I'm sorry about this response being belated.
> Finaly the world maybe disgusting but it's not
> because
> of cynicism. Whats disgusting is that there are
> wars,
> murders, torture, slaves, starving children and on
> top
> of that vast amounts fictional/real violence
> produced
> for film and media as if there wasn't enough in real
> life.
I find this an upping of the ante. Fair enough. But I
think it requires a response. First of all how can you
expect art (any art) to deal with a world full of the
horrors you describe without in some way representing
them. Secondly, an art which investigates the world
full of the horrors you describe is not necessarily
seperate from that world and so the causes of war,
murder, torture etc coincide or effect the creation of
art. If we criticise the colliseum we have to show the
colliseum. If we show the colliseum how are we better
than those who sat in the colliseum. Perhaps noting
the similarities in the audiences is as healthy as
congratulating ourselves on the differences.
And finally, violence can be fun. This can be safely
felt in contact sports and seen in films. The violence
of a kung fu film, a good explosion, Buster Keaton
falling over, Sylvester Stallone being beaten up.
I think a problem so far with the debate has been that
people talk about violence as though it was one thing.
Aren't we instead talking about an element like H2O,
which can be at once refreshing and fatal? Any
simplistic condemnation or celebration ends up as
impossible as trying to bring water to account.
I too dislike all the terrible things which happen in
the world, but somehow drawing a line between screen
violence and these events in such a way strikes me as
a palliative therapy at best.
Best Wishes
John Bleasdale
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/
|