Sunday, August 19, 2018

America This Is Your Mind On Hollywood

I'm doing something I think I've only done once or twice before, reworking and reposting a piece the day after I first posted it.  Having a lot of trouble with my eyes, the last few days and looking at what I wrote on a big screen, yeesh!.  This is nothing I am happy to be writing about but given we are being governed by those suckered by TV and Hollywood, it is important. 

Films and hotels have many aspects that are the same. For example, there is always a big vision, an idea.
Francis Ford Coppola

Back at the height of my reading of the lefty magazines, a period which began to ebb in the 1990s and still hasn't ended, entirely, I'd have told anyone who predicted that twenty years later I'd be depending on Esquire more than The Nation for important news that they were insane.  Shows how reliable the prediction business that seems to obsess the news media in the United States probably is.

I know the estimable Charles Pierce gets more repetition but I've come to really value Jack Holmes as someone who often gets it just about perfect.  One of his recent pieces about Donald Trump's mind and its formation in TV and the movies  tells us a lot of why we are in such danger from Trump.

After recounting the horrific story of how Trump, responded to veterans plea that there be more support given to service members damaged by the United States spraying Agent Orange on Vietnam out of his mis-remembered viewing of the movie Apocalypse Now - even Robert Duval's famous line, "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" didn't register with the grad of one of the Ivys as he repeatedly told some of the audience, some of the Vietnam veterans some of them must have been wrong that they weren't spraying Agent Orange in the movie. because of what he remembered from watching it -  Holmes goes into some detail about the consequences of having the reality TV star as president in horrifying specificity:

It's always comforting to remember the world's most powerful man is swimming in a mental sea of informational flotsam, his synapses firing erratically as he latches onto the profoundly limited number of things he thinks he knows, most of which are fragments of reality he internalized around 1982. This is how you get the moronic, bordering-on-incomprehensible advice for dealing with wildfires he spooned out of his brain onto The Tweet Machine last week. It's something that he heard once, maybe, filtered through the kaleidoscope of his reasoning faculties, which he then presents as God's Own Truth. Of course it is—he's the one saying it.

Obviously, this has some negative consequences for, say, veterans. The Vietnam vet groups in the Apocalypse Now fiasco meeting were trying to improve treatment for vets exposed to Agent Orange. It does not appear they made progress, and Weidman says they now struggle to get the president's ear at all. One upside of the meeting, however, was it was the last time veterans' groups had to deal with Omarosa, whom Trump tapped to run point on vets issues when he first entered office. Now a mortal enemy Trump wants to see "arrested," the former Apprentice was then saying nice things about the president, so he doled out out crucial responsibilities to her for which she was completely unqualified. Apparently, shortly after the Apocalypse meeting, Omarosa simply got bored of her vets assignment and other aides took it over.

It's bad.  Really bad.  And I don't mean the Omarosa angle, I'd certainly trust her more than the three businessmen thugs Trump lets run the VA.  Well, it being Omarosa,  "trust" isn't the right word, though "more" is.

But what's worse is a country which has an effective electoral margin (along with the putrid, anti-democratic Electoral College) which handed the country to the biggest liar and phony in our history on the power of his TV presence, his fascist Boss-man "Apprentice" character along with the long running subplot of the media in which Hillary Clinton was not one of the most dedicated public servants to ever get the nomination of a major party, but that she was written a role something like what I'm told was Omarosa's stock character of evil black woman villain.

Our system, and by that I don't mean only the putrid, corrupt vote-suppressing states and the Electoral College (now subject to Supreme Court rigging, as well) but also the media, from highest to lowest (and, it seems most influential) has produced Donald Trump through media saturation of the collective American mind.

Donald Trump is able to do what he is doing BECAUSE of the "free-press" which now, thanks to the innovative language and creation of neologisms of the "free-speech-free-press" industry means the media, including FOX and Sinclair, Breitbart, etc.  They installed him, they sustain him and the people who put him there, billionaires domestic as well as foreign, used the media they control, knowingly using the corrupt elections system as their tool box to do it.

I don't know what Francis Ford Coppola intended in making Apocalypse Now but I doubt he intended it to inform the ignorant and pathological criminal depravity of the Trump regime, though obviously it does that.   I don't generally go looking for quotes that I never read to illustrate a point but here's one from James Gray

 'Apocalypse Now' poses questions without any attempt to provide definitive answers, and the film's profound ambiguities are integral to its enduring magic.

How anyone could maintain a view permitting ambiguity about the moral depravity of the characters in that movie or have the intention of leaving the audience with an ambiguous view of what they presented is disturbing.

think it's related to that thing that Terry Eagleton talked about, the pose of suspended judgement and decision that is such a big part of the folly of modernism and the demands of the materialist-scientistic view of life.  The claim that unless  something has the status of proof required by nothing but pure mathematics, we are not to assert the truth of something.  If that was what Coppola got out of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, it leaves me to wonder if the fault was his or Conrad's.  Which is one of the reasons I've come to wonder about the efficacy of using fiction to make points about such serious life or death truths and about the entire project of modernism, as can be read in the quote by Jack Levine right under the blog header above.

I would like to hear Coppola on this, on how dangerous such stylish ambiguities are when a reality-TV president misremembers the directorial the auteurial intent in the movie.

Making a movie to make a point is about the most lavishly, expensively inefficient and incredibly stupid ways to make a point that have ever been dreamed up.  Writing an opera to do that is probably less of a waste of resources, effort and time.  Making a TV drama series must be at least as bad, especially if it goes into more than a couple of seasons.  Though presenting Trump as a fascist boss-man seems to have gotten across with a dangerous number of people.  If the point was about the depth of evil of the characters in Apocalypse Now, built off of the presentation of evil in Heart of Darkness,  I doubt that more than a minority of the audience gets the point.   That is even more true when it is a high-budget extravaganza with audacious and memorable effects of the kind that will be adjudged to make it a great movie.  The part those play in the ambiguous take away from the famous "Ride of the Valkeries" scene of the movie is probably one of the main contributions to Trump's use of it in his gawdy, vulgar mental furniture and, as a result of people buying his TV persona, in his use of it in governing us, including the veterans Jack Holmes wrote about.

-------

Is the left any better?  I'd have thought so back when I subscribed to four lefty mags, before I went online.  I don't think so now that I've read a lot of the lefty thinking, only instead of producing electoral victory and powerful presidencies, the left produces electoral impotence and (perhaps as a result) impotent presidencies such as those of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

The Trump regime is just the most recent and extreme in a series of disastrous presidencies since the high point of American liberalism, the Johnson administration got suckered by the Harvard boys and some Generals into sinking it in the mire of the Vietnam war.   One of the strongest tools they used to talk Johnson into increasing the American presence there was his fear of the media calling him weak, saying he "lost Vietnam" and empowering the Republicans who were not yet overtly fascist.  The American media was wildly supportive of the Vietnam war in the early 1960s and, I would say, well into the Nixon administration, that is after they helped use opposition to the war to end Johnson's plans to run in 1968 and then to defeat Hubert Humphrey when he got the nomination in his stead.

The part that the "new left" played in that self-defeating idiocy was no where near as important as the role that the media played in it, and I would include Hollywood which has never been remotely liberal in general and when it has been it's generally been pretty stupid about it.  I mean, Susan Sarandon is hardly the only one,  Aaron Sorkin is as big a tool in his own way.  Never, ever trust a Hollywood liberal, especially one who wants to prop up an updated version of JFK's Camelot, which was a lot of hooey even before his assassination.  In his own way, I think Obama or at least many of his supporters thought it was going to be President Bartlett and CJ and Leo and Toby and the team as they elected Jimmy Smits who won narrowly over the noble Republican  (it was that big a pile of bullshit) Alan Alda who would be offered a job and CJ got to be chief of staff.  Well, in the real life that such TV produced, we got Trump.  Shows you how realistic that show was.

The left are as big a bunch of suckers for show biz as the right, it's just they like different shows.  Even some of the best of them, such as the crew at Majority Report show signs of it.  The lower quality rungs of the left are as wallowing in show biz as the right.  I doubt there are many of them serious enough to miss or give up their shows to save egalitarian democracy.   I used to think it was all that pot we smoked, now I think it's all the TV and movies that sank the left, and the lefty magazines that were running their own old movies of lefty classics on a loop through their heads.  Look at the movies the Hollywood lefties were making, look at the hagiographic junk produced about losers like Emma Goldman and the Hollywood lefties.  John Reed, for Pete'sake, that total and complete asshole douche-bag John Reed!

21 comments:

  1. You're so right, Sparky. Without Francis Ford Coppola, particularly his later years as a vintner, there is no Trump/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simels' typical tactic, mischaracterize what was said because he's incapable of arguing with what was actually said.

      It is indisputable that Trump saw Apocalypse Now, that he saw the famous Ride of the Valkyries scene AND HE GOT ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF ANY MORALITY OUT OF THE MOVIE. I wonder how many of the geezers who voted for Trump saw the movie and it had, if anything, the opposite of the "auteur's" intentional meaning from the movie.

      Movies are the most expensive, least efficient, least explicit and, so often, counterproductive means of giving a message. They can, obviously, produce depravity as the use of them by Nazis, various Marxist-red-fascists, American racists (Birth of a Nation was the spark for reigniting the KKK) but they don't work for the egalitarian democratic left.

      Stupy doesn't like someone pointing it out because, like all idiots, he loves his shows and glitz and glamour and the ridiculous myth that it's an effective means of lifting people. If that were the case then why did all those uplifting movies of the 1960s and 1970s lead us to the movie actor Reagan, then Bush I, II, Trump (who is a 100% creation of show biz).

      The scribbling industry that Simps was a margin . . well, I don't think where he was even within the margins. .. . of is in on the big lie that the movies can do what they haven't done in a hundred years of pretending they can. For every truth that is told in the movies, there are many, many times more lies told the same way and the audience finds those attractively packaged lies more attractive and so they buy those.

      I'd love to have someone get Coppola to give us an explanation of how someone could get the message Trump did from the movie when the lines explicitly contradicted what he believed it said. I would love to hear him tell us it was an effective way of getting his intended message across. Though I doubt he'd be as stupid as Simps.

      Simps, why don't you just go stuff your face full of cannolis. You can't talk when you're doing that.

      Delete
  2. You're so right, Sparkles. Movies and TV are solely responsible for Trump. Fortunately, nobody was ever corrupted by a book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trump as the public persona who became president, yes, TV is what created him, no one would have ever known him outside of that shithole city you adore so much if it was not for TV, he'd never have been president if they hadn't given him billions of dollars of free air-time to boost their ratings.

      We're talking about Trump, not the people who have been corrupted through text, that went out with reading, you should know about that, since you don't read. It takes a real idiot to think that because someone could be corrupted by a text means that no one is corrupted through the electronic media. I know the reason, you're as devoted to the TV as Mike TV and you figure you're a figure in that world. Well, Simps, let me break this to you, you're an old, old and very forgotten figure. You're like a minor assistant to someone like Dave Garroway if he'd never worked on TV again after Today, pretending he was still part of the big time. I mean, your starring role at Eschaton where you push your garage band dross.

      Delete
    2. So yes -- nobody was ever corrupted by a book? Glad you agree.

      Delete
    3. You know what they say, Sparkles --- better to be a has-been than a never was.
      :-)

      Delete
    4. Do you not understand that you're proving what I said about you when you do that or are you really so stupid as to figure that people who come here to read what I write don't notice? I mean, they're not Duncan's post-literate crowd, they can actually read what I said and see I never said that.

      Delete
    5. That would be you talking from your experience as a never-was, and here I thought you lacked any accurate level of self-awareness.

      Delete
  3. "(Birth of a Nation was the spark for reigniting the KKK)"

    Uh, no it wasn't. That was the sole responsibility, some years later, of a Southern PR firm that was strictly in it for the money. This is not a secret, actually; as they say, you could look it up. It's well limned out in the fabulous book SUPERMAN VS THE KU KLUX KLAN. https://www.amazon.com/Superman-versus-Klux-Klan-Superhero/dp/1426309155

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We went through that before, you schmuck, THE MAN WHO RESTARTED THE KKK SAID THAT HE WAS INSPIRED TO RESTART IT BY WATCHING BIRTH OF A NATION, THEY USED THE MOVIE TO RECRUIT MEMBERS.

      Convalescing after being hit by an automobile in 1915, Simmons concerned himself with rebuilding the Klan, which he had seen depicted in the newly released film The Birth of a Nation. He obtained a copy of the Reconstruction Klan's "Precept," and used it to write his own prospectus for a reincarnation of the organization. He delayed his plans, however, until the media-inspired lynching of Leo Frank, the accused murderer of Mary Phagan. This horrific incident became a flash point for anti-Semitic feeling in Georgia. Frank was taken from prison and hung by a mob who lynched him on August 16, 1915. The lynch mob called themselves the Knights of Mary Phagan, and on October 16, they climbed Stone Mountain and burned a giant cross that was visible throughout the city. The imagery of the burning cross, which had not existed in the original Klan, had been introduced via The Birth of a Nation. The film, in turn, had obtained the image from the works of Thomas Dixon. He had taken his inspiration from Scottish clans, who had burned crosses as a method of signalling from one hilltop to the next. The image also occurs in Lady of the Lake by Walter Scott.

      http://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/548501

      You are a Trumpian liar and idiot, Stupy I don't want to do a rerun on that but you've given me a new angle on the habitual dishonesty of the asshole play left. Hey, Stupy, it's all material. I would have to go out and look for that if you didn't volunteer to be a typical idiot of the type.

      I just spent part of the afternoon babysitting my brother in law who is suffering from dementia and he's more in touch with reality than you are.

      Delete
  4. Without these guys, there was no Klan revival. You're a blithering idiot, and you with issues that need addressing by professionals..

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Publicity_Association

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know you're too stupid to understand how time works, Simps, especially never letting it get in the way of what you want to be true but, they contacted William Simmons AFTER THE KLAN HAD BEEN REVIVED.

      Tyler has said that the Association was first put in touch with Simmons after her son-in-law joined the Klan. She has said:

      We found Colonel Simmons was having a hard time [getting] along. He couldn't pay his rent. The receipts were not sufficient to take care of his personal needs. He was a minister and a clean living and thinking man, and he was heart and soul for the success of the Ku Klux Klan. After we had investigated it from every angle, we decided to go into it with Colonel Simmons and give it the impetus that it could best get from publicity.

      https://www.revolvy.com/page/Southern-Publicity-Association

      Apparently the organization didn't even exist at the time of the revival of the Klan, what it originated in was a group that was formed to whip up support for the United States in WWI

      In 1920, two Atlanta publicists, Edward Clarke, a former Atlanta journalist, and Bessie Tyler, a former madam, took over an organization that had formed to promote World War I fund drives. At that time, the organization had 3,000 members. In three years they built it into the Southern Publicity Association, a national organization with three million members. After the war, they bolstered membership in the Klan by giving Klansmen part of the $10 induction fee of every new member they signed up.

      http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3386

      The United States didn't enter WWI until April 6, 1917, two years after the Klan revival started. And it didn't turn into that Association until 1920.

      I really don't know what to say about someone who has entered their seventies as unaware of chronology as you are, Stupy. Other than that they're stupid.

      I really do have to figure the rump remnant of Duncan's commenting community has to be as stupid as you are since they just let these kinds of things pass. Maybe they're as ignorant of history as you are.

      Delete
  5. "The image also occurs in Lady of the Lake by Walter Scott."

    Ah, Sir Walter Scott is responsible for the Klan revival? Why not blame Bulwer-Lytton?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are illiterate.

      Mark Twain did once say that if Walter Scott hadn't written his novels the Confederacy would never have risen. Though I doubt that's what you mean.

      Delete
  6. "THE MAN WHO RESTARTED THE KKK SAID THAT HE WAS INSPIRED TO RESTART IT BY WATCHING BIRTH OF A NATION,"

    Proving exactly dick. For example, you've said that Francis Ford Coppola got Trump elected, which is also unproveable nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, did I? Quote me as having said anything remotely like that. It should be easy, this is the only piece I ever believe I wrote mentioning Coppola.

      Simps, the post-literate-post-truth Kellyanne Conway of Eschaton.

      Delete
    2. "Truth isn't the truth!" Go on, say it.

      You might as well.

      Delete
  7. Well, since you bothered to go to Wikipedia:

    "In 1915 the film The Birth of a Nation was released, mythologizing and glorifying the first Klan and its endeavors. The second Ku Klux Klan was founded in 1915 by William Joseph Simmons at Stone Mountain, near Atlanta, with fifteen "charter members".[96] Its growth was based on a new anti-immigrant, Anti-Catholic, Prohibitionist and anti-Semitic agenda, which reflected contemporary social tensions, particularly recent immigration. The new organization and chapters adopted regalia featured in The Birth of a Nation; membership was kept secret by wearing masks in public."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan#First_KKK

    And yeah, the Southern Publicity Association helped the Klan recruit, but it didn't revive the Klan in the '20's. The Klan hired SPA, SPA didn't reinvent the Klan:

    "The Southern Publicity Association was a fund-raising agency whose clients included the Anti-Saloon League, the Ku Klux Klan, the Red Cross. The firm was owned and operated by Edward Young Clarke and Mary Elizabeth Tyler. While working with the Klan during the its resurgence in the 1920s, the agency was paid for signing up members. They organized recruiters on the national level who were also paid a commission. Their Klan recruitment operation was largely successful in the Southern United States."

    That's from your Wiki link. The second Klan (1920's) also used a "popular fraternal organization structure," which allowed it to grow to an estimated 6,000,000 members, largest it ever had. But it's no coincidence the Second Klan started in 1915, the year "Birth of a Nation" was released. Savvy marketing and good management are nothing without an inspiration. And it was the second KKK that hired SPA, not SPA that inspired a revival of the Klan.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Get back to me when you read the book, rather than a Wiki entry.

    Let me rephrase -- get back to me when have a shred of intellectual integrity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See, just when you swear you'll never, ever use the word "irony" again someone like Simps comes around and forces you to through the sheer and clueless generation of irony.

      a. Look, everyone, Simps is pretending to have read a book instead of reading a review of a recently published book (Really, I think he heard one of the interviews with the author. I doubt he reads book reviews. Why would he, he doesn't read.) b. he's slamming someone for quoting his go-to source - which the schmuck cited as of yesterday, here. c. He's calling out someone on the matter of intellectual integrity.

      Anywhere Simps goes is bound to be more irony than the Iron Range.

      Delete
    2. Coming from you that isn't even a joke, much less an insult.

      And you're the one who cited Wiki.Doesn't seem you read it, though. So who's to say you read the book?

      Or any book, for that matter.

      Delete