Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
CyranoRox
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: a garret over a moonlit street
Posts: 617
Karma: 44 (+44/-0)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
Why it felt that way, from another angle:
What if we take V literally as an Idea? that is the Platonic sense of an being [not just a thought/concept], an original, from which other beings of the same kind are antitypes [copies, images]?
The relationship of antitype/copy to archtype/original is one of eros. That is, if you meet your archtype [all this long before Jung came in] you will feel a strong erotic attraction, just in the geometry of the situation. For us, this is delightfully enhanced by the objective qualities of V, but it is said to hold for any such relation - a mouse to the Mouse-archetype, etc.
That goes to the problem of my lack of defense. You can't defend against that kind of reaction, because it connects to your deepest being, prior to any added mental stuff. In the first recognition ['that and I share an identity'] you can't get to 'no' because you can't deny yourself. So the first gift: that is Good; I am [in some way] that; I am...good. All in a flash, not an argument. Thus the germ of our feelings of validation, release from self-condemnation, starts.
Wait, this is a movie, a character. How did it get all the way up to archetype?
V is an image of Man, in the predicament of an unjust, unfair, enslaved world. More that that, a man who has within himself some of the power to make a new world - after the destruction of the one he helped create. So then he looks like a bridge - here, one of us; there, something stronger than we are.
So, Evey asked the right question: who is he? In my next, I will unweave one thread of his What and see who emerges.
Work with play the happy differentiation!
Last edited by CyranoRox, 11/18/2007, 5:12 pm
|
|
11/18/2007, 5:10 pm
|
Send Email to CyranoRox
Send PM to CyranoRox
|
CyranoRox
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: a garret over a moonlit street
Posts: 617
Karma: 44 (+44/-0)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
Freedom!Forever?? what kind of politics is that?
Unscholarly reader that i am, I tend to absorb ideas and then present them, forgetting that they are not my own.
CS Lewis is a case in point. Is this not what we felt?
quote: In speaking of this desire for our own faroff country, which we find in ourselves even now, I feel a certain shyness. I am almost committing an indecency. I am trying to rip open the inconsolable secret in each one of you—the secret which hurts so much that you take your revenge on it by calling it names like Nostalgia and Romanticism and Adolescence; the secret also which pierces with such sweetness that when, in very intimate conversation, the mention of it becomes imminent, we grow awkward and affect to laugh at ourselves; the secret we cannot hide and cannot tell, though we desire to do both. We cannot tell it because it is a desire for something that has never actually appeared in our experience. We cannot hide it because our experience is constantly suggesting it, and we betray ourselves like lovers at the mention of a name. Our commonest expedient is to call it beauty and behave as if that had settled the matter. -snip- The books or the music in which we thought the beauty was located will betray us if we trust to them; it was not in them, it only came through them, and what came through them was longing. These things—the beauty, the memory of our own past—are good images of what we really desire; but if they are mistaken for the thing itself they turn into dumb idols, breaking the hearts of their worshippers. For they are not the thing itself; they are only the scent of a flower we have not found, the echo of a tune we have not heard, news from a country we have never yet visited.
V, my Island to which no ship may sail, my glimpse of tir-nan-og , my dark afterimage of something bright.
Last edited by CyranoRox, 1/26/2008, 11:06 am
|
|
1/26/2008, 10:26 am
|
Send Email to CyranoRox
Send PM to CyranoRox
|
Venturous
Consul
Global user
Registered: 06-2006
Location: Swamp Forest
Posts: 2015
Karma: 105 (+105/-0)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
quote: it was not in them, it only came through them
the call of the Muse!
quote: if they are mistaken for the thing itself they turn into dumb idols, breaking the hearts of their worshippers. For they are not the thing itself; they are only the scent of a flower we have not found, the echo of a tune we have not heard, news from a country we have never yet visited.
Maybe this is why I so enjoy a love object who is fictional. he is ever a chimera, smirking as he leads me deeper into the labyrinth, and I will never touch him, but I want him anyway. And in the process of following I will discover flowers not tasted and countries not danced. And I will taste and dance them into life.
---  "There is no certainty, only opportunity." -- V
Venturous on IJ
|
|
1/26/2008, 7:37 pm
|
Send Email to Venturous
Send PM to Venturous
AIM
|
CyranoRox
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: a garret over a moonlit street
Posts: 617
Karma: 44 (+44/-0)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
Who is he when hes at home? Or, dishcovering the riddle.
My attempt at a Wachowski theology, or at least soteriology, with contrasts to Orthodox thought as needed.. I don’t say they believe this themselves; just that the movies can be solved for it. Who but myself is interested in this line of thought, I really don’t know. This is going on the IntoTheWardrobe, a CSLewis site and forum
board, too, since they are interested in theology, and I’d like their thoughts about V.
While V is not quite Matrix IV, thre are continuities and suggestive echoes. If a character appeared who was the joint Neo/Smith [great name for a band], he might well be a victim and villain, and have chosen a style midway between the one’s Jesuitical swirls and the other’s natty tailoring. Cast into the cosmos, in a kenotic amnesia, the world he helped shape, he still has a quarrel with the ARchetect to resolve, that is, the Arch. is still making a living by the voracious violation of volition, as we saw.
In the Matrix, as with many of the stories that move us mythically – LOTR, HP, Star Wars, the hinge of the whole thing is filiation/patriation. Aragorn claims his role as Isuldur’s heir, Harry finds out about James and Lily, Luke finds his father and sister. It often goes unnoticed that Neo finds a mother in the Oracle, a father in the archetect, and a brother [that’s why his first name means twin] in Smith—as dysfunctional as any mythic family need ever be. How the relationship between father and son is broken, repudiated, or restored is critical, because, I think, the culture hates both the allegedly Christian image of an angry father only to be satisfied by the sacrifice of an innocent son, who is then to be openly worshipped but often secretly despised or resented, and the frank pagan image of a father and son at war to the death- Zeus killing Saturn. V, in contrast, denies all filiation—he’s no one’s son, he’s made, not begotten. And one of the last things he intended to do was meet his maker and pay him back in kind.
A few catches: V, like Christ, girds himself with a towel – the apron- to serve. Like Christ, he is discovered, once, making breakfast. Once, he wept. He is "like God": compare to the Biblical "Who is like God?", ie, no one but God is like God. He proposes to repay his maker "in kind", that is, in unity of nature.
Blowing up a building, like the destruction of the Temple, can change the world. Everyone addresses him with the exclamation “jesus Christ” – Prothero, Lilliman, the ugly fingerman, Three of them ask him explicitly for mercy, and he gives incolclusive answers: “spare the rod” – punishment is beneficial – “not tonight” – mercy is deferred, and “never”—reconciliation is always available. Remarkably abstract conversations for a political adventure story.
If V is Christ, who is the enemy? Is that the same as the maker? I rather hope not because a simple son-vanquishes-father ending feels reductive, and tips the imaginary cosmos to the Gnostic. Can it be Creedy? “along came a spider”- another avatar, perhaps. But V has met Creedy once, and the larkhill story, where V was made in one sense, predates Creedy’s entrance. We are meant to read the meeting as the Victoria Station fight, and the paying back [in kind?] as the killing. Quite literally, he meets Sutler, and gives him a rose. Altertinatively, the maker is the transcendant God who does not appear in the story, but this is dissatisfactory because the characters themselves are mythic personages, and a fall into plain vanilla religion cuts that off at the knees.
But it has to mean something. Creedy’s not his maker, though V kills him; Sutler is met, but paid a trifle, the symbol of love, “for the only thing you have left”, that is, life. They gave V roses at larkhill, and he gives one – in kind.
Clearly Sutler has called down vengeance with out mercy on himself, in dramatic irony, and doing it is in Creedy’s line – V always leaves a slim opening for mercy.
In the NT thread, as opposed to the cosmic, Sutler is Caiafas and creedy is a kind of
reverse Judas- who sold him to him—ands ends up hanged.
Two enemies, because the plot entwines two threads, personal/political, or Monte Cristo, and spiritual/cosmic, or vicarious victimhood. V, himself, arranges the events so that the foe from the first destroys the foe fron the second – creedy kills sutler. This leaves V dree to finish the personal revenge plot in killing creedy, revealed as the enemy of the father, bloody handed, whose killing is plainly just. V has spent his life to engineer this revelation and resolution. His death pays no one, yet it was necessary to accomplish his Function of What, whence we are to infer Who, he is.
So their solution is this: the hero so arranges things that the [decayed, senile] ruler, no father, is killed by the enemy, and then kills the enemy. His own death was inevitable in bringing the plot to conclusion, but it also works to release the captives of larkhill – harrowing hell, opening a new world. The insufferable Messias of Milton and the atonement is avoided, but the idea of trampling down death by death is nearly, not quite, embraced. In effect, this reverses the modern trope, as if he said, “you’re no father of mine”. The writers rescue the Son from banality or insipidity by denying that there ever was a father.
Not too bad for a couple of amateur theological thinkers trying to get out of a theomachist bind.
Edit:
Further thought - since Who is a function of What, perhaps the solution to the filiation problem is this: there is one Being, who, as What he does varies, change Who he is among the roles of father and son. Or, in a story, the Son really 'is' the father. In theology, this is an error [according to the Orthodox]. In the WB universe, it's an elegant solution, because the hero need not fight, reconcile with, envy, or obey a father.
/edit
Last edited by CyranoRox, 10/5/2008, 5:28 pm
|
|
3/2/2008, 6:43 pm
|
Send Email to CyranoRox
Send PM to CyranoRox
|
CyranoRox
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: a garret over a moonlit street
Posts: 617
Karma: 44 (+44/-0)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
"All I deserve" - is it true? After all the twists on lies and truth, here arises a Speech Act, performative. "That's not true", Evey tells him - he deserves other and better than violent death. He was not lying: till she speaks, he believes he has done the unforgivable to her, and deserves the death he planned. It's important, because the death will be mere punitive justice if he be right, but, imho, a better justice, a poetic and creative justice, an act of deepest chivalry, if he be wrong.
She, in kissing the mask, forgives him. That changes everything: he goes, not as a criminal to punishment, but as a victim to sacrifice, a hero to conquer the last enemy, ie, death. If he deserves such a death, he gives no gift, but pays a debt. In the theological track, this moves the action from atonement to the idea expressed in the west as 'Christus Victor', not a payment but a battle, not satisfaction of justice but creation of justice.
It happens that I was acquainted with a dotty old woman, in the Russian church, who kissed the icons with an, ahem, fervor, that embarrassed everyone. She was more or less mad, always thinking of marriages, though she was very stricken by age, and dressed like Heidi in braids and dirndls. But that iconic kiss stayed with me.
So, does she love him? I'd say yes, but at so many levels it would be impossible to live out.
As a speech act, her forgiveness makes his action [known to be] forgivable, so, in the moment, his assertion becomes not true. A tip of my hat to John Searle, prof of philosophy. As a twist, she redeems him, reversing usual theology; though, like God, he still gambles on girls.
I'm still finding things to think about and unpack; I've become a steadfast knight....
Work with play the happy differentiation!
|
|
5/26/2008, 7:55 pm
|
Send Email to CyranoRox
Send PM to CyranoRox
|
Doctor Delia
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 06-2006
Posts: 519
Karma: 52 (+53/-1)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
How can V be so sure that he is going to meet a violent death unless he planned to do away with himself
beforehand?
Gee, Cyrano, you make a lot of interesting points (as always) but is suicide really the way of the hero? Self-sacrifice is, but that's not really V's goal, is it?
By bestowing a kiss on V, I agree that Evey forgives him for his "sins" of cruelty and deception towards her, but I don't think she can redeem all that he's done. He's really beyond redemption. Doomed. And they both know it.
He's a monster or at least monstrous, as they all are. Darth Vader, Eric the Phantom...by the third act, it's just too late. Haven't we all been consumed by dark emotions at times? Hasn't the Dark Side seemed more appealing and promising than the old "straight and narrow." Yet like any morality play, the villain must die, and he must die within us as well. The villain is not our enemy, he is us.
Killing off that part of ourselves is a constant process, because the Shadow self can never really be killed. He will emerge from our individual and collective sub-conscious again and again, only changed in form.
The sad part is that without the Dark Side, we are helpless, weak and passive. All humans, even the most obedient and servile know this. With the possible exception of evangelical Christians and Baptists, I don't really think most Christian sects recognize the Dark Side enough. Those Southern religions understand that Ole Debil like no one else.
Evey has a part of him in her by the end of the film, and is presumably a stronger person for it. But the act of killing him off, or in her case, causing him to kill himself off, is painful.
She says at the beginning of the film, that it is not the idea but the man that she misses. But how can she miss (or love) a man who is not really there?
|
|
5/27/2008, 7:37 pm
|
Send Email to Doctor Delia
Send PM to Doctor Delia
|
CyranoRox
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: a garret over a moonlit street
Posts: 617
Karma: 44 (+44/-0)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
'mm, you've gone to the Jung side.
My thinking here goes like this: when he declares himself a Victim, we take that for retro - the Lark hill atrocity. But I'm claiming it for prospective - a planned sacrifice. That's what i meant by saying the Guy Fawkes mask is a kill-me sign. Remember, victim is in 'street' english a weak, hurt, damaged person, defined by what has been done to him; but in older thought, a victim is that which is placed on the altar, killed, offered, accepted by whatever is holy in that arena.
Too late? not for Gordon, not for Valerie - not for Dominic. too late for love? it was never in the cards - or the dominos. [domino/domini is suggestive in this context...]
Monster? well, she says so, and then all but kisses him, but it's another word that has an older, more evocative range. the Griffon in Dante is a monster, having two animal natures, but plainly acting the part of a greater two-natured identity.
V knows he is going to die, because he expects to meet Creedy, armed and attended, to try knives against bullets, as a duel. It tracks the duel between Monte Cristo and Albert, the son of Mercedes- he promises, the night before, to let himself be killed. V4V frames it as a duel, taking literal turns. V does say that he is about to die. In the parallism, his decision to give the decision, and the new world, to Evey - the gift - entails his death. I dont think there was any question of what would happen, but a real question of what it would mean. The possibility of an atonement, or Atonement, is closed; he's not that innocent, but he does not, as she says, deserve what happens- The difference is in his judgement on himself - he is no longer self-condemned as a matter of justice, though he goes to the same fate he chose before.
I would not say that beyond redemption and doomed are the same thing. But you have your keen eye on the split: as villain, he dies; as victim, he - does something else.
She can redeem/forgive their relationship, which is all, as i read it, that V blames himself for. Prothero was marked for poetic justice as soon as he said 'im a Godfearing englishman and I'm God-d@mn proud of it". the last words are "Jesus Holy Christ- it's you!", making [in this theological reading] a moment of dramatic irony and an ambiguous fate. Lilliman's case is still pending, the exchange "Mercy!" - "O, not tonight, Bishop" leaving a postmortem issue. Dr Delia is reconciled. I hate to say it, but the cops don't count.
No, that kiss, completed, is saying 'Un-beast' as in a Saki story - that he not a monster in that sense at all.
I don't follow you about his not really being there. On my reading, he is. On yours, he's a little less than human, being a Dark Side made flesh, or at least fabric and voice.
A revolution without apocatastasis, is a revolution- not worth having!
|
|
5/27/2008, 9:31 pm
|
Send Email to CyranoRox
Send PM to CyranoRox
|
CyranoRox
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: a garret over a moonlit street
Posts: 617
Karma: 44 (+44/-0)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
forgive the bump. just had new thoughts, looking for a place to put them.
V is an eclipse, a perfectly shaped darkness exactly covering a great light. Even I can find the sun a trifle boring, the Sunday tales a little worn; sometimes the daystar loses its grandeur and without dimming somehow becomes the dull light of common day. When you look at the blackness of the moon, suddenly the secondary glory of the sun is revealed - literally: you see the corona, you find the sun interesting again. Nor are you looking away; your gaze is toward the light.
Say I'm all wrong; say V has nothing to do with JC, or is in fact an ironical and hostile comment on Him. Say JC never was, or never what we claimed Him to be.
Then, mes amies paganes, you have had one grand treat, because you have had what I also had: a chance to delight in the Flute of Krishna without any danger of actually running away. You, perhaps, because you don't see any RL direction towards; me, because I've already run off with some Guy who said he conquered the Veniverse. We have been so many Odysseus's tied to our RL masts, able by some gift of fate to hear the Siren song, while others are deaf to it.
..and only I am left to tell thee.
Last edited by CyranoRox, 1/8/2009, 9:01 pm
|
|
1/8/2009, 8:56 pm
|
Send Email to CyranoRox
Send PM to CyranoRox
|
Doctor Delia
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 06-2006
Posts: 519
Karma: 52 (+53/-1)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
Dear Cyrano,
Thanks for bumping up this thread. I, too, had just about given up the ghost, burned out, OD'ed on V.
Like you, I was very happy to play a little on the really really dark side of the street. I didn't want to live there all the time like Alan Moore does, but I was content to look at all of my bad traits (anger, hatred, revenge, etc.) and embrace them in V (and therefore in myself) and in the process develop a greater degree of self-acceptance.
I don't think Jesus Christ himself has those traits (except in the Apocrypha) but He invites us to recognize those sins in ourselves. And He forgives us for them! Of course, this religious loophole should not be abused. It is the both the blessing and the bane of Western thought: our dual nature. If abused it leads to genocide, slavery, oppression, and hypocrisy. But in the proper balance compassion, mental balance, and the mitigation of guilt and shame.
V is peculiar in being a lopsided view of a human being. And I think that's what the best villains are. If filmic V were as awesomely terrible as graphic novel V, then this web site would not exist.
In the past three years we have analyzed this movie every which way we possibly could, but in the process, I think we were analyzing ourselves, really. I think the initial question that most women had was: Why in God's name am I attracted to this guy? What does that say about me? One or two days after this film opened, there were hundred of posts at the Internet Movie Database, mostly from women, astonished and a little embarrassed by the degree of their passion for V, and simultaneously relieved that, no, they were not the only ones in the world who felt this way, and therefore not insane. Obviously there were so many women posting there, that they had to break off to form this site. And what a ride it's been, taking us through literature, mythology, psychology, the visual arts, and to London herself! Meanwhile at imdb, fanboys are still arguing over whether V could kick Spider-Man's ass. Sheesh!
I know this sounds like sayonara, but a funny thing happened on the way to the Church of V. For the first time, I suddenly saw the monster in him and it frightened me. Made me almost nauseous.
I was really desperate for a sequel, which I know will never be made, but I would make one for myself anyway. I was taking lots of art classes, so I would just do my own storyboards and maybe write a little outline. My own little illustrated novella.
I conceived of Evey as a kind of Joan of Arc, and V as her mentor, her Savior, the love of her life. He would haunt and instruct her in dreams and in videotape. (You didn't think he'd leave her without some kind of instruction book, did you? )I needed to do a little research, though.
You suggested Pygmalion, and I would watch all of those movies with that theme. But I also watched all of the movies that were Phantom of the Opera-like, including one called, "The Phantom of the Paradise."
I also looked at clips of a movie on YouTube which Alan Moore has cited as one of the great inspirations for V, "The Abominable Dr. Phibes." And Phibes is a lot like V. He's out for revenge for the death of his wife. He needs to kill the 9 doctors involved in her care and he does it according to nine plagues of the Bible. He lives in a fantastic lair furnished with luxuries. He wears a mask, cape and hood. Dresses in black, and waltzes around his 20's themed ballroom with beautiful chicks with music provided by a mechanical band. Sometimes he play a fantastic pipe organ. Despite the beauty, black humor, and quirkiness of the film it is one of the most horrific ever made. If you love V, don't watch it!!!
The effect of watching "Dr. Phibes" and "Phantom of the Paradise" was like what they did to Alex in "A Clockwork Orange." Every time I even thought of V, I experienced horror and revulsion, mixed with a little nausea.
Because now I know (on a visceral level) what a monster V truly is. I'm glad that mask never came off, as it does in "Dr. Phibes." The mask is what protects us from V. We can only sense that monster indirectly by looking at Evey's reactions. We can never know what V himself sees in the mirror, and it is the mystery of not knowing that hooks us.
I'm hoping the effect is only temporary. I mean, even Evey experienced waves of nostalgia for her creepy "friend" and eventually came back to him, but for now I am packing up my action figures in cotton and mothballs and moving on to other things.
I'll continue to drop in from time to time because I thing y'all are terrific, but V needs to take a long nap in the depths of my subconcious until it's safe for him to come out and play again.
Last edited by Doctor Delia, 1/19/2009, 4:59 pm
|
|
1/10/2009, 8:36 am
|
Send Email to Doctor Delia
Send PM to Doctor Delia
|
CyranoRox
VEEK
Global user
Registered: 05-2006
Location: a garret over a moonlit street
Posts: 617
Karma: 44 (+44/-0)

|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The erotic dynamics of alliteration, or why it felt that way.
Dear doctor, this eclipse was bound to pass
The spheres have more to do than wait on us
We get over things; that’s the tragedy.
We cry, Stay! Thou who art so dark.
Perhaps it does; we are moved away.
Behind us, the starlit moment lingers.
All I can tell you is this: it was
All poets know this; wan awakings
cold morning, disillusion, chilly dawns
litter the pages. Scenes that took me in
I cannot reenter. The fourth wall is closed.
No space to stand; no freehold was granted.
All I can tell you is this: I did.
It was a garden gate you used to open
But now it’s flatly painted on a wall
We walked in moondark, elect, fearless
No wonder people rolled their eyes at us
We've not a rose to show for't, not a thorn.
All I can tell you is this: we were.
Dear doctor, the eclipse will come again.
/minor edits/
Last edited by CyranoRox, 1/16/2009, 7:49 pm
|
|
1/14/2009, 1:51 pm
|
Send Email to CyranoRox
Send PM to CyranoRox
|
Add a reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Powered by AkBBS 0.9.5b - Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
Click here to get your own free message board
|
You are not logged in (login)
Board's time is: 11/26/2009, 5:02 am
|
|
|