Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [mythsoc] Ellison etc.

Expand Messages
  • Ernest Tomlinson
    ... From: Elizabeth Apgar Triano To: Mythopoeic Society Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:36 AM
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 31, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Elizabeth Apgar Triano" <lizziewriter@...>
      To: "Mythopoeic Society" <mythsoc@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:36 AM
      Subject: Re: [mythsoc] Ellison etc.

      > I didn't see that one, but I did see all or most of something I thought
      > nasty, called I believe "Blue Velvet."

      Yeah, that's David Lynch, not quite at his worst (I've heard, but only by
      reputation, that _Wild at Heart_ earns that title.) The frightening thing
      about _Blue Velvet_ is that, unlike (say) Waters's films, carefully and even
      subtly crafted. Some people may snort and say, "_Blue Velvet_? Subtle?",
      but there are many little details in the movie, hard to spot, which build
      the sense of malaise which Lynch wants. That's Monty Clift's picture in
      Laura Dern's bedroom, for example, and Clift was a notoriously
      self-destructive closeted gay actor. When Kyle McLachlan says to Dern that
      she's a neat girl, she replies, "You too." Huh? Yet it's still an
      exploitation movie, and a fairly repulsive one at that, especially in its
      treatment of the Isabella Rosselini character.

      > If something is pernicious to the soul, does that make it a Successful
      > Work? Or a disease?

      Can art be pernicious to the soul? Unfortunately the debate has become so
      hopelessly polarized that there is almost no ground for the person (like me)
      who, while setting his face against any notion of censorship or return of a
      "Production Code", believes that some works of art and entertainment are
      morally questionable, even repulsive. You've got the two camps now, the
      (often religiously motivated) reactionaries who want to burn Mapplethorpe
      and expurgate Scorsese, and the (often adolescent or college-aged) radicals
      who scoff at any notion that a movie, book, or TV game can influence
      behavior (then why watch, read, or play?) and that they should be able to
      watch as much pornography and play as much "Grand Theft Auto" as they want.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.