tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8347718.post7295408130096203465..comments2024-03-28T02:21:05.851-07:00Comments on VINYL IS HEAVY: EMPIRE Burlesque, or: Obfuscation and Its DiscontentsRyland Walker Knighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09233954424885027837noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8347718.post-14720784900048863972007-02-16T14:04:00.000-08:002007-02-16T14:04:00.000-08:00There IS a "logic" but it's not some Aristotilean ...There IS a "logic" but it's not some Aristotilean syllogism, you know? And it's not simply a "dream" logic. I really think if you read some Borges you'll get into how Lynch's movies work. Then again, Lynch films clicked for me before I ever wrestled with <I>Ficciones</I>. I dunno... maybe I'm just a silly fanboy; albeit, one with strong reading skills. The gist: a Lynch film is a "network of possibilities" with endless readings given all the signs and oddities, one which shouldn't take too much effort, really, to sort out and observe how it operates. If you want to see it again, and you're up here, and it's still playing, I'll go with you.<BR/><BR/>One other thing I thought about, that kind of pertains to how to deal with the obfuscation, or, how I dealt with it, and read it. I used the word "maze" in my review when "labrynth" could have worked, too, but I like "maze" because it lends an idea of getting to an end, which this film definitely does. It goes left and right and up and down and backwards before forewards but it seems like a quest. A labrynth is an ever-evolving space that continually tricks its inhabitants (much like this movie) but I always get the sense that labrynths are inescapable; a maze seems surmountable. But, once again, I'm blabbering about semantics...that make sense?<BR/><BR/>(Also, yeah, I kept the map cuz I liked it but I thought for the lead pic we needed something from the movie.)Ryland Walker Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09233954424885027837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8347718.post-40624296043684856642007-02-16T13:42:00.000-08:002007-02-16T13:42:00.000-08:00Thanks for the comments, guys.LO--Yeah, I don't do...Thanks for the comments, guys.<BR/><BR/>LO--Yeah, I don't doubt that for Lynch and Lynch fans, the pieces and symbolism come together and form a meaningful work of art, I'm just not sure how much work one should have to put into it, you know? I mean, you can see symbols and meaning in anything if you look hard enough, and it just seems like it's sort of like reading tea leaves or something, one person can see prophesies where another just sees randomness. I think a second viewing would be good for me in just viewing the film on a visceral level, and the pieces would no doubt fall more into place because I'd know what to look for. And maybe the champagne of beers would help too.<BR/><BR/>Rylie--I think maybe I meant signs when I said symbolism, because I agree that things in the movie should not be understood as referring to things outside the text. So when I say I struggled to interpret IE, I was struggling to make the connections between various elements of the film and other elements of the film, not with outside elements. If that makes any sense at all. <BR/><BR/>But another problem with trying to experience a film like this on a purely sensational level and not overthink it is that for me at least, when I let my conscious mind go I can't help but think about things like context, authorial intent, and the fact that Laura Dern is really a paleobotanist. It's only through close attention to the signs and symbols that I can really get into Lynch's internal logic. But perhaps "logic" and "David Lynch" are mutually exclusive concepts. <BR/>Also, thanks for the pic. I guess the map represents my literal mindedness or something...Stephen J. Farrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10106162903606241014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8347718.post-7595947446300295202007-02-16T13:04:00.000-08:002007-02-16T13:04:00.000-08:00Yes and no, but the yes is a tenuous, spiritual on...Yes and no, but the yes is a tenuous, spiritual one. No, because, some, if not all of the film plays out in The Valley (as well as Poland, another landlocked country).<BR/><BR/>But really, the title's all about the interior of the individual, and not just whomever Laura Dern is playing.Ryland Walker Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09233954424885027837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8347718.post-47702851072533653492007-02-16T12:57:00.000-08:002007-02-16T12:57:00.000-08:00I understood that Lynch's title was a reference to...I understood that Lynch's title was a reference to the Pacific Northwest's <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Empire_%28Pacific_Northwest%29" REL="nofollow">Inland Empire</A>, not California's. Since that's where Lynch grew up, and all.Sean Gilmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16124894627028920508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8347718.post-25470737603632839642007-02-16T10:00:00.000-08:002007-02-16T10:00:00.000-08:00Assume that "writing" refers to all texts, which e...Assume that "writing" refers to all texts, which everything is, no doubt:<BR/><BR/>"In the multiplicity of writing, everything is to be <I>disentangled</I>, nothing <I>deciphered</I>; ... the space of writing is to be ranged over, not pierced"<BR/>-- Roland Barthes, <I>Death of the Author</I><BR/><BR/>SO! It's an entirely different way of reading, basically. You said yourself "The creator of a work has said all he or she needs to say about it in the work itself" which gets at the way to read it: how does it work? Looking for symbols means there's something outside the text you're trying to bring in; I'd say there are signs to look at and notice but symbolism is a tricky, narrow word. For instance, the rabbits are obviously some kind of sign, right? What are they doing? Whenever they open that door, or answer the phone, they're engaging the rest of the picture so they're not supposed to be representative of anybody else in the movie; they're some kind of gag at the most base level but also another mode of marriage and acting and inter-personal relations, I think. But they're the least interesting thing there, probably. More interesting are those hotties from hell, or the "confession" scene, or Crimp and how he works into each level of storytelling.<BR/><BR/>Thank you for giving up (almost) three hours of your life to this movie, Stephen. I hope you enjoyed it a little...and don't hate me. Your account is valid, too, and if you don't get it -- and don't really care to get it -- so be it. I can cherish it. itititititititit.....<BR/><BR/>Did you watch the whole end credits? I think they're pretty "sweet"...Ryland Walker Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09233954424885027837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8347718.post-37558274711663287142007-02-16T07:48:00.000-08:002007-02-16T07:48:00.000-08:00Man, your summary of the frustrations you had in c...Man, your summary of the frustrations you had in comprehending the film and Lynch's intentions pretty much sums up why I've hated every movie of his for the past fifteen years (until this one). Like, I don't have a problem with surrealism or non-linear plot or weird shit, but it has to come together on some level to be a complete work. Doubtless, I think in Lynch's mind and to his fans, movies like Lost Highway and Mullholland DO come together and connect perfectly, if you put together the pieces and symbolism and blah blah blah. I've tried hard, though, and been willing to give the benefit of the doubt in those cases, and those films still just don't come together in the end...or if they do it is only by a stretch of the viewer's imagination, not because they were well executed artistically. <BR/><BR/>As for INLAND, just do what I did. Sneak in a six-pack of Miller High Life tall cans and stop worrying about all that pesky comprehension. Nice work, though...Leile Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01025772776851448499noreply@blogger.com