On occasion a number of disparate news stories come together in ways which illuminate aspects of our current cultural and societal tensions. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced the Oscar nominations last night. There were few surprises among their announcements. As The New York Times described them, themes that are championed by "liberals" dominated the nominations :
In a year when size has counted for less than serious intent among voters, Oscar nominations were divvied up on Tuesday among mainly small films with deep political and social themes, from gay romance to the abuse of government power to racial relations to the cycle of vengeance in the Middle East.
"I think this year is the year that small movies get attention because they deal with complexities, they go to the gray area," said Ang Lee, the director of "Brokeback Mountain," which garnered the most nominations, eight, including best picture and best director.
"They deal with issues, and they ask questions; they don't really give resolution," he added. "That's the mood this year."
"Brokeback Mountain," a love story between two ranch hands set over several decades, continued a run that has put it in lead position as the awards season unfolds.
I am less interested in the political resonance than in the cultural significance of the films nominated and the effect such films have, and are meant to have, on the most vulnerable among us.
Fortuitously, this week I received the January issue of the CNS News. An article on the front page (not available on-line) was titled "Pro-Eating Disorder Sites Glamorize Diseases, Make Treatment More Difficult". A brief excerpt:
Recent Comments