|
|
|
May 19, 2005
May the force be not against you!
Is the new Star Wars film a bad case of art imitating life? Political hype imitating art? I haven't seen the film, and I don't know how badly I want to see it. But from what I've read, I might be bored. After all, the New York Times thinks the film "can't hold a candle" to what David Halbfinger calls the "blogging, advertising and boycotting forces of the right and left." That's quite a mouthful. Even worse than the vast right wing conspiracy. What are these "blogging, advertising and boycotting forces" doing? Conservative Web logs were lacerating Mr. Lucas over the film's perceived jabs at President Bush - as when Anakin Skywalker, on his way to becoming the evil Darth Vader, warns, "If you're not with me, you're my enemy," in an echo of Mr. Bush's post-9/11 ultimatum, "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."Well, I don't know whether I would interpret that as exclusively a jab at Bush. The Bush/Vader talking point "line" (if that's what it is) also echoes a 1960s slogan I grew up with: IF YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE SOLUTION, YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM.It also echoes the Bible (assuming this blogger got his quote right): The one who isn’t with me is against me, and the one who doesn’t gather with me scatters.’ ” (Luke 11:23, SV)However, the same blogger points out that Jesus gave himself a little wiggle room: ....earlier in the same gospel, John says: “Master, we saw someone driving out demons in you name, and we tried to stop him, because he isn’t one of us. But [Jesus] said to him, ‘Don’t stop him; in fact, whoever is not against you is on your side.’ ” (Luke 9:49-50, SV)That's a little more optimistic. Probably the best I can hope for. Sheesh. I used to think politics was an escape from Science Fiction. posted by Eric on 05.19.05 at 08:23 AM
Comments
Translation: The US magazine "Newsweek" had to retract a story about the desecration of the Koran in the military prison Guantanamo under massive pressure from the US government. The journalists have now received support for their report from the International Red Cross. David Howe · May 19, 2005 04:51 PM The two quotes from Jesus make the same point. There are two categories -- those with him and those against him. One says that those who aren't in one category are in the other. There's no third group. The other says that those aren't in the other are in the one. There's no third group. Logically speaking, the sentences are equivalent. The only difference is in emphasis. In the one, you'll most likely hear it as saying that the people you expect not to be with Jesus are against him. In the second, you'll most likely hear it as saying that the people you expect not to be against Jesus are with him. Perhaps he even meant that, but the different contexts show that those can be consistent. One is about whether someone is aligned with Jesus's purposes in the heart, and the other is about whether someone is accomplishing the good purposes Jesus intends to see happen. Lucas did say that this film isn't about Bush, by the way. He did use the opportunity to complain about some things Bush is doing, but he didn't say that the empire is modeled on the current administration or that the emperor is modeled on Bush. He just thinks the direction we're heading in is something to be wary of, for unchecked it might head into something like the Empire. That's a far cry from what people both on the left and right are claiming Lucas meant by the film. Jeremy Pierce · May 22, 2005 12:40 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Laughing at the failure of discourse?
• Holiday Blogging • The right to be irrational? • I'm cool with the passion fashion • Climate change meltdown at the polls? • If you're wrong, then so is God? • Have a nice day, asshole! • Scarlet "R"? • Consuming power while empowering consumption • Shrinking is growth!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Even more imperious [if comin from a politico] would be the business world's "lead, follow, or get out of the way". Not even an option to be 'against us' there.