The squealing and drooling over Rob Pattinson's back makes one wonder what women and teens are turning into. As Jean Baudrillard says: Children are carrying the virus of the future. Does that go for teens and pre and post menopausal women? I didn't mention all the younger women with husbands and children nor those hoping for the same. Now his back has been added to the fetish collection. Even guys weren't this bad over Marilyn's tits and ass.
The cinema today: end or impossibility of ending? Most current films, through the bloody drift of their content, the weakness of their plots and their technological trumpery - useless high-tech - reveal an extraordinary contempt on the part of the film-makers for the tools of their own trade, for their own profession: a supreme contempt for the image itself, which is prostituted to any special effect whatsoever; and consequently, contempt for the viewer, who is called upon to figure as important voyeur of this prostitution of images, of this promiscuity of all forms beneath the alibi of violence. There is in fact no real violence in this, nothing of the theatre of cruelty, but merely a second-level irony, the knowing wink of quotation, which no longer has anything to do with cinematic culture, but derives from the resentment that culture feels for itself, that culture which precisely cannot manage to come to an end and is becoming infinitely debased - a debasement being raised to the power of an aesthetic and spiritual commodity, bitter and obsolescent, which we consume as a 'work of art' with the same complicity with which we savour the debasement of the political class. The sabotaging of the image by the image professionals is akin to the sabotaging of the political by the politicians themselves. (Baudrillard, Fragments p117)
This is why Rob Pattinson said yes to Cronenberg right away.
Are these complicit fans the fans Pattinson wants? Are these fans the fans Pattinson deserves? What order of fans does Pattinson himself desire?
The cinema today: end or impossibility of ending? Most current films, through the bloody drift of their content, the weakness of their plots and their technological trumpery - useless high-tech - reveal an extraordinary contempt on the part of the film-makers for the tools of their own trade, for their own profession: a supreme contempt for the image itself, which is prostituted to any special effect whatsoever; and consequently, contempt for the viewer, who is called upon to figure as important voyeur of this prostitution of images, of this promiscuity of all forms beneath the alibi of violence. There is in fact no real violence in this, nothing of the theatre of cruelty, but merely a second-level irony, the knowing wink of quotation, which no longer has anything to do with cinematic culture, but derives from the resentment that culture feels for itself, that culture which precisely cannot manage to come to an end and is becoming infinitely debased - a debasement being raised to the power of an aesthetic and spiritual commodity, bitter and obsolescent, which we consume as a 'work of art' with the same complicity with which we savour the debasement of the political class. The sabotaging of the image by the image professionals is akin to the sabotaging of the political by the politicians themselves. (Baudrillard, Fragments p117)
This is why Rob Pattinson said yes to Cronenberg right away.
Are these complicit fans the fans Pattinson wants? Are these fans the fans Pattinson deserves? What order of fans does Pattinson himself desire?
Do you want more? Do you want different? Do you want every little banal gesture he makes? Maybe we can see him pick his nose? Eat some cake? Ruffle his hair for the zillionth time? Squat? Open a car door? Smile at someone? Frown at someone? Rub his eye?
This is conspicuous consumption. His digital code is global. Rob images circulate like the numbers on Eric Packer's screens. At what point will Rob images implode? Which image will be the one to bring on the implosion? Which dollar of Eric Packer's was the one that started the implosion of the yen?
Are you understanding Cosmopolis yet? DeLillo means what he writes you know.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Be kind to each other even when you disagree.