And Sun Chips, a healthy alternative to potato chips.
I was asked by a friend from church to comment on my Coen brother's philosophy, particularly in relation to Burn After Reading.
The thesis of the Coen Brother's philosophy is this:
Joel and Ethan Coen are Viscious Moralists...
Viscious Moralism has to be explained (apparently I unwittingly invented it).
I would consider moralism to be the exaltation of doing the right thing, whatever that may be, where the moral action becomes no longer an act of worship, but the deity.
There is no higher reality or aim to moralism. You do what's right, because it's right.
Now, Burn After Reading enforces this (consider everything they've done since Raising Arizona as well).
You have a cast of unlikeable mostly amoral characters whose lives are depressingly moronic and mundane.
And they're all politicans and CIA/FBI spooks.
With the exception of the employees at the gym.
Frank, the manager, is the only remotely likeable character in the entire movie, he's also something of an advice giver/father-figure/almost boyfriend to Frances McDormand's character.
He violates his straight laced, moral nature and what happens?
He ends up being shot and brutally hatcheted to death in one of the Coen's most striking scenes since the woodchipper.
Juxtaposed with how Frances McDormand makes out (she gets what she wants, though her existence is definitely the most depressing of the entire cast) you get Viscious Moralism...
An aimless servile dedication to rightness nets far worse results than narcissistic amoral lunacy.
I've got to wrap this up, the Dell Store guys look like they think I'm using them for their internet...
Talk later...
P.S. Buy one of these XPS laptops, they're awesome!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Interesting, but how does this vicious moralism fit into the film, "No Country for Old Men".
I like this post. Lots to chew on. Thanks first for the lap recommendation - timely advice. I'll check the tunes later.
Ethics is the constant Coen theme, for sure. Maybe their stories are more about the deconstruction of ethics than anything else. Do the Coens have a consistent moral center? I dunno. I think that this viscious moralism acts as a backstop within a game of multiple ethical postulations. Or, rather, viscious moralism acts as the pitcher, or the batter...?
Are you becoming a literary critic? Or rather, have you ever not been? Philosophy shmilosophy...I say let your love for stories, film, culture, and wordplay lead you where it will. I say leave the tortured, melancholic pursuits of philosophy for the less inspired.
Unless you're thinking of cashing in on the pastor circuit? Speaking as a pragmatist, that career has a great upside potential, fiscal and otherwise. I have several family members who are both ordained and well-off...and satisfied with life.
In response to bryan:
How wrong was it for Josh Brolin's character to take that money? How wrong was it for his wife to go along for the ride? And consider Woody Harrelson's description of Chegur's nature.
"He'd kill you just for inconveniencing him."
I think if you consider the entire scope of their material the concept fits.
DJ: Check out the inspiron, it's cheaper than the xps, but still pretty solid and I think you can get one for like 400. They have a lot of colors too.
Post a Comment