The Film "W"

The scene that I choose from the film is the one in which the police department heads are discussing how to catch the killer and simultaneously the band of criminals are also discussing how to catch the same killer. Although the meetings are taking place at different places, the film maker's decision to picturize them together makes the scene beautiful, as the topic of discussion is the same however, the approaches are different. The police department, being a law agency, wants to adopt the legal way. However, the criminals are ready to try any method to fulfill their motive. The viewer can also sense the desperation in the voices of the criminals who want this impasses over as soon as possible, because the police have done so much to make their lives miserable, by intefering in their daily lives and activities.

1. Discuss the evolution of police power as it is depicted in Dr. Caligari and M?

The evolution of police power between the two films Dr. Caligari and M is phenomenal. The police force depicted in Dr. Caligari is shown as having old methods of conducting their operations, where as the police force in M has begun to resort to new means of technology. I also noticed that in the film M, certain sections of society had begun to distrust the police, and therefore decided to take the law into their own hands.

2. Does the killer deserve to die?

Firstly, the killer deserved a fair trail. During the climax of the film the killer claims that he killed people out of a desire to suppress his fears and voices that were haunting him. I believe, a fair trail would have adjudicated him as a mentally unstable person and sentenced him to a mental asylum. Even if he was found guilty, he should not be killed, but rather sentenced to life imprisonment.

3. How does the criminals ability to organize themselves affect their ability to capture Beckert?

The criminals ability to spread people all over the city and especially from the beggars union was a smart move. They also showed great determination in breaking the law to capture Beckert.

4. How would you judge the depiction of Nazis as criminals?

The Nazis came to power around that same time period on a broad agenda that they could turn the fortunes of the nation around. In the film, the criminals achieved their means by breaking the law, so did the Nazis achieve it means by doing a lot of injustices.

5. What is the significance of the media in this film?

The media certainly keep the public informed. It also helped to make the authority more accountable for its actions.

The Blue Angel

The scene that I choose from the film is the one where the professor goes to the cabaret for the first time, with the intention of catching his students there and subsequently disciplining them. I think the viewer begins to see the real person inside the professor, who exudes an impression of being a hard task master. This event begins a series of transformations that the professor is due to undergo. In the end we see, the professor in complete contrast to the person that he initially was. So, his first visit to the cabaret is pivotal in the character’s transformation.

1. How would you compare Rath/Lola to Siddhartha/Kamala?

To begin with, there are similarities between Rath/Lola and Siddhartha/Kamala characters. Though set in different time periods, this is a case where the west meets the east. Seduction is a common language employed like by woman like Lola or Kamala, although I reckon the motivation of the women are different. In Lola’s case she is shown as a seductress who can play with the emotions of men to use to her advantage. Kamala on the other hand is not shown to be conniving; in fact she encourages Siddhartha to get a job and gets him to learn new things. Lola’s manipulation and subsequent humiliation of Rath leads him to absolute shame and we see in the end that he dies. Siddhartha manages to come out of the situation, and it can be said that he learnt from his mistake and decides to go back to his former life. Two different stories, similar plot, but different endings.

2. Is Lola an emancipated woman or “totally impassive?”

Lola is portrayed to be an impassive woman, who has no emotions to begin with. Even if she had, she never showed them in a genuine way.

3. What is the significance of the clown.

A clown in real life is a stupid person. The clown in the movie signifies the change in the professor as he goes from being an intellectual person to a puppet.

4.  How is chaos thematically represented in the film?

Chaos has many representations in the film. It must be noted that chaos

is mainly shown to present the changes in the professor’s life, as he goes from being a respected professor to a lowly puppet and finally ending his life.

5. How would interpret the overall meaning of the film.

The film brings a message that lust can be a very powerful emotion. The professor fell in love with Lola on the basic premise that she was a beautiful woman. He did not see her true nature, all he saw was her facial beauty. So the interpretation of the film is that lust or blind love in most times brings misery.

6. Why did I compare Rath to the Haussmann painting/montage. Would you suggest a better comparison.

Rath was the personification of perfection in his life as a professor. The Haussmann paintings portrayed a  revolt against the status quo. Rath transformation was a revolt in a subtle manner against the way of his present life. So in essence Rath’ s life and the painting are similar as it signifies change.

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari

From the movie “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari”, I decided to pick the opening scene between the two gentlemen and the woman in a white gown. Like many films, the opening scene sets the pace and mood for the rest of the film. Being a silent film, the characters rely on facial expression and background music to gives us the effect of the scenes. The interaction between the two men, one being Francis the narrator and the other an older gentleman is particularly noteworthy. I believe that the voice of Francis is the voice of common man, which at that time in Germany was not given its due. The lady walking away from Francis, also shows how the common voice was largely ignored by the people in power. Now to cut to the ending scene, where Frances is shown as the lunatic, and Caligari as the hero, is very surprising, because all along Caligari was portrayed as the villain. I think the ending opening scene and ending scene are depicted in a very contrasting manner. The opening scene has Francis as a smart man, and in end he is shown in a very bad light. I felt the ending should have been straightforward, without the twist.

1. What is the symbolism of Caligari’s power over Cesare?

The symbolism of Caligari’s power over Cesare is comparative of a master over a servant or a slave. So, when the master commands the slave to do something, the slave just follows the orders, without questioning the intentions of the master.

2. How does the profit motive affect cultural production in the modern age?

I believe that the profit motive of the modern age, has adversely affected originality. We have people churning out films, products, and things just with the profit motive. However, I would like to also commend the Academy Awards, for recognizing films like the “The Artist”, which was also a silent film and did well to come across as a film about love and had a deeper message.

3. How would you evaluate the Frankfurt School’s elitism regarding mass culture?

My evaluation of the Frankfurt School’s elitism as the name suggests is one that caters to the needs of the elite in society, with no regard to the mass public.

4. Explain three aspects of the film that relate to the attributes of the culture industry.

a) First aspect is the film is how like a regular industry, it tends toward monopolies.

b) Mr. Pommel, the producer of the film liked the script, but like many people made the

film with the profit motivation.

c) The ending of the film is twisted with Francis as the villain and Caligari as the hero. This shows traditional authority as being restored and the killing of artistic brilliance in favor of division of labor, with a profit motivation.

5. Why does Kracauer interpret the film as a choice between tyranny and chaos?

The film was a depiction of the dilemma faced by the German people of the 1920’s and 1930’s. A time after the first world war, when mass changes were taking place in the German economy.

6. Why was there increased pressure to develop the German film industry after the first world war?

The German film industry was seen a profit making enterprise for the German economy and so it was heavily promoted.

7. How would you evaluate that expressionism breeds excessive inwardness and withdrawal.

Expressionism helps to do self evaluation and one begins to look inside oneself to see the strengths and weakness of oneself. So much like the detachment philosophy of Siddhartha, where the person has given up attachment to the exterior world and looks inward to see the faults and tries to improve oneself. 

8. How does the film foreshadow the Nazi regime according to Kracauer?

It depicts Caligari as the tyranny that Hitler was about to bring.

9. What is praxis and how does it relate to cultural criticism?

Praxis is the fusion of theory and practice. It helps to keep a check on reality at the same

Time keeps theory from being obsolete. It relates to cultural criticism by helping to keep practical events alive and theory to back up those explain those events.

Siddhartha

He had started to suspect that his venerable father and his other teachers, that the wise Brahmans had already revealed to him the most and best of their wisdom, that they had already filled his expecting vessel with their richness, and the vessel was not full, the spirit was not content, the soul was not calm, the heart was not satisfied. The ablutions were good, but they were water, they did not wash off the sin, they did not heal the spirit's thirst, they did not relieve the fear in his heart. The sacrifices and the invocation of the gods were excellent—but was that all? Did the sacrifices give a happy fortune? And what about the gods? Was it really Prajapati who had created the world? Was it not the Atman, He, the only one, the singular one? Were the gods not creations, created like me and you, subject to time, mortal? Was it therefore good, was it right, was it meaningful and the highest occupation to make offerings to the gods? For whom else were offerings to be made, who else was to be worshipped but Him, the only one, the Atman? And where was Atman to be found, where did He reside, where did his eternal heart beat, where else but in one's own self, in its innermost part, in its indestructible part, which everyone had in himself? But where, where was this self, this innermost part, this ultimate part? It was not flesh and bone, it was neither thought nor consciousness, thus the wisest ones taught. So, where, where was it? To reach this place, the self, myself, the Atman, there was another way, which was worthwhile looking for? Alas, and nobody showed this way, nobody knew it, not the father, and not the teachers and wise men, not the holy sacrificial songs! They knew everything, the Brahmans and their holy books, they knew everything, they had taken care of everything and of more than everything, the creation of the world, the origin of speech, of food, of inhaling, of exhaling, the arrangement of the senses, the acts of the gods, they knew infinitely much—but was it valuable to know all of this, not knowing that one and only thing, the most important thing, the solely important thing? - Hess.

This passage is one of the beginning chapters of the story and it helps the reader to understand what is going on in the mind of Siddhartha, the protagonist. Siddhartha had his father and other Brahman priests to impart their wealth of knowledge onto him. However, this does not satisfy him, much less, he even begins to doubt the teachings ability to answer the all important question- what is the core of our existence, the being? In certain parts of the passage, Siddhartha accepts the teachings as being good and excellent like the ablutions, the sacrifices etc.. For Siddhartha, just to abide by the rules and follow the faith blindly was not his calling, he wanted to dig deeper and find the true meaning to our existence.  Later on in the passage, it explains, that Siddhartha, begins to feel that “Atman”, which he believes to lie within, may hold the key to his answer. However, he then decides that the teachings of the priests had everything but lacked the key to his answer. The self discovery path adopted by Siddhartha, is a journey which must turn inward into the self.

I choose this passage, because it lays the ground work, for Siddhartha to feel that he needed to go out of the status quo and do something different. This passage set the tone for the rest of the story, as it propels him to leave his father to go and search for the truth. In western civilization, all the answers to life's problems are sought outside the body. However, in eastern culture, specifically, Hindu and Buddhist cultures, all of life problems are sough to be resolved by looking inside you beginning the journey inward. 

 

1. Why does Siddhartha leave his father?

Siddhartha was born into a Brahman family, which is the highest caste in the complex Indian caste system. Being from such a family, Siddhartha enjoyed social respect, power, and high priests to rely on. Siddhartha was taught almost everything that his father and the other Brahmans knew; however, he was still not content with all this knowledge. The quest for find the “Atman”, which was believed to be the very core of our existence, Siddhartha leaves his father to find the answer to that question.

2. What is the significance of the river?

In the story “Siddhartha”, the river symbolizes life, and our existence. Siddhartha looks at the river and compares it to his own life. Just like how the river is at all places at once, so is his life, being just separated by time. So for Siddhartha nothing is ever past or present, everything is in the present. All the suffering, the torment, the ectasy is all time related. Nothing in our life is permanent. All things are impermanent. What comes must to go and this thing cannot be taught, but only experienced. The river also signifies the coming of full circle of his journey and he is now at peace.

3. Who is Vasu deva?

He is the ferryman, who Siddhartha’s confides in about the discovering the nature of the river and its significance. Vasudever, however, has experienced this feeling long before Siddhartha begins to understand.

4. If Siddhartha never lived with Kamala and the people in the city would he have reached Enlightenment faster?

When Siddhartha left his father, he did so with the motivation to find the real meaning of our existence. Siddhartha, having lived with Kamala and the people of the city, learned to enjoy the sensual pleasures that this world had to offer. This was in contrast to the life he had led to far, which was bound by living a simple life. Siddhartha may have reached enlightenment faster if he had not lived with Kamala and the people of the city, however, he would have failed to understand the true meaning of enlightenment if he had not experienced the sensual world with all its deceptions and faults. Thus, having experienced both side of the world, made Siddhartha appreciate the effects and benefits of the enlightened state of the mind. So, I believe that this was a necessary part of his journey to reach the enlightened state, and there by giving his story more meaning.

5. Why does Siddhartha feel the priests cannot see the true beauty of the world.

Siddhartha is not completely satisfied with the life led by the Brahman priests and their teachings. He feels that they life is led by following rigid conventions, and a religious life heavily bent on tradition, without looking at the logic of the matter and there by with not much meaning. His feels that this path may by good or righteous, but it did not answer the question to our existence. Toward the end of the story, the reader gets to see how Siddhartha comes to see the river, which symbolizes the end of his truth seeking journey and having a feeling of oneness with the river. Siddhartha, feels that the practices of the priests were superficial to a certain degree, and did show a clear path to enlightenment.

Dadaism

Capitalism was defined as the struggle between the owners of capital and those who owned nothing and had to sell their “labor power” to survive. Famously Marx predicted that capitalism would collapse under its own weight since it creates a large proletariat with interests opposed to the interests of the capitalists.

Karl Marx promoted socialism in his lifetime. This definition of capitalism tries to explain that the bourgeoise, who were the ruling class oppressed the proletariat, who were the poor with no capital. So, in essence it also states that the capitalistic form of government made the rich people richer, and the poor people poorer.

Somehow, I do not feel that the prediction of Karl Marx has come true so far. As in the modern world, we see capitalism as a thriving form of economics. Even in a country like China, where their they have a communist form of government, their policies toward business have largely been capitalistic, and China is one of the fastest growing economies of the world. 

OTTO DIX:

Otto Dix was a German painter, born in December 2, 1891. He is particularly noted for his harsh depiction of war in his paintings. He was exposed to art from an early age. Encouraged by his brother, he took up apprenticeship with the landscape painter Carl Senff. By 1910, he completed his apprenticeship and he was subsequently accepted into the Saxon School of Arts and Crafts. Over here encountered influences that would greatly shape his work. He volunteered to enlist in when world war I was declared, and kept a diary where he wrote his experiences. After the war, his experiences at the war led him to depict crippled soldiers as his first great subject. He later moved onto painting nudes, prostitutes, and often savagely, satirical portraits of celebrities from Germany’s intellectual circles. Due to his anti war stance, he became a target of the Nazis during his height of work and fame, and was subsequently removed as his position as art teacher at Dresdan Academy. This also forced him to move away from this particular realm of painting into more different themes like landscape and Christian Subjects. He continued to work until his death in 1969.

SELECTION OF HIS WORKS:

Title: Otto Dix, The Skat Players, 1920.

This painting portrays three German soldiers, all maimed from the water. Two of them miss legs and the third uses his remaining leg to hold cards, since he is missing a hand. Two of them have artificial jaws and one is missing a ear. They are all horribly deformed. Such figures were common sight in Germany and across Europe in the 1920’s. No one wanted to see this people particularly in Germany. They were a reminder of defeat. About 2.5 million people died in the war.

  Title: Otto Dix, Collapsed Trenches, 1924.

Otto Dix used landscape as an integral part of his portrayal of the war cycle. In collapsed trenches the viewer is drawn to the horror as a result of the war. Upon closer examination, we get to see images of skeletons, disarticulated limbs, and other debris of war. The landscape has been made utilized to the maxim, as much as the humans that crawl on it.

Title: Otto Dix, Corpse in a Barbed Wire, 1924

This picture neither glorifies world war I nor heroizes its soldiers, but shows the horrible realities by someone who was there. Dix, an artillery gunner in the trenches at the Somme and on the Eastern Front, focused on the aftermath of battle: dead, dying, and shell-shocked soldiers, bombed-out landscapes, and graves. Dix manipulated the images to render horror images of the war. He portrayed ghastly white bones and stripes of no mans land, leaving brilliant white patches, acid baths ate away at the images showing decaying flesh.