Politics and sentiment don’t mix. Those are words that we tell ourselves to try and form a distinction between the two but inevitably, they end up coming together in the end. Its the same thing as saying that you shouldn’t mix politics and religion. As for me, I agree. Those things should be kept separate. Politics and sentiment is something that should be kept separate as well but more often than not that is not the case.
You could almost break it down to the age old argument that women should show emotions and that men shouldn’t. It basically comes down to that. The women in Marji’s family show their emotions because they believe that it isn’t a weakness. The men or more specifically her father, say that you shouldn’t show emotion and that to do is an act of weakness. The funny thing is that all throughout the movie we see signs of her father’s emotions. When she leaves the first time he is crying. The funny thing here is that he is the one crying and the mom is stoically looking on. Also when she calls home Europe, when he is talking on the phone you can hear the worry in his voice and the concern for his daughter. But I think that this particular trait is something that all father’s have. They try to be tough and with sons I believe that they do a better job of holding together that tough persona. But with daughters, I believe its a little harder to do so. Not having kids myself I can only speculate but I think I’m closer to the truth than most fathers care to admit. I’ve seen evidence of this first hand though from the guys I work with and even from some of my own friends that have started their families.
As for what Marji believes, I think that she wants to believe that they don’t exist but her experiences with her family has led her to believe otherwise. Just like how she wants be a prophet at first and then she wants to be a communist, Marji’s aspirations are influenced by the decisions of those around her. I also think that her mother and grandmother would agree with my thoughts on this as well seeing as how they are both older and wiser than both me and Marji. Having seen the best and worst of people, I think that their thoughts on the matter are probably not too far from my own.
It could be that I’m wrong in my assumption that they don’t believe that the two shouldn’t mix but based on the book and the movie, it could be that they think that the two should work together because if you try to hold one away from the other, the one that is held back comes back stronger than before and ends up doing more harm than good. You could almost use the argument that it would be better to have the emotion there and not need it than to need the emotion and not have it.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Glengarry Glen Ross
The absence of women in Glengarry Glen Ross is something that most people don’t particularly take notice of at first. Its one of those things that you might think about while you’re watching the movie but you don’t really stop to think about it until after you’ve watched it. In my case, after I watched it the first time, when I went back and thought of the movie, I honestly thought that because of the things that happen due to the women in the play or movie, they were in there and I just couldn’t remember them. Now obviously, that isn’t the case. True enough, they do influence the happenings of the movie but they do it without actually being in the movie itself. You could look at this one of two ways. The first being that Mamet is showing his sexist attitude and purposely leaving women out of this film. The other way to look at this is by thinking that he is showing the audience the power that women have over men. Almost like he is paying homage to them.
The fact remains that it is because of the women that the dramatic events unfurl in this story. Without each of them, this story would not have been possible. If it hadn’t been for Levene’s daughter, he never would have been desperate enough to steal those leads. It also seemed to me that Levene ended up being the most influenced by the women in the play. First with his daughter, then with the “ex,” then with Mrs. Nyborg, and finally by Mrs. Lingk. Truly, the only other man affected by a women would be Roma and even that interaction isn’t as bad as it could be or as bad as Levene’s. In his case he only loses a sale which in turn loses him a car as opposed to Levene who ends up being arrested for his troubles.
If you think of the role of women in this movie as a sort of “guiding hand” it makes it easier to see how the events of those men are affected. As for the women themselves, they never really do anything is so major that it is plot changing. They simply say something or do something that in turn causes a ripple effect throughout the rest of the characters. Lingk’s wife is perfect example. She tells him that he can’t buy the land so he goes down to the office to cancel the deal. Just from this one action, the rest of the character’s lives are changed. Levene is sent to jail, Roma loses his car, Moss we don’t ever learn what happens to but we assume he is arrested too, and Aaronow, we don’t really learn what happens to him, but he and Roma get a bite to eat and we hope for the best because he was the only decent character in the whole movie. As I said earlier, it is a lot easier to think of the role of the women as a invisible hand because truthfully, that what it is.
The fact remains that it is because of the women that the dramatic events unfurl in this story. Without each of them, this story would not have been possible. If it hadn’t been for Levene’s daughter, he never would have been desperate enough to steal those leads. It also seemed to me that Levene ended up being the most influenced by the women in the play. First with his daughter, then with the “ex,” then with Mrs. Nyborg, and finally by Mrs. Lingk. Truly, the only other man affected by a women would be Roma and even that interaction isn’t as bad as it could be or as bad as Levene’s. In his case he only loses a sale which in turn loses him a car as opposed to Levene who ends up being arrested for his troubles.
If you think of the role of women in this movie as a sort of “guiding hand” it makes it easier to see how the events of those men are affected. As for the women themselves, they never really do anything is so major that it is plot changing. They simply say something or do something that in turn causes a ripple effect throughout the rest of the characters. Lingk’s wife is perfect example. She tells him that he can’t buy the land so he goes down to the office to cancel the deal. Just from this one action, the rest of the character’s lives are changed. Levene is sent to jail, Roma loses his car, Moss we don’t ever learn what happens to but we assume he is arrested too, and Aaronow, we don’t really learn what happens to him, but he and Roma get a bite to eat and we hope for the best because he was the only decent character in the whole movie. As I said earlier, it is a lot easier to think of the role of the women as a invisible hand because truthfully, that what it is.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Rear Window
The whole premise for Rear Window works really well. Jeffries’s and Lisa’s grows as the movie goes along and we as the audience are allowed to witness it happening. We get to see how Jeffries’s attitude towards Lisa attitude undergoes a dramatic change. We get to see a side of Lisa that we probably would never have seen if not for the circumstances of the film. And finally, we get to see how by working together to solve this crime, they are brought closer together and their true feelings are revealed for each other.
The different apartments across from Jeffries’s apartment and the people that live in there help to serve as mirrors for Jeffries’s and Lisa’s own lives. Miss Lonelyhearts for example. You could make the connection that she is like Lisa in the fact that she wants someone to love and is having trouble accomplishing that. The composer and and Lisa share a common frustration in being unable to accomplish their goal as well. His to write a good song and her to marry Jeffries, although both goals are achieved by movie’s end. Miss Torso is unique in that her and Lisa are both pretty and seem to be waiting or searching for something or someone. The newlyweds and the Thorwalds are both couples that appear fine on the surface but underneath there are problems. The same could be said about Jeffries’s and Lisa’s relationship. But all three have very different endings. The Thorwalds of course being murder and tragedy, we don’t see it but we might make the assumption that the newlyweds get a divorce, and then Jeffries and Lisa live happily ever after, or so we assume.
Throughout the film, Jeffries and Lisa’s relationship is constantly being put to the test. In the end, the events of the movie help to bring them closer together and help to break down some of the barriers that Jeffries had placed in front of Lisa. By having this adventure together, Jeffriess is able to see that Lisa can handle herself and Lisa is able to find out that she can handle a life like that.
Overall Hitchcock did a really good job of making sure that the details in the movie were done right because it is the details that most people seem to take notice of. Its be cause of the film class I took that I say that everything he did in the movie was on purpose, what I mean to say is that nothing was accidental in its placement. For a master of his craft like Hitchcock, the small things that he gets us to notice are probably what he enjoyed the most.
The different apartments across from Jeffries’s apartment and the people that live in there help to serve as mirrors for Jeffries’s and Lisa’s own lives. Miss Lonelyhearts for example. You could make the connection that she is like Lisa in the fact that she wants someone to love and is having trouble accomplishing that. The composer and and Lisa share a common frustration in being unable to accomplish their goal as well. His to write a good song and her to marry Jeffries, although both goals are achieved by movie’s end. Miss Torso is unique in that her and Lisa are both pretty and seem to be waiting or searching for something or someone. The newlyweds and the Thorwalds are both couples that appear fine on the surface but underneath there are problems. The same could be said about Jeffries’s and Lisa’s relationship. But all three have very different endings. The Thorwalds of course being murder and tragedy, we don’t see it but we might make the assumption that the newlyweds get a divorce, and then Jeffries and Lisa live happily ever after, or so we assume.
Throughout the film, Jeffries and Lisa’s relationship is constantly being put to the test. In the end, the events of the movie help to bring them closer together and help to break down some of the barriers that Jeffries had placed in front of Lisa. By having this adventure together, Jeffriess is able to see that Lisa can handle herself and Lisa is able to find out that she can handle a life like that.
Overall Hitchcock did a really good job of making sure that the details in the movie were done right because it is the details that most people seem to take notice of. Its be cause of the film class I took that I say that everything he did in the movie was on purpose, what I mean to say is that nothing was accidental in its placement. For a master of his craft like Hitchcock, the small things that he gets us to notice are probably what he enjoyed the most.
Monday, June 29, 2009
King Lear Blog
This is the second time I’ve read this play by Shakespeare. I did not particularly like it the first time but I think that was more due to the fact that I was high school. This second time through I can appreciate it more and I did just that. Shakespeare never was one of my favorites growing up and even now there are still plays of his that I just can’t read; A Midsummer’s Night Dream and Hamlet to name two. But before I get condemned for a heretic, I better move on.
Now before I go any further, I must put a disclaimer here: The next thing that I say is purely an observation. It does not mean that I believe what I said, merely that I’m putting it to words. This whole play was one based on the deceitfulness and evil of women. Again I say that personally don’t I believe that myself but for someone who lived back in the time of Shakespeare and would have sat through this play, it would have been common thinking among the men of the world.
Kahn’s argument for the femininity of King Lear is a strong one. She makes good points that she backs up with examples from the play itself. One thing that has helped me to understand what Kahn is talking about is that I took a critical theory class and in that class one of the theories that we talked about was feminist theory and how it applied to men. I know that it isn’t in the same context, but that class helped me to better understand what Kahn was talking about.
One thing from the play that I thought worked really well for her comparisons and she mentioned it in the passages we read was Lear’s newfound ability to shed tears. This amount of detail that was devoted to this topic was more than enough to allow someone such as Kahn to formulate a theory of some kind. The fact that the play is based in the seventeenth century, where the masculinity ruled, has major role in Kahn’s theory. I think that because of the location of the play, both place and time, Kahn’s theory works well but if we were to apply it to another time or place it might not work as well.
So now if you go back to what I said earlier about the evil and corruptness of women, it would seem to that me that by allowing a little of his feminine side to take over, Lear in his self is becoming corrupt. But the one thing that redeems him in the story is his daughter Cordelia. Unlike her sisters, Cordelia is the epitome of womanly virtues and I believe that Lear isn’t becoming like his Goneril or Regan but more like Cordelia.
Overall, this is not one of my favorite of Shakespeare’s plays but it definitely not my least favorite. The transformation that Lear undergoes and the subplots of all of the other characters make for a overall enjoyable if not confusing read.
Now before I go any further, I must put a disclaimer here: The next thing that I say is purely an observation. It does not mean that I believe what I said, merely that I’m putting it to words. This whole play was one based on the deceitfulness and evil of women. Again I say that personally don’t I believe that myself but for someone who lived back in the time of Shakespeare and would have sat through this play, it would have been common thinking among the men of the world.
Kahn’s argument for the femininity of King Lear is a strong one. She makes good points that she backs up with examples from the play itself. One thing that has helped me to understand what Kahn is talking about is that I took a critical theory class and in that class one of the theories that we talked about was feminist theory and how it applied to men. I know that it isn’t in the same context, but that class helped me to better understand what Kahn was talking about.
One thing from the play that I thought worked really well for her comparisons and she mentioned it in the passages we read was Lear’s newfound ability to shed tears. This amount of detail that was devoted to this topic was more than enough to allow someone such as Kahn to formulate a theory of some kind. The fact that the play is based in the seventeenth century, where the masculinity ruled, has major role in Kahn’s theory. I think that because of the location of the play, both place and time, Kahn’s theory works well but if we were to apply it to another time or place it might not work as well.
So now if you go back to what I said earlier about the evil and corruptness of women, it would seem to that me that by allowing a little of his feminine side to take over, Lear in his self is becoming corrupt. But the one thing that redeems him in the story is his daughter Cordelia. Unlike her sisters, Cordelia is the epitome of womanly virtues and I believe that Lear isn’t becoming like his Goneril or Regan but more like Cordelia.
Overall, this is not one of my favorite of Shakespeare’s plays but it definitely not my least favorite. The transformation that Lear undergoes and the subplots of all of the other characters make for a overall enjoyable if not confusing read.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Bigger Picture
What can I say about the Moviegoer…...well for one thing, it surprised me. I honestly didn’t expect it to end the way it did. I figured that Binx and Kate would get married but for some reason I saw her killing herself in the end, maybe on their wedding night or something like that. And his aunt was another thing that kinda caught me off guard, that dressing down she gave him then the turn around that she “ had become fond of me.” Both were events that I didn’t exactly see coming them nor the fact that Uncle Jules died. That more than anything was something that I didn’t like because Uncle Jules was one of my more favorite characters, I did call Lonnie’s death though, not that I’m proud of it.
Now as to the matter of Binx’s search, it is my belief that he found what he was looking for but it was in front of him the whole time. In fact, I might go so far as to say that he actually had it the whole time but he was so caught up in his whole “search” thing that he couldn’t see that he already had it. The thing that I think Binx has at the end is a sense of belonging with Kate and his mother’s side of the family. Mainly just a sense of having people depend on him. Kate for telling her what to do and his brothers and sisters for helping them cope with the loss of their brother. Plus, the loss of his favorite step-brother would probably influence this in one way or another. It just seems to me that Binx didn’t really know what he was looking for to begin with so by that same token he couldn’t really know when he found whatever it was that he was searching for.
I don’t think that Binx found religion in the same kind of sense that we normally think of it. What I think Binx stumbled upon is a kind of peace that envelops his life. The last paragraph of the first section in the epilogue even says, “...I am a member of my mother’s family after all and so naturally shy away from the subject of religion.” I say stumbled upon because by Binx’s reckoning, he hasn’t found anything, so he won’t admit that he might have actually found anything.
Going back to what I said about Kate depending on him, echoes of that kind of relationship are scattered throughout the novel, it almost every interaction that they share, Kate’s dependence on Binx is revealed more and more. I think that Binx himself comes to relish his role as Kate’s caretaker. To me, it seems like he feels that by helping Kate to work through her problems, he might be able to take care of his own.
Overall, I think that Binx at the end of the novel has accepted that his life is what it is and that as his aunt puts it, “...that the Bolling family had been going to seed and that I was not one of her heroes but and very ordinary fellow…” He seems to have some kind of self fulfilling prophecy with his aunt and her feeling towards him.
Now as to the matter of Binx’s search, it is my belief that he found what he was looking for but it was in front of him the whole time. In fact, I might go so far as to say that he actually had it the whole time but he was so caught up in his whole “search” thing that he couldn’t see that he already had it. The thing that I think Binx has at the end is a sense of belonging with Kate and his mother’s side of the family. Mainly just a sense of having people depend on him. Kate for telling her what to do and his brothers and sisters for helping them cope with the loss of their brother. Plus, the loss of his favorite step-brother would probably influence this in one way or another. It just seems to me that Binx didn’t really know what he was looking for to begin with so by that same token he couldn’t really know when he found whatever it was that he was searching for.
I don’t think that Binx found religion in the same kind of sense that we normally think of it. What I think Binx stumbled upon is a kind of peace that envelops his life. The last paragraph of the first section in the epilogue even says, “...I am a member of my mother’s family after all and so naturally shy away from the subject of religion.” I say stumbled upon because by Binx’s reckoning, he hasn’t found anything, so he won’t admit that he might have actually found anything.
Going back to what I said about Kate depending on him, echoes of that kind of relationship are scattered throughout the novel, it almost every interaction that they share, Kate’s dependence on Binx is revealed more and more. I think that Binx himself comes to relish his role as Kate’s caretaker. To me, it seems like he feels that by helping Kate to work through her problems, he might be able to take care of his own.
Overall, I think that Binx at the end of the novel has accepted that his life is what it is and that as his aunt puts it, “...that the Bolling family had been going to seed and that I was not one of her heroes but and very ordinary fellow…” He seems to have some kind of self fulfilling prophecy with his aunt and her feeling towards him.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)