Movies.
Day Brown
the word from the pulpit made scripture seem magically powerful. We
still swear on Bibles in court.
But in the 20th century, film produced a narrative even the illiterate
thot they could understand. For a while Biblical tales were produced,
but have generally been regarded as hack jobs while the movies that
became classics, also became authoritative sources of truth. Both
literal, as in documentaries, and allegorical. Both of which are much
more believable.
Much of the debate in philosophy is about the claims of scripture by
zealots on one side or other. While the masses themselves, and now the
young in particular, have moved on. Moved on to the mythic tales of the
pre-Christian era. In much the same way as Native Americans returned to
their shamantic roots, so now also Native European young people return
to Celtic art and music... and cosmology.
"Pagan", "Neopagan", "Wiccan" or whatever hardly ever delves into the
questions seen here on the fundamental nature of reality or the divine
as if the young people do not fucking care. They are living their own
movies. Whether these are projected realities as in the "Matrix", does
not really matter. Neither does atheism or the Levantine concept of god.
Neitzsche showed how that god was dead, and without it as an opponent,
to them the issue of atheism is dead as well. It does not fucking matter.
Giga
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b0597ff$0$32668$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
It sometimes seems to me that people are angry with God? That even though
they don't beleive God exists rationally part of them is still angry. They
are angry at God for deserting them, not being there, alowing the preists to
lie about everything, make fools of everybody and mostly for simply not
existing. One way of expressing this disappointment would be behaving in a
way that is thought to be dissaproved of by God, such as Paganism or
something, to piss God off and show God you really don't care He/She/It/They
doesn't/don't exist. This is not Atheism this is Antitheism.
ZerkonXXXX
> It does not fucking matter.
Yes, to the young only fucking matters.
Day Brown
> It sometimes seems to me that people are angry with God? That even though
> they don't beleive God exists rationally part of them is still angry. They
> are angry at God for deserting them, not being there, alowing the preists to
> lie about everything, make fools of everybody and mostly for simply not
> existing. One way of expressing this disappointment would be behaving in a
> way that is thought to be dissaproved of by God, such as Paganism or
> something, to piss God off and show God you really don't care He/She/It/They
> doesn't/don't exist. This is not Atheism this is Antitheism.
lied to, even tho they lie to themselves so much.
Those I get to speak with in my remote neck of Ozark woods are not that
representative a sample, but I do see the cynacism you refer to, most
especially aimed at clerics. Who are spozed to be the most honest, but
the most adept at lying to themselves. How else could they be so good at
selling bullshit from pulpits?
I know there must be some trying to do the right thing, but I'd never
belong to a group with so many so lacking in character. Also, it must
really be hard to draw wisdom from scripture that archeology has so
often shown to be inaccurate if not downright deceptive.
Movies, even documentaries, dont make the same claims of veracity, but
rather present us with the images and letting us draw our own
conclusions on what truth is. Scripture tries to tell us what man is,
but scripts, going all the way back to Shakespeare, or even Sophocles,
says more about what men really are.
One of the things driving the return to the original Aryan religions,
such as the faith in the Great Earth Mother, is more acceptance of what
men and women are; more understanding, as if those clerics were more
like shrinks or case managers trying to handle people as they really are
rather than converting them into something more. And- failing at it.
Movies remind me of the last non-Christian emperor, Julian, who tried to
endow the Athenian academies with the mandate to extract the ALLEGORICAL
truth in myth. There was no claim ancient writing was literally true. We
see movies now reconstructing that myth and leaving us to make what we
will of it. There are no gods to be angry with. Shit happens.
Giga
I don't know why but the Nietzschian idea of The Great Nausia keeps occuring
to me.
Day Brown
> I don't know why but the Nietzschian idea of The Great Nausia keeps occuring
> to me.
the Genealogy of Morals, where, among other things, he gets into the
misapprehensions young men have of where he's coming from.
Zarathustra is a very different work for far sighted eyes to scan. And
while he's often prophetic, as in referring to anti-Semites as tragic
bufoons wearing pointy hoods on their straw heads, he missed the rise of
feminism. Its not Big Brother or the Ubermensch, but Ma Bell and the
Uberwench that are taking over.
This is seen in all the movies in which young men are buffoons and only
young women really get what is going on. The only time we see men who
are strong male figures is in the utterly fantastic scripts with massive
amounts of special effect violence and explosives... which nobody thinks
has anything to do with the real world.
I'm struck by all the romance threads too, where some physically
attractive stud muffin gets better case management. As if that means
they will live happily ever after. But whereas earlier vintage media
implies she will produce children for him, now, thats off the radar. As
a result, we see all these women who will not bear children, but instead
make children of their men.
Giga
> Giga <Giga wrote:
>> I don't know why but the Nietzschian idea of The Great Nausia keeps
>> occuring to me.
> I read him as a young man, and then as an old one came across a late work,
> the Genealogy of Morals, where, among other things, he gets into the
> misapprehensions young men have of where he's coming from.
>
> Zarathustra is a very different work for far sighted eyes to scan. And
> while he's often prophetic, as in referring to anti-Semites as tragic
> bufoons wearing pointy hoods on their straw heads, he missed the rise of
> feminism. Its not Big Brother or the Ubermensch, but Ma Bell and the
> Uberwench that are taking over.
Uberwench, like that. Must read more N soon. Used to dismiss him a bit but
now I wonder...?
>
> This is seen in all the movies in which young men are buffoons and only
> young women really get what is going on. The only time we see men who are
> strong male figures is in the utterly fantastic scripts with massive
> amounts of special effect violence and explosives... which nobody thinks
> has anything to do with the real world.
Yes, I've noticed this. It seems like the male hero figure has had to become
more and more fantastic, like some kind of movie arms race! Iron man is a
good recent example. The guy is a billionaire, brilliant engineer, has
Gweneth Paltrow as assistant and love interest, but hardly works at all
except when flying around in his home-made superman-body-armour cum
F22-Raptor cum infantry regiment! Don't get me started on Die Hard! If the
movie industry was delieberately setting out to put impossible hero figures
up to make young men feel inadequate (or more often have silly fanatasies
about actually being) then they could hardly do a better job.
>
> I'm struck by all the romance threads too, where some physically
> attractive stud muffin gets better case management.
Not sure what you mean here?
Day Brown
> Uberwench, like that. Must read more N soon. Used to dismiss him a bit but
> now I wonder...?
Semites, and completely missed the opportunity to debunk Nazis, who'd
claimed Nietzsche as a patron saint. Its only natural for us to absorb
the liberal opinions of teachers and professors, especially while we are
aware of their power over us, and be unaware of how ill read they really
were.
For instance, Nietzsche did not say god was dead. what he said was, the
LEVANTINE CONCEPT of god was dead. And since the liberal educators all
believed in Levantine gods, they missed the distinction.
> Yes, I've noticed this. It seems like the male hero figure has had to become
> more and more fantastic, like some kind of movie arms race!
Very well put.
> Iron man is a
> good recent example. The guy is a billionaire, brilliant engineer, has
> Gweneth Paltrow as assistant and love interest, but hardly works at all
> except when flying around in his home-made superman-body-armour cum
> F22-Raptor cum infantry regiment! Don't get me started on Die Hard! If the
> movie industry was delieberately setting out to put impossible hero figures
> up to make young men feel inadequate (or more often have silly fanatasies
> about actually being) then they could hardly do a better job.
Its almost like the corporate mass media does this deliberately to distract
young men from competing with young women in real life. But it is a
capitalistic race to the bottom, where they hire all the smart young
women, taking them out of the gene pool for the sake of near term
profits. But leave all the airhead welfare queens to breed. Hello?
>> I'm struck by all the romance threads too, where some physically
>> attractive stud muffin gets better case management.
>
> Not sure what you mean here?
The woman UNDERSTANDS him; she steers him clear of dangerous addictions
by distracting him with sex. Imagine how much more effective female
shrinks would be if they were able to provide sexual therapy. Unlike the
shrink however, she never expects to make another independent sentient
being out of him, but maintain him, like a child, in dependency forever.
Giga
> Giga <Giga wrote:
>> Uberwench, like that. Must read more N soon. Used to dismiss him a bit
>> but now I wonder...?
> Most of the liberals who dismiss him, missed what he had to say of anti-
> Semites, and completely missed the opportunity to debunk Nazis, who'd
> claimed Nietzsche as a patron saint. Its only natural for us to absorb the
> liberal opinions of teachers and professors, especially while we are aware
> of their power over us, and be unaware of how ill read they really were.
I think for me its only when I did a degree myself that I realised there was
no way for ordinary mortals to even read half of what was required really.
You have to accept a lot of second-hand opinions, especially with
translations like from German of course.
>
> For instance, Nietzsche did not say god was dead. what he said was, the
> LEVANTINE CONCEPT of god was dead. And since the liberal educators all
> believed in Levantine gods, they missed the distinction.
So easy to shorten such complex concepts to a sound-bite 'God is Dead'. I
find people doing this kind of short hand speaking all the time,
unfortunately it all to often and quickly leads to shortened thinking,
especially in students. The next generation of lecturers don't even know its
shortened.
>
>> Yes, I've noticed this. It seems like the male hero figure has had to
>> become more and more fantastic, like some kind of movie arms race!
> Very well put.
>
>> Iron man is a good recent example. The guy is a billionaire, brilliant
>> engineer, has Gweneth Paltrow as assistant and love interest, but hardly
>> works at all except when flying around in his home-made
>> superman-body-armour cum F22-Raptor cum infantry regiment! Don't get me
>> started on Die Hard! If the movie industry was delieberately setting out
>> to put impossible hero figures up to make young men feel inadequate (or
>> more often have silly fanatasies about actually being) then they could
>> hardly do a better job.
> Its almost like the corporate mass media does this deliberately to
> distract
> young men from competing with young women in real life. But it is a
> capitalistic race to the bottom, where they hire all the smart young
> women, taking them out of the gene pool for the sake of near term profits.
> But leave all the airhead welfare queens to breed. Hello?
Not sure I can see that. Suspect it is just an enetrtainment arms race gone
wrong.
>
>>> I'm struck by all the romance threads too, where some physically
>>> attractive stud muffin gets better case management.
>>
>> Not sure what you mean here?
> The woman UNDERSTANDS him; she steers him clear of dangerous addictions by
> distracting him with sex. Imagine how much more effective female shrinks
> would be if they were able to provide sexual therapy. Unlike the shrink
> however, she never expects to make another independent sentient being out
> of him, but maintain him, like a child, in dependency forever.
I have to say I think a lot of addictions are replacements for sexual
appetites, and visa versa, but haven't noticed this theme as yet in movies
or pop-culture. Will look out for it.
Day Brown
>> The woman UNDERSTANDS him; she steers him clear of dangerous addictions by
>> distracting him with sex. Imagine how much more effective female shrinks
>> would be if they were able to provide sexual therapy. Unlike the shrink
>> however, she never expects to make another independent sentient being out
>> of him, but maintain him, like a child, in dependency forever.
>
> I have to say I think a lot of addictions are replacements for sexual
> appetites, and visa versa, but haven't noticed this theme as yet in movies
> or pop-culture. Will look out for it.
not made into a movie until 1990. partly because she wanted it to wait
until all the main characters were dead. Henry, being Henry Miller.
But the tale begins with his first wife June bringing him to the Left
Bank of Paris and trying to get him introduced so that his work would be
published. A task that is taken over more successfully by Mrs Nin. But
all of these participants know they will appear, in one form or other,
in literary works. Which motivates them to challenge sexual conventions,
and become thereby, more interesting.
And at the same time, Henry's sex partners have their own Lesbian trip
going on- at the same time they are trying to manage his sex life,
money, psyche, and creative genius. Really complicated modern people.
But Joseph Campbell shows, how, going all the way back to the bronze
age, how the hero needs to rely on the understanding or wisdom of some
woman in order for him to be successful. It was, if you recall, a gift
of a witch that held Achilles by his heel that made him a winner.
Giga
I'll look out for that.
Day Brown
>> But the tale begins with his first wife June bringing him to the Left Bank
>> of Paris and trying to get him introduced so that his work would be
>> published. A task that is taken over more successfully by Mrs Nin. But all
>> of these participants know they will appear, in one form or other, in
>> literary works. Which motivates them to challenge sexual conventions, and
>> become thereby, more interesting.
>>
>> And at the same time, Henry's sex partners have their own Lesbian trip
>> going on- at the same time they are trying to manage his sex life, money,
>> psyche, and creative genius. Really complicated modern people.
>>
>> But Joseph Campbell shows, how, going all the way back to the bronze age,
>> how the hero needs to rely on the understanding or wisdom of some woman in
>> order for him to be successful. It was, if you recall, a gift of a witch
>> that held Achilles by his heel that made him a winner.
>
> I'll look out for that.
going in his efforts to fight fascism. In the other film, June and Anais
are what keeps Miller trying to complete "Tropic of Cancer". But the
change in the zeitgeist is seen in how Isla feels guilty for fucking
Rick, whereas- while June and Anais may get pissed over who is fucking
who, nobody feels any guilt about it.
In both films, people lie about their sex lives. In both films women
offer sexual services to advance their own agendas. But only in the
earlier era, do most feel bad about it. Similarly, while before
Cosmopolitan and Glamour mostly had raps on how to find and keep 'your
man', now there is much more about how to get the most out of whatever
your sex life is, and how to understand the male psyches in it.
There's also raps on how to read between the lines of what is said, or
not said, to reveal the truth of what is going on. A recent issue of
Cosmopolitan even included a woman fucking a man who had the power to
advance her career in the business they both worked at. No guilt.
I didnt see the movie, but recall a scene shown on TV regarding it where
the 30 something successful career woman gets up in the morning to find
the seat on her toilet up... with no clue as to who left it like that.
I dunno which it is, whether the movies reflect what is going on, or
show what will be, and by showing it, make that a self fulfilling
prophecy whether we like it or not.
Giga
I suspect they only show what is going on in the movie industry, not a great
bell-weather for the whole of society, even in the US I'm sure.
Day Brown
> I suspect they only show what is going on in the movie industry, not a great
> bell-weather for the whole of society, even in the US I'm sure.
begins with
a scene in the Illiad where Achilles drags the body of Hector around
behind his chariot.
Which Plato later writes of the abuse of the dead. But then, she noted
what Aristotle said about what Plato said that Homer said. And continues
on thru history right up to recent times, which turns out to be a long
line of illustrious authors.
Like everyone all thru all this history had seen the same movie. Thus,
that script, by Homer, did have a powerful effect, which Sherman also
delves into, in, among other things, explaining the morals of Stoics
and/or warriors.
So, there's a set of movies now, many made in 1939 for some reason, that
every generation sees. I dunno what the effect on society is, but doubt
many would argue that it isnt any. But I have been looking at movies
lately and thinking about what the effect was, is, or mite be.
One change in the zietgeist I picked up on was in the "Little Foxes"
(1941 w/ Bette Davis), was when a character quoted the line from the
Song of Solomon. As if enuf people had read the Bible (seen that movie)
to know what he was talking about. Hardly anyone today would know. I had
to google it.
ta
Giga
Its always difficult to sort out the direction of causation in these things,
especially looking back. How much are the film makers responding to the
times and how much are they influencing them. I suspect the former is much
stronger than the later.
Day Brown
> Its always difficult to sort out the direction of causation in these things,
> especially looking back. How much are the film makers responding to the
> times and how much are they influencing them. I suspect the former is much
> stronger than the later.
then there is long term, when the effect of genius becomes more important.
There are movies made from books. Then scenes in theaters of people
watching the movie, ie, a movies of a movie. And just the other nite,
reading "Moral Minds", by Hauser, mentioning 'A Clockwork Orange', in
which you dunno the point unless you saw the movie.
Now, spoze someone makes a movie of Hauser's book. Its a hall of
mirrors. None of the various renditions of reality is real without the
support of the others. A recent production, "High Noon" is not a remake
of the original, but a plotline where a character deliberately set out
to reconstruct that scenario.
We've seen this before as well. Schoenfield, "The Passover Plot" says
Jesus knew the Essene writings of "The Righteous One" and set out for
Jerusalem at the right time, in the right way to fulfill what he viewed
as prophecy. Schoenfield says Judas was in on the plot. Joseph Campbell
built a career out of how myth was constantly remade, and there's a
career to be built now on how movies remake myth.