Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman

In the tradition of Wizard of Oz and Alice in Wonderland, the reader is transported into another reality where the only way to survive to give up all we know and accept the realm of the seemingly impossible.

In London, Richard Mayhew is just an average guy, who is about to marry a beautiful woman, Jessica. One night, against his fiance’s wishes, he stops to help poor girl in tatters who seems to appear from nowhere. Her name is Door, and she comes form a very different London, ‘London Below’. A magical world of its own reserved for those people who have fallen through the cracks. A world where danger lurks around every corner. In helping her, Richard has found that he has fallen through the cracks, and his relatively quiet life is about to become a lot more interesting.

Gaiman populates the novel with all sorts of colorful characters like The Marquis de Carabas, a shifty character who owes a debt to Door’s family, Mr Croup and Mr Vandemar, two cut-throats who take great pride and enjoyment in their work who are sent after Door, and Hunter a legendary warrior who dreams of slaying ‘the beast of London’. There is even an Angel.

I think the idea of a parallel London is brilliant, though it’s not a place I would ever want to visit. It certainly puts landmarks, and the suspect street characters that one would normally avoid, in a new light.

I found it to be a nice and easy read, that hooked me from beginning to end. Here is another for SF and Gaiman fans!

Kwame

Black Swan

“If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do…” Bertrand Russell

Swan Lake is arguably one Pyotr Tchaikovsky greatest achievements. It is well known as a classical piece as well as a ballet. It is this ballet that forms the basis of David Aronofsky’s film Black Swan. This dark psychodrama deals with a young, talented Ballet dancer who is trying to achieve that self-sacrificing artistic abandon. This drama attempts to peer into the darkest recesses of the human soul.

The issue is that in 2011, the local censorship board attempted to ban the film because of some ‘homo erotic’ elements. Apart from the fact that this kind of action is an affront to the very notion of Democracy this reveals a far deeper, pathological problem when it comes to local attitudes to homosexuality.

Somehow there seem to be tacit beliefs that if you condemn, it’s illegal and immoral, that somehow the very notion of the homosexual will eventually curl up and die in some dark corner never to be seen and spoken of again. This is, of course, absurd. However, even more absurd is banning a movie for its homoerotic elements when that is very miniscule aspect of the film. Let’s not mention the hypocrisy of allowing Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain to show in cinemas, when there is absolutely nothing ‘latent’ about the homosexual element in that movie.

The truth is that it is not often that a ‘difficult’ movie, like Aranofsky’s, gets played in local cinemas, which can probably account for the rampant pigheadedness in this country.

Socrates once expressed the importance of the gadfly role of the philosopher, prodding society out of stagnation. The truth is that a narrowed minded society that will not critically examine itself will never develop. Instead of simply censoring things that make you comfortable, maybe it would more constructive to find out why that particular thing makes you comfortable in the first place. You may discover that the problem may lay closer to home.

In a time when reading is on the decline it is more important now than ever that there are art forms in this society that challenge the existing stereotypes. It is important that psychodramas like Aronofsky’s are played in the local cinemas to. The free reign of art is important because, to paraphrase Shelley, Artists and philosophers are the legislators of the world. 

Kwame Slusher

Img Credit: IMDB

Reality Check

After Maximus hastily deposes his final opponent in the dirt filled arena, he surveys the thousands of spectators. There is a hush. Then he bellows at the stunned crowd, “Are you not entertained? Are you not entertained?”

In Ancient Rome people would gather in droves at colosseums to watch gladiators dismember each other. People enjoyed watching other's suffer. No film presents this better than Ridley Scott's film, Gladiator. In Scott's flick, Commonus revives these games to distract people from their own economic troubles.

It would be nice to think that the human race has evolved beyond this basic vile impulse. However, when the concept of 'Treatments' was introduced in and they were challenged to come with their own ideas for 'Big Money Productions', at least ninety percent of the concepts were some variation of reality television.

The fact is that people like to watch other people suffer. People like to watch other people scheme and double cross for some kind of cash prize. Shows like The Real World, Big Brother, and Survivor are perfect examples. The worst part is that in many of these shows the spectators are encouraged to participate in the 'elimination' process. People watch as a judge with a few words completely shatters the self-esteem of an aspiring model or singer.

 Gary Ross's The Hunger Games, which came out earlier this year marries this concept with science fiction. In this film Katniss Evergreen is thrust into to an arena where people watch her fight for her life for entertainment. The sad fact is that proliferation of these types of shows their popularity. People's suffering is essentially commoditized.

What does his say about so-called modern civilization? That it hasn't evolved in any new directions. The only thing that has changed is the technology that is used dehumanizes and desensitizes people.

Scarily enough this refers back to the previous post, which discusses the human races' 'will to power'.  The media is nothing more than a technological colosseum. The nihilist is vindicated, but the optimist squints in the microscope for some vestige of humanity that is alluded to by the enlightenment theorist, who believes in the basic goodness of human nature.

There is hope In Gladiator and The Hunger Games. In the end of Gladiator, Maximus defeats Commonus. In The Hunger Games Katniss and her partner Peta defy the expectations the audience by threatening to commit suicide rather than take each other’s lives.

Kwame Slusher

Img Credit: Wikipedia

Fight Club

"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken"- Tyler Durden

Realizing that the rise of science was siphoning away peoples faith, Matthew Arnold, a Victorian Poet, promoted the study of literature because he believed that reading made people more moral. In a way literature became a replacement for religion for those who chose science over God. A famous literary critic, Northrop Frye, contended that literature is nothing more than displaced religion.

Only a fool would believe that all literature is all benign. Palahniuk's novel, Fight Club, takes vicious swipe at the conventions of American society, which, in turn, informs much of the values of Barbadian society.

The story is about a psychologically disturbed man whose alter ego forms a terrorist organization that tries to rip apart the very fabric of modern civilization.

The novel, which later becomes a film in 1999 starring Brad Pitt and Edward Norton, has roots in Nietzsche's philosophy that challenges the conventional notions of right and wrong that only thinly veils the 'will to power'. The alter ego, Tyler Durden, personifies the concept of the 'over-man' who does not conform but sets about creating his own values.

Movies and novels like these in the hands of the young can undermine all the basic tenets of primary and secondary socialization. However, they can create a culture of critical re-evaluation of assumed values. In this sense, they throw people back to the constructive questioning mentality that got philosophy started in the first place.

"I want you to hit me as hard as you can" Tyler Durden

Durden contends that people are all social prisoners, and the only way to free yourself is to self-destruct. It is only through this destruction that people can learn anything real about themselves. Then after a person has hit rock bottom they are then truly free to do whatever they want.

Maybe this isn't good way to gain control over your own life in the real world, but that's excuse not too try to live an 'authentic' life. This positive reading of Palahniuk's controversial work can only come from a legitimate attempt to examine self-examination. The best part is, unlike the ancients, you don't give up your religion.

Equally, religion should never be used as an excuse for ignorance, which is what prompted all the questioning in the first place. To quote a less controversial philosopher, Socrates, the important thing is to 'know thyself'.

Kwame Slusher

Img Credit: Inside The Brain