V for Invasive

by Saleem - April 24th, 2006
why read this?!fairly good.interesting...GREAT READ!oh give us MORE of this!!! ( no ratings yet )
Loading ... Loading ...

At its crescendo, the film V for Vendetta screams. Across a picture-perfect London, realised with an added layering of gothic fascism, the monochromatic people of England stomp their way into revolution, and once again Hollywood does its great global duty by conveying with simple images the fundamental yearnings of our time.

Its success is not in Natalie Portman’s artfully gorgeous features; nor Hugo Weaving’s gravitas; nor the detail of a fascist England; nor the originality of its story. The victory comes from the film’s strength of vision, its example of yet another finely-pitched piece of contemporary culture which abstractly, unknowingly speaks of a kind of promised day, seemingly overdue in human history.

At the current Modernism exhibition at the Victoria & Albert Museum, in London, there is a pointed discussion of modernism’s overt hopefulness that, through design and technology, a new world would be birthed. They were, of course, only half-right; but their optimism is echoed in countless disciplines across human endeavour since the 19th century: everything suggests that we are clawing after, yearning for and screaming at a desperately expectant, needful hope that one day, somehow, life shall become good.

This is the best of contemporary art: it knows something is out there, something good. But art is both unaware of its own innate knowledge, and the promised nouveau it seeks. The learned search all their lives, and fail to apprehend it. The debate over what is art? is endless, but I think I have my own position: Art is Search. I thus emit this call to all artists: neocracy emulates the best of the modernist hope, the V for Vendetta libertarianism, the universality of Bach - etc, etc - in short, the search for that which must be found; that which has been made manifest.

28 Responses to “V for Invasive”

  1. Sarmad says:

    What’s a crescendo?

  2. qwerty says:

    an illustrated example and a question to y’all:

    is this the beginning or the end of creativity ?

    http://creative.com/products/product.asp?category=210&subcategory=211&product=12985#

  3. Sanisha says:

    i thoroughly enjoyed this piece of insight , it makes me want to hop over to London to watch that film and see that exhibit at the V &A museum.

  4. Saleem says:

    The V for Vendetta/Modernism linkage was willful at best; simply the result of having seen both things recently. Welcome to a humanities education: we make it up.

  5. Saleem says:

    Which is why I felt silly when writing it, because my social sciences education (which overrode the humanities) was looking askance at the entire piece.

  6. qwerty says:

    if the writer feels silly for thinking it and writing it then the reader feels silly for reading it and then re-thinks it.

    Saleem,here is some harsh, but i hope constructive critiscm, from a reader (put yourself in my batty trainers)…

    ..for ****s sake if you are going to use the words and make your essays then don’t duck from it afterwards.

    but then again,i do not know the difference between social sciences and humanities ,if feud was derived from feudal or the otehr way around…so maybe this readers shoes will not fit you.

  7. Saleem says:

    That’s a rather harsh reaction. I was simply meditating on the constant existence of two ways (at least!) of seeing something.

  8. Mogogo says:

    She’s right, if rather direct. Take it on the chin.

  9. Saleem says:

    Absurd. All but the most unequivocal, black-and-white questions - i.e. murder is bad, cookies are good, etc - can be discussed with no ambiguity and second-guessing. The world is grey.

  10. qwerty says:

    absurd is this last comment of yours,it makes no sense!

    i have seen from some your writeups and comments here (not salvai.com) that you lack some of the C word.

    (don’t make me say it) and why did you edit my F word?

    when i use it,so sparingly and if so, so Confidently.

  11. Sarmad says:

    Neocracy is for all, including granpas and grandsons.

    What’s a crescendo?

  12. Saleem says:

    I’m definitely not getting drawn into telling a musicologist what a crescendo is; I’ll lose.

    Meanwhile I definitely don’t lack confidence! More absurdity. I happen to be confident in the transience of things I say: very few things are made of stone.

  13. qwerty says:

    more absurdity or bollocks (for all the grandfolks and kids :)

    i think Sarmad ended this conversation quite nicely (in a cresecendo?) by asking that question again after he asked it first 12 comments ago…that subtlety was wasted (perhaps) on you ,Saleem,or was noted but which you steamrolled anyway by your confidence.

    noted.

    or on the flip side of the coin,or the stone,which you love to see,maybe there was no reason at all for a musicologist to ask :

    what is a crescendo ?

  14. Saleem says:

    Further baffling attacks. I have no idea what you’re so upset about, qwerty, but perhaps it has something to do with your own innate confusion, doubtless developed because of the difficulty of balancing the qwerty act and the Sanisha personality - one and the same, dear readers.

  15. qwerty says:

    :-0

    where would you get that idea?

    the personality is not upset or confused?

    but readers…

    this mean war.

  16. Mogogo says:

    this means war, i think you mean(t).

  17. Saleem says:

    I decline war. All is good. Be happy.

  18. Dorian Gray says:

    Dear Saleem,

    There is no law that forces you to use a word merely because it exists. It’s clear that you derive extraordinary pleasure from throwing words around, but do you ever read yourself after wanking to an orgasm of verbosity? I have to believe you would find your language much less satisfying, perhaps even indecent, after a reviving hit of nicotine. Not to mention the day after.

    Sincerely yours,

    Dorian

  19. qwerty says:

    now that was harsh and not at all necesary…!

    i was only joking about a war,we are all on the same side here right neocrats? So who is this foul mouthed imposter with warped metaphors ? our Saleem has a sense of humour, where is yours ? or was that it up there?maybe this is an old boys insiders joke tho’

    is Dorian Gray the girlfriend of Oscar de Cavalier?
    this has to end somewhere,this cyber stuff is NOT the purpose of life,that much i know. lets all get a life.

  20. Saleem says:

    Dorian - welcome to Neocrats. To be sure, I’m constantly unsatisfied with anything I write, even things as transient as blog posts, and even when I also preen via the prose. But which words did you have in mind? (”All of them,” will come the reply.)

  21. Tara says:

    Dorian’s comment was definitely necessary and he’s my new favourite commentator. More bile please.

  22. Original Sin says:

    This level of criticism is uncalled for. Sal’s article is perfectly fine with the exception of the art=search conclusion, but that is perhaps due to a philosophical difference between Sal and I, rather than poor writing or arguing.

    Modernism was optimistic, and if V- was set in that period, then it would embody this optimism; a fair observation.

    Regarding Sal’s verbosity, I do tend to agree with Dorian though, but then again, babbling is Sal’s forte, ups, I mean mad skillz.

  23. Saleem says:

    Dorian Gray seems to have sunk back into the oil on canvas from whence he appeared. Yes, Dorian, I said “whence”.

    Anyway, I appreciate Sina’s support, but I think it’s worth saying that everyone has been right. My original post may have had a couple good ideas - and I think Art as Search is a fun one - but it was not well written. I usually do it better.

    Dorian’s comparison of my words with genital effluence was definitely over-strong, and not unique in the scheme of metaphors for bad writing.

    Fin?

  24. Dorian Gray says:

    That was indeed a rather rude way to introduce myself, but I had just been humiliated by a writer who cared so little for his readers that he saw no problem in casually throwing his work in the circular file (comments at 12:16 & 12:17 pm on the 25th), after the aforementioned readers had invested a non-zero value of time and effort in decrypting his message. Pathetic, Saleem! The flippancy with which you brush off criticism of your writing with an appeal to its “transient” nature is similarly demeaning. I probably speak for most readers when I say I don’t appreciate being told I’m wasting my time reading what you write.

    Regarding the specific flaws in this piece, I’m afraid I refuse to debate with a writer who doesn’t believe in his work. Neither you nor I, nor my fellow readers, would gain a thing. I’ll wait until such time as my criticism coincides with your willingness to muster a robust self-defence.

    I must also point out that your general superciliousness (which I see you mistake for confidence) is more than a little misplaced when one remembers that two million years of natural selection within the genus Homo have spectacularly failed to eradicate stupidity. The ineluctable inference is that high intelligence, which I hereby tenuously equate with the ability to write, is no more worthy than high running speed or good skin tone. In other words: you are not special.

    In summary, your writing can be very good, but it can also be atrocious, and it tends to the latter when you serve it with an unhealthy dollop of ego sauce.

  25. Saleem says:

    You can ask my friends, I’ve been rejecting the label “writer” and “my writing” ever since I walked off the train from Paris for the last time. But I find it fascinating that you take reading a blog so seriously as to use words such as “humiliation” when objecting to me saying that I didn’t like something I’d written. I’m sorry you feel that way, it certainly wasn’t a ruse on my part; nor are you obliged to read. Very rarely do I feel that I’ve said something of any value, and only then will I defend myself.

    That’s my substantive reply to your four paragraphs, because I disagree with your argument. During a recent internship, an editor told me what an editor had once told him: you write it today, tomorrow it’s lining a cat litter. Blogs are usually a grade lower than bad newspapers, and the Neocrats is no Dickensian serialised novel. It is transient, even the physics support this: it scrolls down and away into untouched webpages. A merciful grave.

    But, your replies also excite me a great deal. We don’t know much about you. You write like you might know me, or you write like a proactive reader: both are fun possibilities. I think it’s the latter; I’m quite sure I don’t know you. And so the notion of a stranger engaging so thoroughly with a “writer” on this blog, having so visceral a reaction and voicing opinions so forcibly, is a new experience for the Neocrats. Your civic spirit, purist attitude and articulation are fantastic. Equally good is your readiness to tell me my failings. Please continue.

    One other point: I come across as supercilious, I know, but I suppose I’m sometimes like the oil market: many barriers to entry. If I’m being good company, I truly hope that I am self-abnegating; but if I’m having fun amongst friends - which is my attitude here - you’re damn right I’m supercilious. I mean, look at you all. It’s part of the act; it’s for effect; it’s a joke.

  26. Nat says:

    I agree that art is often essentially hopeful, even when it’s a way of coping with the awfulness of life there is a hope of something better. But essentially I think it’s about creation. If you call yourself an artist of whatever kind - a musician, a writer, a painter, a cook - any creative endeavour - then you must create. You can’t not. And if you feel that impulse - whether you use the label or not - you are an artist.

    My response to V4V was somewhat different. I was intrigued by the fear and what it said about our culture now (compared to when the original was written) that the impetus for the Norsefire rise to power was a virus, not a nuclear war. Medicine has come so far in the past decades, and yet we still fear illness. Think of how many stories there are in the media about “such and such causes cancer” and “bird flu”. People fear because viruses cannot be controlled in the same way that so much of our daily life is now controlled, because who gets a condition can be random and whilst we search for the causes the fact is that sometimes there are none.

    So if I go back to my opening statement, why isn’t there more art about it?

    I also liked V4V because so much was unexplained - unlike most films where any new information comes with an explanation, things like “St Mary’s” and “3 waters” were dropped in throughout the film and not explained until much later, and some details “interlink”, “DCDs” and the phones they used, were not explained at all.

    I haven’t seen much modernist art apart from the Bauhaus and that was a lot about the hopefullness of design and accessibility to everyone. Modernist music on the other hand was a lot about the cleverness of the artist and audience be damned (especially the Serialists and Fluxus mvmts). “Modern” music is now something of an insult, and “modern” art even more do. But modern design is a compliment. Design is just art in the everyday, art that has a purpose. A lot of the modernist “art” was really design - civic buildings and useful objects. Modernism was also a reaction against the norm - for example the Impressionists against the Salon, and about experimention (Eliot and Joyce). At its extreme it was about rejecting tradition and ended up either descending into the surreal and absurd or fragmenting into post-modernism and my personal favourite, semiotics.

    And that is a whole nother debate.

  27. Kim says:

    Kim…

    Looks like your page was heavily hit by spam…

  28. welop says:

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

all content
© by The Neocrats .
design & code
© by nemoDreaming.com.

The Neocrats is proudly powered by WordPress.

Feeds:
Entries (RSS), Comments (RSS)

. 2009 Medical Weblog adult downloads