Hollywood, limitations, and potential
Mar. 24th, 2007 12:13 amI just watched this movie called Jersey Girl. When the love interest was first introduced, I thought: Hey, this is kinda cool. A very liberated girl who talks about how she masturbates twice a day. This movie could work.
But now that I've gotten to the end, I'd like those hours of my life back. Dear goddess.
I am so sick of the American Hollywood machine making movies designed to send the following messages:
-sacrificing your dreams for love is the right thing to do
-sacrificing your dreams for family is the right thing to do
-you should be happy with a life doing a crappy low class job
The way I see it, this movie was very carefully crafted to appeal to the poor schmucks whose life truly consists entirely of family and a truly crappy job, and to make them feel righteous and self-satisfied, and COMFORTED about how crappy their lives are. Like the way they carefully insert a religious statue on the front lawn of the house, but the people in the movie otherwise live a secular life. Like the way the man in the movie is able to live the small-town family life while scoring the younger hot chick who has liberated sexual morals. Like the way he is given positive life affirmation for choosing his child's whim over what is best, overall, for both of them in the long run -- and thus the viewers are able to feel good about themselves because the main character's happy ending resembles their lives.
***
And now for the devil's advocate portion of this post.
I've been arguing, often lately, that one of the tragedies of our society is that we are taught that we can achieve anything. I believe that we cannot. That we all have our limitations, our strengths and weaknesses, and that we must find a lifestyle and profession that works well within that scope.
That's not to say that anyone should be telling you what that scope is -- we don't understand intelligence enough to be able to assess this. But if we could, I'd like to believe that we would see a society in which people would know their potential, and feel no shame about the limitations. That we would no longer be driving ourselves to nervous breakdowns trying to achieve the impossible, and feeling shame for not achieving what our peers have.
So I wonder. Are my issues conflicting? Do I need to reconcile these viewpoints?
They may conflict. But I think part of my issue with movies like Jersey Girl is that I feel like they are produced by the upper class to lull the lower classes into complacency while the upper class takes all. The opiate of the masses, as they say.
It's not that I think that all people should aspire to more than what they do, nor that I think that all people who do manual labour should be dissatisfied with their lives. The character in Jersey Girl clearly can handle the job in question, and was one of the best. He loved his work. He had some trouble balancing his home life with his family life, but that's something he could learn to handle. And when his wife died leaving him with a newborn baby to care for, he cracked. But that's no reflection on his ultimate potential and limitations. Telling him to give up on his dreams and a better life because his little girl didn't want to change schools is dumb.
But now that I've gotten to the end, I'd like those hours of my life back. Dear goddess.
I am so sick of the American Hollywood machine making movies designed to send the following messages:
-sacrificing your dreams for love is the right thing to do
-sacrificing your dreams for family is the right thing to do
-you should be happy with a life doing a crappy low class job
The way I see it, this movie was very carefully crafted to appeal to the poor schmucks whose life truly consists entirely of family and a truly crappy job, and to make them feel righteous and self-satisfied, and COMFORTED about how crappy their lives are. Like the way they carefully insert a religious statue on the front lawn of the house, but the people in the movie otherwise live a secular life. Like the way the man in the movie is able to live the small-town family life while scoring the younger hot chick who has liberated sexual morals. Like the way he is given positive life affirmation for choosing his child's whim over what is best, overall, for both of them in the long run -- and thus the viewers are able to feel good about themselves because the main character's happy ending resembles their lives.
***
And now for the devil's advocate portion of this post.
I've been arguing, often lately, that one of the tragedies of our society is that we are taught that we can achieve anything. I believe that we cannot. That we all have our limitations, our strengths and weaknesses, and that we must find a lifestyle and profession that works well within that scope.
That's not to say that anyone should be telling you what that scope is -- we don't understand intelligence enough to be able to assess this. But if we could, I'd like to believe that we would see a society in which people would know their potential, and feel no shame about the limitations. That we would no longer be driving ourselves to nervous breakdowns trying to achieve the impossible, and feeling shame for not achieving what our peers have.
So I wonder. Are my issues conflicting? Do I need to reconcile these viewpoints?
They may conflict. But I think part of my issue with movies like Jersey Girl is that I feel like they are produced by the upper class to lull the lower classes into complacency while the upper class takes all. The opiate of the masses, as they say.
It's not that I think that all people should aspire to more than what they do, nor that I think that all people who do manual labour should be dissatisfied with their lives. The character in Jersey Girl clearly can handle the job in question, and was one of the best. He loved his work. He had some trouble balancing his home life with his family life, but that's something he could learn to handle. And when his wife died leaving him with a newborn baby to care for, he cracked. But that's no reflection on his ultimate potential and limitations. Telling him to give up on his dreams and a better life because his little girl didn't want to change schools is dumb.