BellaStrega

It has Farscape, but not Brisco County, Jr. as well as Babylon 5.

Some of the shows seemed fairly mainstream to me and thus not so much "cult." Like Supernatural and Star Trek: The Next Generation.

Nope. My statement did not hinge upon that one word. Making a point about its removal doesn't really illustrate that the text isn't racist.

I did not pass judgment. I pointed out that you seem to be ignorant about the topic. People in general tend to be ignorant about all kinds of topics. It happens.

The entire story is about white Anglo-Saxon people creating an awesome nation and immigrants tearing it down and ruining it. I am not sure how the racist themes are avoidable. If all of the racist elements were removed you wouldn't even have a story.

But that's not what anyone is saying. They're saying that Lovecraft was a non-apologetic racist and this racism is reflected in his work. It's obvious, blatant, explicit, and reiterated over and over again. There is no subtext. The racism is all text (as Thessalia pointed out).

Your disagreement over how obvious the racist elements are is not a reflection of how obvious they are, but perhaps a reflection of how little you might actually think about racism, and how little racism you likely notice. If "The Street" can have a passage like this:

And you can't find any racism in the story at all, then you apparently do not know what to look for, and your expertise on identifying racism or the lack thereof is somewhat questionable. Especially given the earlier bit:

And this is what happens in all of his work: Dark skinned "swarthy" people are sinister, smell bad, speak inhuman tongues, and are members of evil cults. There are no positive representations of people of color in Lovecraft's work.

I am glad Pushing Daisies made the list. I love that show, and need to watch it again.

That's up to you to decide. If you do not think it benefits you personally, then that's your choice. However, that's not applicable to everyone. I find knowing about it because it has an obvious impact on what he wrote and the meaning behind his writing.

Xenophobia is a prominent element in racism. The distinction you're making is not really as big as you seem to be making it out to be.

If HPL were not racist, then The Horror at Red Hook would not have been written. If he didn't have a reputation for xenophobia and racism, The Horror at Red Hook would still be easily interpreted to include elements of xenophobia and racism because they're pretty obvious.

I think that the "death of the author" is ********, by the way. I think that's often used as an excuse to cut off certain kinds of criticism - like Orson Scott Card's homophobia.

Since we live in a world where racism is a real thing and impacts a lot of people, then yes, it does matter. If it doesn't matter to you, that's a privilege on your part to not have to think about racism.

From what you've written in your post, I don't really believe you when you say "I understand why others would feel differently." I believe you accept that others feel differently, but this post seems to present arguments as to why people shouldn't feel differently.

I think that it should be possible and is often necessary to be able to critique creative works in these terms (racism, for example). This doesn't mean that everyone has to hate works that have racist (or sexist, or homophobic, or any other -ism or -phobia) elements, and avoid or boycott them. But I do not see a downside to people being aware of what these things are, what they mean, and what they reflect not just about the creator, but about the culture in which the creator is able to produce such works and prosper.

If we simply offer the benefit of the doubt and take on "the death of the author" uncritically, then all that happens is that an environment in which entertainment for some is actively unpleasant to others, with no concern for the latter. I would rather that concern exist.

Do you mean "rugous/rugose" (which means wrinkled, creased, or ridged)?

It is unfortunate that people get defensive at critical discussions of Lovecraft's racism. The xenophobia is real and present and fairly severe. This doesn't mean that anyone has to hate Lovecraft or never read his work. It's just good to be aware of the author's biases and how they are reflected in his work. He doesn't need to be defended, as he's dead. The benefit of the doubt is inapplicable, as he made his views explicitly clear.

They've said they'll cycle it back in eventually.

I would argue that the fact that they are possible makes them natural by definition. They're not possible in the real world, but obviously Paragon City is not in the real world.

I did read past it, but I still don't see the point of bringing it up.

This covers it nicely.

Hey, I've noticed that people keep snarking at you for stuff you apologized for, so I'm going to do the opposite:

I saw when you posted, and I'm glad you did. I apologize for my snarky post earlier in the thread, as well (and in the other thread we briefly interacted on).

Not much has been buffed, either. So is that not likely, too?

"Check it out! I spent 10-20 billion influence on IOs, picked the most powerful secondary with the most OP single power available to blasters and soloed a single hard target that is vulnerable to -regen more than damage. This totally proves that blasters are fine."

This is what happens when people do not understand statistics, performance, and the actual value of anecdotal data.

Perez Park was present at launch. The Hollows were added in Issue 2.

Calling the reactions to Golden Girl's nonsense "hissy fits" is a hysterical exaggeration.

It's more like, "What? She said something stupid again?"

You should PM me how you managed it with a dark/dark defender with SOs, because I couldn't manage it after multiple tries.

I wouldn't assume this is a ~casual vs. hardcore~ thing.