Irrationalism in 'Rings'? So sayeth he... - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Kalessin · 01-11-2003, 08:24 PM

Of course it seems ludicrous to suggest that the LotR films are either (or both) a reflection of, or influence upon, the current American national psyche - as it could be argued the "It came from Outer Space" B-movie genre was a reflection of politically-inspired cold war paranoia in the 1950s.

But the second article posted makes perhaps a more valid point about the way in which audiences project contemporary issues upon their interpretation of art. In fact, it's probably impossible not to do so in an age where postmodernism is taken for granted. And, it is arguably an ultimately flawed venture to attempt to experience art without acknowledging the psychological and cultural context in which one does so.

It is also the case that, as these boards illustrate, Tolkien's masterpiece is simply in itself open to a whole range of 'definitive' yet antithetical interpretations - for example, as outright Christian allegory, against a near-pagan pastoral environmentalism.

In the wider context, both reviewers have a point in that the presentation of war in the vast majority of Hollywood films is absolutely smothered in a straightforward and often politically-tinged morality of one shade or another. Perhaps this is inevitable, as it is similarly the case in ancient epic myths. Battle lines are drawn, and there is rarely ambiguity or moral relativism. In history, and our teaching of history, the victors tend to dictate the judgment about any conflict.

And for any film to achieve a certain universality, and this profitability, the identification of 'good guys' and 'bad guys' has to be reasonably obvious.

It IS worthwhile to question the effect and validity of the dumbed-down homogenous moral sensibility propogated by Hollywood, although I tend to agree that the LotR movies are a decent attempt to capture the essence of the narrative and bring it to the screen. And, actually, in most cases I doubt there is any sinister political conspiracy.

But if one considers, for example, the morality of Star Wars, you could argue that there is a snapshot of current American (and increasingly, worldwide) understanding of right and wrong. I will misquote a famous theatrical review - "it runs the full gamut of meanings from A to B" - by which I mean that C to Z are increasingly ignored [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img].

The Wagner reference in the first article is highly dubious, as Bill points out. Wagner, The Brothers Grimm, Goethe, and Neitzche may have belonged to a jingoistic society with a somewhat insecure sense of identity and an attachment to pseudo-cultural artefact, but neither they, nor their work when honestly appraised, can be seen as having any real connection to Nazism, which was more a political ideology driven by innovative PR and the economy, among other things. The parallels are more valid with reference to say Eisenstein's 'Alexander Nevsky' in post-revolutionary Russia, or the pre-war films of Leni Reifenstahl in Germany.

But, as I have said, the parallels themselves are flawed. There are movies which, while not part of any conspiracy theory, are driven by a particular political perspective - from Dr Strangelove to The Alamo (great films both) to John Milius' Conan the Barbarian - and there are films that are simply in and of their time.

For Peter Jackson's LotR, that time just happens to be now.

Peace [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

Kalessin

[ January 11, 2003: Message edited by: Kalessin ]

01-11-2003, 08:24 PM	#22
Kalessin Wight Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Earthsea, or London Posts: 175	Of course it seems ludicrous to suggest that the LotR films are either (or both) a reflection of, or influence upon, the current American national psyche - as it could be argued the "It came from Outer Space" B-movie genre was a reflection of politically-inspired cold war paranoia in the 1950s. But the second article posted makes perhaps a more valid point about the way in which audiences project contemporary issues upon their interpretation of art. In fact, it's probably impossible not to do so in an age where postmodernism is taken for granted. And, it is arguably an ultimately flawed venture to attempt to experience art without acknowledging the psychological and cultural context in which one does so. It is also the case that, as these boards illustrate, Tolkien's masterpiece is simply in itself open to a whole range of 'definitive' yet antithetical interpretations - for example, as outright Christian allegory, against a near-pagan pastoral environmentalism. In the wider context, both reviewers have a point in that the presentation of war in the vast majority of Hollywood films is absolutely smothered in a straightforward and often politically-tinged morality of one shade or another. Perhaps this is inevitable, as it is similarly the case in ancient epic myths. Battle lines are drawn, and there is rarely ambiguity or moral relativism. In history, and our teaching of history, the victors tend to dictate the judgment about any conflict. And for any film to achieve a certain universality, and this profitability, the identification of 'good guys' and 'bad guys' has to be reasonably obvious. It IS worthwhile to question the effect and validity of the dumbed-down homogenous moral sensibility propogated by Hollywood, although I tend to agree that the LotR movies are a decent attempt to capture the essence of the narrative and bring it to the screen. And, actually, in most cases I doubt there is any sinister political conspiracy. But if one considers, for example, the morality of Star Wars, you could argue that there is a snapshot of current American (and increasingly, worldwide) understanding of right and wrong. I will misquote a famous theatrical review - "it runs the full gamut of meanings from A to B" - by which I mean that C to Z are increasingly ignored [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]. The Wagner reference in the first article is highly dubious, as Bill points out. Wagner, The Brothers Grimm, Goethe, and Neitzche may have belonged to a jingoistic society with a somewhat insecure sense of identity and an attachment to pseudo-cultural artefact, but neither they, nor their work when honestly appraised, can be seen as having any real connection to Nazism, which was more a political ideology driven by innovative PR and the economy, among other things. The parallels are more valid with reference to say Eisenstein's 'Alexander Nevsky' in post-revolutionary Russia, or the pre-war films of Leni Reifenstahl in Germany. But, as I have said, the parallels themselves are flawed. There are movies which, while not part of any conspiracy theory, are driven by a particular political perspective - from Dr Strangelove to The Alamo (great films both) to John Milius' Conan the Barbarian - and there are films that are simply in and of their time. For Peter Jackson's LotR, that time just happens to be now. Peace [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] Kalessin [ January 11, 2003: Message edited by: Kalessin ]