting redemption! But that is a large part of it of course.

See this is why I first had a problem with the movie for a while even BEFORE I started to get more and more interested in Randall- it was the 'surprise' that came from Sulley banishing him like that. It WAS the literal double standard in the movie.

As time went on, perhaps this grew more. It's the fact that while the 'puppetmaster' only got a jail sentence, the henchmen or grunt got the harsher punishment. The fact that the 'heroes', yes, even though one was/is my favourite- did something wrong both legally and morally and yet got away with it without the lesson that usually comes from such mistakes on a hero's journey. They haven't BECOME heroes yet though in my eyes, they have become stuck in quick sand half way through the 'journey' (which often involves them doing SOMETHING or CONSIDERING doing something morally wrong- but the second half of this leg paying/learning from it). There is a double standard due to how the movie ended.

And really... do you think it's ONLY Randall fans who are worried or writing in concerns to Pixar?

I recieved a note it seems, during my haitus, relating to my story which advertises the campaign on DevArt- this person does NOT care much for Randall (does not HATE him, but does not like him either), nor do they find him interesting, though they liked the story: but IS a Sulley fan. (I don't know if they also like Mike)

And they agree that it was wrong of Sulley to do that, and had had similar feelings of unease as I had in the beginning, and they were wondering whether they should write in anyway.

I gave them some advice, in the end, in their first note said they didn't KNOW if Randall was truely redeemable but if it achieved what THEY wanted- SULLEY'S own redemption, which they also wanted like me, then hell, they were all for it.

They wrote back saying they were going to write in- but just about Sulley, the fact they didn't like the banishment thing (they had ALREADY apparently, known about the 'trial line' from Mike, and they were going to include that), and that they wanted the matter resolved if possible in any upcoming sequel.

The fact is, also there are people who aren't interested in Randall... but do not like what Sulley/Mike did either even when they are fans of them. They can also contribute in their own way to the campaign, even if it is only indirectly and they don't mention Randall much, but only in passing when they discuss the illegal banishment itself.

[sgtyayap]

I have just uploaded on dA a shock-value piece of art for the campaign, but this time not showing either Mike or Sulley in it. Instead, it just shows Randall's head impaled on a sharp metal pole, and the text below it reading, "Do we really want this?"

SgtYayap.deviantart.com/art/Randall-Campaign-Decapitation-145571893

Caution: this is the first deviation I've submitted with a mature content warning.