Max wrote:

> Tarentino has the intellect of a 14 year old
> combined with awesome technical skills. The film is fun.

I think the safest bet is that Tarantino is *intellectually*
brilliant.  But, yes, the response to oppression depicted in this
movie feels like a teenager's fantasy of lashing out against the most
immediate sources of his frustration.  However, every response to
oppression, regardless of whether it is misdirected or not (including
the most well organized insurrection), has this irrational cathartic
element.  Marx is on the record arguing that revolutions, with their
irrational eruptions and all, are *necessary* for the oppressed to
shake off the "muck of the ages" and build the resolve to reconstruct
a society from its foundations.  I'm not entirely sure about that.
But we don't need to get too Freudian to recognize some sort of id in
us, the inner minor in us, unrestrained by the demands of civilized
human interaction, particularly its oppressive, historically
unjustified aspects.  In fact, socialism (I believe it was Trotsky who
suggested this) can only stick if it manages to establish social
conditions conducive for our ids to find constructive expression.  But
leaving all that aside, often times, the artist's emotional connection
with an audience hinges on temporarily suspending moral judgment to
enable the audience to get in touch with its rawer needs.  Art,
fiction, humor, etc. play this role in any civilized society.
Sophocles' or Shakespeare's plays are all full of gory barbarism,
cruelty and infantile overreactions of the most violent kind, let
alone profanity and aspersive insults.  So I imagine the hypocrites of
the times abandoning theaters in the middle of plays, calling for
censure, etc.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to