From the time I was imprisoned at home on New Year's Eve, until recently I was able to go out and move freely in a small range, I have maintained a self-isolation at home for nearly three months. The limitations of my body left me no choice but to watch movies and read continuously, instead of creating my own staged breakthrough.
Today, I have finally broken through the 2000 audiovisual work mark, but I am more concerned with qualitative changes than this quantitative breakthrough. And the change in the amount of 2000 movies (TV series, documentaries, variety shows) and countless books, one of the biggest inspirations to me is:
Quantitative change brings qualitative change and is not a non-linear, uniform growth, but a non-linear variable and accelerated growth. The acceleration can be greatly different in multiple stages, and the key to breakthrough lies in the scale of cognition of things and their external environment.
This may sound abstract, but if you give a concrete example, the problem can be clearly seen.
Take the Korean movie "The Furnace" for example. Undoubtedly, from the film itself, we can read the creator's attention to the social problem of sexual abuse of vulnerable children, the exposure of the evil "discourse" class represented by the principal, and the protection and protection of citizens' legitimate rights and interests. The appeal of the social legal system, etc.
From the perspective of film and television criticism, we can make more specific elaborations on the above aspects at the social level. "Carnival", "What's in the Darkness", Iran's "The Kite Runner", etc.), it can also improve the legal provisions related to the promotion of juveniles by the film, and make an "intertextual" analysis between the film and reality, etc.
And if we contact this year's "Nth Room" incident, contact the suicide, depression and other incidents of female stars in the Korean entertainment industry in recent years, and then watch the movies "Suyuan", "Influenza", "Earthworm", etc., it will not be difficult for us It is found that a considerable proportion of the vitality of Korean films comes from the exposure of real social problems. Of course, this point can be attributed to the characteristics of Korean movies, and some people will compare with China and come to the conclusion that China "will never be able to make movies", which requires us to have a deeper understanding.
A deeper understanding, I think, can be obtained from a wide range of viewing and other scales. For example, if you read Aamir Khan's "Truth Interview" on India's caste system, gender inequality, and religious conflict, you'll find that exposing reality is not the preserve of Koreans. If you have watched China's "83, 84 Years in Province T", "Black Cannon Incident", Iran's "Little Shoes", "Why Home", Brazil's "City of God", the United States' "Big Open" Vision", you will find that exposing social problems is actually a major trend in literary and artistic creations around the world.
At this level, you will basically find that every family has a scripture that is difficult to recite. The literary and artistic creations carried out by various countries based on their own social problems have their own history, and objectively speaking, there is no question of who is better or worse. However, the cognition of things at this level is still limited to the literary and artistic works themselves. Literary and artistic creations create works based on a certain cultural background and personal values, which are not equal to reality itself, which must be paid attention to and more in-depth thinking.
The key to breaking through this bottleneck, I think, is to think through the study of non-art categories in culture such as history/philosophy. For example, by reading the five volumes of "Selected Works of Mao Zedong" to cultivate historical materialism and people's standpoint, coupled with a superficial understanding of global history (such as "Global History", etc.), you can easily find the law of development of human society, that is, from the primitive society to the public ownership society To the later private ownership society, then to the later coexistence of public and private ownership society, to the final public ownership society (primitive society - slave society - feudal society - socialist society - communist society). Then, in the middle of primitive society and communist society, the existence of private ownership society is indispensable. Private ownership is the inevitable result of the expansion of the population and the development of productive forces, which will inevitably lead to human beings moving from individuals to clusters. After the cluster is formed to a certain scale, the development of productive forces will inevitably require a more refined division of labor, which will bring about the corresponding imbalance in the distribution of property, and the resulting gap between the rich and the poor and the class gap will continue through blood/affinity and the ruling system, such as the hereditary system of the throne. , the imperial examination system, etc., were further consolidated and expanded, and finally a stable social order (that is, the state) was formed, and it remained unchanged until science and technology promoted the great development of productive forces and created a new ruling class.
It is precisely because of the stability of the class ruling order established in the form of the state, which has brought about the continuous expansion and diversification of differences at the root. Each country has its own characteristics. For example, South Korea is a typical capitalist country. Due to its economic strength, chaebols have penetrated into every peripheral nerve of politics, culture, and technology. Naturally, there will be problems of this and that kind (of course, to a certain extent, it also creates problems. employment and promote national development).
As a country dominated by public ownership, China can effectively ensure that the development of the state-owned/collective economy takes the leading role through the control of the state-owned/collective elements. Of course, this is the ideal situation, and it is basically the real situation. As long as we uphold public ownership, our advantage will remain and will continue.
From this point of view, compared with Koreans who dare to photograph the truth of social problems, China is much more clever at solving social problems quietly and silently. In the story of Bian Que's practice of medicine, his eldest brother is often aware of diseases before they are discovered, so he is not considered a genius doctor. When his second brother had minor problems, he was able to treat him, and he was also considered to be not skilled enough in medicine. And Bian Que often treats terminally ill patients, but he has won the title of "Rejuvenating Hands" and is regarded as a genius doctor. And the facts? Contrary to what people think, Bian Que is actually the worst in medicine.
Of course, I don't say this because I'm the so-called "self-made five" and "powdered maggots", but to state the facts truthfully. Compared with daring to photograph real problems but unable to eradicate social problems, creating a system that can eradicate social problems is obviously more revolutionary, forward-looking, and naturally more challenging. However, some so-called experts in our country, so-called out of ideological considerations, impose strict restrictions on literary and artistic creation, science and education, and so on. But I venture to say that the main problem is not with the socialist system, but with the defenders and executors of the system themselves.
Both Marxism and Mao Zedong Thought require seeking truth from facts, analyzing specific issues concretely, and advancing with the times. In particular, Mao Zedong Thought pointed out that "don't be afraid of criticism from the people, and have the courage to hear different voices." As for whether the relevant people have understood it well, and whether they have implemented it well, I don't know.
So far, I have taken "The Furnace" as an example and mentioned the development and changes in the perception of things at different scales. This is also my thinking and progress on some issues since watching this film for a few years. I think, for me, and for a lot of people, knowing things requires a wider range of knowledge and a wider mind, a constant study, rather than a light-hearted assertion, which is fundamentally wrong.
Up to the previous step, our scale has been expanded to the humanities and social sciences, but the angle of understanding things can obviously be larger, and it can be raised to the combination of natural sciences and humanities and social sciences. In order to open up the cognition of natural science, I think in addition to the scientific quality education from childhood, we should also actively improve our understanding of physics, astronomy, chemistry, etc. The best introduction is science fiction, science fiction magazines, etc.
Here is the most famous science fiction novel "Three-Body Problem" in China. The reason why I recommend the Three-Body Problem is that he has achieved a very high ideological realm because of his compatibility in natural science and social science. For example, his core setting is that the Trisolaran galaxy is unstable, and he needs to find a more stable home for survival needs. And some people in a special period in China, out of pessimism about reality/society, etc., established a connection with the Trisolaran galaxy. During the entire long period from the departure to arrival of the Trisolaran fleet, in human society, The country, society, army, science and technology, game compromise and development and changes in different aspects of human nature, showing profound thinking and strong rationality. And science fiction concepts such as cosmology, water droplets, two-way foils, dimensionality reduction strikes, and the law of the dark forest also have a great incentive to inspire people's enthusiasm for science.
When my vision expands to the intersection of natural science and social science, and in the process of developing and thinking deeply, I simultaneously do more research on the film itself, whether it is the clever means of narration or the strong generality and universality of the matter itself, or the In-depth analysis of the micro-emotional context can create more powerful motivation, but it is still a difficult thing to explain. In my opinion, both Akira Kurosawa and Bergman have achieved the ultimate in audio-visual form, while Bergman's thinking about things is obviously more profound, and he mainly focuses on beliefs, interpersonal relationships, etc. On the other hand, Fellini and Kubrick found more absurdity and comedy in the common tragedy of reality, showing the pluralism of reality and the profit-seeking and short-sightedness of human nature. How to absorb the different advantages of different people and how to create my own style is still a very complicated proposition for me.
On the macro level, the poor understanding of the natural sciences and the lack of a thorough understanding of the social sciences have limited my in-depth thinking to a certain extent. How to further develop is still an urgent problem to be solved, only time and practice can tell the result.
The French documentary "Homeland" I watched today shows the development context and current situation of human beings from scratch to today with an extremely grand and shocking audio-visual epic overview. How can human beings break through the limitations of nature, or be imprisoned by nature, and stop at the end of modern society, just like dinosaurs cannot adapt to the climate, and some backward agricultural gatherers are replaced by agricultural planters (represented by the movie "God Is Crazy") the decline of the Bushes)? The underdeveloped third world countries face the triple dilemma of development, pollution and hegemony. How can developed countries break through the dilemma faced by them?
Are these kinds of things the cage of all things, or the late arrival of the driving force? If science pushes mankind to what it is today, will it have its limitations and will eventually perish? This cage of all things, I think, is a dilemma that is difficult to solve in the short term.
View more about Home reviews
