In connection with "Dark Heart", some people say that it embodies the opposition between civilization and primitiveness. The civilization represented by Kurz tried to save the primitive African indigenous people, and the collapse of Kurz represented the failure of salvation. That definitely makes sense. Maybe it's because I'm not good enough. I think this is not a complete statement about Kurz's mental breakdown. Anyway, I can't understand Kurz's sudden change from this perspective. There is a further explanation: after being free from the shackles of civilization, the manifestation of human nature is evil. That's also true, but it's still not enough (maybe it's a problem with my level).
I think Kurz's betrayal of the US military can be explained as a confrontation between individuals and collectives. From the perspective of individual and collective comprehension, it can be roughly divided into three situations: First, the individual comprehension is lower than the collective comprehension, and the individual unconditionally obeys the collective. We see this situation a lot, and it's everywhere around us. Looking back, when there was a collective, there was obedience, and it reached its peak in feudal society. After the capitalist society, personal rebellion gradually increased (our socialism is not within this law, we have characteristics, haha) This is not bad, at least it is conducive to social harmony. But the progress of society, especially the progress of human thought, is absolutely an obstacle. The servility of human beings will unconsciously restrain the advancement of advanced thought. This is what Mr. Lu Xun criticized?
Second, personal understanding is equal to collective understanding. If you think about it, this might be an ideal state. Only the will of the ruler can be completely equivalent to the collective understanding (and there may be differences). They formulate a series of things such as laws and ethics to be obeyed by others. This is inevitable. There are differences in understanding in human society, so there must be rule and be ruled. It's just that the way of expression of governance is different. The so-called "democracy" in the United States may be more economical, and China uses politics and ideology more. There may seem to be differences in degree, and I personally feel that it is essentially the same goal by different routes.
Third, individual understanding is higher than collective understanding. There are two kinds of them. One is that in view of the weakness of the individual, they compromise with the society, that is, the wise self-sufficiency; the other is the Axis person who is opposed to the society and resists. There are two kinds of wise protections. One is to exterminate one's own thoughts and follow the "party" with one heart. Such a smart and gentle person will obviously get a lot of worldly benefits, reputation, money, and nothing else. There is another type of people. He is not willing to give up his inner freedom, but also wants to find the comfort of this world (of course, glory and wealth, the glory of the ancestors can afford to give up), he is silent or turned to other areas. For example, studying music, literature, religion and so on. Can't waste talents. Such people are Wang Xiaobo, Lao Tzu and so on. The recent rise of cultural research is not that literature is used as a weapon to resist political power. But I think no matter how much you resist, it is also a level attack, it can't be hit with a shot, and it's not on one level at all (the intensity is definitely there).
Let's talk about resisting those kinds of people. Kurz is such an axis man. He is definitely a smart person, and his aggressiveness at the beginning shows that he fully agrees with the collective understanding. He believes that these are valuable, and coupled with his own talents, merits are absolutely indispensable. With the increase of experience and constant thinking, he discovered the hypocrisy of war. So he started his rebellion in unison with words and deeds, which led to a series of puzzling behaviors: three times to send letters to the air force training camp, give up the opportunity to be promoted to general, and participate in the Vietnam War. This is totally inconsistent with the collective understanding, so it will be incomprehensible by people who are lower or equal to the collective understanding (the masses and the rulers). Kurz is the kind with high IQ and tough personality. This great man is actually independent. But also lost. Because he stood on the highest peak and couldn't find the way forward, he could only follow his own desires. He thought that was the freedom of the soul. Later, he also found that he was offended, but it was done and there was no way out. He has never understood that with such a tough character, he cannot escape the evil of human nature in the end. The personal rebellion failed completely. Complete rebellion brings complete failure. Perhaps the rebellion from the side to the second kind of clear-cut people can play some role.
The collapse of smart people is the law of all time. Because reason is a historical concept. As history continues to advance, rationality will continue to evolve. To quote our teacher's example, the third party was absolutely spurned early in the 70s and 80s. Today, people gradually understand (Engels said: loveless marriage is the greatest sin. Do you agree?). Everyone grew up under A rationality, but suddenly became B rational in middle age. People like me don't feel that I am numb with the pace of history and live comfortably. But there are some smart people who are ahead of history. They see the ills of the current era, but they still have to live an incorrect life. You say this is so uncomfortable. Kurz saw the hypocrisy of the war, and the American soldiers felt it too. But if the American soldiers didn't think about it, they vented when they felt uncomfortable, shouted a fuck, and just picked a girl and solved it. Obviously, axis people like Kurz can't accept this kind of low-level compromise, and what awaits him is punishment (personal power is definitely not worthy of centralization and public will, you say that tyranny of the crowd will not help, this is the law).
When I write this, I feel that the more I am talking, it is worse than human nature, and the opposition between civilization and primitive seems to be even more. However, I personally think that I'm quite systematic and quite clear. Understand the comprehension of my kind of people. Seriously waiting for correction.
View more about Apocalypse Now reviews
