Something sedate to wrap up the week: “Max”, the fictional, “what if” recounting of Adolf’s failed apprenticeship. Some have taken the producers to task for tackling the subject; similarly, an installation art piece in Stockholm was vandalised by the Israeli Ambassador. There is a deeply disturbing theological underpinning within this hostile response which denies the spectre of contingency, insists on the innate and immutable nature of “evil”, and decries any attempt at aesthetic representation. It is as if “evil” always announces itself publicly and in good faith, and thereby does not not require the machination of theory and art to develop and highlight its subtler hues. Quite what is the significance of film (art) and the proper role of film (art) criticsm? And what of the sacking of a Liberal Democrat frontbencher who dared voice her understanding of the motivation behind Palestinian suicide bombings? Does this mean the out-lawing of empathy?
Recent comments
- tom on A work of hard love
- marq on A work of hard love
- Suryani Said-Piracci on Kevin Ariken
- Nancy Ariken on Kevin Ariken
- Patrick Yap on Kevin Ariken
My Library
Tags
architecture arendt artistic friends book cover books bookshops bookshops in asia c. j. arthur church creative writing creativity cuba dubyah film films football gillian rose harry eyres hegel honeymoon howard caygill jay bernstein macedonia michael n. forster nazi girl norman geras obituary online learning open learning paul westerberg philosophy reading SIFF simon critchley Singapore taskent tehran the old left the slow lane travels warwick university writing writing prize zizekstudies.org ŽižekArchives
Categories