 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Among the seven movies (I am not going to say "beauties" - too corny, and not all that true), there was one that left me feel uneasy. The title: "The Disappearance of Garcia Lorca".It is not easy to comprehand the destruction of human life. It matters little whether it is a butcher or a poet. The movie obviously plays on that natural human emotion to achieve its aimed purpose. That purpose is grosly slanted in its representation and is way too obvious.
Perhaps it is thirty years of been fed from sewer pipe that speaks in me, but I find it intellectually insulting that someone apparently expects his naively manipulative ways to work as designed.
The history of Spanish Civil War and the communist putch is a complicated ball of wax. Not often would one see such mixed picture - "good" guys doing horrible things and "horrible" monsters upholding what is right.
The result is that I am now longing for good read on this subject. I am hopeful for some recommendations. I want to hear from people intimately familiar with the subject.
How naive it is that in many people's mind the term fascism is associated with the ultimate in evil. In reality, it is far from being that - its horrible deads being overshadowed by even higher evil. Worst kind of fascism had never exterminated 30% of its population.
The director doesn't even realize that in his attempt at showing the true face of the evil regime he actually makes a fatal mistake. It is 1952 and the young fellow wants to know more about the horrors and crimes of the 1936. What does he do besides walking around and talking to scores of people? Why, he goes to the library and starts reading the old newspapers from that period.
You call THAT opressive regime? Free acsess to old papers? Are you kidding me?
I mentioned that to some of my friends in the know, and without an exception they smiled. Some laughed hysterically. Reading old papers! Hah! How about 20 years of hard labor for ASKING for one? For MENTIONING their existance?
In life, things are not always what they appear. It is even more upsetting when someone makes them look even more untrue. That movie is speculation on the best human emotions. It s too bad its makers chose to use Lorca's name to promote their agenda.
When it comes to movies describing contraversial historic events, education is a must. Otherwise we all become easy pray to whatever political agenda is currently embraced by the director/producer.
Definitely NOT a movie I recommend.
You should not be surprised at this, given the long-standing alliance between the European artistic community (and, to slightly lesser degree, the US community) and the communist left. The Spanish Civil War, in particular, has been romanticized at least since Earnest Hemingway wrote "For Whom the Bell Tolls." The problem is that facsim lost the contest, and its evils were laid bare long before the same fate befell European/Russian communism and its evils were laid bare. And, of course, the persistence of belief even in the face of contrary evidence is a well-documented human phenomenon.Other "propaganda" films that come to mind:
"z" by Costa-Gavras (1967) very entertaining
"JFK" by Oliver Stone; laughable to anyone who lived through the period and remembers the events depicted
"The Hurricane" a vicious, dishonest, racially inflammatory polemic that was too much even for Hollywood to swallow; too bad -- a wonderful performance by Denzel Washington wastedAs for who is worse, Nazis or Communists? One can't make a comparison. Unlike the Russian communists, the Nazis didn't have 70 years to play in the sandbox. You must admit that they certainly got off to a *promising* start with the "final solution."
***You should not be surprised at this, given the long-standing alliance between the European artistic community (and, to slightly lesser degree, the US community) and the communist left.You are right. Actually, I am not surprised as much as I am saddened.
***The Spanish Civil War, in particular, has been romanticized at least since Earnest Hemingway wrote "For Whom the Bell Tolls."
Absolutely true, and the communists made sure that every kid in Russia was familiar with that work.
However, there is an interesting twist. I am reading a serious work by Rudolf Rocker written in 1937, where all those events are covered with what appears to be a very objective eye. There are sections on the communist terror and political assasinations in Spain, on the subversive role the communist party had played, on the role of Stalin and Russia, on the Spanish communist Cheka secret police, on extermination of opposition, and more and more. It is sad that while written at the same time, this work was not given more light, while the "artistic" work was promoted.
***The problem is that facsim lost the contest, and its evils were laid bare long before the same fate befell European/Russian communism and its evils were laid bare.To large extent the true exposure of the communism did not take place until the late fifties. Anyone familiar with the situation knows that what followed was one massive exodus from the communist parties around the world. The American communist party quickly became a non-entity.
***And, of course, the persistence of belief even in the face of contrary evidence is a well-documented human phenomenon.
Sigh.
***Other "propaganda" films that come to mind:
"z" by Costa-Gavras (1967) very entertainingI know that one very well. That was before Yves Montand left the party.
***"JFK" by Oliver Stone; laughable to anyone who lived through the period and remembers the events depicted
"The Hurricane" a vicious, dishonest, racially inflammatory polemic that was too much even for Hollywood to swallow; too bad -- a wonderful performance by Denzel Washington wasted***As for who is worse, Nazis or Communists? One can't make a comparison.
Unlike many of my friends, I do not burden myself much with that question. However, I sometimes use the words "greater evil" for one, perhaps simplistic, reason: in all of human history no other political force was responsible for more deaths. We can perhaps attribute 20 million murders to the Nazi, while by various accounts the communists are directly responsible for extermination of upwards of 150 million people in many countries.
***Unlike the Russian communists, the Nazis didn't have 70 years to play in the sandbox. You must admit that they certainly got off to a *promising* start with the "final solution."
There is no question about it. Unfortunately, while the Soviet Communism had slowed down its murderous pace years ago, its devoted satellites are still there, doing today what they have been doing for many years.
Vietnam, Cuba, China are among these.
But going back to the movie, it is the sad fact that majority of people will not even try to balance that rather artistic viewpoint with facts. Simple food is easier to swallow. So while the right-wing murder squads are rightly painted in their evil color, the communist murderers still escape any light.
Very interesting Victor. It is my understanding that Stalin sold out the Spanish republicans in some way. Had to do with money, I think.I feel that many Americans and others believed that the Spanish Republicans were on the side of democracy against a totalitarian bureaucracy (in this case fascism). Were they duped? Who were really the bad guys here?
The supremely important issue, in my view, is democracy vs. totalitarianism of any kind.
The issue of communism and the arts is a red herring, no pun intended. When college grads and people like pharmacists could not get jobs during the 30's in America, that's when people were attracted to communism. When times were good, who wanted to be a communist? Does anyone actually think that Warren Beatty with his millions is a communist?
***Very interesting Victor. It is my understanding that Stalin sold out the Spanish republicans in some way. Had to do with money, I think.The money element was there for sure. Let me quote one document:
"Communist workers in other countries were naturally not in a position to see through this cunning game behind the scenes and were happy because Russia was from time to time sending the Loyalist government larger or smaller supplies of weapons and provisions. They naturally had no inkling that this, also, was done with the approval of France and England, who respected the provisions of the neutrality pact just as little as did Hitler and Mussolini and tacitly approved the importation of arms into Spain just to the extent that this suited their purposes. But what the Communist press diligently concealed from its readers was the fact that the Russian government never delivered a single cartridge to the Spaniards that had not been paid for dearly and in cash with the gold of the Valencia government."
I am not sure that Stalin "sold" the Republicans, he simply looked after his own interests all along. As we all know, he would deal with anyone, Hitler, etc, as long as there was some benefit for him. He had no moral stops of any kind.
***I feel that many Americans and others believed that the Spanish Republicans were on the side of democracy against a totalitarian bureaucracy (in this case fascism). Were they duped? Who were really the bad guys here?The more I read about it, the more complicated it looks. Neither side was uniform, but rather consisted of many factions, often along for a short ride, until the right moment.
On the Republican side, for instance, there were strong forces that saw the dictatorship of proletariat as their goal. In that respect one might be talking about not freeing the country, but rather simply replacing one form ot totalitarian rule with one under different name.
Let me quote the source again:
"Of greater significance is the attitude of the Russian government toward the Spanish question. Not that we had the slightest illusions on this side either. We had foreseen the inevitable results of the Bolshevist dictatorship from its first beginnings, and the later developments in Russia have confirmed our conceptions in every respect. The so-called "dictatorship of the proletariat," in which naïve souls wished to see a passing but inevitable transitional step to real socialism, has, under the domination of Stalin, developed into a frightful despotism wilicll lags behind the tyranny of the Fascist states in nothing, goes, indeed, beyond them in many respects -- a despotism which suppresses all free expression of opinion with b]oody brutality and deals with the lives and fate of human beings as if they were inanimate objects."
***The supremely important issue, in my view, is democracy vs. totalitarianism of any kind.As another source had incidated, the road to democracy in Spain was not through the communist revolution, but rather through the develoment of free capitalist economy. By some accounts the interests of Germany and Italy were much more along these lines than those of Russia. In that respect the Fascist countries were more aligned with progress, perhaps.
***The issue of communism and the arts is a red herring, no pun intended. When college grads and people like pharmacists could not get jobs during the 30's in America, that's when people were attracted to communism.Communism is the *emotional* philosophy. It speculates on normal human emotions, good inclinations and desires, while providing no real solution, just promises. Capitalism, on the other hand, requires advanced thinking and understanging of many facts, one of them the realization that equal opportunity doesn't mean equal results.
It is a bitter pill that warks, if you will. Communism is a piece of sugar-coated horse dung.
***When times were good, who wanted to be a communist? Does anyone actually think that Warren Beatty with his millions is a communist?
No. He is simply a dumb idiot and a complete disgrace to this industry.
Pardon my long rant.
FWIW, the only thing I recall from Spain during that time was their betrayal of Germany who funded their fascist side during their civil war. Spain wanted France for their assistance in WWII & since Germany wouldn't budge, Spain stayed psuedo-neutral along with Switzerland.re: "democracy vs. totalitarianism"
... Beware the tyranny of mob rule, lest we forget that's precisely why pure democracies don't work.
re: "Does anyone actually think that Warren Beatty with his millions is a communist?"
NO, but a socialist, YES! ... nobody said money follows intelligence, only that a fool loses it.
You'd think that with the money Hollywood makes, it wouldn't want such a system, but every chance they get they want their projects publicly funded. That's right, billion dollar industries want more of your money to fund more stuff (mostly propaganda) because the populus won't pay to see it. Or, how about millionare actors asking the middle-class & poor to fund out-of-work actors? Talk about cojones! It's amazing they can walk at all!
I'm not sure I would say that the Franco government "betrayed" the Nazis. After the Civil War, Spain was physically and financially exhausted -- and only tenuously united. What could Spain offer the Nazis? Sending Spanish troops abroad was dangerous since they might be needed internally to put down rebellion. Spain did not have oil, which was the principal natural resource the Nazis lacked. The spanish navy was small and was aligned with the Loyalist faction.
What Spain did supply were submarine bases for the U-Boats operating in the mediterranean and off the straits of Gibraltar in the Atlantic. I lived in the Spanish city of Cartagena in the late 1950s. The city, on the southeast coast of Spain (well away from the British stronghold of Gibraltar) was the headquarters of the Spanish Navy and had an excellent. athough small by modern standards, natural harbor, surrounded by rocky hills that were topped with forts. Blasted out of the rock at the base of one of the hills were two submarine pens that had been built for the U-Boats. At the base of an 800' rocky hill, they were invulnerable to aerial attack. I know about them because the US Navy had taken them over in the 1950s and converted them to bunker fuel storage for the US 7th Fleet, which operated in the Mediterranean. I think the Spanish also had facilities for U-Boat resupply in the Atlantic port city of Vigo, just north of the Portugese border.The Spanish paid some price for their quasi alliance with the Germans. They were isolated from the post-war European community. The US government for Cold War military reasons made friends with the Franco government, even though it was not a part of NATO. The US had a large Strategic Air Command bomber base at Torrejon, outside of Madrid, and a large naval air base at Rota, near Cadiz and the Straits of Gibraltar. The smaller installation at Cartagena was for fuel supply and there was a second ammunition dump. These were really a form of payment-in-kind for the Spanish government in exchange for what the US really wanted, which was the SAC base at Torrejon and the Navy base at Rota.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
