: Most of your remarks I found interesting and not necessarily
: disagreeable. I think the student is analytically limited
: by a background that is not very deep in things pertaining
: to Film-TV-Radio.
: What you call name-dropping may be an awareness that one
: element "here" is like another element
: "there." Or it may be name-dropping. Dunno.
Oh, I wasn't saying it _was_ name-dropping; more implying
that s/he missed an opportunity to go further with what
might have been some interesting comparisons between this
TV series and those two unusual and distinctive films. :)
: Your last paragraph about being "creeped out" by a
: possible Cameron/NWO connection, indicates to me that you
: are maybe a little too emotionally invested in the
: television shows you watch, or DarkAngel in particular.
(Ah.) (Yes, I've read your later reply; we're good. :) We've
seen in recent months some rather lengthy dissertation in
support of an idea Cameron is deliberately or perhaps
subconsciously crafting screen messages with a particular
bent to them - not my idea; someone else's.
From within that framework of suspicion (or understanding, as
the case may be), the imagery of kids with bar codes, who have
no parents, were raised by "the state", have strong bonds with
one another, in a world decimated specifically by a "pulse" bomb,
et cetera - and yet are really, really cool kids (and look like
J Lo and Val K) becomes a "likely suspect" for being an example
of the very best kind of propaganda, the subliminal kind - the
kind that can't be readily defended against because it slips in
under the conscious-mind radar and comes to rest in the
subconscious almost before you know it.
(That said, however - I've seen more blatant "messages" delivered
by "ER" and "Gideon's Crossing" in recent months. The recent "ER"
episode in which parents, who had chosen not to have their little
boy vaccinated for measles, were held up for ridicule, contempt,
self-involved negligence, shame, and guilt was particularly
egregious, I thought - sending lots of uncertain parents straight
to their pediatricians, I expect, without further consideration
: Your knowledge of Film-TV-Radio seems pretty impressive.
: Do you work in the industry?
No - Life seems to have been intent on keeping me out of
there, in fact. :) A few forks in the road that might
have led me in that direction had "closed" signs on them
when I got there. (It's probably just as well - I think
"Hollywood" might've eaten me alive.)
: I take issue with some of your remarks below, and will
: interact with the text you've provided.
: Is it evidence of "advanced" development that one
: would wish to emulate or "be" a stock character
: in a not very new or necessarily interesting genre? Or any
: character derived from the experience or imagination of
: another, for that matter?
Oh - no; not at all what I'm saying, and I intended nothing
pejorative in regard to the student, with that observation.
There are several points in our growing-up at which we, all,
may tend to be somewhat derisive of the actions, thoughts
and attitudes of those just slightly younger than ourselves,
who represent to us the set of actions, thoughts and attitudes
we may, only just moments earlier, have grown out of. This is
totally fine - it's a matter of coming to understand oneself
by observing what is "other" and saying, "No, I'm not that."
This does produce a temporary mindset, however, that tends
to orient more to "this I am not" than to "this I am".
Similarly a really good (still learning, still growing) artist
will tend to be dismissive of the quality of the art s/he's
just recently produced. It's not because the art is no good
but because the artist's vision has already grown beyond the
place from which, in which, the previous work was accomplished.
: Personally, I think the whole "role modeling" thing
: is pretty much morally bankrupt. The more advanced we are
: in our thinking and experience, the less likely we will
: want to "be" any imaginary character or
: "real" person other than our selves.
Agreed, but I think the idea and function of learning who we
are and of learning how to handle various circumstances is
"hard-wired" into early human functionality - we quite
naturally "play at" being grown-up doctors, nurses, cops,
cowboys, ballerinas, etc.; we're "playing dress-up" and
"trying on for size" a variety of life paths, before we're
old enough to actually set foot on one for "real". Rather
than a model for something, we emulate examples of something,
then may discover empirically whether it's "a good fit" for
who we are, or not.
: Really, I'm in agreement with Patriotlad's statements in his
: "Waiting for Frodo" post. To make a
: one-size-fits-all generalization: Every right thinking
: person will want to be for himself the hero he'd like to
: hold in high esteem.
Yes - a nice bit of very thoughtful writing, that post, with
much to commend it. I found a slightly different message in
it, though - not so much to be the hero but, warts and all,
not to await the arrival of "someone better" (whoever that
might be) before proceeding to "do that which is right".
In the end, it's the same thing. :)
: Can you elaborate on that angle-of-view skewing you mentioned?
: I don't think you're totally wrong, but I'd be interested
: in your developing the idea you've introduced.
(Responded to, above.)
: By the way, I thought the naming of the characters and
: likening the naming unto a child naming fish was pretty
Me, too. :) I thought it was a brief glimpse into the
genuine child-likeness (as directly opposed to childishness)
that is available to that student. True creativity can spring
forth from there.