| Username |
Post |
| SAGAR |
Posted
on 10-Apr-01 01:25 PM
When I read the poem by Kabi posted here sometime ago, I wasn't sure among all the "active members" of gbnc, why Kabi needed to pick on Biswo. But Once I opened gbnc page this afternoon and viewed the disturbing pictures posted by a Nepali, then read Biswo's "Best war movies ever made" I got my answer. After looking at those pictures, how can someone (with a normal brain) even think to relate it to best war movies? Had Biswo had some kind of idea what he was talking about, he wouldn't have compared these photos with movies he'd seen, which showed brilliant acting by great actors. This is not a movie, man. Why don't you send this message to the mourning wife and mothers of dead policemen? They will agree their situation is like in Platoon, and they will also know why Kabi said, when talking about you, that "he doesn't know his head from his ass".
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 10-Apr-01 01:50 PM
Dear Sagar:
I didn't intend to compare. I was writing my opinions about some
war movies. This is a break from monotony of other subjects.
Platoon ,btw, was some kind of autobiography of Oliver Stone. The
village destruction scene was also portrait of what happened
there.Almost all of the war movies I mentioned were movies made on
true incidents.
I don't claim to be smart, and I don't have any objection if you
want to categorize me as a moron because that is your freedom.
|
| Sally |
Posted
on 10-Apr-01 02:15 PM
I wondered if anyone would respond to that posting. I'm sure a lot of people were shocked into silence–both by the photos themselves and the bizarre analogy. From what I've read here, Biswo is a pretty smart guy, but for one surreal moment, I guess he found it easier to think about Art than Life. Isn't it always?
Yes, "Platoon" was a great movie because it recreated a little bit about what it must feel like to be in the midst of a guerilla war. It was horrifying and gut-wrenching. But only because of what it said about reality.
Unfortunately, the people in those Kantipur photos weren't extras. Pawns, yes. Extras, no–-especially not in their own lives, which have now been cut short.
And speaking of jarring, wasn't it jarring, after all those horrific photographs, to see the face of that politican? (I'm sorry, I'm sure he's a very important man and everyone else here knows all about him, but Nepali politicians tend to run together in my mind.) All those dead bodies, all those crying relatives and shellshocked faces of survivors, and then a closeup of the politician just sitting there, "thinking."
Maybe he was thinking what war movie it all reminded him about. More likely he was thinking about how to save his own personal, high-paying Starring Role.
Either way, it sure does seem inappropriate.
Sally
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 10-Apr-01 02:42 PM
Dear Sally:
I notice your point.
The movies I talked about are great movies, and almost all of
those movies tried to portray what really happened in the war.The
genre is different,but they are just another depiction. If we
can quote history by saying the scene was as gory as that of
Crimia(sp?) war,or if we can quote a book (as grisly as
Kurukshetra of Mahabharata), then why can't we remember the scenes
from war movies?Only those people who think cinema to be inferior
work of art think that way.
I just wanted to be honest with my mind.
|
| Sally |
Posted
on 10-Apr-01 03:47 PM
Hi Biswo,
I assume by saying, "the genre is different, but they are just another depiction," you mean to contrast the genres of, say, literature and cinema, and not to imply that photojournalism documenting a current event is a "genre" that can be meaningfully contrasted with the genre of cinema.
Or, of course, that Life and Art are two different genres.
I do tend to think that comparing an actual, present-day event to an imagined event, or a historic one that none of us has seen (such as the Crimean War), is not very illuminating, and also tends to trivialize. Which of course can make the whole thing much easier to handle--and in that sense, I guess there's an attraction to the whole exercise.
I'm sure that you have no intention of trivializing. I do think, however, that cinema is at its most powerful as an art form when we watch a movie and are moved to recall an event. In that case, art is illuminating reality. When we see an event and are moved to recall a movie, however, it does seem we're getting things a bit backwards. Either that, or being incredibly postmodern. :)
All of which is probably making a mountain out of a molehill. Because we are all, of course, free to make whatever analogies we choose--there is no "right" way to react, speak or think. At least not yet.
Let's hope the forces of oppression don't triumph in the end, and that people can continue to make as many kinds of statements as they choose--right, left or center, foolish, brilliant or muddleheaded--without having to fear that our thoughts will be silenced by the barrel of a gun.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 10-Apr-01 05:45 PM
Dear Sally:
I am not sure if every such analogy constitutes trivialization of
current events.For example, do you really think that comparing
the pain of Rukum's those unfortunates who were bereaved of their
loved ones to the pain of those villagers depicted in Platoon is
trivialization? I haven't seen the destruction of Rukum with my
own eyes, nor that of Vietnam. We heard of Mai Li(isn't it the
village mostly talked about when we read of Vietnam war,please
correct me if I am wrong.) and the attrocities inflicted there,
and we also hear of Maoist attrocities in western Nepal.If all
human are equal, if their feelings are comparable, then I guess
we can make such comparison.Now, the question is whether such
depiction made in cinema are comparable or not. It depends on
whether we think cinema as a genre equal to other forms of art
or not.And ,again, when we watch cinema, we should watch them
as self-contained entity, I think. Of course, if we think these
people are merely acting,then it is another matter.I am not
trying to compare the unfortunates of Rukum to the fortunates of
Saigon and Hollywood, but this comparison is between those poors
of Rukum and the character the actors represented in the movie.
|
| Hari |
Posted
on 10-Apr-01 07:25 PM
I have to agree with Biswo. When comparing two distinct yet similar events, both unseen or "un-experienced" (albeit one of them being a reality-based documentary/hollywood production), I think it is perfectly okay to say "that reminds me of..." It is trivialization only if the feelings are insincere. And Biswo's exemplification of a movie being equal to any other art form hits the bullseye. For example, is the Vietnam Memorial in Washington DC a trivialization of the War? Or for that matter Picasso's Guernica? I think not!
But, having said that, because quite a few of the people do INTEND to trivialize things in this kali-yug, others are generally and rightfully suspicious.
May God bless all of the dead policemen's souls. They are the true patriots in this war.
Hari
|
| Kali Prasad |
Posted
on 10-Apr-01 08:47 PM
I do not see any thing wrong with Biswo's posting of comparing war movies scenes with the real life horrible scenes shown in the TKP. After all, vietnam war was real. Cambodian massacre shown in the KILLING FIELD is real. This posting is truly a comparison between two unseen situations, therefore the person posting the thread has right to compare. Sally or Sagar, what is wrong to say statement such as the federal attack in Branch Davidians camp reminded me of Tamil Tigers attack to innocent people in Ceylon (Shri Lanka)? I do not know... may be you all can enlighten me.
I think Ashu mentioned few days ago that when you start posting things in public, you have to have thick skin. Comments from Kabi and Sagar like people are always expected. My suggestions to Biswo is -- keep on posting. HOpefully, all these comments make you think through and possibly post things which is beyond the comprehension of some of the self-fullfulling mundane people visiting this site.
A good writer is the one can improve his writing with criticism and politely explains his/her intention. I hope all of the continuous contributors to this site like Biswo and Ashu would fall in that category over the time period.
Right to express feelings is one of the hall marks of democratic society.
Long live democracy.
|
| Anit-Maoist |
Posted
on 13-Apr-01 03:59 PM
If one's comment have hurt somebody's sentiment a few words of apology instead justifying oneself would be more graceful. A friend standing up for a friend is a nice thing when it is called for. Appreciation for a movie, no matter how well made it is, is the last thing that comes to my mind when presented with images of such inhuman proportion. Would those pictures have educed the same feeling had those pictures portrayed a familiar face?
|
| sagar |
Posted
on 14-Apr-01 04:10 PM
Muddled thinking, isn't that what earlier response said (Sally ?). I seriously question Biswo's judgment on this particular matter. I question because anyone who starts thinking that pictures of inhumanity is a "genre" has some problem. I think too in the first posting he wasn't truly comparing inhumanity in Maobadi killings and Vietnam, he was just boasting his comprehension of these movies. Otherwise, instead of talking about how Maobadi and these other inhumanities were similar, why talk about what great actors were in Platoon and whatever?
You don't have to pass your judgment on every thing posted here. Sometimes silence also allows great knowledge
Sagar
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 15-Apr-01 03:26 AM
Dear Sagar:
I don't know which of your remarks I should answer. You have been
contradicting your own allegations in two of your postings.See
how:
In your first posting:
"Had Biswo had some kind of idea what he was talking about, he wouldn't have compared these photos with movies he'd seen.."
In your second:
"I think too in the first posting he wasn't truly comparing
inhumanity in Maobadi killings and Vietnam, .."
In the first posting you think I was comparing, and in the second
posting you think I wasn't comparing. I don't know how you
define vague term like 'truly'.
Anyway: let me tell you what I was thinking. I wasn't comparing
in my first posting.(see my first reply to you). I said 'it
reminds me of..', but as the debate progressed, I said it is
perfectly valid to compare two forms of genre. Photojournalism is
a genre, an art, if you say this isn't art,I am sure several
serious photojournalists would object your statement.
Now is it boasting to talk about movies? I don't think so. I mean
I wasn't saying I got published my article in a journal, I wasn't
saying I won some international prize,all I said was I liked those
movies.Platoon, patton, apocalypse now, the deer hunter.. and
I am sure a lot of our visiters have seen more movies than
those six. Where is boasting?
Again, boasting is relative term. When I was growing up, if some
of my classmates claimed he had been to Kathmandu three times,
we would think he was boasting.For adults, such claim doesn't
constitute boasting. It depends on how you think. Probably for you
, talking about some movies is boasting. Again,probably talking
about some English movies is boasting because in this same forum,
we previously discussed about Chinese movies, and some Russian
movies also.
Hey, I am sorry for that,Sagar. I hope my writing won't appear
boasting for you in future.
|
| anti-maoist |
Posted
on 17-Apr-01 01:50 PM
In the first posting:
"Had Biswo had some kind of idea what he was talking about, he wouldn't have compared these photos with movies he'd seen.."
In the second:
"I think too in the first posting he wasn't truly comparing
inhumanity in Maobadi killings and Vietnam, .."
to me means one was boasting in the pretense of comparing...
|
