4 ms·
This film struck me as an educated elitist view of the lumpenproletariat. Once upon a time, an itinerant person was the one who idled by reading, rather than wo
by oinksoft 14y ago
This film struck me as an educated elitist view of the lumpenproletariat. Once upon a time, an itinerant person was the one who idled by reading, rather than working, or enjoying the more "vigorous" pleasures of the hunt, etc. Reading novels was thought (and by some, still is) to delude the mind with fantasies. New mediums are often derided.
I also found the film prudish, implying that having a large family can only be a product of ignorance and animalistic tendencies.
- rglover 14y agoI also found the film prudish, implying that having a large family can only be a product of ignorance and animalistic tendencies. I believe you're referring to the family tree scene where the affluent couple wants to conceive but they cannot. Instead, they parallel their experience against the destitute couple breeding at an infinite rate. I don't believe this should be a slight against having a large family, but rather, doing so under mindless pretenses. To be blunt: just having sex to have sex, not to procreate with a purpose.
- oinksoft 14y agoThis would be my statement to the writer: Sex for sex' sake is far from mindless, and a child conceived in love is no worse than one who is the product of deliberation and effort. Also, pregnancies are equally likely to be deliberated amongst low-income families, especially in rural societies.
- rayiner 14y agoThe film is a masturbatory exercise aimed at 18-25 year old males with Ayn Rand fetishes.