Which is to say that what they intended doesn't matter in the slightest; it's how it's read that matters.
I'm sorry, but I must passionately disagree with this. Intentions count for a lot and should be respected. Verify them by all means, but credit them. Also, if "it's how it's read that matters," the implication is that if even one person is offended, then the original should be eradicated. But it is IMPOSSIBLE to some up with anything that someone won't find offensive.
I saw your comment below about it being the creator's responsibility to be clear about meaning. But the reader has responsibilities as well.
(admittedly, I looked at the cartoon, wondered why Obama had been drawn as a bowling ball, and just didn't get it because I was unaware of the bowling gaff; the coconut thing did not occur to me at all, and I still think it's very unlikely to have been intended)
no subject
I'm sorry, but I must passionately disagree with this. Intentions count for a lot and should be respected. Verify them by all means, but credit them. Also, if "it's how it's read that matters," the implication is that if even one person is offended, then the original should be eradicated. But it is IMPOSSIBLE to some up with anything that someone won't find offensive.
I saw your comment below about it being the creator's responsibility to be clear about meaning. But the reader has responsibilities as well.
(admittedly, I looked at the cartoon, wondered why Obama had been drawn as a bowling ball, and just didn't get it because I was unaware of the bowling gaff; the coconut thing did not occur to me at all, and I still think it's very unlikely to have been intended)