Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!hsdndev!cfa203!thakur
From: abp@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov (Andrew B Philips)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.cinema
Subject: Re: Crimes and Misdemeanors
Summary: What??
Message-ID: <1991Jun12.002451.13823@zerkalo.harvard.edu>
Date: 12 Jun 91 00:24:51 GMT
References: <1991Jun9.000517.10781@zerkalo.harvard.edu> <1991Jun11.164342.13441@zerkalo.harvard.edu>
Sender: thakur@cfa.harvard.edu (Manavendra K. Thakur)
Reply-To: abp@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov (Andrew B Philips)
Followup-To: rec.arts.cinema
Organization: NASA-Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Lines: 40
Approved: thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu


In article <1991Jun11.164342.13441@zerkalo.harvard.edu>, jelkind@garnet.berkeley.edu (The Unexpected Tiger) writes:
> In article <1991Jun10.195909.12597@zerkalo.harvard.edu> npc@electron.physics.arizona.edu (Nick Christenson) writes:
> >In C&M, the use of eyes as symbolism is terrific. . . .
> I like C&M quite a bit (it's a much better film than "Alice" for instance, 
> IMHO) but I personally felt that the bit about rabbi going blind = the
> blindness of God was just a trifle forced, and less than a trifle lacking
> in subtlety.  The symbolism that I found most appealing was the use of the
> Schubert G major quartet.  When the movie came out, there was a discussion
> in rec.arts.music.classical wherein some people felt that he should have
> used the "Death and the Maiden" quartet, which I think would not have
> been nearly as effective.  The G major quartet is "about" the fundamentally
> irreconcilable conflict between major and minor (it keeps switching back
> and forth the whole way through), which exactly matches the kinds of moral
> conflicts that the characters undergo.  Including Woody Allen's character,
> who can't realize that Alan Alda's character indeed has some redeeming
> features.

Is this guy serious?  Who does he think he is.  It's a good thing that
I have Woody Allen right here to ask him exactly what he meant.  Mr.
Allen, what do you have to say about this?  ..."He's full of sh*t"

:)  Just kidding.  I could resist it.

> 					Richard Schultz

:Andy Philips

[Moderator's note: With all due respect to Andy, this is the type of
 posting that I probably would reject under normal circumstances, as
 it is witty and amusing but doesn't really help advance the
 discussion going on about Woody Allen's film(s).

 But since the charter for rec.arts.cinema is currently under debate -
 and because I don't want to be accused of not having a sense of humor
 - I'm posting Andy's article to the newsgroup.  So what do you think?
 Should a posting like this be allowed?  If so, what would be the
 appropriate wording to put in the charter to allow (or not disallow)
 such posts?  If you have any thoughts on the subject, please post
 your comments.  Thanks.  -- MKT]