"a fish, a barrel, and a smoking gun" |
The Third Time As "Tragedy" Good morning - or, as Leonardo DiCaprio prefers, "Good morrow." Do you still feel guilty for not voting? As local citizens flocked ovinely to the polls, cutting short hurried breakfasts to drop another polite turd on the statistical dungheap, more than a few web wiseacres took the opportunity for a cheap laugh or a bitter jibe. As those helpful English lads told us all last spring, "voting is pointless, humanity has evolved beyond the point of democracy," etc. Or, as our own Bryant
Street Bakunin "People believe electoral politics is democracy because they have been brainwashed, period." Me, I voted! But I have to admit the process lacked drama. Where's the thrill in voting compared to, say, storming the Bastille? Isn't there supposed to be a revolution going on? Oh, you were talking about a digital revolution? Well, still. I fear that in this one rare instance our friends the anarcholibertarian revolutionaries may be misled. Humanity has not evolved beyond the point of democracy. Voting is not pointless. Voting has a very definite point. The point of voting is to build traffic. Here, go ahead. Help Dave and Buster out. But let's think for a second about that sense of disappointment. Wouldn't a nice little social cataclysm have livened things up? It is not just the Tofflers et al. who thrill to the sound of some third wave crashing down. The hope for a bitter end and for the looted luxuries of revolution suffused the fat fall Vogue, in which, among the photographs of clothing inspired by military officers and by the Empire's stylish beneficiaries of the tumbrel, we read that photographer François Halard keeps a Sevrès cast of Marie Antoinette's breast on his mantle, next to a Twombly print. The familiar rhetoric of revolution has a history of gentrification, of course. Right-wingers wield it with self-congratulatory irony and our highly regarded colleagues in the digital garrets of the '90s (not sans-culottes, certainly, but with a definite preference for shorts) use it to garrote the more traditional fourth estate. And just at the moment when these revolutionary cries rise and then seem to die
disappointingly peculiar golden colors of an imaginary revolutionary aftermath begin to appear in fashion advertisements and in movies inspired by fashion advertisements. For instance, on the shores of Verona Beach, Leonardo DiCaprio (Premiere calls him "D," his cute set nickname) and his Montague homies twirl their guns and wait for the vile Capulets to show. Verona is postapocalyptic, but this is no Blade Runner. The waves lap seductively, the boys and girls wear pretty clothes, and Ms.
Dionysus note that people dance and shoot at each other as a form of joyful sport. And despite the ending, when Juliet puts a bullet through her head surrounded by hundreds of lit candles, what you have here, mainly, is a happy apocalypse. I'm all in favor. We all know already that the cries of faux-rebellion are linked in fantasy not to the terrors they articulate but to the unspoken wish for and anticipation of a restoration of order - and not even with a different gang on top, though maybe with a few new members. That's the harmless rhetorical fun of it. Sometimes, though, I worry. If the wonderful Luhrmann missed the point, and presented Romeo and Juliet as innocent victims rather than as crazy kids drunk on rhetoric who didn't know when to stop, might our friends and colleagues make the same mistake? Will the anarchists and libertarians and revolutionaries you find theorizing in South Park and Silicon Alley actually poison themselves on resentment? After delivering their lines, will they fail to snap out of it? "I've completely embraced the concept of 'tragedy,'" said Claire Danes recently to W, leaving readers to wonder whether the actress's intonation or the irony of New York copy editors had added the quotation marks. Right on, Claire. Here in the land of digital politics, we've completely embraced the concept of "revolution." But God protect us and the mansions of our masters from "a universal rebellion on the part of the people." Like the porcelain-breasted Antoinette and her indecisive husband, they don't really have a taste for violence. Shooting and looting make them nervous. This suggests a business opportunity. The Palo Alto papers have been advertising etiquette classes for high-tech companies whose engineers and executives don't know how to hold a fork. The next step: bejewelled armaments, such as longswords and flamethrowers, plus classes on how to handle them, for our friends who want to take their fantasies to the next level. The ultimate in digital edutainment: shooting the pike from the hands of a knave at the head of a mob in Hillsborough. courtesy of Dr. McLoo
| |
![]() |