posted on Jan, 19 2010 @ 04:32 AM
Generally, I avoid double posts, but since my previous message, Thermo Klein has honored me as a respected foe.
I had written what follows yesterday, anticipating a reply in the thread itself. Since we have established that no real violence occurs in the subject
video, it is proper to explore what is actually depicted there.
You said what you got out of the film. Here's what I get.
We see that this boy is growing up without a father. That is a touchy subject in the never-relaxed American dialog between races. But it is faced
squarely here, neither sensationalized nor denied.
While his mother can request that the boy "play nicely," it is likely that a father would better be able to instruct the boy about the proper
expression of his masculinity. While this man is obviously not ideal, he is a genuine candidate to function as the father whom the boy lacks.
First, however, the man needs to lose his self-absorbed and on-the-prowl persona. For that to happen, spiritual growth needs to occur. The
sooner, the better.
The mother exits, to attend to nurturing life (to place the flowers she has received in water), female generativeness, leaving man and boy to enact
the male mysteries. Immediately, the child drops his toy, putting away childish things, thereby announcing that he will be the initiator and
hierophant in what is to come.
And hierophant he is. The slap, of course, is immediately recognized as an archetypal symbol of sudden enlightenment, of epiphany. And its use here is
as a contrasting example for that proper expression of masculinity which the boy needs to learn, and which the man, if enlightened, can teach him.
The boy states plainly what the man must learn: to respect the person of the boy's mother and the good order of their household. In doing so, the boy
exemplifies and personifies what the man must become: the "man of the house."
However, we do not know whether the man's enlightenment will take hold. It is a good sign that the man does not react to his initiation. We can thus
be sure that his mask is gone, but the question is whether it is gone permanently.
The final moments are given over to the return of the mother, as a disembodied voice. Thus, at least for now, the man must confront her not in her
carnal aspect, but as the mother complement to his father candidacy.
She has the last word, and uses it to ask the vital question, has her son "played nicely," that is, succeeded in precipitating the expansion of
consciousness by which this man can assume his proper role in the eternal drama of life.
She receives no answer. Only time will tell.
I believe that we need more, not less, sociologically valid and psychologically well-founded self-examination in American public life. I am surprised
that someone about to receive a master's in psychology would either disagree, or else have had only a surface reaction to what is portrayed in the
Pass those Doritos, please.