<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bookmarks for Feb. 4-9</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rowthree.com/2010/02/09/bookmarks-for-feb-4-9/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rowthree.com/2010/02/09/bookmarks-for-feb-4-9/</link>
	<description>Where Cinema is more than just $100 Million productions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:49:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rot</title>
		<link>http://www.rowthree.com/2010/02/09/bookmarks-for-feb-4-9/#comment-40816</link>
		<dc:creator>rot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:10:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rowthree.com/?p=25778#comment-40816</guid>
		<description>Soderbergh: &quot;I guess the point of some art is to illuminate. I just don&#039;t see any evidence that it&#039;s happening. It happens for ten minutes and then everybody&#039;s thinking about where they want to go eat.&quot;

A-fucking-men.

I agree entirely with what he is saying, film has become disposable geek curiosity, people are preoccupied with the packaging and not the content.  Movie blog culture has spurred this on because I believe movie blog culture is foremost movie geek culture (fetishizing the trees to the detriment of seeing the woods).  I looked long and hard and I do not see much by way of approaching film as art discussion outside of the carcass of academic inquiry, and I find that just as misguided.

Its not just films that are disposable, art has become disposable, art has no meaning in this culture, and it has no meaning because, I suspect, there is so little time for introspection, we work long hours and fill our free time with distractions and there is nothing for the art to engage with anymore.  the art requires something from its audience to work, but that audience is diminishing, and even those who can relate to it, are immersed in a culture that is missing the vocabulary to articulate it.

I am somewhat hopeful about the democratization of creative expression, and the attempts to overturn corporate copyright of our shared culture to create a healthy public domain for new generations to expand upon... its not the technology, its the cult of efficiency that I see as deadening us.  

I say this as someone subsumed by the culture, I feel worn down, preoccupied, less attune to the art.  Case in point, I watched half of Che part 1 but grew tired because of getting up early for work, and had to turn it off, and truthfully, that is not giving the film its proper due, I feel like I am missing something, I am not as sharp as I was, especially when I was working part-time and drifting.  People in France work less hours and have more vacation time and I think that kind of culture is more accepting of indulgences like art.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Soderbergh: &#8220;I guess the point of some art is to illuminate. I just don&#8217;t see any evidence that it&#8217;s happening. It happens for ten minutes and then everybody&#8217;s thinking about where they want to go eat.&#8221;</p>
<p>A-fucking-men.</p>
<p>I agree entirely with what he is saying, film has become disposable geek curiosity, people are preoccupied with the packaging and not the content.  Movie blog culture has spurred this on because I believe movie blog culture is foremost movie geek culture (fetishizing the trees to the detriment of seeing the woods).  I looked long and hard and I do not see much by way of approaching film as art discussion outside of the carcass of academic inquiry, and I find that just as misguided.</p>
<p>Its not just films that are disposable, art has become disposable, art has no meaning in this culture, and it has no meaning because, I suspect, there is so little time for introspection, we work long hours and fill our free time with distractions and there is nothing for the art to engage with anymore.  the art requires something from its audience to work, but that audience is diminishing, and even those who can relate to it, are immersed in a culture that is missing the vocabulary to articulate it.</p>
<p>I am somewhat hopeful about the democratization of creative expression, and the attempts to overturn corporate copyright of our shared culture to create a healthy public domain for new generations to expand upon&#8230; its not the technology, its the cult of efficiency that I see as deadening us.  </p>
<p>I say this as someone subsumed by the culture, I feel worn down, preoccupied, less attune to the art.  Case in point, I watched half of Che part 1 but grew tired because of getting up early for work, and had to turn it off, and truthfully, that is not giving the film its proper due, I feel like I am missing something, I am not as sharp as I was, especially when I was working part-time and drifting.  People in France work less hours and have more vacation time and I think that kind of culture is more accepting of indulgences like art.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

