Let's talk about Vice Magazine

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1177 of them)
Much as I loathed the Loaded culture, I have to admit that the sudden embrace of football style by Islington liberals and fashionistas made skinhead fascists in Fred Perry shirts suddenly invisible in a sea of lookalikes with very different politics from them.

But doesn't that just reaffirm to the skinhead fascists that their style (and by extension way of life) is more than just okay, it's cool and trendy?

Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:39 (twenty-one years ago) link

Yes and the complete lack of recent BNP success shows that the skinhead fascists have really been left reeling by the adoption of aspects of their culture into the mainstream (leaving out the v.v.v.dodgy equation of football and fascism which better-qualified posters than me can take apart). What has actually happened of course is that an intermingling of liberal lads and fascists has given fascists a golden opportunity to make themselves more 'respectable' which they've duly taken. One problem with a lot of your thinking Momus is that it seems to assume conservatives and fascists are stupid as well as wrong.

Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:40 (twenty-one years ago) link

Ooh, Momus caught me out. No, my family wouldn't really beat his ass if he walked into one of our reunions and said, "Hey niggas, how are you?" He gets ten points!

No amount of "recontextualization" or "recalamation" is going to make a funny situation out of someone passing around pictures of a semi running over a black man titled "NIGGER-KILLER" a month after your brother dies in a hit-and-run accident. This is the position I am arguing from and this is why your liberal racist bullshit is pissing me off.

So if I were an East End Bangladeshi, [...]

YOU ARE NOT AN EAST END BANGLADESHI, YOU SELF-IMPORTANT TWAT.

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:41 (twenty-one years ago) link

Nicholas, the East End Bangladeshi you invoke is still nervous about the bald white guy on his way to buy a Chablis. He is a property developer, d'oh! And the Loaded generation are very socially conservative types working in marketing or summat, so your point is?

I don't really fall into the trap of romanticising or idealising 'difference' (which my esteemed friend in Tokyo seems to be doing). Ninety-five per cent of the time it's fucking awful being 'different' even if you vehemently don't want to be just like everyone else.

So how would the makers of Vice, y'know, DEAL with the world they moved in if all their convenient little labels for people just fell off one day? What content do they have besides 'this is really cool, hur-hur' to fall back upon?

suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:42 (twenty-one years ago) link

I mean, surely this process works both ways. Everyone seems willing to accept that Vice magazine may increase the courage of some readers to use offensive language. Why then everyone accept that it will also dilute taboo this same language until it becomes powerless to offend? And, given the two options of somehow censoring Vice or hoping that the expression-dilution process works, a concern for the freedom of expression should always make us choose the latter.

Momus (Momus), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:43 (twenty-one years ago) link

(Sentence 2 above should have read 'Why then won't everyone accept that it will also dilute the taboos in this same language until it becomes powerless to offend?')

YOU ARE NOT AN EAST END BANGLADESHI, YOU SELF-IMPORTANT TWAT.

Well, I was married to one, you, er, person!
;-)

Momus (Momus), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:48 (twenty-one years ago) link

Has anybody on this thread really talked about censoring Vice though? At worst, it seems like some people don't like it.

Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:49 (twenty-one years ago) link

Okay, 'censuring' Vice...

Momus (Momus), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:52 (twenty-one years ago) link

Nobody on this thread is talking about censoring Vice. However the magazine's advertisers are facing a proposed boycott from other magazines, which hasn't been addressed on this thread yet.

(I think nevaready and falling-on-a-bruise would liven this discussion up no end.)

Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:54 (twenty-one years ago) link

No, fucking stop that! Censorship is not the only other option here. We are though still free to say that Vice is a fucking stupid magazine, and to impugn the motive of it's editors.

From experience, the shortest way out of this for someone to claim that you're a middle class western white male who shouldn't speak for others, and you to huff off. If someone has to start that, I'm game.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 11:55 (twenty-one years ago) link

What I have been saying throughout is that their tactics are styooopid on about 10 different levels, that they think they're smarter than they are, and they're making money off of 'difference' in a way that really only gives them a shorter artistic and commercial shelf-life than other publications. And as they're clearly and unashamedly in it for the money, they are fucking up bigstyle.

Tom's post: I don't see how magazine ad departments are going to affect change that way. It's just not the way they do business. At best they can ask the agency, 'where else are you running it' and the agency may or may not tell the truth. What works is the actual accounts placing provisos with the agency, eg, 'sell to Index and not to Vice, we've had complaints'.

Andrew: it is possible to win the argument without resorting to name-calling, you know ;-p.

suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:02 (twenty-one years ago) link

The most obvious attempt to defuse a derogatory term has to be the word "queer." Of course it brought with it much of this same debate. (See II.)

bnw (bnw), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:06 (twenty-one years ago) link

Go read Death to the Nerds -- The Nerds Must Die. It's well written and amusing -- and I say this as a total nerd. I have to say, Suzy, that it's a lot fresher than anything I've seen in i-D for a while. And they illustrate the article with an artwork by Spencer Sweeney, one of the key personalities of the NY art fag scene.

Momus (Momus), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:07 (twenty-one years ago) link

Yes, Vice has recieved the strongest censure that the Star Chamber of ILE can hand down (unless we need to be unanimous about it).

(I'm also not swearing at Tom, obv)

Suzy: No, I don't think it is. But I think it's the quickest way to end the argument.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:08 (twenty-one years ago) link

I read Death To The Nerds. It was funny. How surprising that they can write so viscerally about the Junior High experience.

suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:18 (twenty-one years ago) link

Is it okay to be conservative if you spell it konservativ?

Sam (chirombo), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:19 (twenty-one years ago) link

Alongside the Nerds article (obviously aimed at people who are about 12) Vice recommends Among The Thugs, Bill Buford's book about soccer violence. What's not to like about a magazine that treats teens as intelligent beings?

Momus (Momus), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:19 (twenty-one years ago) link

suzy, i'm (...) this close to proposing to you.

mark p (Mark P), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:23 (twenty-one years ago) link

What's not to like about a magazine that treats teens as intelligent beings?

I think 30-somethings are more likely to be reading Vice than teens.

Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:27 (twenty-one years ago) link

Look, this is pure kidult nostalgia stuff. When I was 12 I was busily trying to read Finnegan's Wake and Vogue while distancing myself from junior-high mentality depicted in article. Any decent magazine reviews or recommends good books, it's hardly rocket science.

Also if 12-year-olds were reading Vice in any large numbers, they'd lose the booze and cigs adverts.

suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:31 (twenty-one years ago) link

Although my calling of Momus a middle-class white male is a bluff, being as I am all of those, the nerds thing hits a nerve, because I am and he isn't. Far too concerned with being cool.

That I am seriously considering playing "you're in, you can't talk about being out, you can never understand my pain, which you must still respect" is an indication of how much this thread annoys me, as I abhor this attitude. And how glad I am that this thread has avoided this pitfall so far.

Though of course, it's in my advantage to hope that in-ers can understand out-ers: I'm still in on three of the axes :)

Perhaps that's a moral of the thread: outsider status that you can parlay into cool is a very different beast.

And the first time I went to that page the recommended products included mook-tastic Grand Theft Auto, which sums up what they (or at least their advertisers, thx Suzy) think about the nerd population.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:40 (twenty-one years ago) link

Momus: Why are there always only two choices? Where is this lovely, easy-to-operate-in binary world? And can we eat it?

Colin Meeder (Mert), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:48 (twenty-one years ago) link

Momus/etc what do you think of the eXile?

("If Vice was based in Moscow & run by self-loathing ex-American nerds, except with the twist of Edward Limonov (& John Dolan, obv); + without the whole advertising thing & oh well I guess it isn't really like Vice at all"?)

Ess Kay (esskay), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:49 (twenty-one years ago) link

Vice doesn't run booze and cig advertising. I never understood why, but they have a policy against advertising actual vices despite their schtick.

Is this boycott thing real? I have never heard of anything like that, ever in publishing. seems like it would just generate publicity for them. "the magazine Maxim tried to BAN!" heh heh.

I wrote a few things for them years ago. Shit pay back then anyway. Suroosh is a very smart guy, Gavin and Shane are coked up tattoo jocks but cunning motherfuckers.

(a lot of people here bitching about Vice have apparently never seen a copy, so their PunkRock 'hate us' publicity campaign is working. why let em suck you in so easily? it's actually pretty fucking harmless, mostly about skateboards, hip hop, and boobs. just yr average larry clark baloney. so what?)

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 12:59 (twenty-one years ago) link

(Actually, I have very little against Vice and a gigantic issue with Momus.)

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 13:04 (twenty-one years ago) link

Guys, there's a fantastic lightning storm here in Tokyo! You should see it! The fork lightning was flickering in straggly horizontal lines across the horizon, so the whole city felt like a floodlit football arena with very unreliable lights!

I've totally gone off the idea of the song about retards. Now I think I want to write one called 'The Biographies of Famous Mathematicians', because mathematicians are under-represented in song, and the math of curves is beautiful. Or something about lapdogs...

BTW Dan, I just recorded my Schubert song in German (it didn't sound right in English) and was thinking about you -- affectionately -- when I sang it, because I remembered you'd offered to sing it. I guess that isn't going to happen now...

Momus (Momus), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 13:35 (twenty-one years ago) link

Flattery will... well fuck, it will get you pretty damn far.

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 13:39 (twenty-one years ago) link

(Sob!)

Momus (Momus), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 13:43 (twenty-one years ago) link

If all this naturalisation is so successful, why does "gay" seem to be used as a negative and offensive term about a zillion times more now than five years ago? Where is Momus when I need him to recontextualise the way my little sister and her friends talk and make it tolerable?

Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 13:46 (twenty-one years ago) link

it's because we haven't taken it far enough yet, tim.

we won't reap the rewards until oprah derides the latest martha stewart clothing line as being hella gay.

mark p (Mark P), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 13:50 (twenty-one years ago) link

jesus christ, go to bed for eight hours...

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 14:26 (twenty-one years ago) link

...and you still won't want to get up. At least that's my approach to life.

(Vaguely serious post on this thread by me to occur sometime tonight, perhaps.)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 14:38 (twenty-one years ago) link

I love everything about Vice. It's odd that almost this entire thread is about the language they use and not about the actual articles, reviews, etc that make up the magazine.

sundar subramanian, Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:06 (twenty-one years ago) link

who wants to point out the hi-larious logical inconsistency in sundar's post there?!

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:09 (twenty-one years ago) link

i agree with sundar

geeta (geeta), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:11 (twenty-one years ago) link

sigh.

in what possible universe is "language" distinct and seperable from "writing"?

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:15 (twenty-one years ago) link

this thread is almost as bad as the abortion one. well done everybody...

Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:19 (twenty-one years ago) link

Me: Momus, can you explain why exactly you see inherent value in people's doing things society disapproves of?

Momus: Because I don't believe in the status quo.

This is my problem, Momus: you never seem to bother to isolate the valuable parts of the status quo from the ones you disagree with. The western "status quo," insofar as it exists, frowns on things like racism, child pornography, spousal abuse, and incitements to violence -- and I don't imagine you'd see inherent transgressive value in taking any of those actions. It's for that reason that you can't simply fall back on the syllogism that any transgression against the status quo is an inherently good thing: at some point you're going to have to start looking at the individual transgressions and working out whether you think they're productive ones or not. What I'm seeing in a lot of this thread is you saying "it's a transgression, therefore it's good" and a lot of other people saying "it's a particular transgression that doesn't help anything and quite possibly makes things worse."

nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:24 (twenty-one years ago) link

or: "stop acting like a 16 year old goth girl."

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:27 (twenty-one years ago) link

what's wrong with acting like a 16-yr old goth girl?

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:29 (twenty-one years ago) link

have you ever tried debating one?

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:32 (twenty-one years ago) link

"16 year old goth girl" = "white boy" = "nigga", jess

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:38 (twenty-one years ago) link

by which i mean stereotypes are stereotypes are stereotypes, not any kind of relativity of historical meaning

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:39 (twenty-one years ago) link

Racism isn't primarily bad because it stereotypes.

Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:44 (twenty-one years ago) link

long and arduous is the oppression the middle-class subcultural teenager has suffered at the hands of those who have since outgrown it. swing low, sweet chariot!

"nigga" isn't a stereotype, fritz. it's a collection of stereotypes as well as being a word, unlike "16 year old goth girl" which is just a collection of stereotypes (and isn't a racial or sexual slur no matter how it can be twisted.)

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:45 (twenty-one years ago) link

Actually maybe it is. Bit I still think there's a useful real-life distinction between "nigga" and "16 year-old goth girl" as epithets.

Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 15:48 (twenty-one years ago) link

OF COURSE there's a HUGE diff btwn those terms as epithets, what i was trying to say is that jess is using "16-year old goth girl" as Vice uses "nigga" purely in terms of using a word as a literary device. He's just doing it with a safe term instead of a dangerous term. you're saying, 'I know this is a stereotype but hey, you know me so you know so you know that I know that I don't mean it as saying "16-yr old girls are dumb, goths are dumb, girls are dumb" even though it implies all those things.' and I know what jess meant and wasn't offended by it. and I know what vice means by "nigga" and I'm not offended by it. it doesn't make me think of either as a particularly reliable narrator, but I understand what they're trying to do.

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 16:01 (twenty-one years ago) link

nb: you might have to take out some of those 'i know so you knows' to make sense of that last post

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 16:05 (twenty-one years ago) link

(Addendum: Equating a magazine with a private conversation is Bill O'Reilly-level idiocy. Did someone redefine "clever" when I wasn't looking?)

(nb: i don't think fritz is an idiot, and basically agree with what he sez.)

(also equating a public message board with a magazine is a bit more problematic.)

jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 16:07 (twenty-one years ago) link

i don't think jess is an idiot either, for whatever that's worth.

I had a huge argument with a Vce editor about this issue one night, and his basic argument was that there should be no difference between the way people talked to their closest friends and the way they wrote. they were arguing that it was just honest.

Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 15 October 2002 16:20 (twenty-one years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.