AuthorPosts Mark Topic Read |
05 Oct 2016 at 2:32 pm #8601
I watched THE SUNSET LIMITED this morning and so came here to read topics about it.
I had such a strong feeling of the two characters being out-of-touch.
I felt both of them had attitudes of entitlement, especially Black. I think that antinatalism, which is actually almost a comical notion to me, is totally entitlement too. Not of money…although perhaps class struggles in some countries are places that would produce the regret of even being born or having life.
I think probably people who think we shouldn’t be born or alive are very wise to not have children. I don’t want them to have kids, LOL.
The arguments in THE SUNSET LIMITED seemed to be so entitled and insensitive to me partly because people who live close to the world, in lock with life, might not have the ethos of suicide.
First nations and indigenous peoples have growing suicide rates because of the continuing onslaught of totalitarian agriculture and its philosophies.
I was bothered at White expressing lack of compassion to Black. White had pain for genocide and the Holocaust….but he declares lie not worth living to a man whose family and history likely had been part of a genocide too with U.S. slavery. It seems incredibly insensitive which i goes of course White is very clear about not finding joy in humans so why would he be sensitive.
And the idea that compassion is absent. It’s not just that compassion is absent it seems to be manifested as guilt. Isn’t guilt something that only Judeo-Christian society believes in? White doesn’t seem so far removed from the structure of Judeo-Christian. It seems to me his dislike of that worldview has influenced that he only sees the world as a sore loser in the Judeo-Christian grid.
However, I do see how he could feel futile that there isn’t any way to change the way humans are in the world right now.
It’s very funny to watch this movie from a Buddhist perspective…it seems almost impossible to imagine that a Buddhist could be involved in this argument with the same outcome.Its confusing to me that both men always argue from the perspective that some kind of happiness is expected.
I think Buddhist would completely agree with Whites opinion….except a Buddhist would say that Whites response is Whites ego response to wishing the world was improved in some way rather than observing the flow, the impermanence of life. Because life is Dukkha …impermanent therefore it not is not always “happy” or “suffering” it is always changing.
I noticed something I didn’t notice before…that White talks about vanity…
“I suppose from the God point of view all knowledge is vanity. Or maybe it gives people the unhealthy illusion that they can outwit the devil.”
” Whatcha got ain’t nothin new. This country’s hard on people, you can’t stop what’s coming, it ain’t all waiting on you. That’s vanity.”
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.