0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :- Fascism, then and now, 31 May 2003
Author:
Keith Hart (hart_keith) from Paris, France
I saw this movie only recently on video, while I am spending three months
in
the USA.. I have been coming here for thirty years and I am a great fan
of
this mysterious society and its warm people. Lately, I have been
disturbed
by a discernible shift to autocracy, even brutality in public life at
home
and abroad. Much of this is justified as the need for security in
response
to "terrorism". We all depend on impersonal society, call it law,
bureaucracy, the market or whatever. And the quality of face-to-face
interaction with other human beings is still our measure of the standards
we
set for personal society. The balance between the two is a thin line we
tread daily. Personal society can mean feudalism or criminal mafias and
no-one wants that, whatever we may think about the tendency of
bureaucrats
to trample on simple human interests.
The other day I left my wife crying at the airport where her personal
goods
had been systematically ripped apart by officials claiming to be just
following orders. She said she had never been treated that way in the
Soviet
Union. There is no question that people who travel through US airports
these
days expose themselves to harassment and humiliating treatment that would
have been unthinkable two years ago. All in the name of security, of
course.
Black young men have suffered much worse from the police for much longer.
But it does seem as if American society could be sliding imperceptibly
towards instituted inhumanity of a sort we once called fascism. The
present
government's indifference to law, whether in Iraq, at Guantanamo or in
the
domestic detention of suspects, and its apparent ability to lie with
impunity merely reinforce the impression that we are witnessing something
new here or perhaps rather something old that we thought we put behind us
after 1945.
These thought were brought to life and made relative by watching The
Pianist. The first half of the movie is harrowing. It shows a decent
middle
class family shuffling down the slippery slope to destruction by a
fascist
society that had trained some of its members to behave with the most
callous
brutality imaginable. At every step, normal people could doubt the
plausibility of what was happening to them. By the time they tried to
resist, it was too late. The second half is a chase whose outcome is
already known (it wouldn't be a movie if the hero died before the end).
This
reduces the suspense and contributes to a feeling that the film lasts too
long. The main character and his relationships don't develop at all in a
protracted sequence marked by historical dates, the Warsaw uprising, the
arrival of the Russians and so on. But the movie did provide a useful way
of
placing disparate phenomena along a continuum we might label 'fascist'.
Could I claim that roughing up the belongings of a French woman with a
baby
at the airport is analogous to picking eight men out of a line at random
and
shooting them in the head? My answer was and is Yes. Because Nazism
started
out with the acquiescence of ordinary people in brutality that escalated
imperceptibly over time. And because all nationalisms are implicitly a
racist assertion of superiority over foreigners who lack any claim to
human
rights.The critique has to start with the inhumanity of normal society --
harassed women slapping kids in supermarkets, men in their 50s being
thrown
on the scrap heap because the terms of trade dictate it, a teenager being
strip searched because she fits a drug runner's profile. I think this
makes
me a liberal, as does the belief that we can't return to the Warsaw
ghetto
or the Gulag, not that far. Why so? We are witnessing an attempt to put
the
lid on a popular uprising that was continuous since 1945 and peaked in
the
90s. The resistance is not obvious today because people are fearful about
losing more than they think they can afford to. And they are right to be
afraid. But I don't think the repressive classes can get away with as
much
as they did in mid-century. And here I rely on the classic liberal idea,
that people know too much these days.
So I wonder what this fine movie provokes in the minds of the audience:
that
this couldn't happen to us again or that it could, if we forget the
history
it brings alive for us.
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv scheduleAwards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summaryplot synopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotesFun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsnews articlesPromotional
taglinestrailers and videospostersphoto galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsIMDb user comments for
The Pianist (2002)
0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Fascism, then and now, 31 May 2003
Author: Keith Hart (hart_keith) from Paris, France
I saw this movie only recently on video, while I am spending three months in the USA.. I have been coming here for thirty years and I am a great fan of this mysterious society and its warm people. Lately, I have been disturbed by a discernible shift to autocracy, even brutality in public life at home and abroad. Much of this is justified as the need for security in response to "terrorism". We all depend on impersonal society, call it law, bureaucracy, the market or whatever. And the quality of face-to-face interaction with other human beings is still our measure of the standards we set for personal society. The balance between the two is a thin line we tread daily. Personal society can mean feudalism or criminal mafias and no-one wants that, whatever we may think about the tendency of bureaucrats to trample on simple human interests.
The other day I left my wife crying at the airport where her personal goods had been systematically ripped apart by officials claiming to be just following orders. She said she had never been treated that way in the Soviet Union. There is no question that people who travel through US airports these days expose themselves to harassment and humiliating treatment that would have been unthinkable two years ago. All in the name of security, of course. Black young men have suffered much worse from the police for much longer. But it does seem as if American society could be sliding imperceptibly towards instituted inhumanity of a sort we once called fascism. The present government's indifference to law, whether in Iraq, at Guantanamo or in the domestic detention of suspects, and its apparent ability to lie with impunity merely reinforce the impression that we are witnessing something new here or perhaps rather something old that we thought we put behind us after 1945.
These thought were brought to life and made relative by watching The Pianist. The first half of the movie is harrowing. It shows a decent middle class family shuffling down the slippery slope to destruction by a fascist society that had trained some of its members to behave with the most callous brutality imaginable. At every step, normal people could doubt the plausibility of what was happening to them. By the time they tried to resist, it was too late. The second half is a chase whose outcome is already known (it wouldn't be a movie if the hero died before the end). This reduces the suspense and contributes to a feeling that the film lasts too long. The main character and his relationships don't develop at all in a protracted sequence marked by historical dates, the Warsaw uprising, the arrival of the Russians and so on. But the movie did provide a useful way of placing disparate phenomena along a continuum we might label 'fascist'.
Could I claim that roughing up the belongings of a French woman with a baby at the airport is analogous to picking eight men out of a line at random and shooting them in the head? My answer was and is Yes. Because Nazism started out with the acquiescence of ordinary people in brutality that escalated imperceptibly over time. And because all nationalisms are implicitly a racist assertion of superiority over foreigners who lack any claim to human rights.The critique has to start with the inhumanity of normal society -- harassed women slapping kids in supermarkets, men in their 50s being thrown on the scrap heap because the terms of trade dictate it, a teenager being strip searched because she fits a drug runner's profile. I think this makes me a liberal, as does the belief that we can't return to the Warsaw ghetto or the Gulag, not that far. Why so? We are witnessing an attempt to put the lid on a popular uprising that was continuous since 1945 and peaked in the 90s. The resistance is not obvious today because people are fearful about losing more than they think they can afford to. And they are right to be afraid. But I don't think the repressive classes can get away with as much as they did in mid-century. And here I rely on the classic liberal idea, that people know too much these days.
So I wonder what this fine movie provokes in the minds of the audience: that this couldn't happen to us again or that it could, if we forget the history it brings alive for us.
615 comments in total
Add another comment
Related Links