First day on the Blog
Okay, so it's another blog. Whoopde-do, right?
Well, not necessarily.
So, what'll we talk about?
How about Vendetta?
I haven't seen it yet, but I have read the book. For those who've been living in Sadaam's vacated hole in the ground, it's a little controversial. It's from the 80s, and it's about a future England, post-nuclear war. They managed to avoid being a target themselves because the Labour party was voted in in the early 80s and had all American nukes removed from their soil.
So, they didn't end up a charred cinder, but they're not too happy.
The story (book) takes place in 1997-98, when England is a totalitarian state. Think Nazis with Benny Hill voices.
Like any little dystopia, it's not exactly a happy place. Secret police, gays and minorities pretty much done away with years ago, lots of white supremecist stuff used as prime-time entertainment.
People aren't doing too well financially. Some of the scummiest people make it into positions of authority and power, including the head of the Church of England (has a thing for young girls. I'm not talking what-a-hottie young, I'm talking omigod-you-sick-bastard young).
And into this little dystopia comes our man V. Wearing a Guy Fawkes mask (tred to blow up Parliament, just check the story on the wikipedia, they have everything), he starts his career by blowing up a few government buildings. So yeah, he's a terrorist.
And here we get into the meat of the controversy. This is why there are plenty of people who instantly find themselves opposed and disgusted by the very idea. This is why people hear a vague description, and think it's some "liberal movie out to bash the troops and hurt America."
Yes, he's a terrorist - but we're not talking some white supremecist so bananas he thinks the government stuck a microchip up his butt because they're so interested in him. Nor is he some fanatical Muslim (or Christian - yes, boys and girls, there are such things, and while not as extreme as their Muslim cousins, some would like to be).
This is a terrorist who's fighting a totalitarian regime. Kind of like the underground during WWII. Yes, he blows up government buildings. Yes, he kills members of the government. Yes, he's trying to bring down the government. Yes, he's a terrorist.
But he's a terrorist fighting _for_ freedom, not against it. He kills those responsible for the regime's power, not civilians.
So - is he a villian or a hero?
Here's my take on it.
While this story takes place in a future England (much as 1984 did), it is more just the story of how bad things can get in any country whose people let those in power strip away their liberties in the name of fear and protection. England just happens to be the location of the story.
Those who take offense at the idea of a film in which a terrorist is a hero seem to forget something:
He's a terrorist if he's fighting against you. He's a hero if he's fighting for you.
Forget current events for a moment. These days, it's easy to hear "terrorist" and think of some snarling Arab with a scraggly beard and a big towel on his head (hey, let's face it, that's the mental image. Usually bears a striking resemblance to Bin Laden. Or a Klingon. Or Bin Laden as a Klingon. Hmmm. We may have the plot for the next Star Trek movie), and therefore be immediately repulsed, given the losses the US, Britain and others have had at the hands of such people.
Forget all that and put yourself in the story. You are living in a totalitarian state, at least as bad as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or 1984's Oceania. You have no freedom, no rights. You can be made to disappear with a phone call. You have nothing to look forward to except a stark, mediocre existence and the possibility that your children, brainwashed by the state, will one day turn you in for some comment you made in the privacy of your own home
You have secret police, corruption everywhere, people of wealth and power who hold onto it by supporting this regime. And you’re old enough to recall when it was different, and you absolutely despise what’s become of the country you love, and the people who made or allowed it to happen.
If someone starts blowing up the buildings (yes, even with people in them) of this corrupt and criminal government, will you complain? If someone starts killing off the people in power who support the regime, will you complain? If someone offers the hope that one day the tyrants will be dead and gone, and you will live in a free country again, will you complain? And if he offers you a gun, or a bomb, will you turn it down?
You might want to think about that, the next time you claim this is "anti-American," or the next time you complain about the terrorist while ignoring the tyrant. This story is anti-tyranny. And it is also a warning:
A warning to the citizens, not to give away too much.
And a warning to those in power or who wish to someday be in power, to watch your step. Because the rest of us are watching your steps, too.
Well, not necessarily.
So, what'll we talk about?
How about Vendetta?
I haven't seen it yet, but I have read the book. For those who've been living in Sadaam's vacated hole in the ground, it's a little controversial. It's from the 80s, and it's about a future England, post-nuclear war. They managed to avoid being a target themselves because the Labour party was voted in in the early 80s and had all American nukes removed from their soil.
So, they didn't end up a charred cinder, but they're not too happy.
The story (book) takes place in 1997-98, when England is a totalitarian state. Think Nazis with Benny Hill voices.
Like any little dystopia, it's not exactly a happy place. Secret police, gays and minorities pretty much done away with years ago, lots of white supremecist stuff used as prime-time entertainment.
People aren't doing too well financially. Some of the scummiest people make it into positions of authority and power, including the head of the Church of England (has a thing for young girls. I'm not talking what-a-hottie young, I'm talking omigod-you-sick-bastard young).
And into this little dystopia comes our man V. Wearing a Guy Fawkes mask (tred to blow up Parliament, just check the story on the wikipedia, they have everything), he starts his career by blowing up a few government buildings. So yeah, he's a terrorist.
And here we get into the meat of the controversy. This is why there are plenty of people who instantly find themselves opposed and disgusted by the very idea. This is why people hear a vague description, and think it's some "liberal movie out to bash the troops and hurt America."
Yes, he's a terrorist - but we're not talking some white supremecist so bananas he thinks the government stuck a microchip up his butt because they're so interested in him. Nor is he some fanatical Muslim (or Christian - yes, boys and girls, there are such things, and while not as extreme as their Muslim cousins, some would like to be).
This is a terrorist who's fighting a totalitarian regime. Kind of like the underground during WWII. Yes, he blows up government buildings. Yes, he kills members of the government. Yes, he's trying to bring down the government. Yes, he's a terrorist.
But he's a terrorist fighting _for_ freedom, not against it. He kills those responsible for the regime's power, not civilians.
So - is he a villian or a hero?
Here's my take on it.
While this story takes place in a future England (much as 1984 did), it is more just the story of how bad things can get in any country whose people let those in power strip away their liberties in the name of fear and protection. England just happens to be the location of the story.
Those who take offense at the idea of a film in which a terrorist is a hero seem to forget something:
He's a terrorist if he's fighting against you. He's a hero if he's fighting for you.
Forget current events for a moment. These days, it's easy to hear "terrorist" and think of some snarling Arab with a scraggly beard and a big towel on his head (hey, let's face it, that's the mental image. Usually bears a striking resemblance to Bin Laden. Or a Klingon. Or Bin Laden as a Klingon. Hmmm. We may have the plot for the next Star Trek movie), and therefore be immediately repulsed, given the losses the US, Britain and others have had at the hands of such people.
Forget all that and put yourself in the story. You are living in a totalitarian state, at least as bad as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or 1984's Oceania. You have no freedom, no rights. You can be made to disappear with a phone call. You have nothing to look forward to except a stark, mediocre existence and the possibility that your children, brainwashed by the state, will one day turn you in for some comment you made in the privacy of your own home
You have secret police, corruption everywhere, people of wealth and power who hold onto it by supporting this regime. And you’re old enough to recall when it was different, and you absolutely despise what’s become of the country you love, and the people who made or allowed it to happen.
If someone starts blowing up the buildings (yes, even with people in them) of this corrupt and criminal government, will you complain? If someone starts killing off the people in power who support the regime, will you complain? If someone offers the hope that one day the tyrants will be dead and gone, and you will live in a free country again, will you complain? And if he offers you a gun, or a bomb, will you turn it down?
You might want to think about that, the next time you claim this is "anti-American," or the next time you complain about the terrorist while ignoring the tyrant. This story is anti-tyranny. And it is also a warning:
A warning to the citizens, not to give away too much.
And a warning to those in power or who wish to someday be in power, to watch your step. Because the rest of us are watching your steps, too.
posted by Nightfly | 8:20 AM
|
1 comments
