Just a little fun
A couple months ago we conducted a contest that asked readers to decorate Martha Stewart's prison cell. Some readers were offended that we would make Martha the subject of such attention. But it was all in fun, and more than 100 people sent in decorated drawings, many of them creative and clever.
The contest was popular enough that we decided to do another. But with whom? It had to be someone who has captured the public's imagination, in that "love-him-or-hate-him" way. Michael Moore of "Fahrenheit 911" was a natural. He's a purposely polarizing figure who seeks fame and, perhaps, notoriety. So, we offered readers the opportunity to give Moore a makeover, on paper, of course. To assist, we're helpfully published a line drawing like a coloring book drawing of Moore in his boxers.
We knew we would have to dodge the brickbats. One reader e-mailed me to complain that we are making him look at "that slob" every morning. Another called saying that making fun of another person is disrespectful and unchristian. A third said, "As it says in "The Little Prince," "it is only with the heart we see rightly, what is essential is invisible to the eye." You tread on thin ice when you diss one of your blue county's heroes."
The contest isn't political, by any means. We're trying to lighten the readers' day and give them something to have fun with, not unlike doing the crossword. With Moore and Stewart, we had personalities who have inserted themselves forcefully into the public eye and who, through the power of their personalities, have divided the nation into two sides. OK, that may be a slight overstatement, but you know what I mean. Very few people are neutral on Moore or Stewart.
Only three days of fun (or looking at the slob) left. Look for the final results on, when else, Oscar Sunday, Feb. 27.
Comments (2)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Interesting that the two you selected to "have a little fun" with are politically highly charged. You stayed away from entertainment and sports and that speaks a bit about decision-making. I'm surprised you're doing round two at all, given the Martha comments (I silently agreed; she was too easy a target and it felt like a cheap shot at a strong women (or "assertive bitch" - feel free to edit that out). After all, you could've picked Karl Rove.)
When it comes to "having a little fun," wouldn't it be more fun if the person weren't so controversial that vituperative comments weren't part of the discussion? Or has this country just completely lost its sense of humor and nothing's funny anymore?
Posted on February 13, 2005 8:40 PM
Well, there also had to be an angle in the selection. With Stewart, it was her prison term, and Moore's was his sloppiness. We could have picked Rove, but he doesn't have nearly the universal recognition that Stewart has and Moore seems to be approaching. We're open to other suggestions though.
I don't think the country has lost its sense of humor. After all, we received ten times the number of entries to the Stewart contest to the number of complaints. One person's humor is another's insult, though.
Posted on February 14, 2005 11:44 AM