[MD] False Messiah

[Heather Perella]

Hello Smith and all,

 
>  SA:    Smith, I could see the movie more times as
> well,
> as you said there may be more layers to this.  Yet,
> what I am referring to is her wanting to remember
> him.
>  The simplicity in remembering him, could lead into
> an
> idealization of the man, as opposed to the sense
> that
> all of society was caught up in an idea.
  
> Smith: The possibilities are endless ( almost )
> Yet, what
> happened was the people on the march, at the end,
> wore
> a mask of this man.  It was this man that was
> changing
> society, and they were marching behind this man, his
> mask.  He became their leader.  
> Smith: We all wear Masks. In movies there are
> messages and effects. Sometimes they are not
> the same thing.

     From what I might understand from you here, is
the difficulty in trying to have a moral revolution. 
Could the Masks have been pointing to the idea or the
man?  Were they wearing the masks to show that it is
not their flesh and bodies, but the idea, as V
explained, behind the mask that counts for moral
intellectual longevity helping society?  Is this what
you mean by messages and effects not being the same? 
How much intellectuality can be infused, allowed
freedom, and used in society to know the difference
between an intellectual level and societal level
action?
  
> She said at the end,
> that the man was her dad, her mother, the inspector,
> herself, and so on.  This man became somebody bigger
> than one person, he became many people.  Yet, if she
> wants to remember this man that takes on all of
> these
> people, and does not leave the man behind for the
> idea.  If, the rest of the society would discard
> their
> mask of him, and would realize the idea they are
> caught up with, an idea that this masked man was
> caught up with, too, just like everybody else, then
> it
> is the idea, not the man, that provides something to
> remember.

> Smith: Indeed it IS the IDEA. Not everyone is going
> to get it. We live in a society now that
> worships people and turn them into idols...the real
> worry is that the man will buy the idolization 
> and lose sight of the idea or at least make it
> secondary to being the idol.

     Yes exactly when you say, "Indeed it IS the
IDEA," this is the intellectual level higher than
societal level that we studying the MOQ are trying to
bring about more frequently in society.
      
> If she does remember the man, even if not to
> literalize and idealize his life as a man, not the
> idea without the man, then what would future
> generations think about this man she allowed to be
> remembered.  Will she write about this man?  Will
> movies be made?  Will memorial days be set aside in
> memory of this man?  How will she remember this man?
> 
> And how will others look back at this man?  
> 
> SA  
> 
> Smith: Do you think there might be a V2? ( no pun
> intneded )

     If there is, these are issues I would like
cleared up in the style of quality that notices these
kinds of possibilities to these kinds of actions and
thoughts by people in which I stated above.  A V2
would be nice.  I was left hanging with a 'now what?',
but sometimes revolutions come, are achieved, and then
the 'what now' is sometimes not clearly established.  
     As in Iraq, the war must continue to be a war,
until people don't want war anymore.  War is confusing
and the intellectual level is being subverted by the
chaotic level, biological level, and straight on
through by the societal level in a world turned upside
down.  This does not necessarily mean until the U.S.
does not want more war or insurgents don't want more
war, as much as it might mean the Iraq's themselves
don't want war.  By simple location the Iraq's may be
in the best position to have the intellectual level
takes its' place in the evolution of the region.  This
would be the most helpful answer to 'what now'.  
     Not saying the Iraq War is a revolution, but a
case in point, what of the U.S. revolution?  Is there
a character, a state of being, a spirit, something,
'whatever you might call it', that must still exist
after the war part of a revolution is over?  This
would provide for intellectual cut-backs without
getting rid of all the static patterns?  I mean, since
much of the government now is bogged down into a
static structure (bureaucratic structure) that may
think more as a giant and less than as an intellect or
is this statement more of a question?  Thus, the
question would be does the present U.S. government act
more as a giant and less as an intellectual?  More as
a society for what society can do.  Such as have more
$ and compete for status and power with other
countries by working more and more with more and more
$ being the U.S. society's symbol of what is morally
right and wrong in what we do or not do as individuals
in society.  Is the intellectual freedom left out on
this point and others?  Has $ become the barometer of
a good society?  Less intellectually, therefore stiff,
immobile, and paralyzed, not changing and moving like
a well tuned, skillfully trained Bruce Lee handling
situations as they come and go?  

Thanks 
SA

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com