Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Drawing the Undrawable: An Explanation from Neil and Amanda. | Amanda Palmer Blog (Patreon)

Published:
2015-05-31 20:06:43
Imported:
2023-04

Content

-patron-only post- hola guys here's the reason i was in such a shitty fucking mood the other day and needed to post lambs. the cover of the new statesman turned into a bit of a drama, and while we're really really proud of the issue (you can download it as a PDF from their site), i was super sad that this happened. high level irony, and we lost two or three days to dealing with it. anyway...full blog here, please pass it around. we didn't want to go to the press with this, we just wanted to tell our community, and make sure that art's (beautiful) cover, and comic, got seen by people. meanwhile....i just played bristol (WONDERFUL) and did the hay literary festival (WONDERFUL) and just landed in edinburgh, where i play tomorrow. i am loving meeting patreon people in the signing lines - thank you for making yourself known, and for banana bread, and for hugs, and esp to the LONDON folks who came to the new statesman gig and gave me the book - you guys are beautiful. don't forget to save june 8th for the LONDON WEBCAST FROM UNION CHAPEL - if you missed it in the email blast that went out: CAITLIN MORAN is special guesting!!!!! i'll remind you all here and we will post the link in real time for patrons only, same way we did with the dolls webcast. more soon, always. xxx afp http://blog.amandapalmer.net/20150531/

Files

Drawing the Undrawable: An Explanation from Neil and Amanda. | Amanda Palmer Blog

So that, as they say, was a thing. The Neil and Amanda guest-edited New Statesman came out a couple of days ago. It's what we wanted it to be - an issue about saying the unsayable, filled with writers saying stuff. We are in it too. Everything is perfect...

Comments

Anonymous

How horribly hackifically frustrating - I totally understand the lambs now! Enough time hasn't elapsed yet for this to ease the frustration, but the irony is SO poetic, and the censoring is brilliant at making the point of the whole issue... it's made it even more powerful, to me. I'd love to see a meme built around this, somehow. Maybe something akin to @Joseph Matthews suggestion to Draw the Undrawable -- a blank cover template we all interpret our way -- and let it become a meme? #CoverTheUncoverable?

Anonymous

Thank you for working so hard on something you believe in. I feel sad and drained after reading that thorough and much appreciated recap. Haven't read the issue yet and I will. All I can hear is that moron saying "they hate us for our freedom" and all I can think is, I wish we were doing something with it.

Anonymous

I'm in the UK, can I tweet, share, Art's comic? Would that help?

Ali Grotkowski

Thank you so much for sharing this with us. I appreciated reading it.

Anonymous

What if, for drawing the undrawable or drawing the unsayable you put a blank cover on the magazine, encourage the audience to draw their own and submit what they think it means? I realize it is now way past too late but I'm game to take a crack at it. Who's with me?

Molly McEnerney

It's really sad to find out that the editors were not, apparently, honest from the beginning about their policy. It sounds as if they made the choice not to tell Art Spiegelman the truth about why they chose not to publish the comic when he submitted it a few months ago, and that they again chose not to be honest about their reasons for not printing it this time, either. I could respect their integrity while disagreeing with them if they had stated their policy honestly all along, but waiting until after the last minute to let anyone involved know that they had such a policy was just not good journalism on the editors' part. Frowny face. Let's have a nice day anyway.

Anonymous

I'm so sorry that the Statesman censored their cover in so many ways, in a publication with a"saying the unsayable" theme. It must have, in it's own way, come out of left field that "drawing the undrawable" was not the same thing, and afforded the same rights when it came down to magazine's censorship. 1) I'm so sorry the comic cover didn't get used. It's brilliant. And it's especially ridiculous to be afraid of it when it has been accepted and empowered in other publications. 2) I really really loved the "woman in bondage" cover. I know that you all described it as a disempowered woman, an angry woman, but for me it meant something entirely different to me when "saying the unsayable". It was a representation of something else to me personally. I am a part of the kink and BDSM scene, and that's what I can't say. So I am a little anxious, but I'll say what is usually unsayable. In the scene I'd describe myself as a sadistic, masochistic, primarily Dominant Switch, who occasionally works as a Pro Domme. But that's not all of it. I'm a part of a huge community, that I can't explain to anyone. Where am I going for an event? Vaguely, "Into the City". Or, "I have an appointment tomorrow." Or getting together with certain friends, groups of friends who are or aren't vanilla, or who you can talk in front of. But I also volunteer, I teach, I play nice with newbies, and at SF Pride and Fulsom St Fair every year, I raise money by cuddling and making people feel safe with their first kink experience. And I'm the one who will give the boastful white boys (this is not a stereotype, or rather, it is, but it's a true one when they see a dominant woman) what they ask for ;P But it's a part of me. Of my sexuality. It's that thing about me that I had to learn very early on to hide. Hiding sucks.

Anonymous

Seriously? They made a fuss about that? *Wanders away shaking head in disbelief* FWIW I LOVED that issue. I subscribe to NS but these days rarely make time to read it, but this time I eagerly devoured everything. I guess there's no pleasing some folk.

Anonymous

Near the end of your post on the blog (link above) is the statement, "We ended up feeling like we’d tried, and, due to human error on our parts and on the magazine’s, failed." -- hmmm. really? I think it's not human error on anybody's part. It's folks working in a magazine who would like maybe not to have to worry too much about whether they're going to actually get sprayed with automatic gunfire for publishing the wrong cartoon. You searched for an undrawable image, and- you GOT one. But are you ready to die for it? For a frigging published cartoon? Honestly now. Are you ready to die for it? My own hit on it is, one has to pick one's battles, and I personally might be willing to die for some things, but not for publishing a cartoon. Whether the artist is brilliant and right on, or not.