Killing Me Softly
I worked 72 hours this week. This is the third week in a row I’ve worked more than 50 hours and that includes time spent having the flu and working at home. I’ll work all day tomorrow and prolly Sunday morning too. Along with the workload, comes an immense amount of stress. Part of that is related to deadlines, part due to the fact that others are relying upon me to get data to them so they can finish their own work. Then, there is the fear that everything I’ve written is totally wrong. A government agency will be relying upon my work to make decisions that will have a major impact on their region. What if what I’ve turned in is totally flawed? What if I forgot to properly reference something or in my fatigue just typed whatever I was reading right onto the page without realizing what I was doing? It’s times like these that I start buying lottery tickets.
A word or two about our seder - Passover is my favorite holiday (it’s a holiday that commemorates the survival of a minority under the oppressive thumb of a dominant majority, a fundamentally humanist theme, even for a religious holiday, and far more meaningful and relevant than any stupid Christian holiday could ever hope to be, IMHO) and the seder was a good time. It was really Elisabeth’s seder. I’ve been so wrapped up in work that I only managed to invite Bill and that was at the midnight hour. So, I apologize for not having extended that invite to other folks who may be reading this. I got home from work to find that Elisabeth had completely transformed our kitchen. The table was beautifully set, there was matzoh wrapped in colorful napkins hanging from all over the ceiling (in lieu of hiding the afikoman, Elisabeth cleverly decided to hang dozens of potential offerings from the ceiling and let our guests pick one that contained a prize – a gift certificate good for 1 lb. of See’s Candy). Elizabeth had done all the prep work for dinner. So, after I spent a few minutes unwinding, I had no problems cooking it while enjoying 2 to 3 bottles of non-kosher wine that Bill brought over. Elisabeth and I haggled over the charoset – her recipe was quite a bit different from the one with which I had grown up. I promptly mixed up some of my own and Elisabeth declared it disgusting. Being a non-Jew who grew up in a half-Jewish household, my vote on the matter was promptly vetoed by Elisabeth, the genuine article. Charoset is to Passover what gravy is to Thanksgiving. Similarly, the haggadah that Elisabeth had us use was quite different from the one I grew up with – more reform minded with a strong feminist bent. Still, it was thought provoking which is what all good haggadoth should do.
At dinner, we had a heated debate on the films of that asshole Lars Von Trier – everyone disagreed with me (what’s new, eh?) and Elisabeth tells me that her friends were concerned that they had offended me. After a dessert of lemon and rose gelato with fresh macaroons, Bill and I engaged in a stupid argument outside. The major topic – whether one can have an opinion on a text without ever having been exposed to the text, just criticism of the text. These are the kinds of arguments that Bill and I have.
Right. Goal for tomorrow is to clean up my room (it looks like the bathroom of America’s #2 Favorite Crack Ho, Whitney Houston, only without all the death and flies and stuff), get everything unpacked and put away, to finish my noise analysis, and to spend some quality time with my best friend, Kate La Braverwoman. Surely there are enough hours in the day to do all that, no?
Comments
With all that going on, have you had to forego any pretense toward sleep?
Posted by: CV Rick | April 15, 2006 07:43 PM
I agree, Lars von Trier is an asshole, even though I managed to like Dancer in the Dark and Zentropa. I think I've decided that I can skip Dogville and his more recent bullshit, including the upcoming Marzipan or Mandelbrot or Manderlay or whatever the fuck it's called.
I think I lost any respect for the guy when he said he has never visited nor ever intends to visit the United States, yet his passion is making films exploring and criticising American history, ethics, etc.
To me, that's a lot more fucked up than even having an opinion on a text without ever having been exposed to the text, just criticism of the text. Then again, I'm wondering if you may have been on the "wrong" side of that argument.
Posted by: Joe | April 17, 2006 08:56 AM
Joe, given our own age-old use of the term "well-browsed," you should already know that it was I who thought one could have an opinion without always reading the text. Not a complete opinion of course (as if there's any such thing), and it depends on the criticism and on the text itself.
I've never visited the Middle East, and I have opinions about the region. Am I wrong to have them? Why read criticism, news analysis or history at all, then? But I do think von Trier should visit the U.S. if he wants to make a career of commenting on it.
(You've now heard the gist of our argument, minus the raised voices.)
Posted by: Huntington | April 17, 2006 02:19 PM
Criticism should be read to help further your knowledge of a text, to challenge your viewpoint, raise new questions, etc. Criticism should NOT be read as a substitute to exposure to the actual text.
Some of your analogies are flawed, Bill. Comparing first hand knowledge of a text to visiting the Middle Eastern is faulty logic.
I think you can have an opinion on anything, but without actual knowledge of the text, the opinion is irrelevant. Von Trier's movies may just be entertainments, as was argued at the seder, but they're also deeply problematic critiques of American culture based in prejudices, stereotypes, and a very shallow understanding of our culture based on his exposure to American popular culture and our twisted foreign agenda. These things do not adequately represent America and they're certainly not enough of a source of knowledge from which to base the kind of assertions that Von Trier makes in his films. Unfortunately, Americans are so insecure about their culture and so invested in the belief that anything European is by default superior in some way to everything that we are, that they'll slavishly devote themselves to Von Trier's stupid vision without serious thought. Fortunately, it's starting to catch up to him. From what I understand, many critics rejected his ideas in Manderlay, his meditation on American race relations, by noting that his knowledge of the complexities of race in America was deeply and totally lacking. The guy can critique all he wants, but at the level he's attempting to do so, he's completely out of his league and the resulting product can never hope to be much more than shallow drivel without any substance or genuine meaning.
Posted by: The Angry Young Man | April 18, 2006 07:20 AM
Facts are relevant or irrelevant, and not even either most of the time; opinions are informed by facts to greater or lesser degree, but can't be in themselves "irrelevant."
While we agree that my opinion of Dogville is less well informed than yours since you've seen the movie and I haven't, the fact that I've seen Zentropa and Dancer In The Dark, seen clips and stills of Dogville, read plot summaries, read several criticisms by people whose opinions I take seriously (including yours), and believe that von Trier's themes repeat themselves from film to film, make my opinion not without some merit. As usual, I see a spectrum where you seem to see black-or-white.
Please expand on why my logic is faulty on the Middle East analogy. While I don't think the comparison is exact, I do see a similarity regarding reliance on primary versus secondary sources to form an opinion.
Posted by: Huntington, again | April 18, 2006 11:56 AM