He represents Marx/Engels. He's all the philosophy behind the revolution. Pure ideal, the precursor to action.
We started staging in tonight's rehearsal and I had a mini moment of clarity/epiphany during the staging of Old Major's speech. The direction we're headed in is anti-deification. That's amazing, I think. Instead of elevating Old Major with some glowing halo, instead of imitating the bread and butter Communist propaganda images, bring Old Major down to the ground. Watch the prophet communicate and inspire the animals from the dirt and the dust. That's truth, and as a result, it's surprising. Our heroes, our prophets, they are regular folks. Joe Six Pack, I guess (as much as I hate to lend credibility to that character). Ghandi, MLK, etc: these are exceptional individuals. They are not the stuff of which most heroes are made. Get down in the dirt and tell it like it is, Old Major. Yes. Revolution begins in the dust, not on the pedastal.
4 comments:
So how does one differentiate from the "truth" that Old Major is telling and the "truths" of our Joe Six Pack friend? Her whole appeal is based on being a regular person, down in the dirt,and people love it. People eat-it-up. And we think its bs. So do you we only like the truth teller down in the dirt when they're on our side? It still doesn't quite work for me...
In my mind there's a big difference between being a progressive, down-in-the-dirt visionary (albeit fictional) and a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants bumpkin who wants to overturn Roe v. Wade, guarantee same sex American couples remain on the periphery of civil rights, and continue a foreign policy of global American alienation (except maybe with Israel). Old Major doesn't have to remind the crowd that he's "one of them." He just is. Old Major doesn't need to wink at the camera. Old Major's priority is generosity. His speech is selfless.
It still feels very subjective to me. Which I think is what our play is about. Sometimes a leader emerges, and they inspire, and you want to follow them. But how do you know that's the right thing to do? Knowing, as history tells us, that leaders often become currupt and turn against the very ideals they espoused in the first place (if they are not assassinated first.) So, I guess, if absolute power usually absolutely corrupts, how do we identify leaders, generate change, and make progress, without the curruption? I'm talking in general, Animal Farm terms here, not about Sarah f'ing Palin.
I think it's f'ing difficult. People had such high hopes for this election. Both candidates promised us a new era of politics, a new era of campaigning. But we've been spoon-fed (by both camps) the same old bad-press contest, the same old negativity. Both of them have the potential to change things once they're in, but to get there they're using the same formulas for spin as developed by the Nixon campaign. I think one of the lessons of Animal Farm is that corruption is a given wherever there is power. The important thing is not to despair, choose the best leaders you can. AND that the work is only starting once a leader is elected - the bigger job is ensuring a fair system of checks and balances and keeping the leader connected to the will of the populace. A participatory democracy without participants is an open door for those that thirst for power and money.
Post a Comment