elag wrote:
> john adams wrote:
>
>> "Dale Houstman" <dmh7@citilink.com> wrote in message
>> news:403A02A0.1030905@citilink.com...
>>
>>>
>>> john adams wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Parry" <parry@perfectOMITmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4033F095.FCE@perfectOMITmail.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Andreas Moss wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for a GREAT answer Parry. Well, surrealism or
>>>>>> surrealistic.. I don't really care. To me its just
>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>>> keyword to finding movies I seem to enjoy. (Even though I
>>>>>> would argue
>>>>>
>> on
>>
>>>>>> early Lynch not being surrealism.., but thats not
>>>>>> important..)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> May I add some questions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Why is Jean Cocteau a joke? I haven't seen anything with
>>>>>> him, but I
>>>>>
>>>> heard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> he's done some good movies? Could you elaborate?
>>>>>
>>>>> He's a director who, in ancient times, would wrongly be
>>>>> labeled "surrealist." Surrealists hate him for being a
>>>>> pretentious, religionistic "fake poet."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I still think Blood of a Poet is great now and especially for
>>>> its time.
>>>>
>>>> "..."
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think he made several interesting films, including "Beauty and
>>> the Beast" and "L'Enfants Terribles" but after reading his
>>> memoirs, I discovered he was an appalling lover of Nazi parties,
>>> luxury, and celebrities, a social-climber, and an elitist
>>> aesthete.
>>
>> That's what I've heard. Not very much to be proud of, unless you
>> like nazi parties, celebrities, luxury, and elitism.
>
>
>
> Can we not seperate the work from the worker? There is a very nice
> flat fieldstone wall upon which I've rested my bottom, which was
> built by a neofascist thug. It is very sturdy and also beautiful.
> Shall I push it over because of its unfortunate political leanings?
I understand this argument, but it isn't one that was compelling to the
surrealists. Since the "work" is supposed to be mainly a bit of
"forensic debris" left over from an unconscious adventure (the adventure
being the truly important element of the process), to separate a
person's "work" from their - let's say - proto-nazism isn't a very
useful act. But - as I said - I liked Cocteau's work, and I AM
separating him from that. The work is often interesting, the person is
odious. Accepting the person who does work you deem acceptable is the
same problem you protest over, only from the other side.
dmh
>
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 |
|