the comic relief of "What to do in case of fire?"

I love movies, especially the ones that manage to make me laugh as well as think. I happened upon the movie "What to do in case of fire?" recently at Hastings and I must say, I adore what I have watched of it thusfar (so much that I have to ramble about it here!)

The plot is about six anarchists protesting the occupation of Berlin and what happens after a bomb they planted goes off years later, after some have "grown up" and "moved on" and others refuse to. The problem for these "former" anarchists is that the police have collected all of their former "propaganda" films, detailing all of their "work." There's a specifically telling scene in the movie, where after the bomb explodes years later (which is in an abandoned building, though the explosion does injure two people) two police officials (investigators? I haven't quite figured out yet who they are) discuss making a list of every leftist group and investigating them and should anyone complain about their human rights being violated well...too bad for them. The notion of rights and violations vs. freedom of expression and protest are interspersed throughout the movie which for me at least, make it all the more interesting and evocative.

As I said, I haven't finished the film yet but so far, I love it. I enjoy the comic relief (much in the way I enjoy the comic relief in "American Beauty") but also the way that it suggests a reality check of ideology, set against a backdrop of history. I also appreciate the fluctuation between activism, anarachism, and "life in the real world" and how some of them feel that putting the past behind them equates with living life as is, unquestioning the status quo (or becoming it!)
I wonder then, if we as audience are compelled to judge those who are still agitating for change (and I MEAN agitating) as being stuck in teenage mode, rebelling against any and all authority...i.e. they simply haven't "grown up." I think of this in two ways. First, I was for so many years religiously rebellious. I went through the punk phase, goth phase, "industrial" phase, etc. etc. After having my son though, I starting thinking alot about not wanting to alienate him from the status quo, even if I questioned it. So my second point is that while I have not stopped questioning and I LOVE that my son regularly questions authority (including mine)
I am wondering if "growing up" really means having to find where you're willing to fight and choosing to do more wisely, if you choose to do so at all. Think about it. Even the most rightist people tend to believe they are fighting for something that is worth fighting for. Even the greatest pacifist has to draw a line for themselves as to what part of living constitutes a necessary violence for the sake of living. (Here, I am reminded about those of the Jainist faith who wear masks over their faces to keep from breathing in insects but also of people worldwide who protest war and yet support "humanitarian intervention" if it will lessen horrid slaughter of the defenseless. Generalizations aside, I wonder why questioning authority becomes equated (and thus degraded) as being immature. Change has always come from questioning/agitating and one could argue that knowledge itself comes from the willingness to question the "authority" of others and to seek out knowledge and understanding for oneself.
So while I can sit and watch a film like this and appreciate the questioning, agitating and even the fighting for social change, I appreciate more that the greater tension comes not between the police or even the State and the protesters but within the protesters themselves and with each other as they struggle with this same question.

I look at my son and wonder what he will be like as a teen. He's only nine (soon to be ten) but I wonder, you know, what will his priorities be? What will he fight for or will he think there is any point to struggling? After all, there is a interesting trend in children his age to believe that things that are bad are simply that and why try to change it. This worries me. Yet I have faith that he has the kind of mind and character that will question injustice (or at least that which he deems unjust) and will argue against it. He ALREADY does that quite well. With all of the political analysts focusing on the causes/problems of voter apathy, hell I think they need to focus more on the youth culture and what apathy is doing to them and why it is permeating their lives, replacing civic engagement with rampant consumerism/consumption. They are, after all, the ones who will inheirit our unexploded bombs, our unfought/unfinished wars and our unasked, unanswered questions. They are the ones who deserve our attention more than any damn leader or professional rhetoritician.

I know full well the desires of a parent cannot render a certain course for their child. If it were up to my dad, I would be getting a "meat and potatoes degree" and would be working as hard as possible toward security and status. There of course is where our paths diverge as parent and child but also where a greater understanding arises. When I don't react egotistically I can see my own unwillingness to truly listen to him. This is because listening requires one to think about what others value and what others love and fear and to see how those values are not necessarily any better or worse than our own. To me, better and worse are value judgements that separate, secure and distance. At some point, you have to ask yourself how much weight you are willing to put on other's perception of your worth. I see this alot in my own relationship with my son. Point here is that I think we can learn alot about ourselves just by listening to others and seeing how we relate as human beings to one another but also in relationship to the social structures that bind and divide us.

I am learning to value listening deeply more than speaking out (or yelling) all of the time.
After all, how can you possibly think/reflect or grow if you're always shouting at some enemy or toeing the line of one extreme or another? Imagine if those who run nations stopped long enough to listen before REACTING? Imagine if we could get beyond our us vs. them mentality as individuals, nations and even as a species? What will it take to get there, I wonder... an erasing of arbitrarily drawn borders, imaginary lines and fences, needing to be guarded at all times and at all costs? Well...

Someone asked me once what is the point of having a weblog? Does anyone care about what you like or don't like? Why should you assume so? Why do you think you can just say these things and that in doing so, people will listen? Is blogging a sort of benign ego tumor growing wild but not really causing too much chaos (yet?) I don't know why others write but for me, it boils down to trying to carve sense out of life. My criticism of what I have termed "cultural myopia" is not lost on me either and I admit that freely because it is the one facet of myself I really wish to change. Yet how DO you grow out of your blindspots? Out of your ego? Out of your need to be the Sun around which all things orbit and depend upon to live? I like to think (sounding abashadly kindergardenish) we all have our own light to bring as well as our shadows to cast.
It is my hope that this blog serves some purpose other than as an ego boost in cyberspace.
I like to think it might serve as a sort of consciousness shift. Speaking of which, it was incredibly nice to hear on PBS's "NOW" show a man (whose name I did not catch) was arguing that people will have to realize their interdependence and interconnectedness in order for the human race to survive. Every time I hear someone saying that it makes me smile and gives me hope. More hope than any well-crafted, teleprompted speech or convention ever could.

Anyhow, the film is worthwhile in my opinion.


peace!