Rob Skogen
"Do you know what the man is saying? Do you? This is dialectics. It's very simple dialectics. One through nine, no maybes, no supposes, no fractions…OK? Dialectic logic is there's only love and hate, you either love somebody or you hate them." -- Photojournalist (played by Dennis Hopper in Apocalypse Now)
Are these thoughts simply the gibberish of a stark raving lunatic in a hallucinogenic nightmare, or is a hidden message to be found upon further reflection?
This concept of binary polarizations providing the structure of a given cultural myth is the same one Frank Tomaluso uses as a basis for his argument in this week’s reading. According to his analysis, the most important opposition we should be concerned with in our discourse on the links between popular culture and politics is that between the social imagination and reality. It is through myth that people have the ability to “justify the discrepancies between their society and the ideal image of it (146)�. He goes on to claim that that by presenting both ends of the spectrum on the issue of war in his film, Coppola is committing “ethical ‘fence sitting’� and is projecting an politically ambivalent message – going so far as reminding the reader of “a special spot in Hell for those who refused to take a stand and remained silent in times of moral crisis� (154). Not only is this rather harsh, but it is misguided.
I struggled to find a suitable response, but reading John Hellmann’s article helped connect the dots with some of the topics we discussed in our Film Noir unit. His interpretation of “the use of the hard-boiled detective formula as the structural, stylistic, and thematic center of the film� (430) brought to mind the moral ambiguity explored by the noir “genre� in counterpoint to the black and white ethical choices pushed in typical propaganda pieces. It is this ambiguity that Coppola is asking the viewer to contemplate, not merely a reflection of ambivalence as Tomaluso suggests. Both ends of the spectrum are woven together to offer the audience a chance to take an active role in coming to terms with the war and its place in the American experience. If one was to look closer at the film’s elements, it is fairly obvious which way the filmmaker leans, but that discussion can be saved for another entry.