(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Male research is by no means an attack on women's research, it is rather a pat on the shoulder. Common to both types of gender researchers is that they are looking for gender high and low. Just as one was looking for "race" in the 1930s. There will always be problems associated with making one (of many) qualities the culture key itself. You look and you look and you find and you find.
I man beast Knut Kolnar comments on a bunch of films, mainly Siste tango i paris, Falling Down, Fight Club, American Psycho, Nattsvermeren, Alt om min far og Romance. Most of these films show extreme men in activity, and Kolnar believes that they can say something about what it means to be a man today. What cultural pressure does men make to men, and what might happen if these men do not fit into what is expected of them.
"Creative" violence
The main point of Kolnar is that if men fail to channel their desires in fruitful ways, they resort to "creative" violence to restore or strengthen their male selves. The problem with this explanation is that Kolnar has already postulated that the problems are due to problems with the male identity. The main character of Falling Down (played by Michael Douglas) obviously belongs to a rather stereotypical male type. That does not mean, however, that first and foremost there are problems associated with being a man, we are witnessing. This is even clearer American Psycho: The criticism of materialism and hedonism that both novel and film convey has very little to do with problematic man's ideals. The problem is culture and mentality.
From the movie Nattsvermeren Kolnar brings up the crazy serial killer Buffalo Bill, and thinks that his project of making a suit of women's skin, and his feminine poses in front of the mirror and so on, says something about the uncomfortability of being locked in the man's mind. He can't play his entire record as a human being ...
To make the shitty tormented serial killer Buffalo Bill an indicator of what is wrong or restricting men today is utterly ridiculous. But this is how it can be when you know the answers beforehand: No matter what films or cultural expressions Kolnar deals with, he finds signs that "gender is moving", that "gender competence is changing" and that there is "gender turmoil". This, for example, causes him to call for a transvestite or androgynous character Fight Club, which could somehow show openings between the men's world and the women's world! As most others have learned, it's the consumer society that makes people zombie-like consumers the problem in Fight Club. This is also stated in the clear text of the character played by Brad Pitt.
Word stealing
Another problem with Kolnar's book is that it is poorly written. There are no limits to what kind of word-stealing he comes with. There is still talk of "draining the gender" (who is draining?). About Esther "Pirelli" Benestad: "The lust for optics she fixates in public space gives femininity a foundation." Romance: "It's a problematic and dangerous intimacy outlined, a constellation of intimacy that refers to a number of the gendered dynamics that are going on, especially in postmodern urbanism."
In addition to this, Kolnar is very imprecise. He constantly talks about "a number of ways" unfolding. Instead of limiting to those he mentions. In general, I constantly disregard arguments for both strange and inaccurate claims. Instead, we get adjectives, a poor consolation: There are "heavy leads", "fatal leaks" and "strong connections". By the way, Kolnar does not control the use of prepositions. But it is perhaps quickly made to forget the kind now that one has bigger words to be inscribed in the postmodern desire room.
Underlying Kolnar's book is a constant criticism of movie characters who live superficial, materialistic and hedonistic lives. And they do this because they are unable to indulge in the "orgastic voluptuousness" that lies in letting the masks fall and just enjoying, enjoying and enjoying. So a criticism of hedonism because it is not hedonistic.
I have nothing positive to say about this book.
also read the author's comment.
