Acting-Out Politics

Weblog opens discussion about the psychology of Bushmerican style of behavior.

Bunch of criminals pursuing Will Kane (Gary Cooper) to take over the town

“Stubborn” Will Kane (Gary Cooper) and his courageous wife Amy (Grace Kelly)

The hero fights the gang of outlaws in spite of being betrayed by the townsfolks (philistines choosing bandits over the honest person)

In “High Noon” the Marshal of the little town (Gary Cooper) is informed about arrival to the town of a pack of bandits with guns and thick criminal records. The Marshal’s assistant, a shameless self-promoter suddenly couldn’t be found, and so several friends seemed reliable until this moment. In the hope to find help to resist the intruders Gary Cooper is going to the church, but meets there a lack of desire to join him. The town inhabitants hope that if the Marshal will leave the town before gangsters arrive the bandits will not behave dangerously and everything will be alright, peaceful and prosperous. Shocked by the people’s refusal to help him, the local authority and friendly person for many years, Will Kane decides not to run away and stays to fight the outlaw murderers alone. But he understands that the armed criminals and robbers and philistines of cowardly happiness are like the right and left hands of the same body.

It is not the uniforms of SA or SS that can identify real “fascism”, and it is not the Nazi flag or Mussolini or Franco‘s slogans. It is the psychological condition of human beings, which, first of all is a combination of frustrated self-aggrandizement and rather diffused hate as a result of this frustration. This hate is directed towards those who are perceived as rivals for and danger to one’s prosperity and wellbeing. It is usually the minorities: blacks, foreigners and intellectuals (all of them are obvious personifications of dissimilar others). Secondly, it is absolute (infantile and sentimental) admiration for a tough top leader – a personification of a perfect strongman, a man whose power is as unlimited as his wealth – an idealized father figure as it is perceived by an early adolescent boy.

The amazing feature of a really fascist leader is a mixture of imperial distance from the masses which worship him and his “miraculous” identification with members of the loyal crowds. He is perceived as tough and demanding, but in other times as a close and a loving friend, loving as only you can love yourselves (configuration referring to a common identity between a private and a general – one who can easily die and one who gives commands).

In a fascist universe self-sacrifice is natural – it is, as if, the one who is sacrificed (died in a line of duty) is at the same time always staying alive as his/her comrade in arms. For this reason concentration on hate towards the dissimilar others as a basic prototype of an enemy is a factor outweighing fear for one’s own life. If you will die you still will be alive as your very comrade. Hate in the fascist world is more focused on than love – love is always there whether one is alive or dead, but hate is a collective focus on a distinguish target – the enemy (the alien, the bizarre, the monstrous.

Unconditional love for a fascist leader and our comrades in arms on the one hand and the unconditional hate for those who are the bizarre others and must be hated and punished for being different from “us” on the other, creates a drastic contrast between fascist togetherness and fascist dehumanized alienation from dissimilar people. The presence of enemy, foreigner as carrier of all evil, all that is wrong binds people to unite without criticism with their own crowd.

It is not too difficult to comprehend how this psychological and social totalitarian dynamics came to be a reality in the beginning of the 21st century. Americans from childhood are objects of “official” suggestion that they are exceptional people belonging to exceptional country. But the word “exceptional” is semantically close to (and easy resonates with) the word “superior” – “exceptionalism” is connected through the golden chain with “supremacy” and “superiority”. This problem refers to the megalomania of Soviet Communists who treated themselves as the number one country in the world by its exceptionalism and superiority based on the uniqueness of their ability to belief in Communism. This semantic knot is too close to the Arian megalomania as a part of military thinking constellation before and during WWII.

Let’s not forget that it is the primitive human megalomania that creates Consuls, Tsars, Kings/Queens, Dukes, Billionaires, Gen-secs, Gods, power, wars, D. Trumps as standing above Congress and Demos, and the outlaw bandits of the Wild West in “High Noon”.

Solitary fight with a gang of outlaws is not easy, but the more difficult is to survive the disappointment with the people. Will Kane (Gary Cooper) is a real human being – instead of megalomania he has dignity. After his victory over the megalomaniacal bandits he “resigns”. Humility respects the ability to tolerate the human pain. Probably, he will never become a Marshall or a Sheriff again.

There are 10,000 recruiters across the country working with a $700 million a year advertising budget… you are more likely to see the recruiters in schools where kids have less options after graduation.
“The War in Our Schools”, Z-magazine, June, 2016, by Rory Fanning, p. 17

Recruiters have contact information for every junior and senior. This is the law. “No Child Left behind Act” insists that the school hand over information about every student to the Department of Defense, if it wants to receive federal funds.
“The War in Our Schools”, Ibid, p. 18

We, humans tend to underestimate the intelligence of God. And intelligence as such is in tune with humor and very often irony, because it knows its logically inevitable limits and for this reason is prone to frame itself with embellished borders, humoristic or ironic.

God has to think in a very difficult conditions, when thinking has to proceed not in relatively short moments, like it is the case with His Adams or Eves, but in the widest historical periods which tend to swallow His intuitive inspirations like berries. For Him His own humorous or ironic reactions on His creative achievements are rather routine, like the types of creatures he created and their problems. Even oak or maple leaves become ironic or rat’s tale and zebra’s camouflage, even when we cannot appreciate this aspect of Creation. See for yourselves. Even the most basic and elementary creatures not seen by our human eyes (like bacteria or viruses) are involved in permanent “macro” battles with opposing armies of other bacteria or viruses. Dinosaurs or human bodies are literally made of internal wars between those who live, kill and be killed inside them. Can we be surprised that we ourselves – the inhabitants of the world where we kill and victimized or survive, are no less belligerent than other creatures? Rare creatures among us try to become morally above Creation (and its murderous inside) – above militancy as life’s alphabet. But it’s hellishly difficult, not to say – above human power. We, humans become easily angry and furious and are enraged with a speed of air into and out of our lungs. We are as intolerant as stormy wind or rain. For us to kill other humans with our today’s high-tech weapons is easier than for volcanos and earthquakes. We enjoy (!) torturing other people (remember photos of American soldiers in Iraq). With what ease, readiness and cheery itch (!) we go to new wars. The impression is that our youth is genetically programmed to rival and to fight, not just to quarrel but to clash and resourcefully justify doing so, and to… kill with the feeling of being heroes or to die with the feeling of being gloriously immortal and praised by contemporaries. Democracy tried to soften this part of us, at least rhetorically, but as we see today, it is just a veneer of reality, a kind of a wig on an outdated superstar or cosmetic makeup for the personifications of future social success. More and more people among us are yearning to get the chance to insult, assault and beat up others – they pay for high-tech guns and shooting range with human-like targets and enjoy jokes about shooting at human knee-cups.

It seems that the young people of all nations are genetically programmed (by God’s inspiration) not only be ready to kill, but also be unconditionally obedient to the elder males, especially to the ruling authority and military commanders. They psychologically combine hate (towards dissimilar others) and extreme obedience to leaders (whom they worship). This combination of contradictory features in the young people is a miracle of nature (one of the miracles created by God inside the very nucleus of human nature).

Another God’s miracle (not the last, of course) is matter-of-factness, normalized version of predators-preys’ natural “co-existence” in nature. God not only equipped the predators with very efficient – almost “military” tools for hunting and killing and swallowing the preys, but obviously followed the principle of justice of His own invention – He equally equipped the preys with some abilities to avoid being killed: with knowledge how to hide or run away with some success. Our human ancestors resourcefully joined the natural predators and with arrows, spurs and knife-like instruments provided themselves and their offspring not only food but very soon slaves and so forth, and as people today proudly proclaimed – “conquered the Planet Earth”.

Here God is, as if, saying to Himself – I gave the preys the ability to hide and run – be good at these and other capabilities and then your chances of survival will grow in comparison with the big predatory cats or crocodiles and anacondas, etc., etc. Here God is not just showing his sarcastic humor. Here God is really a joker. It’s not surprising that people are able to shoot children from military helicopters. It seems that the Creator either doesn’t care about His creatures or was not able to make a more just structure of living on our tiny planet. Indeed, even God-genius has drastic limitations of His creative thinking. We, the offshoot of his Adams and Eves are not able to refrain from violence and learn how to live in an interracial and international world peacefully – how to create a language to talk with the dissimilar others on an equal terms, without bribes and ultimatums, without seductions and menaces. Our shameless moral impotence is a legacy of (but, of course, not an excuse for) our Creator’s cynical and miserable humor.

Hans Bellmer, “The Machine Gun-neress in a State of Grace”, 1937

This incredible Bellmer’s construction is not just a parody on human obsession with weapons and on an emancipation of women who try to become as gun-equipped and gun-competent as the best of men. Again we see that exceptional artists are capable not be just critical of the reality but to look into the future of our species – at our today’s life.

Marcel Duchamp, “Paradise”, 1910

It seems, that according to Duchamp God with his supernatural intelligence is not far ahead of what is supposed to be the brains of Adam and Eve. Adam obviously thinks that if he covers his sexual attribute with his palms God will believe that this substantial part of man’s body is not yet assessed by Adam’s mind. But God let’s Adam to fake his innocence rather than to sin in front of His very eyes. Eve is taking her baby out of her primal zone but covering her resourcefulness by turning her back towards god’s eye, while God is already happy that the primordial couple is able to spent at least some time together refraining from intercourse.

Joan Miro, “The Woman”, 1934

Fascist mothers, according to Joan Miro are despotic and scandalous, but screaming and roaring at their children won’t prevent them from becoming fascists. To the contrary they are the future fascists partially because they hate their noisy and bossy mothers.

Picabia’s style of representing couples in a vulgarly-glitzily-radiantly erotic mood includes many details crowding together and expecting from the viewers to indulge in scrupulous analysis to sort it all out. But why to laugh at people who’re giving themselves to the irresistible dangerous waves of love? Picabia could answer that it is very difficult to sublimate the amorous emotions – river of love too often awakens the monstrosities of Eros, its obsessive and violent indulgences and that people need to be aware of these dangers.

Francis Picabia, “First Meeting”, 1925

Is the sky covering the beloveds into a feeling of being isolated into existential interior for the two, as if closed to the world? Or, may be, this sky is just a sheet or blanket of intimacy helping them to feel together with a foretaste of a blissful togetherness?

The man’s eye(s) are, as if, drawn on his face as on a manikins’ head. With his cardboard nose and lips like a little wheel he is rather an object of the woman’s presence than a seducer. Her eyes on the other hand are overstrained not only because she was waiting and looking for a marital partner for too long, but because it appears that she understand that with this particular person (with rather waiting than insisting posture) she has to think and calculate for both of them instead of just relying on her new possibility. Her right eye became an artificial lens blurred by the fog of not knowing what exactly to do, while her left eye is with double pupil because of her stress of feeling ambivalent.

His embrace of her is too gentle for her taste – almost hypothetical, and her protective gesture by her right hand is protecting her only from his “passivity”. It is, as if just marking of a punctured border line between them. Their movement into a possible unity and their hypothetical movement into a common future is reasonably careful. The man’s eye(s) are not only vertical but closed – men’s eyes tend to look at women a bit down – men unconsciously always mean to look at women’s bodies – the ultimate, although carefully masked reflex of physical love.

Woman’s lips are simultaneously opened and closed – more exactly, they’re opened within being closed, as if, she is ready to kiss and at the same time is not. It’s possible even to think that her lips have opened two times – her small – red lips are directed towards the man’s lips-wheel, but her wider bigger lips in black color, as if, swallowing her red mini-lips ready for kissing in order to prevent the impression that she is kissing ready.

The hero of Picabia’s couple in this painting belongs, it seems, to the smaller category of males who want to be loved by women rather than to fall in love, who wants to be chosen by a female partner rather than to conquer her with his passion. Some men from this category want to marry in order to please their parents, not to be judged by “decent people” as “bums”, etc., etc. The pointing finger of woman’s left hand is, as if, pointing at her companion – in spite of all her hesitations her conclusions are rather optimistic. But the black jagged lines along of her arms and hands reminding of the sharp spikiness of a saw underline, it seems, the woman’s torment connected with making her decision for both participants in the situation.

Man Ray’s Photo of Francis Picabia (1879 – 1953), 1922

By looking at Man Ray’s photo of Picabia we get the feeling that in his spirit he is close to those who live in the 21st century with a democratic reflex of a critical mind about what’s going on today. It seems that Francis Picabia is laughing at our civilization – at the pathetic seriousness of innocent philistines driving cars and trying to achieve their social and financial successes. His facial expression is parodying our concentration on our boastful busyness. In this photo Picabia, as if, impersonates our proudly conformist readiness to overcome and smash any obstacles on our way – here he is, as if an exemplary citizen of the future of rewards we all expect for our efforts.

Dark Mold Of Violence (Stalin’s Russia) And Primitive Greed of Idolatrous Profit-makers Who Pauperize Democracy (Today’s US)

The neocons with neo-liberal money-making style don’t have any ideas or concepts. With their primordial self-centeredness they have only desire to increase their personal profits and multiply high-tech weapons in the country’s military force and personal guns in the hands of their worshippers among the poor. Democratic politicians who have “discussions” with them don’t even understand that only their democratic side has the arguments, inferences, logic, syllogisms, etc. – the neo-cons are occupied only with accumulating their wealth and fighting to protect what “they already accumulated and what they plan to get more”. And they perceive their opponents not just as people having different points of view on life, but as evil-carriers dreaming to deprive them their wealth and weapons. They see the world only in one perspective – how much profits and weapons they can accumulate around themselves.

Look at Klee’s “demony” – at demonic emanation which swallows nature, human and social life, at these primal creatures with predatory eyes, mouths and jaws.

Paul Klee, “Demony”, 1939 (The Dark Mold of violence and greed contaminating life)

Almost ten years passed after the Russian civil war and a horrifying mass hunger in some regions of the country, but for the majority of the people it was still possible to somehow live. Russia was already Soviet Russia, but people still tried to survive. The cows, the goats, pigs and vodka were still Russian. But the very atmosphere of life step by step became impregnated with, as if, pressure in the air – with intimidation and fear. People always like to exchange their opinions about life – is it tolerable, unbearable, ok and the gradations in between, but now people started to shut their mouths – on the streets, in the streetcars, even at home. The reason was a new extreme ideology as absolutist belief, mandatory as a military service. It was belief in a new God, this time – not Christ, not Church, not Tsar, not Lenin and not life after death in paradise, but a new ideology demanding absolute belief in – Communism, Socialism and Stalin (leader made of steel) and super-alert necessity to report even smallest skepticism about new God in steal. It took him until 1937 to get ready for mass terror – for mass arrests of the people suspected in not believing in the new iconic ideological phraseology. So, millions of people become inhabitants of austere barracks (accused in being anti-Stalin – ripped away from their families and children) – doing physical labor without any pay and any hope for redemption. Most of them perished before Stalin’s death, many were released after his death. And some of them, after return from the concentration camps were still… praising Stalin for his admirable strength of a god to demand from population more enthusiastic belief in communism. Totalitarian leaders are popular because they are as culturally illiterate as masses uneducated in humanistic sciences.

“Daemonie” or “demony” of Stalin’s henchmen tormenting, torturing and killing those who dared to disagree (even jokingly and ephemerally) with the despotic leadership of the shining aura of top leaders’ self-confidence and rightness was growing like Klee depicts it. The genius of the artist found the visual elaboration of this dangerous virus of demony poisoning the human life. The name of this “daemonie virus” is the raveningly harassing and swallow (disappear) people who are not loyal to the despotic god of human authoritarianism with totalitarian sweep.

It has been less than forty years since Ronald Reagan, with hurrah of conservative money- and power-worshippers and perversely cowardly supported by many democrats took course on transforming democracy into an oligarchy. And only a little more than two years are behind since a person who lives just for money and power began his presidency and a democratic country started to forget about the demos – about caring for regular people and has started to participate in the creation of a bombastic cult of bill-mills – billionaires-millionaires. Now the American financial elites fell in love with their counterparts in other countries while the ordinary Americans and people of the world are losing their standards of living.

The people of power plagued by “demony” are psychologically underdeveloped – their basic relation to the world is the need to appropriate, control and expand their territorial space. But on the lands they bought or conquered it’s not easy to completely eliminate the local population. It’s necessary to brainwash and transform people into servants of masters and technology. There is no place for humanistic education – for the knowledge of life and history. Instead people are overwhelmed with cheap standard entertainment. Like in USSR so called humanistic education was in reality a propaganda of Soviet way of life based on the belief in Sovietism, in US today entertainment distracts people from the possibility of thinking based on knowledge of life and respect for nature and the world. Consumerism of technical toys hypnotizing human souls and medical pills stupefying human brains helps entertainment to make populations to forget about human freedom oriented on developing moral sensitivity and existentially spiritual concerns.

There are many ways towards death – through life’s mistakes, through sudden disasters and unexpected traumatic events, through hell created for punishment, through paradise created by personal money, through self-sacrifice for the sake of political leader or a loved general, through irresistible sins and vices, through a love which has taken a destructive turn, etc. But the most absurd and radical way to die is to worship idols the strongest of which is the immortal and long ago discovered golden calf. The overwhelming power of the golden calf gives the idolatrous person the most tormenting death through a prolonged (or soon made endless through technology) life bought by money. In the beginning the idolatrous billionaires will enjoy immortality, but with each and every decade their living will become more and more tormented with a stinging and humiliating boredom, and here the idol-worshippers will demand a super-technology already not for prolonging life but for providing death – a technology stronger than immortality! Even today’s high-tech nuclear weapons by its very destructive power exist already not so much for protecting wealth, power and life but to save the wealthy and the powerful from life.

Paul Klee, “Demony”, 1939 (poison is gradually eating away the social life by pauperizing people with its blind obsession with wealth and power).

Look attentively at these deprived – simultaneously miserable and mightily destructive creatures with bodies of the dark mold.

When People Go Through Life Like Eyes Through The Visible World Or Ears Fill With Sounds, And Human Heart Pumps Blood Just Because It Is Its Job

A good looking couple with intelligent and sensitive faces – Claude Ridder (Claude Rich) and Catrine (Olga Georges Picot)

The dark moods and the inability to understand what bothers them, what is intervening into their happy life together with those strange melancholic drapes from nowhere?

Even successful sexual mutuality in our couple’s life wasn’t able to make them resit deterring the intervals of sadness clouding their togetherness. They felt happy with one another, but… They were lucky that they were able to share their sadness as a part of their love.

Because their nameless torment was incorporated by their love their amorous feelings became even enriched by their spiritual pain.

Catrine was first who had died – although the exact reason of her death was difficult to establish – she died from gas poisoning because she fell asleep near the running fire place.

Catrine and Claude are better than regular human beings – philistines (tautological survivors) fighting for success of their survival. Catrine was very sensitive of death – she was afraid to lose Claude. He was so gentle, not like other men. He was able to love without any affectation.

Claude in his participation in a scientific experiment had a fellow traveler – a tiny mouse. For this miniature gracious creature the whole world was her environment and dedicated to her needs. The mouse could return from the past at any moment, but Claude obviously couldn’t – the time machine was not able to take him back because it was, probably, confused – was Claude (sent by machine into his past) was revisiting his past or the world of his past imagination, which controlled him – made him a little somnambular he always was in his past life? He lived the unreality of his past life as if it was reality. It is exactly how he lived before his suicide – as majority of people who live through their imagination and judge the world according to their imaginary perceptions.

In the background of this shot we see the very time machine itself – looks like a giant onion or, may be, garlic from a famous book for children with vegetables, fruits and berries as anthropomorphized characters. Look at the scientists in the foreground – they’re like insects always know what to do.

Here, we see Claude Ridder in the time machine chamber, on a scientific mattress which was made, probably, to soften the transition for the time travelers between two incompatible realms – reality like fantasy (life of Claude in the past – before his suicide) and fantasy like reality (genius of science).

– ——— –

Our natural (pre-scientific) time-machine is our memory accumulating for our retrospections not only facts of our life but also our feelings and thoughts connected with it. Resnais, probably, had to somehow connect the semantics of his film with science-fictional time-machine since not many viewers are interested in human memory. But they are interested very much with science fictions because they want to see scientific miracles (if not directly imaginary – mass audience’s first preference, but at least scientific ones). Resnais’s project got attractive and prestigious label of science-fiction movie. Of course, in “Je t’aime…” he also had a chance to mock science-fictional facet of mass-culture – at least some satisfaction for the director who is “forced” by the circumstances to make profit for the producers, etc., a burden for the disinterested artist who makes cinema because of love for the art, concern for the human race and irresistible philosophical bent.

Resnais’ film, it seems, is about our inability to judge and to use our memory (to adequately apply it to the encircling us actuality – to judge not in a sense of how exactly or not exactly it can register what really happened with us in life or how disappointed or satisfied, unhappy or happy we are about what we remember. Resnais thinks not about human memory as such – the time machine as a part of the plot does its best to distract us, the viewers from Claude Ridder’s (Claude Rich) life, because it’s broken or just a “capricious” scientific aggregate. Through the metaphor of a broken time machine Resnais makes a point about the broken life of the characters – broken not in a sense that it is interrupted by the intervened disaster or their inability to follow the society’s rules and norms, but because it is broken from the beginning – by the pettiness, meaninglessness and emptiness making human life absurd in essence. In other words, what is broken is not computer (time machine), but life, the social container of human life, because of the absence of life’s meaning. Life of Claude Ridder, Catrine (Olga Georges-Picot) and Wiana Lust (Claude’s alt-[other]-mistress – Anouk Ferjak) plus the film’s endless small personages including the very serious scientists, is miserable by being not touched by secular spirituality in action, by the depth of human personalities.

It’s very symptomatic that the “time machine” worked perfectly at the end, when the hero (who is stuck in his past because of the machine’s inability to bring him back) is re-experiencing his own attempted suicide again, as if, going through it the second time. When while visiting his past he reached the point of his suicide the machine very quickly throws him bleeding back to actuality. It is, as if, his life was inevitably leading towards his suicide following by its dark but genuine logic pushing him to meet the horrifying but real event of his suicide. Here for the first time the machine acts “adequately” spitting him out of the past into actual reality. Indeed, Claude’s suicide before the scientific experiment was the only real event of his whole life. The reason Claude couldn’t return to actual life from the kingdom of the past before is that his past life was completely artificial, not existential – the time machine, as if, couldn’t see the difference between his real past life and his memory of it according to his past perception which the time-machine was reading from his mind. This machine, as if, permanently made mistakes in distinguishing between what is Claude Ridder’s memory and what was the lived reality in his past life. Claude lived his past life as if he was imagining it – he never felt the taste of reality, until he was engulfed by the extreme despair triggering his suicide attempt.

It’s very important not to forget that Claude Ridder is very intelligent and a witty person, and so is Catrine – his main love. But the basic flatness of their personalities – living as if collecting cherries from the cherry trees is fatal existential weakness, reinforced by their mindlessly, although minimally prosperous way of life. All their life Claude and Catrine looked around smilingly. They liked the quiet and cool waters of living.

But let us be just to the time-machine which gave Claude Ridder the chance to look into his past and, we hope, to understand how inadequate his very way of life was. Of course, he survived his suicide attempt, but will he be able without the time-machine experiment and risky mistake to really feel comprehend what was going on with his past life, how amazingly inept he was in his perception of living, how weak he was in his inability to help Catrine. Existential passivity was his compass. He was, as a human being an invalid, as majority of us, people are, even when invalidity of the others are different from his or ours. The creator of smart time-machine which was able to make mistake but because of this mistake became enlightening for Claude and for some of the viewers – was Alain Resnais himself, not the scientists. It is he as the artist of cinematic art tried to help one person, the hero of his film Claude Ridder to understand his basic problem and to help us, the viewers of his film, to reconsider our own psychological condition, either similar or different from Claude’s, without the dark necessity to rush to our death in despair.

After all the peripeteias between the young stubborn beauty Conchita claiming virginal status (Carole Bouquet and Angela Molina in the same role) and the old rich man Mathieu (Fernando Rey) dreaming of rejuvenation in her precious hands, the desperate Mathieu used the ultimate tool – the key to the house he eventually bought in Conchita’s name.

The grateful Conchita couldn’t believe her happiness and Mathieu’s generosity

She became gentle and soft. He never saw her like that. He felt himself like a skier on top of the White Mountain. Their fingers were trembling.

Suddenly Conchita changed. What could have happened again? After the operation of the golden key and the castle? Mathieu was still hoping that the bizarre change in Conchita is nothing more than a playful joke. He knew her well, but that was before the key…

But Conchita’s face changed again, like many times before. How is it possible – just moment ago she was so… cheerful?

Conchita’s… laughter was like a thunderstorm from the blue sky. How fioritures of her angelic voice can be so thunderstormy? Mathieu again felt the deadly burden of his age.

But even this wasn’t the end. Conchita’s unthinkable, unbelievable cruelty had more numbers. Mathieu had never seen anything like this in his whole life.

Finally, the last act. Mathieu felt himself, as if, locked in a deep cave. He was afraid that he will lose consciousness. Conchita did something that cannot happen in the world. In front of his own very eyes she… with her “disgusting“ boyfriend… Mathieu felt that he became dark as a lamp that lost electric power. But the amazing thing is that it wasn’t all. “Relations” between Mathieu and Conchita were continuing. Is it possible?

Some wars never reach a final resolution. After a lot of blood and corpses and some financial exchange wars may take a break – people need period of joys and hopes. But the spirit of wars are stubborn, especially the war of deadly rivalry between “Its Majesty-Money“ and the Human nature. In some historical moments it can seem that one side will prevail forever the other. Is the beginning of the 21st century one such moment? Is today it looks like that “Its Majesty Money“ interests are able to triumph over “human nature” (with its anarchy and stubbornness)? What if Money found a way to make Itself the nucleus of the human soul, more – the very heart of human nature?

For Thomas – an intelligent young man with a Cupid-like face (making the girls care about him) – a prelude to sex starts with pleasant visual impressions

Warming up for threesome through observing faux-wrestling

Satisfied and calmed by pleasure, Thomas-the creative commercial photographer is able to resume his everyday work

After being generously attended it is not easy to return to the demands of reality

Infantile sexual desire comes quickly (although a little teasing can make it look almost like passion). Its gifts can be strong but always ephemerous. And it disappears quickly and indifferently. But soon it is again reminds about itself rather disrespectfully and without any hesitations. Its call is not loud, but matter-of-factly. It is “why not” call which is always impossible to refuse as a small change without which we, somehow, cannot live.

Thomas’ (David Hemmings) unexpected and casual but, as if, trapping him encounter with enigmatic woman (Vanessa Redgrave), was felt by him as strangely meaningful.

Even a semi-detective plot (which they both were trapped by) – the plot of the film, couldn’t eliminate their fixation on one another

It’s, as if, the shadow of Adam and Eve was slowly touching their bodies and leaving and returning again

But the dope easily eliminates everything strange and transforms everything back. Thomas tried to find her. But they will never see each other again.

Contrary to infantile sexual desire (analyzed by the four stills in the beginning) even minuscule existential drive towards another person has ability to immediately push anything else to the margin. Of course, it’s not necessarily continuing forever, but it can return again and again refreshed and potent. The main character of the “Blow Up” didn’t reach an elaborated phase of his existential drive towards Jane-Vanessa Redgrave, and it is not because he is not impressed enough – he is emotionally taken like this for the first time in his life. But not for long, because he lives in a society which advertises itself to the population by mobilizing consumerist and entertainment pleasures and occupying people with money-worship – activities stimulating the dreams of wealth-power which in its turn stimulate megalomania making humanistic truth unrecognizable.

Antonioni and Vanessa Redgrave on the set of “Blow Up”

When Everyday Life Becomes Self-Glorification – When People Dream To Become Coupled

Francis Picabia, “Venus and Adonis”

What’s happening with two human beings – Jeanne and Jean or Heather and Bill or for that matter Katia and Victor, when they publicly celebrate their reciprocal love – when they turn into Venus and Adonis? How to describe this magic transformation from being just prosaic, social success calculating, depressed or money-hooked into togetherness of erotic excitement? How to understand this incredible energy making a woman and a man, as if, euphorically superhuman? Is it irresistible for a couple to go out late evening for a celebrative event, especially if they met recently and have a project of eternal togetherness?

The metonymies which can help us describe a couple’s transformation from humans to stars can be the appearance in them of a particular – maniacally cheerful mannerism of social behavior plus tendency to overdress and over perfume themselves and an artificial, let’s say – too loud or too playful talking and laughing. Even their skin becomes lit by, as if multicolored garlands that embellish Christmas trees. In short, when people are exposing-and-expanding themselves to celebrate their intimacy amidst mass crowding in order to publicly enjoy their privacy (to look at themselves through the admiring public eyes), their inspiration is enriched by a kind of… monstrosity of Being, as if they are irradiating light.

When regular – normal people became Venus and Adonis they after a certain point start to beam with… a primitive, almost animalistic spirit of predatory, even rapacious euphoria. It is at this point Francis Picabia gets them into butterfly net of his creative imagination. The eroticism of solemn bravado erupting from the volcano of togetherness becomes mixed with excess of narcissistic megalomania when two fresh sexual partners who appropriated the super-energy, as if advertise their insatiability and happiness with one another. These what Picabia’s couples erotically imposing themselves on people around are all about. They, as if are flying up by the power of their own wind.

Let’s look at Venus and Adonis again. Their kiss is like that of two snakes – one with a masculine dark, and another with feminine red lips. And her soul trembles like a flying mouse we see on her cheek. The double-pupil of the man’s left eye (for this occasion of being Adonis for Venus he must have four pupils with hypnotizing power) participates in transforming woman’s gaze into the flat mask. And look at their mutual embrace – the man is embracing woman into locking her body. The woman – his head. He appropriates her flesh itself, she – his mind.

The couple is covered by the glitter of shining dust of confetti and flying artificial flowers. Of course, it is the carnival’s crew cares for this aspect of celebration, but what if it’s our couple – Venus and Adonis who irradiates this multicolored dusts as the natural atmosphere of their love with bodily heat of immanent eroticism belonging to the members of our human race?

Francis Picabia, Mardi Grass Le Basier

« Previous Entries  Next Page »


July 2019
« Jun    




Recent Comments