This is on-topic, I promise; just needed a little set-upamysawrusJune 4 2009, 02:57:44 UTC
I saw a short film (fiction) at USC this semester that detailed the horrors of a battle during the Iraq war with a troop of Marines. It was gritty and very unabashed in its telling. One of the soldiers has never killed anyone, so his fellow soldiers egg him on about it throughout the film. It culminates in the soldiers hearing movement in the bombed out building they're hiding in, so they thrust a grenade in the guy's hand and make him throw it in the room with movement. Turns out it was a civilian woman watching TV.
Now here's where I share the "why?!" sentiment you experienced in reading that anthology -- the woman is clearly dying, bleeding from the neck. It was established early on in the film that there was a soldier with medical supplies, but the soldier (who's never killed anyone in battle) is told to make sure the woman doesn't suffer and is handed a gun. The soldier fatally shoots the woman. And the film ends there. So . . . why didn't they just overmedicate her?! Why commit her to such a violent, terrifying death instead of comforting her? This is the question a professor overseeing that class and I discussed.
The way the movie ended bugged me to no end. What was it trying to say? What message was I suppose to take away with me? What was the moral? Was it just to present the horrors of war? I was baffled. The only explanation I could come up with on my own was that the filmmaker was venting in some way (she use to be in the army). But that wasn't enough of an answer for me.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that you're DEFINITELY in your right to be upset. There was no conclusion to that anthology! It leaves you with so many situations that you have to draw your own conclusion to without any sort of note or preface from the authors. I still haven't worked up the courage to ask the filmmaker what the meaning of her film is, but have you entertained the idea of writing a letter to the authors detailing your concerns?
The negative views you described of the people in the book is complete a form of ________-ism. I don't know what word to use, there's definitely a prejudice going. It's very appalling to me that people can be that mean. Sadly, we see it in the news everyday but still . . . my jaw is on the floor . . . .
Re: This is on-topic, I promise; just needed a little set-upkristen729June 4 2009, 03:26:26 UTC
There are several words you can use, but I guess the technical term is "sizism." That sounds a little clinical and removed for me, so I say "fat hatred" or "fat phobia." Feel free to use whichever appeals to you more. As to sending a letter, I have thought about it, though I feel that would be best served by reading the whole thing, which I really don't want to do at this point. I'm in a serious funk at the moment. And the thing is, there was a preface from the editors. It was just weird fluff though. Nothing about what the contributors were really about. It made me feel blind-sided.
Now here's where I share the "why?!" sentiment you experienced in reading that anthology -- the woman is clearly dying, bleeding from the neck. It was established early on in the film that there was a soldier with medical supplies, but the soldier (who's never killed anyone in battle) is told to make sure the woman doesn't suffer and is handed a gun. The soldier fatally shoots the woman. And the film ends there. So . . . why didn't they just overmedicate her?! Why commit her to such a violent, terrifying death instead of comforting her? This is the question a professor overseeing that class and I discussed.
The way the movie ended bugged me to no end. What was it trying to say? What message was I suppose to take away with me? What was the moral? Was it just to present the horrors of war? I was baffled. The only explanation I could come up with on my own was that the filmmaker was venting in some way (she use to be in the army). But that wasn't enough of an answer for me.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that you're DEFINITELY in your right to be upset. There was no conclusion to that anthology! It leaves you with so many situations that you have to draw your own conclusion to without any sort of note or preface from the authors. I still haven't worked up the courage to ask the filmmaker what the meaning of her film is, but have you entertained the idea of writing a letter to the authors detailing your concerns?
The negative views you described of the people in the book is complete a form of ________-ism. I don't know what word to use, there's definitely a prejudice going. It's very appalling to me that people can be that mean. Sadly, we see it in the news everyday but still . . . my jaw is on the floor . . . .
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment