Sunday, July 6, 2008

More Thoughts on MORE

Following up from Chris's comments, I think that the short is so startling because it really does not offer a solution. I tried to tie everything up nicely in my post, but I think in doing so I did a disservice to the short. We need to feel uncomfortable, or it would not serve its purpose (which I cannot really define in all honesty). Nostalgia definitely plays a role in what is portrayed as utopic in the short, and I think that that is a occurrence common in human condition. Childhood is often looked back upon as a magical, beautiful time that can never be returned to. But why is that? I was not in constant "bliss" as a child, in fact I could not wait to grow up. I do remember playing a lot and not having too much to worry about, but I did not realize how great that was at the time. Perhaps we cannot appreciate something until we are in a less desirable situation If so, that is a rather depressing condition.

As to why our beauty is in our gut, perhaps the heart is too cliche? I have no idea, but it is definitely an interesting question. I thought that it was interesting that the key to seeing the world in a beautiful was was inside everyone, so one's happiness is a matter of perception, and inversely, so must be misery.

2 comments:

Christopher Schaberg said...

But why are we taught to look 'inside' ourselves when it is the 'outside' world (at least in "MORE") that so clearly needs the most attention? (And maybe this inside/outside dichotomy is really ridiculous in the first place; maybe there are far more 'sides' to life than this binary evinces.)

Christopher Schaberg said...

Also: I completely agree with you about demystifying the seeming ‘bliss’ of childhood; for many children, it’s either just mundane or nearly unbearable.