Ok, let’s get it straight to the peanut gallery that Ben Heaton’s article on interracial marriage is a satire. However, if we are going to do that, then we are also going to have to get it straight to Ben Heaton that it was a very poorly written satire. The whole point of a satire is to expose the stupidity of a subject (in this case, anti-gay marriage laws) using irony, sarcasm, wit, ect. We can rule out wit from Heaton’s article… it was dry as a bone. Sarcasm too is only barely visible if one sits down, reads the article several times, and actually looks for something that may resemble sarcasm. Irony is simply not applicable because anti-miscegenic law activists do exist. Gay and interracial marriages share several parallels so it is ridiculous to use one to parody the other. George Orwell’s 1984 was a successful satire because he compared a government to talking farm animals. However, you cannot compare two equally serious subjects, and expect it to be obvious that one is a parody of the other. Heaton’s website criticizes the public for not knowing that his article is a satire. Well, from a literary point of view, it’s not.
ai
"Marriage debate" poor satire
Over the last year, conversations about artificial intelligence (AI) in art have grown increasingly dualistic in their unresearched vigilance and shallow enthusiasm — becoming, as most controversial topics now do, against compromise in any capacity. Read More
BladeSmart kitchen knife
"Marriage debate" poor satire
So, you have a degree in Biochemistry and English. You served in student government for four years, clustered in Astrophysics, and speak passable German. In other words, you’re unemployed. Read More
daisy
"Marriage debate" poor satire
they could amicably share Daisy’s territory so long as Count Kipper (heretofore known as Lord Kipper of House Daisy), swore total fealty and obedience to Daisy’s cause. Read More