Roger Ebert tears apart the self-indulgent, vapid and materialistic “Sex and the City” franchise while enjoying every written word in the process. The man knows life is too short for his readers to waste their time sitting through such a film. Thanks to Ebert for doing it for us.
I have never attempted to put into words why I choose to blog. (Maybe some day I will.) Some decisions you make without fully articulating, let alone understanding why you make them. Sometimes you act and nothing more need be said.
However, were I to explain why I blog, I think it might sound something like this recent post from Roger Ebert. In addressing the nexus between writing and the Internet, Ebert writes:
What the internet is creating is a class of literate, gifted amateur writers, in an old tradition. Like Trollope, who was a British Post official all his working life, they write for love and because they must. Like Rohinton Mistry, a banking executive, or Wallace Stevens, an insurance executive, or Edmund Wilson, who spent his most productive years sitting in his big stone house in upstate New York and writing about what he damned well pleased. Samuel Pepys, who wrote the greatest diary in the language, was a high officials in the British Admiralty. Many people can write well and yearn to, but they are not content, like Pepys, for their work to go unread. A blog on the internet gives them a place to publish. Maybe they don’t get a lot of visits, but it’s out there. As a young women in San Francisco, Pauline Kael wrote the notes for screenings of great films, and did a little free-lancing. If she’d had a blog, no telling what she might have written during those years.
Ebert uses this as a jumping off point for a larger discussion on advice for young people tackling their own ambitions:
Yes! This is the best possible advice. I tell young students: Take film courses, certainly. But cover the liberal arts. Take English literature, drama, art, music, and the areas Bordwell lists. Learn something about science and math. A physical anthropology course was my introduction to the theory of evolution, which is an opening to all of modern science. Don’t train for a career—train for a life. The career will take care of itself, and give you more satisfaction than a surrender to corporate or professional bureaucracy. If you make careers in that world, you will be more successful because your education was not narrow.
Roger Ebert’s most recent blog post entitled “Video games can neve be art” responds to a TED talk given at USC by Kellee Santiago about whether a video game could ever be considered art. Ebert faults Santiago for failing to deliver a good definition of art on which to base her argument that video games can be art. Ebert later admits that settling on any definition of art is difficult. He gives a few different versions, but fails to settle on one. His main point is that like pornography, we know it when we see it. After all art appeals to the non-rational part of our brain. Some emotional responses cannot be explained. We simply feel something and we call what ever made us feel that way, art.
Ebert continues by arguing that art is a subjective matter of taste. Shit in a can or art, you decide. But I think both Santiago and Ebert miss something in their back-and-forth. Like Ebert and Santiago, I also have difficulty stating a satisfying definition of art. But instead of asking the question what is art, how about asking why does art exist? Why does the artist need to create art? Why are people compelled to seek it out? I think these questions give more satisfying answers. For me, the artist looks at the world and sees something missing. Or he sees something within himself that is absent from the world and he feels the need to express what is inside of him. This desire is not rational, neither is what the artist creates. Some people will respond to it. Some will call it art, many will not. That is the subjective element of taste to which Ebert refers.
As Ebert notes when words like: Development, Finance, Publishing, Marketing, Education, and Executive Management are attached to Ms. Santiago’s presentation her argument becomes a lot more difficult to make. But Mr. Ebert as a lover of film, surely an art form in his estimation, knows that the same words often attach to his favorite art form. Yet, beyond the agents, the corporate mentality, and the target marketing, art and film come together all the time. Some artists just require a little more corporate underwriting than others. Ultimately, the best test of art may not be asking what is it, but why it is.
(Photo: Kaschkawalturist/Wikimedia Commons)
The laws of nature are simple, adapt to survive. Look at Roger Ebert. In 2002 Ebert was diagnosed with thyroid cancer and later with cancer of the salivary glands. After successive surgeries Ebert no longer has a jaw. He can no longer speak and and eats through a feeding tube. After these many setbacks Ebert faced a choice, adapt or go home. Since his illnesses began Ebert has remained as strong a movie critic as ever. Further, he has found an even stronger voice as a writer. He writes a popular blog that touches on a wide range of topics beyond film. He continues to push his physical limitations while carrying on his prolific writing of film literature. Even though the show “At the Movies” started by him and Gene Siskel was recently canceled, he pushes forward. Instead of treating this like another setback, he is working on creating another show geared around film review and critique. Adapt or go home. Roger Ebert is not going anywhere.
Roger Ebert began writing for the Chicago Sun-Times in 1967. The change in film since then has been immense. Just think, “2001: A Space Odyssey” had yet to be released. Since then he has remained relevant for more than four decades. In that time the studio model of film production has been reworked, trashed, and revived several times over. The central importance of theater attendance has been reduced with the spread of cable and satellite, HD television, the Internet, and Netflix. In the newest era of film-making, an ever widening gap exists between high budget blockbusters and low budget independent films. The number of films produced in the middle continues to shrink. Yet, none of this means that film is any less relevant to society. Roger Ebert understands this and wants to capitalize on it.
Roger Ebert has another great post on his blog this past week addressing America’s excess in the the post-World War II era and the check that has now come due. Although, many have mentioned it, Ebert’s writings are as strong as ever. His writings also reflect a man whose passion has been undiminished by his various physical ailments. Ebert’s post is a must read reflection on the current state of American society.
