This is a big topic, I don't think I can write anything, and it is very likely that I will give it up halfway, and go to work/sleep halfway through.
Western films, similar to knight novels in the early Renaissance, are written on the surface of heroic biography, but actually reflect the redemptive complex in religion. This is not to be praised or criticized here, but to point out the similarities between the two. We are talking about deconstruction.
Any literary history will point out that "Don Quixote" is a deconstruction of knight novels, and its appearance marks the end of knight novels. In fact, the era when Cervantes was writing was the era of the disintegration of the knighthood, but his seemingly absurd writing reflects the truth far higher than those "old" knight novels.
Similarly, for Western films, in the early days of film history, like the 1920s and 1930s, the United States was not far from the history of the “manifestation of destiny”, and people’s lifestyles should be basically the same as those shown in the film. The works at that time should have reflected reality more. But why is it that now the protagonist of Westerns is not the sharpshooter and doesn't treat shoelaces as spaghetti?
Is it a fan of the authorities? Obviously not. Whether it's us now or the grandparents who lived in the 1920s, we all know that guns can't be hit with one shot, and the shoelaces are not as delicious as pasta. The difference is that people watching Western movies in the 1920s may be like watching Hong Kong police and criminal films now, "well know this"; and it is precisely because we no longer pull the reins and turn the steering wheel, we begin to care about what The question of the beauty of riding a horse.
Therefore, deconstruction, in its nature, is actually not close to the facts, but the last struggle before the facts fade from people's vision. People's understanding of literary works cannot be separated from the context. In terms of the amount of information, a few MB of the original "A Dream of Red Mansions" can be made into a TV series of several GB because the text information has its own extended function. For example, when people look at the word "tree", they do not only see "wood and inch" or a string of codes like a computer; they can think of trees as plants, and then think of the terrain around the environment and our place. The feeling in it is waiting... However, if I grew up in the desert and never saw a tree, then suddenly I saw the word "tree" in the book, and I would be confused: climb the "tree" ? What is a "tree"? Is it different from sand dunes? At this time, if you want to tell me what a tree is, you will tell me the roots, trunks, branches, leaves, etc., in a serious manner. Only in this way can you convey the information you want to convey. Therefore, when people are very familiar with a certain concept and are in the "comfort zone", it is normal to dramatize it. Only when the background fades and only the form remains, will they think of "deconstruction" it. If deconstruction can make the work abstract and break away from vulgarity in the process, then it just provides an explanation for the phrase "distance produces beauty".
View more about Unforgiven reviews
