In the years when Proust was in the Paris noble circle, one of the main impressions of these nobles was: flattery. In fact, he needs to be accepted into their small group. A certain earl held a ball or salon at his home today. Proust came here the next day and pulled the host’s barman aside, and asked carefully which duke or countess was there yesterday and what he said. What are some of the popular witticisms and so on. Finally, quite satisfied Marcel gave the waiter enough tips, so that when the writer passed away, the master looked at the waiter who was crying beside him in surprise.
In contrast, Proust criticized and denied these nobles in his book.
Vaguely speaking, the performance of the former is to accumulate realistic material for the later writing of the latter, and if we try to figure it out carefully, we may ask: If not, how could Proust behave. Flattery means that when someone is acting, you admire him, and as a result, he prefers to act in front of you. Over time, the natural tendency is to like you and treat him as a friend. Flattery is obviously intentional, and it is more natural to express yourself like the person in front of you.
Show (express) what's wrong with oneself-the listener doesn't understand or approve of it, and don't want to listen. I don't understand, I don't need to repeat it, it's the normal state of human interaction. The eleven dialogues in the film are all based on this, but they suddenly understand each other but they are abnormal, surprised and inexplicable, and turn into ecstasy, and it is too late to meet each other. A deeper saying is that "the scholar dies for the confidant."
In the eleven scenes, it is obvious that the inner emotions of all the characters are uneasy. In order to eliminate this uneasiness, they started chatting. I don’t have the desire to chat, but I have to talk. What the talker says is meaningless. For example, in a Paris café, a man invites a friend he hasn’t seen for a long time to meet. The friend comes and he is only smoking in silence. After drinking coffee, the friend felt restless, so he repeatedly asked him if there was anything wrong-but the listener was serious, and the conversation became more tense. As an audience, we can naturally feel that the speaker is unintentional and will not be entangled in the meaning of his (her) words, but once we become the party concerned, we can’t do it. Why? In these eleven conversations, the relationship between the two parties is different: friends, strangers, first meeting, guests and waiters, colleagues, cousins, twins, etc. But the two most common types of relationships are not among them: husband and wife, father and son (mother and son). The reason is that in such a relationship, sitting face-to-face will not feel uneasy, and there will be no performance based on it.
Why are you upset? In fact, only the husband and wife relationship is the furthest away from that kind of uneasiness of the above two kinds of relationships. Husband and wife are familiar with each other and better than father and son (mother and son) such a blood relationship that should be known to each other. In front of their parents, children tend to converge on their true selves and only show what their parents expect. Husbands and wives can’t, staying together day and night and sharing the same bed, it’s impossible to hold back the true self without revealing it. At least part of the truth, at least, the part where drinking coffee face-to-face without talking without feeling uneasy with each other.
In several conversations, the person said that coffee should not be drinking and smoking should be quit, and then could not help but drink with relish and smoke with endless aftertaste. Caffeine and nicotine are not good, but the good side is enough to comfort the heart and make the bad side pale and weak; the really bad thing is love, but everyone is more eager. At least, you have to rush to it again in order to ridicule love (self). Besides, the object of love is a person, failure, the phenomenon of love suddenly pervades infinitely, such literature and art, etc.-in this way, is it good or bad? It seems that there is an underlying truth that is set as one of the attributes of life, whether admitted or not in the name of reason-the meaning of life does not lie in health and longevity.
The relationship between husband and wife naturally makes it uneasy. The state of rationality and irration together constitutes the person in front of you and you get along with it day and night; the relationship between the characters in the film is not close to this level. Or you can directly question the so-called "closeness": what is it that causes only the rational and polite side to be displayed hypocritically in front of others, and the other side is hidden and suppressed? Therefore, it is not sunny, trivial, even abnormal and unreasonable, so I am worried that the other party will judge arbitrarily; in a word, this perpetual existence is generally not understood and accepted by people.
However, even the constant side of husband and wife is inexhaustible, impossible, impossible. In "The Last Tango in Paris", Marlon Brando's husband Paul, when faced with the body of his wife who died by suicide, said with grief: "I'm the fucking husband who will be your husband for two hundred years. do not understand you". He never understood why his wife, who had lived together for many years, committed suicide. The danger of fully exposing yourself to people is to keep people away from you, and you are getting away from everyone, so it is truly horrible, and Nietzsche is an example.
The so-called reality is also relative reality: you are one reality and he is another reality, and the two realities go hand in hand: they are two different individuals. "The calling and the called rarely respond to each other", then the loneliness of life is fatal and unsolvable, because the necessity of being alone is like the breathing of freedom, so the performance of people in eleven scenes is almost inevitable.
But in love (love and marriage) we have done our best to express ourselves. We must know that loneliness is destiny, but we need to be lonely and escape from loneliness to escape from destiny, longing for stability and need for restlessness, another attribute of life seems obvious: Never at peace, never at peace for various reasons. Love is an "excus", "borrow" this "mouth" to express each other's true selves. However, the expression of truth in the name of love is still in a small atmosphere, and the big atmosphere-in the atmosphere of everyone or the community, is there a tacit understanding of each other and peace of mind to reveal the truth.
Love is impossible. Loving people is ideal, romanticism, and ignorance of people. Doesn’t this mean that people must be knowledgeable in such an atmosphere, and that humanity knowledge that is as true and complex as possible and inexhaustible is incorporated into the consciousness background? It's almost similar to ideology; where this knowledge comes from, it is the true expression and feeling of each step of the self, or literary works (the two complement each other). But even for husband and wife, the reality of each other is already making each other patient (because of love). Everyone is incapable of talking about love, and desire for profit becomes a transaction. In the film, there is a dialogue between two men in the film and television industry: when one of you realizes or thinks that the other is showing passion and intimacy out of profit, he feels that Contempt and dislike.
The attraction between love is super-utilitarian and purely the charm of the person itself. Of course, most of the "charm" in the eyes of love is personal, but the meaning of charm can exist beyond love. Charm is beauty: the appearance of beauty and the beauty of personality are all fascinating, and the vision is suddenly refreshed. In the eleven scenes, there is only one beautiful woman who drinks coffee and smokes cigarettes by herself from beginning to end. It is a male waiter in a coffee shop who has a conversation or is trying to talk with him; at first, he rushed to fill her with routine work. Coffee, in fact, she didn’t need coffee. He destroyed the strength and color of her coffee before. He felt sorry for this and walked away in frustration, but then whenever the camera was pulled wider from her, he walked around. He walked in, holding a coffee pot, he was hesitant to talk to her, his expression was hesitant and nervous, and his words were even more vague, so repeatedly. What can be guessed is that he wanted to apologize to her, but not only that, he was caught by her charm and didn't know what to do-he wanted to talk but didn't have the courage to express it, let alone how to express it.
Appearance beauty is easy to say, dressing is what it is; personality beauty is difficult. It not only controls appearance beauty and mellowness, but also has moral attributes and transcends it. It seems to be the opposite of ideal morality. You can call it It is "freedom", and what is freedom, this is a topic that gets tired of it again.
View more about Coffee and Cigarettes reviews
