Nathan's Super Secret London Thingy

POSTED BY: Chindi
UPDATED: Sunday, July 1, 2007 01:25
VIEWED: 18976
PAGE 5 of 6

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

ANTHONYT

Monday, June 11, 2007 12:35 PM

"Equality is a matter of respect, not brute force."

This is interesting to me. I consider women to be equals to men, but I don't agree with this analogy.

Equality is not a matter of respect. People don't become my equal because I respect them.

Respect does not breed Equality, in my opinion, but rather the reverse. Equality breeds Respect. Women who are physically inferior to me have consistently, throughout my life, shown their great intelligence, compassion, and innovation. They make physical strength a non-issue, thus demonstrating equality and earning respect.

It's important, in my mind, to understand that Equality doesn't mean, "Any woman can be as strong as any man," but rather "Any woman can be as good/effective with her own talents and attributes as any man can be with his." In essence, a pound of sand and a pound of feathers are very different things, but they are still a pound.

So, women have earned my respect by being my equal. They did not become my equal when I respected them. They were always my equal. The respect was a consequence, not a catalyst.

*********************************
*********************************

As for Strength Without Force... it's not a new concept, as I've said already. I've never equated compassion and love with weakness. But I also believe you can be full of love and compassion and use violent Force for the better good.

Violence is a tool. Like a wrench. And it solves its share of problems. Action films are usually filled with those kinds of problems, thus creating the false impression that violence is the only form of strength that 'the modern man' respects.

It's not. We make Dramas and Comedies and all other sorts of films, too. Works of art where violence is not the primary tool for solving problems. Rather, self-realization, wisdom, and internal growth and change seem to be the tools of choice for heroes in those genre.

So... this art project seems largely redundant to me. It has nothing new to say, and leverages itself on a false premise.

Or am I the only man on this board who hasn't used violence to solve problems in the past year?

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

HOPERULES

Monday, June 11, 2007 4:02 PM

When reading this tread I DON'T see where people have attacking men who admit to compassion, kindness, and love.

Rather, they have been questioning the effectiveness of this project. This is a legitmate question because the people Mr. Firrell seems to be trying to reach are probably not that into art.

Also, some people on this thread are standing up of the "old breed of hero" who is kind and compassionate, but often expresses it through actions, not necessarily words and, yes, sometimes uses the tool of force to stand for what is right and protect others. This kind of hero risks everything for love. Mr. Firrell's project seems to be attacking him by implying he is not good enough. That somehow he is too violent. What is strange about this criticism is that the "old breed of hero" does not even always use force.

By the way, this "old breed of hero" does really exists. Please check out earlier posts for examples.

Finally, I wish people would stop attacking men as a group. I know there are some bad ones out there. However, generally I have found men to be funny, honest, kind without being sappy, competitive in a way that is fun to watch, practical when solving problems, romantic, and protective of those they love. I like all these qualities and think the world is a better place because there are men in it.

May have been on the losing side, still not convinced it was the wrong one.

ANONYMOUS1

Monday, June 11, 2007 4:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by jetflair:
Someone commented that the project might appeal to women that feel men have to get weaker for women to be equal. That rankles me a bit.

Read what I said again.

It is not that the artwork would appeal to THOSE women but that the artwork might be trying to get THOSE WOMEN to accept the strength that exists in men. And not try to make men weaker.

What I was trying to say that maybe the artist is trying to get through to the women who think men have to get weaker to make women equal. You know THOSE women are out there. THOSE women (NOT YOU. NOT ME. ) feel threatened by any sign of strength in men.

MAL4PREZ

Monday, June 11, 2007 5:59 PM

Does anyone else question the artistic intent and presentation of this whole thing? I'm not seeing much actual critique of the creation, just a lot of disagreement over the message behind it. (Which, I think, is very telling.)

My take is this: the artist clearly has something to say something about the behavior and mentality of men in our society, (am I'm pretty sure I could like that message, and debate it all day...) but his way to do it is to make a few grossly general statements and then shine colored lights on a guy's face.

Am I the only one who sees this as just plain silly? It's impersonal, even superficial. Why was Nathan chosen? Because a few things in that general statement "rang true" with him? Because he looks good all lit up like a christmas tree? That's all there is in the video!

Wouldn't it be nice if there was something about *Nathan* in the little vid, so we get a grip on why he's being presented as a hero? Without something personal, this whole message is, imo, useless. Who (besides us obsessed folk) is going to give a damn? And even with us, who've heard stories and stories of how great Nathan is, it seems half the discussion on this thread is about Malcolm Reynolds. Again, very telling. We were given nothing to make us see Nathan on the screen instead of Mal. But they're completely different men!! Which is the artist calling a hero? Sure, I know it's Nathan, but again I ask - why?

Yeah, so I've thought about it and I'm agreeing with TVchick. This thing is just pointless. Unless there's a whole lot more to it that has actual content...

-----------------------------------------------
I'm the president. I don't need to listen.

HOPERULES

Monday, June 11, 2007 6:47 PM

Mal4prez, you have a good point. I guess I've been reacting to the message I can glean from a few words and some funky pictures. It may not even be the message the artist is trying send. It is hard to tell.

Why Nathan? Good question. I think it is probably his looks. Not a bad reason. I don't know if Mr. Firrell knows Nathan well enough to understand his character. Nathan seems like a good guy who is generous, funny, smart, and charming. Does that make him a hero? I'm not sure. Personally, I've always seen heroes as the kind of people who run into burning buildings to save lives (firefighters and superheroes), protect society from violent evil doers (police officers and superheroes), and go to Africa to help the extremely poor and sick (saints).

I just had a thought. Maybe Nathan is secretly a superhero.

May have been on the losing side, still not convinced it was the wrong one.

ANONYMOUS1

Tuesday, June 12, 2007 1:04 AM

Nathan is my hero because he helped save a cancelled convention.

Remember we are only seeing Nathan's part of the artwork. And also only what the artist put on the internet SO FAR. We have no idea what will be displayed on the museum. I am thinking that the part where Nathan talks is not going to be shown on the museum. BUT I don't know.

MAL4PREZ

Tuesday, June 12, 2007 3:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Anonymous1:
Nathan is my hero because he helped save a cancelled convention.

Too true! I was there, and I'm still amazed at how this man can bring a room to life. I even got a handout from him.

Quote:
Remember we are only seeing Nathan's part of the artwork. And also only what the artist put on the internet SO FAR. We have no idea what will be displayed on the museum. I am thinking that the part where Nathan talks is not going to be shown on the museum. BUT I don't know.

Oh, I like the part where Nathan talks. I just can't believe there isn't more of that. Maybe there is, somewhere... but this clip is the one the artist chose to represent his body of work. It makes me wonder if the rest is greatly different.

Hoperules - if it's truly Nathan's pretty face the artist is out to show off, that's an odd statement about what the New Male Hero could be. (I'd even go so far as to say that rugged good looks are squarely in the Old Hero regime. Or maybe an Old Hero would beat up anyone who tried to shine girly lights on his face?

) It's soooo disappointing. Nathan is so much more than looks. We all know that, but it's not showing in the clip.

I do hope more is posted. I think the message, as much as I can figure it, could be a great one. Very needed by our violent, bullying society, which also happen to be largely male dominated and - hey - has anyone noticed that these school shootings are always done by males? I don't at all mean to pick on you Y chromozone folks. I think the flawed thing is the message our society gives you - that violence is the most fitting way to vent male unhappiness. That message isn't given to girls and young women. We're allowed to do other, more reasonable things.

It's just flawed, I tell you! So kudos to Mr. Firrell for at least getting this discussion going.

-----------------------------------------------
I'm the president. I don't need to listen.

ANONYMOUS1

Tuesday, June 12, 2007 4:40 PM

Did everybody watch the behind the scenes stuff?

HOPERULES

Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:25 PM

I doubt that school shooters are trying to emulate heroes like Malcolm Reynolds or Pat Tillman. I think they are more likely to be coping serial killers like Hannibal Lecter or Charles Manson.

How come men as group don't get the credit for the good things members of their gender do, but get the blame for the bad things members of their gender do? It doesn't seem fair to judge entire group of people based on the behavior of some in that group.

May have been on the losing side, still not convinced it was the wrong one.

ANONYMOUS1

Wednesday, June 13, 2007 12:24 AM

Read on Our Captain's myspace today that students are being shown Nathan's Super Secret London Thingy in school. EEEK, trapped audiences.

So dregs can see it walking by the museum, maybe on a public broadcasting station, on the internet (lots of us dregs here) at libraries or whatever, and in the classrooms at schools and universities.

Maybe court ordered viewing. Heh.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE