It has been a very long time since I have read anything in a newspaper as deeply offensive as Mr. Gottfried’s “Watch Me Salvage the DSU Rebranding Survey” comments in your January issue. When used skillfully, sarcasm can be a valuable literary technique. In unskilled hands, it can become a publicity stunt, the voice of an intellect still on training wheels that attempts to draw attention to itself, as in deliberately and loudly passing gas in public. Mr. Gottfried certainly got our attention, but anything meaningful in his message was lost in the offensive delivery. And it could have been different. With the right use of sarcasm, aided by a touch of humor, minus the religious cheap shots and the crude sexual references, it could have been an enjoyable read that would have made his point effectively and powerfully.
If Mr. Gottfried chooses to look at bearded men in chaps and cowboy hats and wonder if their buttocks are still warm from recent sexual experiences, I do not. Nor do I think most other people do. But I would undoubtedly be included with those whom he sneeringly described as having an “insatiable fetish for ancestor worship.” Please pardon me for feeling that this is infinitely preferable to the apparent sexual fetish we see in his Broke Back Mountain/cold butt cheeks/dog humping references.
Mr. Gottfried has mastered the freedom of expression with a vengeance. It is unfortunate that he has not mastered the wisdom that should accompany it. The mistake is costly. Playing to those with a high school locker room mentality limits one’s audience and potential influence.
What was the point of the crudeness? What was the point of offending spiritual sensitivities? Simply because he had the freedom to do so? I was taught that one of the hallmarks of maturity was the ability to tell the difference between what one CAN do, and what one SHOULD do. Maturity is as maturity does.
In sum, would Mr. Gottfried be classed among those judged by Shakespeare as being “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”?
Only one question remains in my mind: Was this material actually read and approved by an editor who felt it was appropriate for a wide audience?
Respectfully,
Rodney Nelson
Hurricane, Utah
“Deeply offensive?” We’re talking about a college mascot. Or rather a series of utterly hilarious suggestions for one. What is there to say that could be “meaningful”? Ah, let me wax poetic about a raptor.
The funniest thing about what you wrote — besides the fact that the Internet now knows exactly what you think about the buttocks of bearded men in chaps and cowboy hats — is this: When you say it plays to a high school locker room mentality, are you not belittling those who frequent high school locker rooms?
And isn’t the rebranding effort largely geared toward DSU athletics?
So didn’t you kind of just insult every DSU athlete? Or did they not just graduate from high school? Is there a big difference between a college locker room mentality and a high school locker room mentailty?
As you say, maturity is as maturity does.
However, you paid me quite a compliment: ” Mr. Gottfried has mastered the freedom of expression with a vengeance.” That is precisely my aim, so thank you. But will I ever master the “right use of sarcasm”? Whoops, I just did.
Quite literally, the hallmark of maturity is age. And one of us sounds like a grumpy old man. Back to your cocoon, sir. The world is a big, scary place full of different ideas and free speech, but it’s safe and warm in Hurricane. 🙂
I think Rodney’s response to Jason’s puerile innuendo and humor is spot-on.
Jason, has it ever occurred to you that the mascot suggestions being “utterly hilarious” is very much just your opinion, and clearly an opinion not shared by many others. The fierce Utahraptor is a “quasi-fictional historical “fact””? Do you even know what a fact is? You may be incapable of “waxing lyrical about a raptor”, but why should the rest of us suffer from the same lack of imagination? You belittle “The Wranglers” because it is going to remind you of “Brokeback Mountain”. Why should that matter? After all, we do live in 2016.
Even I, as a local “outsider” and staunch critic of the university’s name, was wondering why the editors of The Independent thought that this piece was worth publishing. On the other hand, there does seem to be a pattern here. For whatever reason the powers-that-be at The Independent just cannot resist any piece of writing that reflects negatively on DSU.
Lighten up… IF THY MEDIA SOURCE OFFENDETH THEE, CUT THE CONNECTION… Mascots are fair game and not sacred icons. Desseret News may be your cup of tea. But you know it sure as he’ll ain’t as entertaining and humorous. Or interactive for that matter. Add to that, no other media source in Washington County is willing to broach difficult issues or challenge the status quo. The Spectrum has no bite and has to cater to paying subscribers and thus is neutered. On the other hand you had your letter published and expressed your opinion. Dixie State needs the criticism to improve regardless if it is constructive or not. For a small University it is surrounded by lots of controversy and the Independent has been a catalyst for positive change. Good luck and don’t fret over mascots.