Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Secrets of the Social: Grad of the 21st Vol. II. /Midaisle Critique: Social Network is Relevant!

Today it is so much easier than ever before to find who/what you are looking for. I saw the Social Network the other night and I can fairly say that it was a great movie. Does it have all the elements pulled together in the tightest fashion? No. Does it answer our burning morality questions about our generation? Not really. Instead it offers up, in a quite honest and approachable sense, the declaration that though we may find ways to create our journeys (in this example: connecting with others over social networks), we ourselves must traverse the gaps in order to truly make connection.  I don't necessarily believe that it defines my generation, as much as I feel it describes my generation. It is in our generation, and this time, that we have put aside so much on the behalf of the new and unknown. We are dreamers; but we are cynical about it. This film carries that cynicism like a worn t-shirt and it comes across very realistic.  In the process of creating a "network of community", the stability of these individuals are torn apart, redefined, and repackaged in a world that is ever-changing before them. This is a widening gap of identity, which today's graduates are facing more and more as we become more globalized, more "connected", and far less unique. The Social Network is definitely worth a watch, and I really appreciated Fincher's interpretation of Sorkin's script.


On to other things....
I have had three encounters in the last month or so, where my interactions with older businessmen have ended in discouragement for what I see as a widening "continental divide" of generations. Everyone has an iPad, everyone has expendable income (and time apparently), but what did they do to deserve it? Or maybe... did they deserve it? I think we have become self-absorbed with the idea that we have to compensate everything to make ourselves feel somehow superior. I'm not buying it. There seems to be no sympathy to people my age, as we don't have the experience or the prowess to elevate ourselves and instead are deemed with "cutting corners" to get by. Something about that doesn't seem right. I mean did I go to college for 4 years? yes I did. Am I paying school loans with all of the money I make? bazinga! Well then where is the justice here? I don't see it. I especially hate when these business people flaunt their positions in front of me as if I am supposed to be impressed. Well guess what! I am not. You can change the world with your life and thus change yourself, or you can  change your own individual world for the betterment of yourself. You can't do both at the same time without becoming a hypocrite. 


I believe that in the future we will find that we will want to amend the things that we have broken in our time and along those same lines- I believe we will perhaps realize that at times the lack of meaning we adhered to will place us as the killers of objectivity. But perhaps not. I mean, the philosophy of meaning has existed for thousands of years- whose to say we are the ones to do it in. I'm not saying it, but I am throwing it out as a possible course of future-history.


I find myself at Barnes n Noble a lot these days. I don't know if its a convenience thing, an environmental stimulator, or merely a sad puppydog-esque desire to have the money to buy books. I keep hearing about these e-book readers, and although it seems convenient to have, there is something about carrying real books that still catches my attention. I just don't think I'm sold on it yet, but maybe if someone gave it to me as a gift I'd use it. That and I, in this situation and in the iPad situation, don't have any money.


That's why I am....a Grad of the 21st Century: pessimistic, full of wit, and down on his luck.


Cheers

Monday, October 4, 2010

The Middle-Aisle Critique: Cinephobia, Textures, and the Weekly Spin

The sweeping texturazation (wc?) of cinema astounds me. It is within the layers and depths of this complex moving artform that emotions are tied to actions and movements are tied to withstanding or withheld expression. I once wrote a paper about how I felt that cinema-environments, defined as the layered reality within the film contrasting physical environment with nonverbal individual emotions/communions, are the basis for the realm in which filmmakers build upon to tell stories. These textures then compose those building blocks into music, actors portraits, direction, and editing.

The layered existence of a piece of art penetrates the viewer, just as we penetrate the art piece. We act as the art pieces liason, able to exemplify or destroy the spread of its influence, yet we don't have the ability to destroy that which already is, and in that sense art pieces are beyond interpretations. This relationship can thus move an audiences emotions from moments of either close connection (communion, defined as:interchange or sharing of thoughts or emotions; intimate communication ) or a cold indifference.

In this exchange I want to quickly comment on the cold indifference. Does the voyeur then empower the recieved messages as they exist and then interpret them in a possible cinephobic reaction if the film does not capture their attention?
Does the idea of "seen it, its old hat" become the basis for an anti-film standpoint regardless of what composes the film? Its not that anyone hates movies, well most everyone doesn't; but the point that I am trying to make is that if the textures, layers, and execution of a film do not somehow match our preconceptions, we sucuumb to a sense of cinephobia, and that is what becomes our desensitization. Could be because of their accesibility, or it may be a sign of the way the post-2000 post modern generation Y (right?) has grown to accept?

But have we accepted it? Are we a generation that will ever find true comfort? true peace? truth?
These are questions that are asked in films, literature, albums, and in photos, websites, in radio, in politics, in education.... that sweeping movement of enlightenment... that sense of new beginings, and new wonders!!! What would we be without this?? Perhaps THIS is why cinema draws my attention! It is not necessarily the genre or who stars in it, or even when it came out... it is the textured reality that composes itself and calls itself an artform. If we can reawaken the cinema to envelope our sense of connection, we can break down the desensitized bounderies that we place, in order to capture new and invigorating insights!

For those of you who I have possibly lost by the layered subtextual array that I have written this in, I apologzie.