> I won't get into the "which is better" argument
between Heart and
> Apocalypse, except to say they are both
masterpieces, each in its own way.
> Conrad's short novel is more about a moral awakening
to darkness at the
> heart of Europe; Coppola is focusing on something
similar in the American
> effort, though he's much more ambivalent, since the
film both endorses
> pyrotechnic destruction and questions its
purpose.
*******************************************
apocalypse now endorses pyrotechnic destruction? thats an
interesting idea. what made you think that? i didn't think
the movie "endorsed" anything. i didn't even think it was a
commentary on the vietnam war. the war was just a great
setting to play out the story between kurtz and marlow.
of course, i'm not a fan of big-picture messages. i like em
down on a personal level. i had a hard time seeing cormac
mccarthy's _blood meridian_ as a commentary on manifest
destiny. and i didn't find the idea of _the heart of
darkness_ being a commentary on colonialisation appealing
either.
and expanding on your comment on the novel being about a
"moral awakening to the heart of darkness of europe", i would
say its about a wonderful amoral spot that lies firmly rooted
within the primal soul of us all. cormac plays in that
sandbox so very well.
miker
-- # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # majordomo@icomm.ca. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 04 May 2002 EDT