If his big-thighed, huge-busted, sometimes gaping. And the greatest testament to this would be the fact that, now returning to the documentary, some would disagree with, or find themselves disdained by, Robert Crumb's work. In turn, we want to find ourselves, or shades of ourselves, in others through the stimuli they put out into the world. This 'truth' then seems to fall under postmodern definitions whereby all realities are merely relative and subjective no truths really existing.Ĭall it what you will, define it as you may, the truth we reveal about our subconscious, our inner self, our id. By writing hundreds of posts about films, I am thus revealing some deeper truth within myself to you one that probably reveals a lot more character than I can fathom - added to this, the subtext of this entire blog would probably allow you to assume things about myself that I'd completely disagree with. Either way, what seems to be underlying this interaction is an exchanging of an inquantifiable substance between two minds. Maybe this is you collecting ideas from me as I spurt them out into the ether, maybe this is just you re-affirming your own self-claimed obsession with that thing you call cinema, or maybe it's something else I haven't the imagination or foresight to put down in words right now. However, as you read this, probably a stranger to myself, an abstract, rather meaningless notion and just a number on my dashboard, there is some sense of communication. As I write, I'm merely vocalising my own thoughts so that they don't remain ambiguous abstractions in the back of my mind - all so that I have a more concrete understanding of, or opinion on, this thing I tell myself I'm obsessed with: cinema. An example of this would be this very blog. This self-centric process isn't entirely purposeless and self-isolating, instead, there is often a capacity for vicarious interaction within it. In my opinion, art, whether it be labelled as such or as mere entertainment, is the latter a writer sits and masturbates in front of his laptop, trying to squeeze out something that either draws attention to himself, or just allows him to scream about himself. Is it supposed to simply entertain, or is a much more self-centric endeavour are the things people create supposed to please others, or is it all self-gratification that others vicariously gain something from? And in such we find the debate on the function of art. This led to the critique that Crumb's work was no longer satirical and empowering to women, rather pornographic and offensive - to some. As the documentary depicts, this shift saw Crumb's work stop emphasising a natural feminine form, one that is curvaceous and bulky, not always conventionally pretty nor 'feminine', and start fetishising and exploiting women's bodies in a very direct and simplistic manner. This would make many people pretty uncomfortable, and some of these voices find their way into this documentary - especially in regard to his shift from light satire to a darker sense of sexuality. Crumb's work is highly sexual and seemingly self-serving (in that he indulges his own fetishes). Through Crumb's work, the main question you may raise is on the perception of others - specifically, those of another sex women. So, within this documentary seems to be a pretty prevalent discussion being had, one that essentially questions the functions and purposes of art. I also get the feeling that this resonates with many people who create art of some sort as I came across this film having watched a bunch of the Criterion Closet Visit YouTube videos in which filmmakers sift through an array of films distributed by Criterion. And this is certainly what resonated with me when watching this documentary. This isn't a topic unique to this documentary, nor Crumb's work, but there are very few better examples you can find of an artist using his or her work as a means of communicating or unleashing something within themselves than from this film. In such, this narrative explores many of the topics and themes of Crumb's career as an artist, primarily, an idea of the unconscious or, to use Freudian terminology, the id. Whilst Crumb starts on slightly shaky ground with an uncaptivating opening 10 minutes or so, it quickly assumes an incredibly idiosyncratic (a word I'll try not to use a million times over) view that delves unrelentingly into Robert's persona for the remainder of the run-time. This subject is Robert Crumb, the famous cartoonist known for his surreal, sexual and perplexing work - most of which was focused on somewhat warped female figures with huge thighs, breasts and asses. Crumb is a brilliant documentary, well shot, edited and directed with a terrific central subject.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |