One of the things that I choose to believe, as I make my way through the wandering rocks of life, is that God doesn’t make mistakes. This, obviously, is a matter of faith, and very often – when things are tough, or when terrible things happen like Beslan, like every other horrible cataclysmic event on this planet etc. – this belief of mine is challenged. I believe in God. But Beslan? God??? GOD? HELLOOOOOO?
This is part of life, I believe. At least a part of my life, where I believe in God, and I believe in connections, patterns being revealed … that there is an underlying sense. I also believe that this faith of mine is MEANT to be challenged. It’s not easy, or black and white. It is faith that is of this world, and meant to be shattered, and crashed … so that I am constantly examining it and not hiding from reality.
Something like Beslan shatters the faith. The Holocaust shatters the faith. Andrea Yates shatters the faith. Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy shatter the faith.
Then along comes something like this story.
And I think to myself: There are mistakes in humanity. There are freaks of nature, embodied in one human being. People beyond the pale. People who are aberrations. Mistakes. Something went wrong in the factory or something. I believe that certain people are born “missing” certain things. Like – er – a conscience. Or compassion. The sense that other people are actually REAL, and not just extensions of your own ego. This is controversial, I know, but I believe certain people are born missing those things.
I don’t care what horrible thing was done to you. I don’t care what “rubber-ducky” explanation is given for why you are such a big fucking evil mistake. I don’t give a shit. I don’t care that Mommy didn’t love you enough, and Daddy beat you upside the head. I’ve got plenty of friends who weren’t loved by their mothers, who were abandoned by their fathers, who were sexually molested, who were basically born into a shitty fucking world – I’m sure we all do – and you know what? My friends didn’t chop up their neighbors, didn’t travel through the country dismembering random women, didn’t shoot up their schools. They got through it.
Look at that freak. I do not care what pain she went through or what “happened to her”. She’s a freak of nature, she is beyond the pale, and what she did wasn’t just bad and wrong, it was evil. That smile, that goopy-eyed smile, is one of the scariest things I’ve ever seen in my life.
I know a lot of people think that calling people like her a “freak” is a cop-out. It means I do not want to deal with the larger societal issues, that it’s easier to call names, etc.
Bah. I don’t believe that.
I think the tougher thing to contemplate, the scarier thing, is that there are those out there who just are born bad. (John Steinbeck NAILED this in East of Eden with the chilling character of Cathy.) Such people are rare, thank goodness. But I do believe they exist.
Scott Peck, in his terrifying book, People of the Lie tackles this issue, too. Very controversial, because he’s a psychiatrist! But he takes as his thesis the premise that – We don’t know that pure evil exists. We can’t know it for a fact. But … let’s just consider the possibility … what is wrong with considering the possibility?
Peck defines evil as being unwilling, literally, unwilling to change, grow, move, transform – people who absolutely REFUSE to look inward, and see: Huh, this is why I’m acting this way. I know people like that and I’m sure you do, too.
Anyway. That’s what I think of when I look at that freak-ass bitch’s crazy smile.
Things like this not only remind me that I don’t know the Plan, but that I’m not entirely sure I’d be any happier if I did know.
so given this kind of crap, what DOES make you believe there’s a god that knows what he or she is doing?
Beth – ya ever heard of faith? I don’t need proof.
Ken – Yeah, really, if this is part of the Plan, then I’d rather be in the dark.
I don’t know if this particular woman is truly evil, or just totally wacko. She could be either, or both. Scott Peck talks about how some people could be crazy, and do seemingly evil things, because their brains were simply broken, not because they are truly evil. While others, who may not even seem crazy, can be truly evil.
But I have no doubt whatsoever about – and plenty of empirical evidence to support – the existence of existential evil, and also believe it is part of God’s plan. The whole yin-yang thing you know. There has to be a counterbalance to “good” in the universe to keep things running. To me, doubting the existence of God because evil exists doesn’t make much sense.
Also in our universe it seems to be that good is more powerful than evil. It is very possible, however, that there could be a “mirror image” universe where evil predominates. The one where Mr. Spock has a beard.
CW – heh heh heh heh
On a more serious note, CW – I understand, logically, what you say: (“doubting the existence of God because evil exists doesn’t make much sense”).
But for me (ever since I read Anne Frank’s diary when I was – 11 or whatever) it has always been about that struggle. I have faith in God. I always have. Even when I’m pissed off at him.
And I remember when I finished Anne’s diary – and I was young, I was a little girl – I was so mad at God that I wanted to rip through the sky and wring his fucking neck.
This may not be logical – but on an emotional level (at least in my world) – it makes a lot of sense.
Do you imagine yourself standing in the Presence, many years from now (one hopes) and asking for an explanation? Even knowing you’d get no more answer than Job got?
One of the best scenes in Herman Wouk’s War and Remembrance (after Lord of the Rings, The Winds of War/War and Remembrance are my favorite novels) takes place in Terezin/Theresienstadt, the “Paradise Ghetto.” Aaron Jastrow gives a lecture contrasting the Iliad and the Book of Job, which climaxes on Job’s question and God’s answer.
It’s brilliant. I don’t have my copy with me, but if I find it tonight maybe I’ll post it, hoping it’s not an abuse of fair use. I don’t quite type like a Tasmanian devil, but perhaps I’ll manage.
Ken – yes, please post it. I’d like to hear it.
The movie Rapture deals with these issues in a FASCINATING way. It’s a terrifying movie. I highly recommend it. It makes you wonder: Jeez, what the hell happened to Mimi Rogers? The chick is amazing.
//Beth – ya ever heard of faith? I don’t need proof.//
so you just sort of…believe it because you believe it?
please don’t take my questions the wrong way–i am seriously asking this because i want to know your thoughts on the matter. i’m not trying to challenge you or be argumentative. i’m sorry if it’s coming across that way.
//Also in our universe it seems to be that good is more powerful than evil.//
this is where i strongly, wholeheartedly, vehemently disagree.
First off Sheila, Freak is not a cop out, it’s a Noun. I loved the way you used it, and anyone who says you’re copping out is an over analyizing, over zealous, indignant moron. I hate those kind of people who want explanations with their explanations. Go to hell. She’s a Freak, and it makes perfect sense to me.
I believe in God. I like other people who beleive in God. I also like people who don’t beleive in God. I also like people who don’t care and who aren’t sure. And then there are people who want proof, and think they HAVE proof…..of either side. I like some of those people, too. Here’s who I don’t like, especially right now:
I don’t like the people who are USING God.
I think you know what I mean, yeah? Pointing fingers, proving points, disregarding people’s rights, closing their ears, and doing pretty much everything you shouldn’t be doing when there’s so much goodness and light to be found. I feel very sorry for those people, and unfortunately because of the childish way they’ve been acting, I now officially don’t like them. At all. They are sad, sad, sad people. They’ve turned Faith into an act of vengenance.
The only solice I have is my Faith. I believe, as most of history has proved, that in the end, the truth will be revealed, and those people will be proven to be stupid and wrong. History will not be kind to them at all. Hopefully that will be in my lifetime, but until then, I just hold on, and believe.
Beth disagrees with me that good predominates over evil in this universe…
So if she is correct – for example, if there was comparative balance between good and evil – then half the people would be good and half evil. Or everyone would have as much evil as good.
That would suggest that half the nations of the world would be run by people like Hitler or Saddam, the bad guys would win the wars half the time, etc., etc.
I think a world where evil was as powerful as good would be one I would not want to live in. You’d have to look over your shoulder ALL the time. Much less a world where evil predominated.
There’s plenty of evil out there, no question about it. But it takes a lot of effort and persistence to sustain true evil in our world. You have to really want it. It’s so much easier to do the right thing, or at least do no harm.
Beth –
What I mean is: faith is faith. I can’t explain it. I just believe. Not blindly – I have had experiences where I have felt the presence of God, etc., and because of that I believe.
I also think faith is a choice. I choose to believe. Why do I choose to believe? A friend of mine’s grandfather was an Episcopalian bishop and when asked that question he would answer, “Because it pleases me to choose to believe.”
That’s as good an answer as any.
And about your vehement disagreement: I’m with CW. I think the evidence of good on the planet is FAR more compelling than the sometimes more-noisy and more spectacular evidence of evil.
To me, it all comes down to Anne Frank’s declaration in her journal, as the walls of hate closed in around her: “I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are really good at heart.”
Her GOODness – which may seem so small and so powerless in the face of the enormous and more organized forces of evil – is (for me) proof of God’s existence. Her strength of goodness will last forever. And will help OTHERS remain hopeful, look to the light, stay strong … If SHE can do it, in HER circumstances, then I can.
And her pure GOODness is far far more powerful (in an uber way, in a propelling-the-human-race-forward way) than the forces of evil.
This is how I believe, and what I choose to believe.
Alex –
I completely hear what you’re saying, friend, and I’m with you. :)
//So if she is correct – for example, if there was comparative balance between good and evil – then half the people would be good and half evil. Or everyone would have as much evil as good.
That would suggest that half the nations of the world would be run by people like Hitler or Saddam, the bad guys would win the wars half the time, etc., etc.
I think a world where evil was as powerful as good would be one I would not want to live in. You’d have to look over your shoulder ALL the time. Much less a world where evil predominated.//
you’ve pretty much described my worldview perfectly.
anne frank was a good person. but you’ll notice, she was killed by the many, many, many bad people around her. one good person. many bad people. many bad people more powerful than she was, powerful enough to take her life if they so chose. and they did.
anne frank was a good person, and she died a terrible death.
another example: i covered a story on saturday, a woman who died at 38 of leukemia, leaving two kids, 11 and 9, and a husband, 43. she’d been a tireless, dedicated volunteer for her community, so much so that they held a huge event to honor her, and to help raise funds to help her family keep their house, which they now stood to lose without her income.
or at least, that’s what i was told. when i got to the event, though, i asked how much they were looking to raise, thinking something like $10,000 to get the husband started.
they said between $500-$1000.
this group that this woman devoted her life to is all-volunteer and virtually unfunded. they have nothing to give her family and no way to help them.
so this woman who’s basically given her life for other people–the thanks she gets is, she dies at 38 years old. of pneumonia as a complication of leukemia she’d been diagnosed with just two weeks before, and which doctors said was treatable. leaving two young kids who will now have lost their mother, their house and all their friends (they will have to move into a shitty apartment somewhere other than the town they’ve gone to school in) in the space of a few months.
and i’m supposed to believe there’s a god? fuck that. i’d RATHER believe that things are essentially meaningless, because the cognitive dissonance when i run into a story like that would be far too painful.
Well, Beth, all I can say is – to each his/her own.
I read Anne Frank’s journal and see that her good is far more powerful and will, ultimately, be far more long-lasting than the violence of the Nazis. That’s what I see.
I know not everyone sees it that way – but that’s how I choose to see it.
Cognitive dissonance is obviously PART of seeing things the way I see them. Which is part of why I did this post.
Alex, I think when the truth is finally revealed we’ll find out we are all stupid and wrong, in our own way.
Other than that, I quite agree with you–and of course some are wronger and stupider than others. :-)
Alex – have you seen The Rapture with Mimi Rogers? Did we talk about that when I was there at your house? On the porch?
SEE IT if you haven’t already.
Also, this one is for Beth:
You write: “and i’m supposed to believe there’s a god?”
Uhm – no you’re not “supposed” to. I think being force-fed religion is a travesty – I enjoy my faith, because it’s part of who I am, blah blah blah. There’s no “supposed to” about it, if you get my meaning.
beth,
I feel like you look at isolated incidents and think that evil is far stronger and more prevalent than it really is.
Note how Americans react (donating significant time and money) when major tragedies strike: 9/11, hurricanes.
Note how bloggers and readers have responded to various pleas for donations and help. The world or at least in America is mostly good.
The unfortunate thing is evil makes for better news and one evil person with acts of distruction can trump 10 good people with acts of charity and construction.
Oh, and a small heads-up: I have no need for other people to believe in God. It doesn’t matter to me. I’m like Alex – I have friends who are vehement atheists, devoted Jews, on the fence, new-age spiritualists, or – quite frankly – don’t care one way or the other.
Makes no difference to me.
Speaking of which: Alex, love, I re-named this post. Thanks to you.
I think you have to try to separate individual people who become evil from the general conditions that increase the likelihood for evil behavior.
I believe in personal responsibility. When people do bad things, they should be held accountable. Many people endure horrific circumstances in childhood and beyond and emerge as wonderful, caring, loving people. My dad is one of those individuals. But it’s also true that on a macro scale, we know that certain factors do increase the incidence of criminal behavior. Emotional and/or sexual abuse in childhood is the story behind one person after another in our prisons – the percentage is extraordinarily high. Abuse can never excuse the behavior of any individual, but the greater the amount of childhood abuse that exists in a society, the more problems that society is guaranteed to have.
I’m an agnostic, but I believe that faith can be a wonderfully powerful force in people’s lives. The problems come when people rely on other humans as their conduit to their god, allowing these supposed conduits to make their decisions for them, rather than simply feeling a direct connection. Trusting in God is a good, life-affirming thing for those who believe. It’s trusting in other people – specifically religious leaders – that has caused so much death and pain and misery throughout human history. Any social structure that involves checking one’s ability to think for oneself at the door is nothing less than a ticking time bomb. We see it over and over again, and the religious killing continues with no end in sight.
If God does exist, I don’t blame him/her for our failures. We have the mental faculties to avoid these problems, if we would only use them.
Hi Sheila,
Thanks for writing this. I’ve been curious about your thoughts about God for a long time. I am basically a Buddhist, which is a non-theistic religion, so a fortiori I don’t hold that God works out all things for the best in an overarching plan. Nevertheless, it interests me a great deal to hear your views on these things.
Your post got me thinking about evil, in particular whether or not the concept of evil is necessary or useful. We are presented here with the case of a person whose behavior we find shocking and unbelievable. We ask ourselves, how is it possible that someone could do such a thing. At least four answers present themselves.
1) That person did what she did because of environment/upbringing (i.e., the cause is social).
2) That person did what she did because of faulty brain chemistry or development (i.e., the cause is biological).
3) That person did what she did because she is fundamentally evil.
4) Some combination of 1, 2, and/or 3 (i.e., bad upbringing could cause faulty brain development, etc.).
My question is, what meaning does 3 have separate from 1 or 2? You refer to Scott Peck, whose book I unfortunately have not read, who defines evil as being unwilling to change or grow, which raises the question, what causes certain people to be unwilling to change or grow. Since he is a psychiatrist, I am guessing that he would respond that faulty brain chemistry or development inherent from birth is the cause, in which case 2 and 3 are identified, and the term “evil” becomes unnecessary. We can talk about people having faulty brain chemistry or development and dispense with the category of evil altogether.
Where option 1 is concerned, you have pointed out correctly that poor upbringing or environment is not a sufficient condition for violent behavior. Whether or not it is a necessary condition is a different question. Alice Miller, of course, whose works we have discussed before, is probably the most forceful proponent of the thesis that it is a necessary condition, and she goes further to argue that where people with abusive upbringing do not commit antisocial or self-destructive behavior there must have been some mitigating factor in their childhood. Whether or not this is the case I am incompetent to judge. However, we can make an observation here analogous to the one that obtained with respect to 2, which is that if we make 1 the cause of evil behavior, then asserting that someone is evil is redundant. We may restrict ourselves to talking about that person’s upbringing or environment, or that person’s upbringing or environment and brain chemistry, and dispense with the concept of evil altogether.
My question then resolves down to asking, are 1 and 2 sufficient to explain violent behavior or not? If so, then clearly the concept of evil is redundant. However, I argue that even if 1 and 2 are not sufficient, the positing of the category evil does not actually serve to explain anything. It becomes a sort of philosophical diabolos ex machina, disguising the fact that we do not understand what the cause of the violent behavior was. In other words, if we assert that it is not the case that this person behaved the way that she did because of upbringing and/or brain chemistry but because she is simply fundamentally evil, then have we actually asserted anything meaningful? My assertion is that we have not. The only meaning that the word “evil” has at this point is, “I do not understand this behavior.”
The problem, though, is that people who use the word “evil” usually do not consider themselves to be making a statement about their ignorance of a cause, nor do they usually consider themselves to be making a statement about their emotions (i.e., “She is evil” = “I really really disapprove of her”). They usually consider themselves to be making a statement about a really existing state of affairs in the world (i.e., “She is evil” = “There is a meaningful category called evil, and that category actually in fact inheres in her”). I assert that there is no philosophical justification for such a claim. The concept of evil is vacuous.
This is not necessarily a non-theistic position, by the way, even though I am not a theist. Even St. Augustine insisted strongly that there was no independent metaphysical principle of evil; he defined evil as a privation of good. Not even the devil could be totally evil, because a pure evil could not conceivably exist.
//I feel like you look at isolated incidents and think that evil is far stronger and more prevalent than it really is.//
i would point out that from my perspective, people who feel the world / people are inherently good suffer from a similar, if opposite, myopia.
Bryan –
I remember our discussion about Alice Miller. Excellent reference.
This may seem shallow after your theological discussion – and I cannot back up my feelings about this with any kind of chapter or verse – nothing like that. But in East of Eden Steinbeck created Cathy (did I mention to you my theories about her in our earlier exchange?) – as a person who lacked the milk of human kindness. Naturally. She was born that way.
On many levels, his book is an allegory – I am not saying I took it as biographical or factual, but it got me to thinking about that very thing you talk about in your comment. Evil independent of anything else.
Like I said – I can’t back up any of this. I can’t even defend it, nor do I feel the need to.
I believe evil exists, independent of any other cause. I believe that there are aberrations in nature – very rare ones – and these things can sometimes (not always, but sometimes) be properly called “evil”.
Scott Peck’s People of the Lie is something you really should check out, if you are interested in all of these questions. He came to the realization that therapy (and you and I have discussed THAT as well) can only go so far with SOME people – because of this very issue. he goes into all of his different case-studies, a la Road Less Traveled, and as far as I am concerned, he is really onto something.
I won’t go so far as to say I am right – and any back and forth along the lines of “I’m right – you’re wrong – HOW CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT?” rubs me the wrong way and also seems pretty stupid. Since we are talking about faith which is (in my world) PERSONAL.
I do not feel that I can EVER be right when it comes to theological or spiritual issues, and I find righteousness obnoxious on either side of the fence (believers, non-believers, whatever).
St. Augustine also said, “If you think you understand, it isn’t God.”
That’s pretty much my view.
And Beth – maybe I do suffer from “myopia” – as you just defined it. Maybe so. Still – I align myself with Anne Frank in choosing to believe that people are “really good at heart”.
Again – I’m not saying I’m right – I’m saying that I CHOOSE to look at the world that way. And I don’t always succeed. I’ve got a huge dark side, and can be quite the serious depressive.
This is not something that comes easily to me , and is not like those people who seem to want to stick a happy-face sticker over the tragedies of the world. I know religious people who are happy-face-sticker types and they go up my ass sideways and fucking DIE THERE. In the face of their smiling denial, their “jesus loves me” denial – all I want to do is shove in their faces pictures from the Holocaust, evidence of disaster, cataclysm, God’s absence.
On the flip side, I come from an active religious family. We’ve got a ton of nuns in my family. Active fabulous down-and-dirty incredible women. These are people who live their lives out in the world WITH their faith. They do not run from painful realities or cognitive dissonance. They have their faith AS they are confronted with great and horrible evil.
Not an easy thing, but that is the path I try to choose every day.
I’m talking about choosing to believe that there are forces of good at work, struggling against the evil.
sheila, i was responding to the post above that addressed me specifically (the one i quoted above my comment), and not what you have said. i was less than happy with what i perceived to be someone telling me how i look at the world, and hence responded in kind. i didn’t mean for you to take it personally. as far as you go, i think we’re kind of coming from the same place but have come to the opposite conclusion.
also, i don’t think i’ve ever said there is NO good in the world whatsoever. i just don’t think that good is predominant or always wins out.
besides, good and evil are highly relevant and subjective terms. fred phelps believes that all homosexuals are evil because of their sexual orientation. the ku klux klan believes that people are good or evil because of the color of their skin. i believe that people are good or evil based on their actions, and that pretty much everyone is both. pat robertson, on the other hand, believes salvation comes through faith alone, and he is not alone in that belief.
meanwhile, osama bin laden thinks any american is evil. in turn, many americans think any muslim is evil.
each person knows what *they* believe is right, but that’s it.
i kinda get the feeling we’re sort of saying the same thing in different ways right now, anyway, sheila. except for the whole good over evil idea–in other words, you say the glass if half full, i say it’s half empty, we’re both wrong and we’re both right and we both agree there’s a glass.
cheers.
beth,
I didn’t mean to imply that most humans and the world are, by nature, “inherently good”. In fact they are neither good nor evil. But good tends to be self-propagating, fortunately for humanity.
huh?
now we’re talking about apples and oranges. anne’s belief was strong within herself, as an individual. but her surroundings were overwhelmingly evil.
there are small acts of kindness and friendship and good in the world, and there are individuals who are more good than they are evil. but they do not constitute the majority, and i think the majority of human society–as a collective rather than as individuals–has something seriously, seriously wrong with it.
Beth –
I’m not so sure we’re saying the same thing. I have a hard time talking about this stuff (and Bryan – I think I might have mentioned this to you in our exchange a while back) – because it’s so personal, and subjective.
It’s private. And so I don’t really have words for it.
I think Osama bin Laden thinks Americans are evil because he lives in a cave and he has never met an ACTUAL AMERICAN.
We are most definitely not talking about the same thing.
i didn’t say why osama bin laden believes americans are evil, or that he was right. just that he believes it. i was…ah forget it. i keep trying to explain where i’m coming from, and all i’m doing is offending you. i’m sorry.
Beth, I’m not offended at all. I’m just responding to what I THINK you have said. I could be wrong about what you have said because it’s not in real-time, it’s over the Internet, and misunderstandings can happen, and all that.
I am perfectly fine with disagreement. Especially on such issues as “does God exist” and “what is morality” blah blah blah. Difficult questions, with not easy answers.
Hi Sheila,
Fascinating exchange.
There are several things here that interest me, but I wanted to single out just one.
“I think Osama bin Laden thinks Americans are evil because he lives in a cave and he has never met an ACTUAL AMERICAN.”
This statement suggests to me that you believe that there is a basic moral intuition that all humans share, a sort of categorical imperative, and that OBL’s destructive actions are a result not of some inscrutable perversity but of his ignorance. This would suggest that evil is ignorance, a very Buddhist view.
Or at least that evil is ignorance is some cases, which I suppose is uncontroversial enough.
Bryan –
Hm. Now I’m thinking about what you just said. Let me think a bit more.
If you never ever have MET a Muslim, and all you see is raving lunatics flying into buildings, and raving Palestinians swarming over dead Israelis – then you may very well hate “all Muslims”.
I am unable to “hate all Muslims”. Because that means I would have to hate my friend Fred. I would have to hate my good friend Mozam. I would have to hate the lovely smiling Arab gentleman who sells me my coffee every morning, and HAS IT MADE HOW I LIKE IT by the time I get to the register. He serves hundreds and hundreds of people each morning. I cannot hate him. It wouldn’t make any sense.
If you have never met an American, then it’s easy to lump them all together as stupid, blah blah blah.
This kind of thinking pisses me off more than ANY OTHER. It’s … illogical.
It’s like Lars von fucking Trier asshole making Dogville – that stupid-ass bad boring and most of all IGNORANT film – It reeked of hatred of America, condescension towards America, it lumped us all together, made giant assumptions about how we live and how we think – and he has never ever been here, and never plans to come here. Because he truly believes that Americans are soulless and evil.
Fuck off, you “subtle nuanced” European. Talk about People of the Lie – This guy can’t even SEE that he has blinders on, and yet he presumes to lecture us on how horrible our country is.
(hm – do I have any opinions about it?? I hated that piece of shit movie, and in general, I hate ALL of his work. I could not understand why everyone licked his asshole so much for breaking the waves. That movie ENRAGED me.)
Fuck you, euroturd.
Ehm. Whoops. Forgive the tantrum. Carry on.
C’mon now red, can’t you open up and let us know how you really feel about old Lars?
I know that Breaking The Waves got great reviews, but it sounded so thoroughly unpleasant it was just one of those movies I didn’t feel compelled to see. From all accounts, Dogville is simply a frenzied political diatribe. I’m sure it found an eager audience in certain quarters, but political tracts are never good movies. By their very nature they must sacrifice truth at the altar of ideological consistency…
Mike R:
I know. I really should come out of my shell, huh?
Breaking the Waves made me ANGRY. It was hailed as this genius film, blah blah, and the acting is, indeed, incredible. But the plot made me ANGRY, the ideas it promoted made me ANGRY.
If anyone out there has seen it and agrees with me (er – Mitchell?) please speak up. It was a piece of shit movie which promoted and glorified the victimization of women. That a woman who turns itself into a completely beaten-down whore is showing the ULTIMATE love for her man. I found it fucking disgusting and I couldn’t believe that nobody commented on it.
I’m still mad about that movie. I went to see Dogville just to get even MORE pissed.
Well, that and Lauren Bacall. I’m happy whenever she gets a job – so I would go see her do a Kabuki play in New Haven, I don’t care.
“Sad” != “Evil”
Sorry. This thread lost me while I was out flying this afternoon.
On the other hand:
“Bacall” = “wonderful”
I think you’re right about Breaking The Waves, red. Supposedly it’s about the supremacy of pure love, yada yada, but it sounds more like a glorification of victimhood to me.
Which sort of makes sense, in light of Dogville. Lars is really pissed at us because we’re not meek, willing victims…
MikeR:
When feminists came out in droves singing the praises of “Breaking the Waves” I knew I could rest easy in my conviction that the movie was a piece of shit.
That film is a feminist movie? With a lovely innocent girl (Emily Watson) WILLINGLY letting herself be gang-raped repeatedly in order to show her paralyzed husband how much she loves him? So she can come back and tell her paraplegic husband the story of all the guys she fucked?
I’m pissed off. I hated that fucking movie.
I’m glad I didn’t see it. Some hideous things are worth enduring for their artistic value, but I don’t think this is one of them.
I know this might sound a bit off-topic, but have you read Life of Pi? (Everytime I ask someone that they look at me like it’s a stupid question. I forget that it’s very in these days to read the novels that have won the Booker Prize– ehh, sorry, MAN Booker Prize. Way to go Booker, get paid, change the name.)
It deals with faith and how you go on living with evil. I think you might enjoy it. The auther is Yann Martel.