Comedy might not be Loach’s forte. But there is splendid unintentional humour in this class warrior standing up at a dinner sponsored by large corporations to denounce the Government that pays him so handsomely to keep churning out his Marxist drivel.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Sticking it to Ken LoachFebruary 15th, 2017 |
 32 comments to Sticking it to Ken Loach |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
“… we are with the people.”
Uh-huh.
The trouble with you, Loach, is that just because you have succeeded in inducing a handful of half-wits to disfigure the cinema with grim, depressing movies, you think you’re someone. You win pointless awards and you imagine it is the Voice of the People. That is where you make your bloomer. What the Voice of the People is saying is, “Look at that frightful ass Loach, swanning about at the BAFTAs! Did you ever in your puff see such a perfect perisher?”
It’s probable that Ken Loach is a good director (I say this because I have never seen his films, but people who seek them out seem to value them, so he is clearly directing them in a way to appeal to his audience). We should probably allow this fact.
But we should also wherever possible publicise him, as he is not going to win people over to his cause, any more than a Holywood star is going to do so. Because they are making art, and art reflects what is going on, not, despite its pretensions, causes things to happen. Speaking as a historian, I have yet to see any evidence of any art doing anything more revolutionary than causing a riot. And I have never seen a movement caused by a film – I have seen a lot of films aimed at movements though. Whilst I don’t think people dislike directors and actors telling them what to think any more than they dislike taxi drivers, politicians or me (probably less than me – all the others use a lot less parantheses…), I don’t think they are any more effective either. Mind you, the people who like Mr Loach’s films are generally the sort that somehow believe the Sun wins elections, rather than predicts them, so will happily think talking down to people achieves change…
Ken Loach is a dismal cunt.
“Look at that frightful ass Loach, swanning about at the BAFTAs! Did you ever in your puff see such a perfect perisher?”
What a delightful collection of British (or is it Scottish?) colloquialisms!
Ken Loach is not completely without sense of humour. I saw him trending on twitter and wrote the following:
One person ‘liked’ the tweet. It was Ken Loach 😆
I believe “Guernica” and “Napalm Girl” caused definite shifts in public opinion. This might be considered impact, rather than revolutionary, though.
Ellen,
Guernica I am not sure about causing an immediate shift in public opinion – it was controversial, and I suspect almost all of those affected by it initially were actually already of an opinion about the Spanish Civil War. Certainly if you look at the early display history (courtsey of Wikipedia) then the groups promoting it were generally supporters of the Republican cause.
Napalm girl is not art but journalism which can make a difference (albeit with difficulty), but was published at a time when public (and government) opinion was that the US should come out of Vietnam anyway (by 1972 Nixon was heading for his second term, and the war was being wound down), so it might be said to reflect rather than alter the mood.
Both works might make a proviso to my statement worthwhile though – art can crystalise the views of a movement, so appear to represent changes that are happening (or the aspirations of a group that are unable to make changes – here’s where Mr Loach fits in). I cannot see any cases where a movement started because of a piece of art and caused change. Artists like to think they are important because they create, but forget that they are just producers at the whim of the market (and yes, I suspect there is a market for Ken Loach).
Sam Duncan was re-writing some lines by the greatest English writer of wit and humour ever, namely PG Wodehouse, originally directed at amateur dictator Roderick Spode and his Fascist organisation, the Black Shorts…
In his own mind he may think of himself as an inside agent; fomenting revolution from the belly of The Beast. Like so many other such types, he’s not a rebel against the system, but a luxury made possible by it.
I’ve never seen a film by Ken Loach, but I am a BIG fan of parentheses 😉
Indeed, RAB. I thought the link was a bit of a giveaway. 🙂
Thanks, RAB. I’m a Wodehouse fan, but haven’t read that one. And Sam, sorry for missing that; I just didn’t associate the link at the beginning of your post (which obviously I didn’t click) with the quote at the end of it. My bad.
(And Wh00ps, I join you in your appreciation of parentheses!)
Yes sorry Sam, I didn’t click on the link either… feeling very red faced here.
“Comedy might not be Loach’s forte.”
Oh, that’s nothing!
In the US we have this guy called Al Frankin……
O/T, but for the record:
“Napalm Girl” has a very shoddy journalistic history. That American forces dropped the napalm that hit nine-year-old Kim Phúc and her village is balderdash long since exposed. For instance, in Session 11 of the 2004 conference “Examining the Myths of the Vietnam War,” a transcription of reporter Charles Wiley’s remarks on “Culpability of the Media” says:
http://www.viet-myths.net/ Click Session 11; Click Transcript. (The .wmv video file seems no longer to play on my system.)
.
Or, here are excerpts from the 1999 article “The Fraud behind the Girl in the Photo,” by Ronald Timberlake,
At the bottom of the page, there’s information about the author:
http://www.ndqsa.com/myth.html
NOTE: The site features memoirs by various Vietnam vets. The home page (delete all after com/) has some interesting articles.
.
And lest we remain believers in the Myth, here is the Great Foot its own self:
and see the photos on the right side.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phan_Thi_Kim_Phuc
Perry de Havilland (London), February 15, 2017 at 5:07 pm: “Ken Loach is not completely without sense of humour. I saw him trending on twitter and wrote the following: ‘For a brief moment when I saw “Ken Loach” trending, I felt a surge of exhilaration… But sadly it was not what I had hoped 😉’ One person ‘liked’ the tweet. It was Ken Loach 😆
Perry, I would agree with you if I could feel sure that Ken had grasped your meaning when he clicked ‘like’. I will agree with you if you have any evidence that he did. (The egotistical can miss the obvious and instead assume the vain.)
I wish I could be so cheerful about it as Harry.
The sickening hypocrisy of Ken Loach and co make me spit blood.
Correct Julie.
And very well presented.
You defend the truth – this makes you the sworn enemy of Ken Loach and all the vermin who applaud him.
:>))
Captain, when you name celebrities and stupid politicians, please don’t omit half their names. It hurts their feewings.
That would be Al FrankenSTEIN. An acquaintance I believe of Mrs. Shelley.
[Just teasing. 😉 ]
Well, don’t blame me. I have no idea. 🙁 If some powerful soul wants to delete one of ’em, my feewings won’t be at all hurt.
Thank you Julie. Tried that line once at a gathering of our clan. Was massively shouted down. I’m the “black Sheep”, the Uncle reluctantly countenanced. They would not hear anything that ran contrary to their received wisdom. They were unwilling to investigate further. They all have university degrees.
Having worked (albeit as a technician/manager)for a lifetime(40 yrs and at times it felt like several lifetimes) in “The Arts” my considered opinion is that they don’t matter a tinker’s damn except to those individual rentiers dependent on the largess of a small proportion of the population, some corporate support and many layers of government support. I know, I was one of them. The scales began to fall from my eyes as the flush of youth and enthusiasm diminished. But it took a while.
YVW. I’m still fighting the V-N War, y’see.
All those polls saying how glad we were when it was Over. The Fall of Saigon. Yeah? I had the feeling that there was a hush of mourning over our land.
The Fall of Saigon. If ever there was nothing to cheer, it was that.
.
Moving on. I’ll see your Confused and raise you two Old Misfits! LOL
I agree with Paul, Julie. Handsomely done. 🙂
Thank you, Cristina. :>))
Julie, you are correct about napalm girl (and I already knew it). But whatever the objective reality, the picture and the story built around it had impact.
Loach is in good company, I recall ex Arts Council Chair Dame Forgan who complained about arts funding at her £8,000 taxpayer funded “leaving party”.
Julie,
So, ok, the napalm was dropped by South Vietnamese planes rather than by US planes.
But the SV Air Force was equipped, trained and coordinated by the US.
And, as far as I could check, the NYTimes always wrote it was the South Vietnamese.
As an illustration of the horrors of war, the photo was correct, it doesn’t matter very much who exactly dropped the bombs.
I would say, there are bigger lies out there worth exposing.
@ Sam Duncan – as one who fancies a bit of parody now and again, fine work, sir, fine work. Nicely done.
llater,
llamas
Ellen, you are certainly correct that the photo and the subsequently-dreamed-up, and widely publicized, “history” have had great effect. That is why it’s so important to present the truth at every opportunity, even if it isn’t directly “on topic.”
. . .
Jacob,
Quite. It’s heartbreaking, in fact, and also frightening in the extreme.
As to the rest: Every lie involving the actions and reputations of people most of whom are trying to do the right thing is worth exposing and then some. This one is more egregious than some others, because of the existence of honest reporting of the facts at the time.
.
Sigh … From Mr. Timberlake’s article, as linked above:
Which is an important, and correct, point.
However, to argue (by implication) that the American forces were ultimately responsible for the event because they had in the past advised and helped to train ARVN forces, is the same as arguing that it’s on the head of the drug company that makes Elavil when a patient (me!) accidentally overdoses on this quite effective drug, which is very good when used per instructions. (Fortunately it wasn’t enough of an overdose to do more than disconnect my brain from my musculature. Fine the next day.)
Or, ” ‘–it happens.'”
Julie near Chicago, February 16, 2017 at 6:54 pm, while I agree that false details should be corrected, there is (sometimes) a false narrative about this incident that is maybe more fundamental. Many men, women, children and babies were burned to death in the firestorm of Hamburg and Dresden, and in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Most were not filmed at the precise moment, though pictures of corpses, and words describing the last moments of those that did not even leave corpses, can be found. There is “I hate war” (e.g. because I’m compassionate) and then there is “I hate this particular war – our side of it at least” (e.g. because I’m a fashionable campus commie). The latter attitude, pretending to be the former, will often expose its true self by its focus on one thing rather than another – and by seeking to alter details (e.g. who exactly dropped that bomb, what was intended versus what was accidental, etc.).
Oh, very true, Niall.
I try to take every opportunity to present the truth of this particular event — which now includes the further truth of the sort of lying revisionism to which I think you refer — because the truth needs to be stated both in the generalities (“the U.S. is often the target of lying revisionism,” for instance), and then the evidence for it, which lie in the details of a particular battle or other event.
Conclusion: Agreed. :>)