I can not miss the opportunity to publish this post on the day of the Epiphany, the last chance given to children who do not go too well at Christmas, to see how good they are now in the week between one and another. The inspiration comes from my
white ribbon, and literary influences of the Lord of the Flies , my favorite book for years that came to my mind immediately after the movie.
The point is, in my opinion: why adults continue to see the film - or to wear - white ribbons to children (a symbol of purity and innocence), they are real or metaphorical? And why at the same time those same adults are violent, liars, selfish, incestuous? And because children are - sembrano stare - al gioco?
Se non fosse stato necessario porsi la prima domanda, si sarebbe di sicuro risolta parte della trama. Se Michael Haneke non avesse sapientemente focalizzato il meccanismo deresponsabilizzante degli adulti che delegano la realizzzione di quanto è buono e puro agli adulti di domani (pur sempre radicati nell'oggi!), non ci porremmo la seconda. Se sforzarsi di corrispondere alle aspettative non fosse comportamento comune ai giovani esseri umani ancora dipendenti dagli adulti da cui, buoni o cattivi che siano, introiettano l'immagine di sè non ci porremmo la terza.
Il fatto è, e qui vengo all'intuizione letteraria di Golding , che all'immagine socialmente diffusa dell'infazia privileged status as pervaded by the condition of absolute goodness and innocence is no specific ontological condition of actual, absolute goodness. So there is nothing to "save", nor anything that can be "corrupted" by the growth or after entering the adult world.
I'll say more. While Golding's pessimism about the "special" status of children and adolescents may seem exaggerated, there is no denying, widening from a single age group to the human being in general, the presence of what is commonly called good and what is commonly called bad (see this paper about ). Simply the magnitude and manifestation of one and / or the other vary depending on a number of factors, including, thinking as a function of 'age, there is also the experience.
There are so many possibilities in our behavior, some simply defined good, some bad defined. This should be taught to children, no less intelligent than adults, but simply less experienced employees of life and therefore the adults themselves, they can not do without the filter of those who constantly educates them and gives them an example not only to interpret reality, but also himself (remember the importance of the fact meta conveyed, attraverso il non verbale , con i messaggi impliciti).
Come avviene allora il passaggio, stavolta non agli occhi della società, ma nella mente dei piccoli adulti, dal fare delle cose cattive ad essere (o meglio: sentirsi) cattivi dentro ( alias : uno dei dilemmi a mio avviso lasciati in sospeso dal film)?
Ecco, se stesse a me progettarne il sequel , coglierei la ghiotta opportunità per rigirare l'intero film, scena dopo scena, non in funzione della trama complessiva che emerge (anzi, sembra emergere, direi), ma ricostruendo su modello dell' analisi transazionale , personaggio dopo character, the various scripts of life ... between parents regulatory variants of the "persecutor" (ie a reference point that such rules, prohibitions and judgments but not in the protective function) and adapted children submissive or rebels might not even be born a pearl film but they certainly take a substantial educational material ... Often understand what is behind reality can discern them more important than reality itself. In this sense, for me there is no open-ended: we see enough to guess why all that may remain outstanding.
And now, ugly bambini cattivi, finite il vostro carbone!
white ribbon, and literary influences of the Lord of the Flies , my favorite book for years that came to my mind immediately after the movie.
The point is, in my opinion: why adults continue to see the film - or to wear - white ribbons to children (a symbol of purity and innocence), they are real or metaphorical? And why at the same time those same adults are violent, liars, selfish, incestuous? And because children are - sembrano stare - al gioco?
Se non fosse stato necessario porsi la prima domanda, si sarebbe di sicuro risolta parte della trama. Se Michael Haneke non avesse sapientemente focalizzato il meccanismo deresponsabilizzante degli adulti che delegano la realizzzione di quanto è buono e puro agli adulti di domani (pur sempre radicati nell'oggi!), non ci porremmo la seconda. Se sforzarsi di corrispondere alle aspettative non fosse comportamento comune ai giovani esseri umani ancora dipendenti dagli adulti da cui, buoni o cattivi che siano, introiettano l'immagine di sè non ci porremmo la terza.
Il fatto è, e qui vengo all'intuizione letteraria di Golding , che all'immagine socialmente diffusa dell'infazia privileged status as pervaded by the condition of absolute goodness and innocence is no specific ontological condition of actual, absolute goodness. So there is nothing to "save", nor anything that can be "corrupted" by the growth or after entering the adult world.
I'll say more. While Golding's pessimism about the "special" status of children and adolescents may seem exaggerated, there is no denying, widening from a single age group to the human being in general, the presence of what is commonly called good and what is commonly called bad (see this paper about ). Simply the magnitude and manifestation of one and / or the other vary depending on a number of factors, including, thinking as a function of 'age, there is also the experience.
There are so many possibilities in our behavior, some simply defined good, some bad defined. This should be taught to children, no less intelligent than adults, but simply less experienced employees of life and therefore the adults themselves, they can not do without the filter of those who constantly educates them and gives them an example not only to interpret reality, but also himself (remember the importance of the fact meta conveyed, attraverso il non verbale , con i messaggi impliciti).
Come avviene allora il passaggio, stavolta non agli occhi della società, ma nella mente dei piccoli adulti, dal fare delle cose cattive ad essere (o meglio: sentirsi) cattivi dentro ( alias : uno dei dilemmi a mio avviso lasciati in sospeso dal film)?
Ecco, se stesse a me progettarne il sequel , coglierei la ghiotta opportunità per rigirare l'intero film, scena dopo scena, non in funzione della trama complessiva che emerge (anzi, sembra emergere, direi), ma ricostruendo su modello dell' analisi transazionale , personaggio dopo character, the various scripts of life ... between parents regulatory variants of the "persecutor" (ie a reference point that such rules, prohibitions and judgments but not in the protective function) and adapted children submissive or rebels might not even be born a pearl film but they certainly take a substantial educational material ... Often understand what is behind reality can discern them more important than reality itself. In this sense, for me there is no open-ended: we see enough to guess why all that may remain outstanding.
And now, ugly bambini cattivi, finite il vostro carbone!
0 comments:
Post a Comment