18 November 2010

Jean-Luc Godard and his critics

Actually, it's not about JLC, his hateful ways and his Oscar. As far as I am concerned, JLC can do with his Oscar whatever he wants, as long as this Oscar ends up sticking from his anus.

This post is about the typical sloppy way the Guardian scribes try to talk from both sides of their mouths. Like in this case: Paul Harris, a US correspondent for the Guardian and Observer, tries to present the case in a unique manner.

Example 1

The question on many people's lips was: is Godard anti-Zionist or is he anti-Jewish?
That was reporting. Now comes an opinion (or is it reporting too?):
In Hollywood there is no greater sin.
Example 2

A bit of reporting:
In one of his films (Here and There), the director alternates images of Adolf Hitler with Israeli leader Golda Meir. He has criticised films about the Holocaust such as Schindler's List and Shoah, though often on apparently artistic grounds.
And now a bit of opinion:
But some other reported statements are less easy to defend...[examples follow]
Meaning what? That it's easy to defend alternating images of Hitler and Golda?

Notice also how the article detours from the subject of Goddard's anti-Semitism to his greatness as director. As if this has any relevance to Goddard being a proven  raving Jew-hater. Or to Harris being, in all probability, a mightily confused person...


jams o donnell said...

Now on the correct post. The man's a prick!

SnoopyTheGoon said...

True again.