Alan Rickman, the Fox (Aidan Quinn too)

Today at IFI we watched Michael Collins, a Neil Jordan film I knew absolutely nothing about, and a person I also knew absolutely nothing about until later on in the day, of course...

We unfortunately didn't get to discuss it much in class, but we all seemed to find it at the very least entertaining and full of awesome stars: Alan Rickman, Liam Neesom, Aidan Quinn, and Julia Roberts (only semi-good, as usual)

Salah echoed Kevin Rockett's comment about how the Michael/Kitty/Harry love triangle in the film became more important than the general/historic for some, but I thought that perhaps if we had more time to talk about it, I, and hopefully others, certainly would have brought up the idea that the goings-on in Ireland in the film, and the love triangle itself, were working together in the narrative. I thought the love triangle was not really taking over, so much as being used as a way to get the audience to feel how divisive the civil war was to friends and people living in Ireland, to get them to feel the betrayal seekers of the republic felt by those who accepted the treaty as a stepping stone, and vice versa. I mean, Ireland is often represented as a beautiful woman (Cathleen ni Houlahan), in this case, both loved by two men who are best friends. The romantic love Kitty has for Michael and not for Harry, though of course she treasures both as friends, and inseperable ones at that, eventually rends the two from each other, and both from her. It is interesting also that Michael "gets the girl" just as he gets the treaty for his country, the free state, but loses his best friend Harry, and the trust and fellowship of some of his people, De Valera being the most notable. Michael proposes the Treaty to England and its Queen, and also proposes marriage to Kitty. Harry and Michael are linked to Kitty in love and friendship prior, but go their seperate ways after the treaty. To me, these things seem not subtly but evidently linked.

Perhaps it was just because we had another lecture, but I somehow feel that Salah thinks that we are nothing more than we might seem to be. Ignorant American college students out in Ireland for the freedom to binge drink and be away from home, responsibilities and reputations. I hate the fact that some professors, rather than prod and really try to get us to think critically, present history upon history and dense rhetorical pieces and then especially with the more salient things like film and literature, ask us what we thought, and if we say, "we love alan rickman," we can't possibly have a critical or intelligent thought in our heads. It is early on to make such a judgement, but I really only want to express it as a feeling, that I get the feeling that some of that is there. He asks questions after we talk about our perception of something, tries to get us to not generalize, which I think is good, but that's not actually helping us branch out from our own perception or opinion. Challenging us would be nice, I hate being left out in the cold to think by myself, I love talking with others. You never know who will say what or learn what, sometimes the most critical answers come from the most surprising of mouths, and I don't want to be bedgrudged of that experience, if I can. If I am, I'll attempt it unofficially ;).


PS:I foamed about 300, again today.... So help me Frank Miller, I'll see you in Hell.
AND a great speaker talked to us today (I might write more about his speech later) and mentioned Yeats and hinted at his aristocratic fascism... AND TS Eliot's, high art and all, it was lovely, and Joyce's denounciation of both. I read Yeats later, some poems I hadn't read before, and I was pretty astonished by how blatant it was...
I can't wait to read Ulysses, another self assignment for the year!

I also told the genital herpes story to a new audience, gets better every time ;)