The Sheila Variations

If I had to choose between this week's "Beyond Borders" and "Radio" or a DVD of "Battlefield Earth", I might just choose the John Travolta epic.

At least BE doesn't claim to be "important" or "inspirational".

Too bad, because that Clive Owen fellow is an absolute babe.

He certainly is a babe. And I like Angelina Jolie. I like her independence, her wildness - and her acting can be off-the-charts good.

But perhaps her commitment to refugees in Third-world countries blinded her judgment to the inadequacies in the script of whatever...

Like that film Richard Gere made about the evils of China agianst Tibet ... can't remember the name of it...

"Red Corner", ugh...what dreck.

"the english patient" is another AWFUL flick that is also totally "anti-casablanca-ish", as it also valorizes the romantic plight of the hero (the english patient, who was - after all - just a man who sells-out to the nazis just so he can recover the corpse of his lover!); yet, in spite of the fact that this selfish and "romantic" effort led to the deaths of thousands of allied soldiers and hurt the allies' efforts to dislodge the nazis from n.africa, many people and critics loved the flick. go figure.

mccains refrain - "to serve a cause greater than yourself" - is NOT very popular yet, in spite of 9/11. that's the sad thing: it's sad how many people have forgotten 9/11, and who've allowed themselves to think of "WW4" as "the bush crime family's attempt to rule the world".

they make me mad as hell, as do the hollywood
sh-ts that turn out this awful crap that promotes awful values. (they do it because more than half
their market is export.)

the best way to fight them is to boycott their crap - I mean "work".

even if you think sean penn is a GREAT actor, why subsidize his moronic anti-Amerian, anti-libertarian platform by seeing his movies?!

unlike sheila, I can't separate an artists work from their political beliefs - if they choose to become public about their politics then they have to be big enough to accept the criticism of their views. which includes looking at their work differently because of what they espouse. after all, all artwork represents the creative choices the artist has made, and these artistic choices - this judgements - should not be separated from their political judgement. it's part of the context. the artist is the primary context of the artwork.

I argue, for example, that since kahlo was a stalinist - one cannt valorize her art without also valorizing her stalinsim. the work doesn't stand on it's own - it shouldn't. It can't.

THEREFORE, any seemingly "liberating" aspects of her paintings must be seen in this light - and it reveals her (and her paintings) as shallow and hypocritical. after all - as they saying goes:

"you can't be a real revolutionary of you support totalitarianism." she was a phony - her art is phony, false - a pretense - just like her politcal leanings.

paintings - and ALL other "artworks" are not "works-of-art"; they're "works of an artist" -the artist is ALWAYS present in the work, never absent. this is the very core and essence of art: it's a resynthesis of HUMAN experience froma human perspective!

in this sense, artwork can NEVER be anonymous. and it can never stand apart from the person who made it.

If the art is good, if I respond to the art - I forgive. I'm more interested in art than politics anyway.

I love Clifford Odets. I love Arthur Miller. I love all those actors and writers in the 1930s and 40s who were blatant Communists. I don't care, and I don't blame them for holding views that I don't agree with. To me, the only quesiton is: how is their ART?

I think it was a disgrace that Charlton Heston could not get a damn JOB in Hollywood because of HIS political views, and I would think the same thing about people on the opposite side of the fence.

Dishonest and hypocritical art bores me.
It's artifice, not art.
It's craft, not art.
And it diminishes and darkens humanity - it does NOT enlarge or brighten humanity.

Miller's plays reek of stalinistic propaganda.
People who love them probably would have fallen for Goebbels' lies, too. Many peope did, then. Many people do today - like the whole moonbat anti-American peacnik/pro-terror crowd. They're either evil, or they're fools.

Take "The Crucible" - and the term "witchhunt" that grew out of it. IT'S A LIE! A FILTHY BIT OF ORWELLIAN DOUBLESPEAK!

The "witches" in Salem weren't witches - there is no such thing as a witch!

But there WERE COMMIES and SOVIET agents trying to infiltrate our Pentagon and our State Dept!
So McCarthy's hunt was for REAL enemies, sworn enemies of the USA and the American Way! McCarthy was not on any witchhunt!

Miller IS NO ARTIST! He is a slimy piece of suet propagandist, and apologist for genocide, slavery, and atheism. He used his craft to obfuscate the human conditon, not to illuminate it. He pandered to the left.

When you enjoy/"spectate"/witness/partake of a work of artist, you're an active participant, dialoging with the artist.

Acceptance of the work, is acceptance of the underlying ethos, the values, and the intentions of the work.

Crafty propagandists might make intriging stuff - BUT WHAT DOES IT SERVE???

It is lower than mindless pulp that merely seeks to entertain.

It is evil. Destructive.

And people who dedicate a portion of their life's energy to efforting to make the world a better place should ignore the work of propagandists.
Their work should be boycotted. And then "tossed" into the dustbin of history.

All I can say is, Danny, is that that is your opinion.

It may sound like a cop-out, but that's how I see it.

I have my opinion, you have yours. And you are stating your opinion like it is truth.

But it is an opinion, that's all.

Oh, and when I say "this is your opinion" I am not talking about the infiltration of our state department and Hollywood by Communists.

I know, from my reading about the Group Theatre, that the Communist Party was extremely involved - and trying to control these actors - which was why, ultimately, Elia Kazan left the party. As an artist, he did not want to be told what he COULD and could not use as subject matter.

And the persecution of those actors who were merely SUSPECTED of being involved is a black mark upon the McCarthy era. So much for innocent until proven guilty. These people, like J. Edward Bromberg, a fine actor, a great actor, were presumed to be guilty and had to protest their innocence.

J. Edward Bromberg never worked again - and died of a "heart attack" - deprived of his livelihood.

Merely because he was ACCUSED OF SOMETHING.

But anyway, when I say "that is your opinion" what I refer to is your comments about what IS and what is NOT art.

Come on, man, that's just an opinion.

I think Death of a Salesman is high art. I think that there are certain monologues in Waiting for Lefty that cannot be touched, in terms of the language, and Odets' use of language. It's my opinion. I acknowledge that.

You're talking like your opinion about art is the truth. You're also fucking obnoxious and condescending about it. Bah. Go away.