Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 1 Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   2 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

How Could They Do It?

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 2 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Valuable 2   Must Read 1   Well Said 1  
View Ratings | Rate It Headlined to H4 2/27/13

Become a Fan
  (59 fans)
- Advertisement -

That's where the malice comes in: deliberate ignoring of the   contradiction   of the modern   story   while using the story as a driving force    for the art form   is   malicious- it   distorts the purpose of   art, makes it the servant of evil. And a very powerful   servant I should say.

Now we can return   to Juilliard and ask the question, "How Could They Do It?' How do they teach those future artists in that school; do they tell them   about   the great responsibility any person entering art takes upon himself/herself?   Do they challenge   them   to decide when and how can   they   use   their ability- the ability to influence people, the most powerful   weapon of all?   Do they give them examples? Do   they mold the characters of those people   who come out and perform and then ( again, by   Russian poet Alexander Block):

-           We see the great fire of life though the small   flames of art"

The whole purpose of art is to   make us   understand   that we are   in that   great fire and   that malice is the arsonist.   When malice pretends to   be a part of the picture, when   a great talent is used    in wrong hands and   for the wrong reasons- the result is   more fire, not less. In the old times there were people, for instance who were professional executioners and torturers.   Even in those tough times   people   tolerated them and even paid them but   they were overwhelmingly despised and no one, not even in the carnival performance   presented them as agents of goodness.   They were the agents of fear.   Fear is   not an art form. Fear   is a real thing.   Art does not serve it. Zero Dark Thirty thus is not an art. It is an imitation.   It would be good if someone in Juilliard   takes a note.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

Next Page  1  |  2


The writer is 57 years old, semi- retired engineer, PhD, PE, CEM. I write fiction on a regular basis and I am also 10 years on OEN.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; , Add Tags
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Human Coprophagia


Y2012- The Year Of A Coward

They Think Of Us As Slaves ( small note with big conclusion)

The School. Reading 'To Kill a Mockingbird' in Russia

Glory and Malice


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
2 people are discussing this page, with 2 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
I never watch movies any more. I quit.   '... by Ned Lud on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:46:04 AM
I've never heard of Juillard School - which probab... by Ad Du on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:35:30 PM