I went to see Lars von Trier's film Dogville last night. I wouldn't recommend anyone go to see it unless they want their faith in humanity crushed like a grape between the fingers of a vengeful iron god. I don't think I've ever seem such a mean-spirited, nasty film.

The real Andy Dougan was hanging around the cinema beforehand, but I think he went to see something else.

[quote]I went to see Lars von Trier's film Dogville last night. I wouldn't recommend anyone go to see it unless they want their faith in humanity crushed like a grape between the fingers of a vengeful iron god. I don't think I've ever seem such a mean-spirited, nasty film.

The real Andy Dougan was hanging around the cinema beforehand, but I think he went to see something else.[/quote]

Ooo..a celebrity.

---
dcomposed:11-06-05: If I was a viking invading your village, you'd be the first to get raped.
Crabby: 10/5/06: i would love to feed you fresh fruit while bathing you.

That's why he's a film critic extraordinaire. He has taste. Did you get his autograph?

[Click to view comic: 'Inane Conversations #42']

After a preganant pause that was nearing its third trimester, Artemis responds:

I do see the merit of having an informed critic who can provide authentic, valuable insights into a piece of art. My problem is with those who cannot divorce themselves from their critiques. Art theorists shouldn¡¯t be brash enough to apply their own vision, filtered through personal experience (education, upbringing, rampant psychosis), and claim it to be THE authoritative, definitive measure of a work.

My thinking is thus: There are two areas from where intellections originate. There is that of the Self-Filtered and that of General Application. For instance, after reading The Metamorphosis I might say, ¡°I think this story is about the stress and guilt sewn in us by an unhealthy work ethic that we do not believe in. Samsa¡¯s devolution is the same backsliding that workers succumb to when the labor culture overloads them. They slip into apathy, slovenliness and depression; and that part of them that was vigorous and filled with the Will To Produce dies.¡± But that would be me injecting much of my own life into my interpretation (Self-Filtered). Conversely, I could say, ¡°The Metamorphosis is about failure. Unexpressed feelings of inadequacy jumble the outside world into a horrific comedy of aggression and confrontation. Man¡¯s struggle with himself is, in this novella, the greatest struggle we can commit ourselves to.¡± This is much more general an interpretation and, while it could lead a person lost in the text to a better understanding, it is open enough to let them draw their own conclusions about what the author might really be saying.

A primary function of critique or evaluation is to assist the engaged but struggling minds of certain readers. While an apt intellectual should certainly guide them through the forest of words, bringing attention to the pinnate leaf structures and mating habit of squirrels, they are overstepping their role by commenting, ¡°Yah, and those squirrels are useless fuckers!¡± For are they not then simply enlightening the viewer, but also attempting to sway them to adopt an opinion?

I think what I¡¯m looking for is some discretion in art analysis.

---
Ham-fisted ham fisting.

Did anyone else see odd-looking symbols in Artemis's rant?

Here's a fun, interesting fact that is neither fun nor interesting:

There was "My Side of the Mountain", which was supposed to be set in the Catskills (according to the setting listed) but was actually shot in the Smokys.

[/fun fact]

[rant]
And as far as art interpretation goes, its the same with songs people write. It may be about some deep philisophical meaning, or it could be a song about mastrubation. It may be about the pain of a breakup, or it could be about raping your girlfriend when she has her period and then burning her house down. People will continue to interpret art(graphic, musical, and whatnot) any way they feel about it, whether they see it in black and white or in 6 million shades. I could paint a picture and it could mean something symbolic about society, and other people might only see a grotesque monster. Someone could shoot a movie with the intentions of some deep truth, and others could see it as someone beating the crap out of a dude for 2 hours and 7 minutes. You be the judge. Thats what art is for. Freedom of expression and freedom to think whatever the hell you want about what was expressed.
[/rant]

---
I will rate you hard, and unendingly.

you could have just asked directly- I live in Seattle.

You're welcome.

---
When they invent BookFace, I'm -there-.