 |
 |
> I don't know of any better answer to the "why" question about the = > pleasure males take in violence than the one offered by Freud and some = > more recent evolutionary biologists: such violence provides a catharsis = > for our instinctual desires, which can no longer be given direct = > expression in civilized society. The debate is as old as Plato vs. = > Aristotle on tragedy...does viewing such violence make it more or less = > likely that someone will act on such desires in real life?=20 > =20 > "For beauty is the beginning of terror we are still able to bear, and = > why we love it so is because it so serenely disdains to destroy us" = > Rilke's First Duino Elegy > =20 > Daniel Shaw > website: www.lhup.edu/dshaw > =20 > Many of these issues appear in David Cronenberg's intriguing ''The History of Violence''. Is the family drawn to violence by looking at the violent father figure? Is the viewer's scopic pleasure implicated as well? The link between violence and SM sex reappears, in a thrilling rape scene on the staircase. The film is also interesting as an exploration of torture issues - from a ''family perspective''. * * Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to. To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask] For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon. **