The difference between what I want to show and what I show actually reflects my own prejudice.
Suddenly think of the debate about whether people have/have no freedom to express prejudice
For example, why follow a life even if you don't want it is not free, and a good education can be completely subverted by some unwanted order in life. The family does have a dislike for the plan created by Elena, but this in itself does not refute their need for proper arrangements in the plan.
For example, why the artist can sell his paintings to Sotheby’s auction house for a living, but he has to wander around with his daughter who wants to settle down. In other words, if he is not willing to let go of even a little bit of the artist’s loftiness, he chooses his daughter at the beginning At that time, it was decided for the daughter to accept the setting of wandering and the homosexual daughter never responded to the mother's concern but felt that the mother should see her own difficulties and struggles even if the mother did not show disapproval of gay.
For example, why didn’t I continue my youthful impulse to go to New York, but went back to the small town. When a reporter needs to be pointed and pointed by a free person, why can a free person continue to respond in a haughty tone when he needs a little help? Do the charity for white people and those who choose freedom automatically have the courage to confront everything in reality? Or is it because of the meanness and isolation brought out by the oppression of life for a long time that people have lost confidence and goodwill in their surroundings.
Another example is the mother who left her daughter at the door of the fire station in winter and wanted to get her daughter back. She thinks that blood can defeat everything and thinks that the adopted family can only provide funds and did not think clearly about the surrogacy for the money, and then deceived people that she had aborted her child. According to my own existence, there is a kind of natural righteousness of my child. I think of the two miserable couples in the drama who were unable to raise their children due to physiological reasons. Then one was taken away by surrogacy, and the other was abandoned by the adopted child. Is it pitiful for the biological mother to steal it?
American dramas like to talk about no judgement, but they are actually picking up on a value that is usually not to be criticized with a critical eye. But since a control freak mother can criticize a mother who is impoverished and deceitful or a mother who has abandoned her child; since it can be critical of the white middle class who yearns for stability, we can't criticize the man who breaks away from the black middle class and pursues freedom.
If the assumption is that every choice is possible to be happy, then why choose A to escape is to be forced to B by others stepping on the "cage". I want to express my thinking about a certain group by using a group who thinks that the public will be picky to step on another group that looks comfortable and correct, and the way of presentation feels very pathological.
View more about Little Fires Everywhere reviews
