|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: The Decline and Fall of Our Society as We Know It. posted by Daryl R on July 07, 2000 at 20:20:27:
Well, at the risk of coming off as some sort of liberal relativist, I can't help but present the following episode of cultural history:In 1774 Goethe published the novella The Sorrows of Young Werther (anonymously). It was an epistolary novel about a young man who falls in love with a woman who is engaged to marry another man. <<200-year-old spoiler alert: at the end of the novel, the protagonist commits suicide>>
* It was an enormous popular hit, unprecedented in its time. In fact, I would argue that it was the first modern literary sensation. People dressed up like the characters, adopted their affects, bought plates and teasets with their likenesses painted on it, etc.
* Literary critics gave it a lukewarm reception. Some noted literary figures expressed reservations about the moral content -- or lack of it -- of the novel.
* Social critics across Europe condemned the novel, arguing that it was a damnable book that romanticized and encouraged suicide, that it glorified self-indulgent reverie, that it infected its readers with its melancholic sensibility. The novel was banned in some cities; some religious leaders forbade its reading.
* The novel was widely held out by critics as the epitome of the decline of European civilization: it was identified with the decline of religiosity, with the rise of philosophical and moral skepticism, with the spread of materialism, with the disintegration of social bonds, etc.
* Some two centuries later, "Werther" is considered one of the masterpieces of modern European literature.
* I can't think of many periods in modern history that weren't -- at least in the minds of some interested group -- about the decline and fall of our society as we know it. The idea of degeneration itself has a fascination history; I can trace its modern usage back to about the mid-19th century. It includes some pretty nasty moments, including the rise of the eugenics movements in Britain and the United States at the turn of the 20th century.
I don't mean to lecture, and certainly not to chide. None of this is meant to minimize any real substantive critiques of the film, of which I've not seen. I'm just trying to bring another perspective to bear upon some of the language in which some of the critiques are wrapped.
--daryl
...but what does that have to do with allowing pre-teens into a theater to view a sexually explicit movie meant for adults? I have no qualms about the content of a movie - sex, violence, whatever - so long as it's kept in the proper perspective. That is, adults only. If you maintain that "Scary Movie" is proper fare for 11 and 12 year olds, then I must say you have a very twisted mentality.Perhaps you are also saying that books such as The Sorrows of Young Werther should be included in 8th grade literature. I do not get your point. We are talking about exposing youngsters with highly impressionable minds to filth, not the puritanical attitudes towards risque books clearly meant for adult consumption. Good try, but not even close.
Wow, that's one misdirected reading of my post. (Incidentally, I re-read Joe S.'s posts, and I can only conclude that you've misread them, too. I think that wanting to warn people that "Scary Movie" is not suitable for children is a commendable thing. I think that accusing others that they are not concerned with the welfare of children -- indeed, that they desire the opposite when it is obviously not the case -- is not.)So, what's the point?
1. The argument that some film, book, opera, or other cultural artifact is decadent, trash, filth, etc. is not particularly new. "Scary Movie" is not the end of society. History would suggest the very opposite.
2. We can learn from history, not just in the non-specific sense of "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it", but in the specific sense that it provides a perspective that might let us say interesting and specific things about the state of violence, racism, or sexuality in contemporary culture. Knowledge -- specific, reasoned, grounded knowledge -- is a wonderful, liberating thing.
3. As an example, there is a rather devastating critique of "The Patriot" at Salon.com that suggests, among other things, that the film articulates in a rather disturbing manner the United States' ambivalent encounter with genocide. I'm not a knowledgeable enough person to judge the historical accuracy of the review, but its a pretty decent example of an interesting, historically-informed critique.
4. The "shock" genre of film is not new. The very fact that "Scary Movie" is a parody of horror and slasher films literally announces this fact. More generally, the argument that mass culture is essentially one founded on the experience of shock, as well as its antidote, goes back at least a century. As an example, one might check out Nietzsche's critique of Wagner ("The Case of Wagner").
5. So, what is it about the "shock" genre of films that makes it so appealing? What kind of experience creates the conditions where shock, and even moreso, the repetition of shock, can be experienced as pleasurable?
--daryl
...suggesting that this material is approapriate for 11 and 12 year olds. Dont even try to paint us with that brush.joe
You've done a pretty good job of it all by yourself. I suggest you re-read your posts.Case closed.
...on that point. I suggest you try comprehending my posts.joe
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: