more on 'Private Ryan' It is a good combat movie, but a lousy war movie, because it shows nothing about the

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: jean_camp <jean_camp () harvard edu>
Date: November 15, 2004 11:00:51 AM EST
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] 'Private Ryan' It is a good combat movie, but a lousy  
war movie, because it shows nothing about the

Arguments based on historical ignorance  could be made about a movie  
about the 1712 slave revolt in NY, or the Polynesian War  or the Opium  
Wars.

We can be comfortable that Americans are fairly clear about the role of  
Hitler, the existence of the Holocaust and the value of a valor shown  
in Saving Private Ryan. (Of course not all the men show the same  
courage.)  Watching the movie I became much more aware of the horrors  
borne by a generation of men who would not speak of it in detail,  
certainly not to a female.

The movie paid homage to a generation of warriors. Your comparison of   
that to pornographic is evidence of the vast failure of rational  
discourse. Why would anyone stretch so far from rational discourse as  
to classify this asexual work of recognition of sacrifice,  and  
therefore praise,  as pornographic? Well, because to defeat something  
for which there is no rational argument - only powerful vested  
interests - today we just use words in politics today like tweedledee :  
bad word, subject bad word subject. \

the following is not a rational argument. Who could argue that no one  
understands that defeating Hilter was a noble and life-saving goal?  
Below instead is the free association of the offensive that was used so  
effectively  by Gingrich in  the GOPAC-issued "Language: A Key  
Mechanism of Control".  And here it is again, used to dishonor a  
contribution to theater, and a contribution to the understanding and  
appreciation of the sacrifices of a dying generation.

Oh brave new world.
-Jean


> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Munro, Neil" <NMunro () nationaljournal com>
> Date: November 11, 2004 4:34:17 PM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Subject: RE: 'Private Ryan' It is a good combat movie, but a lousy war  
> movie, because it shows nothing about the
>
> politics that led to the war, or the political results of the war.
>
> (Remember, wars only begin when the defenders fight back -- otherwise  
> the 'wars' are quick conquests -- so they can only be understood in  
> terms of their causes and consequences, not merely their conduct. But  
> all of IP's sophisticates understand this already...)
>
> So, critical parts of World War II include;
>            the survival of 60 million Russians who would otherwise  
> have been killed by the Nazis
>            the liberation of Europe ( including France -- from the  
> Nazis)
>            the benefits of 50 years of peaceful Nazi-free development  
> in a free Europe
>                           and, at the end of a very, very, very long  
> list,
>                                           my children, neither of whom  
> would exist if the democracies had not fought Hitler. .
>
>          Ordinary Americans tend to understand this broader picture  
> better than many intellectuals who amuse themselves and their friends  
> by professing horror of war and thus ignoring the undeniable benefits  
> - and undeniable costs -- of the American Revolutionary War, the Civil  
> War, WWI, the Cold War, the first Iraq war, the war on terrorism, and  
> a myriad other conflicts where ordinary people good defeated bad with  
> courage and weaponry. .
>
>            Because of all this, it should be clear that combat movies  
> which divorce themselves from politics are akin to sex-movies which  
> are divorced from humanity and love.
>
>           Have a peaceful vetreans day.
>
>           Yours,    Neil Munro
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-ip () v2 listbox com on behalf of David Farber
> Sent: Thu 11/11/2004 2:48 PM
> To: Ip
> Subject: [IP] ABC fear FCC fines if they air "Private Ryan"
>
>
>
> Maybe it is because they fear actally showing the US audience what war
> is actually like. djf
>
> ABC affiliates pulling 'Private Ryan'
> Stations in 8 states will pre-empt broadcast of award-winning film due
> to concerns about indecency.
> November 11, 2004: 12:21 PM EST
>
>
> NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - ABC affiliates in at least eight states will not
> televise the network's broadcast of the World War II film "Saving
> Private Ryan" because they fear repercussions from U.S. regulators.
>
>   Affiliates in Alabama, Georgia, Iowa, Massachusetts, North Carolina,
> Ohio, South Carolina and West Virginia said they were worried about
> running afoul of the Federal Communications Commission in Washington.
>
> WOI-TV in Des Moines, Iowa, for example, said it decided to pre-empt
> the Academy Award winning film, which depicts several violent battle
> scenes and contains foul language, over concerns about possible fines
> by the FCC.
>
> "Would the FCC conclude that the movie has sufficient social, artistic,
> literary, historical or other kinds of value that would protect us from
> breaking the law?" WOI-TV President Raymond Cole said in a statement
> appearing on its Web site. "With the current FCC, we just don't know."
>
> Janice Wise, spokeswoman for the FCC's enforcement bureau, told Reuters
> it had received calls from broadcasters asking if the film would run
> afoul of the agency's indecency rules. Wise said the commission was
> barred from making a decision before the broadcast "because that would
> be censorship."
>
> "If we get a complaint, we'll act on it," she said.
>
> But at least one watchgroup group that has urged the FCC to levy
> harsher fines for questionable programming said the broadcast should go
> ahead.
>
> The group, the Parents Television Council, said in a statement on its
> Web site that "context is everything."
>
> "We agreed with the FCC on its ruling that the airing of "Schindler's
> List" on television was not indecent and we feel that "Saving Private
> Ryan" is in the same category," it said. "In both films, the content is
> not meant to shock, nor is it gratuitous."
>
> WOI-TV's Cole noted that the station is still concerned even though it
> has shown "Saving Private Ryan" in prime time on two previous
> occasions.
>
> Since those broadcasts, however, the FCC has taken a strong stand
> recently against obscenity and profanity -- especially after the
> raunchy half-time show during the last Super Bowl telecast. Fines also
> have been levied for radio shows hosted by "shock jocks."
>
> Another affiliate, WSB-TV in Atlanta, said it asked ABC for permission
> to air the film after 10 p.m. and to have the option to edit some of
> the scenes.
>
> "ABC would not allow that, nor would it give permission for us to edit
> out the graphic language," said WSB-TV General Manager Greg Stone in a
> statement.
>
> "With no options available regarding the preparation of the movie or
> altering the start time, we decided to pre-empt the network on this
> night," he added.
>
> Instead, WSB-TV will air several programs produced by its staff.
>
> A fellow affiliate, South Carolina's WSOC-TV, said in a statement on
> its Web site that ABC's contract with Steven Spielberg prohibits
> stations carrying the film to edit its content.
>
> WSOC-TV said it made its decision to withdraw "Saving Private Ryan"
> amid the war in Iraq and concerns about FCC penalties.
>
> In addition, Sinclair Broadcasting Corp.'s six ABC affiliates will not
> air the program, according to a spokeswoman for affiliate WGGB-TV in
> Springfield, Mass. Sinclair affiliates in North Carolina, West
> Virginia, Ohio, Alabama and Massachusetts were also affected.
>
> ABC, a unit of Walt Disney Co. (Research), has said it is proud to air
> the 1999 film again.
>
> "As in the past, this broadcast will contain appropriate and clear
> advisories and parental guidelines, and, as customary, we will provide
> advance screenings for ABC affiliates and advertisers," the network
> said in a statement.
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as nmunro () nationaljournal com
> To manage your subscription, go to
>   http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at:  
> http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as Jean_Camp () harvard edu
> To manage your subscription, go to
>  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at:  
> http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ 
> <winmail.dat>

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/