[flagged]
This is a movie review from their culture section, not their journalist news section
How to feed a dictator
21–30 of 71 posts
Re: How to feed a dictator
#22Re: How to feed a dictator
#23Not the original title
In the case of book reviews (and film reviews, I guess) we often change the title to that of the book/film being reviewed.
We started doing this years ago after realizing that book review titles often do pirouettes on top of the book being reviewed; it's kind of a minor art form (a very minor art form!) but it doesn't serve the reader who just wants to know what-is-this.
I wouldn't call the OP title a pirouette, but the pattern of following HN's original-title rule through an extra hop (from the review to the thing being reviewed) has held up so well that we do it pretty consistently now.
It's amazing how many sub-cases like this there are. Who would have thought that reviews need to be handled differently from non-reviews, but it actually does work better.
Re: How to feed a dictator
#24> “It goes back to Hannah Arendt’s banality of evil a bit,” says director Andrew Neel. “These everyday things that are beloved to us, like food, can take on an entirely different dimension within the context of a dictatorship.” That’s not at all what Arendt was writing about. She was writing about those who do evil things are rarely the “evil” monsters we imagine but rather bureaucrats motivated by things like promot…
I think your interpretation is a little rigid. And did you read the rest of the article?
I ended up going back and reading the article. It’s not bad that it’s bad writing, it’s that the opening is sloppy and turned me off from reading the article instead of pulling me in the way a good lede should.
The subject is interesting, which is why I clicked the link in the first place. I might check out the documentary. But the misunderstanding/loose invocation of Arendt is a turnoff imo
Re: How to feed a dictator
#25Re: How to feed a dictator
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Later: > By most measures, theirs was a great gig – logic that can excuse almost anything. “Saddam’s chef got a car every year,” Neel says. “That phrase, ‘it was a great gig,’ I think, actually runs the world. Like, ‘It was just business.’” I’d say they understood the meaning.
No, they did not. Arendt’s point about evil being banal is that the perpetrator’s behavior is motivated by the banal. A chef isn’t the perp. They’re adjacent to the monsters and they might be motivated by and fixated on the banality of doing great work.at most this is juxtaposition of evil and banality.
But didn’t the chef literally serve the dictator, pushing moral concerns aside by dispassionately performing their assigned tasks?
Re: How to feed a dictator
#27Re: How to feed a dictator
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, they did not. Arendt’s point about evil being banal is that the perpetrator’s behavior is motivated by the banal. A chef isn’t the perp. They’re adjacent to the monsters and they might be motivated by and fixated on the banality of doing great work.at most this is juxtaposition of evil and banality.
But didn’t the chef literally serve the dictator, pushing moral concerns aside by dispassionately performing their assigned tasks?
These chefs are effectively being held hostage. One had his passport withheld. Another was executed for giving a kid a stomachache. This isn’t careerism.
Re: How to feed a dictator
#29> “It goes back to Hannah Arendt’s banality of evil a bit,” says director Andrew Neel. “These everyday things that are beloved to us, like food, can take on an entirely different dimension within the context of a dictatorship.” That’s not at all what Arendt was writing about. She was writing about those who do evil things are rarely the “evil” monsters we imagine but rather bureaucrats motivated by things like promot…
I don't see a misrepresentation there - the need to eat and the love of good food is common to most of humanity and points to the fact that even dictators are also just people. Banal humans rather than cartoon villians. > Hard to remain motivated to consume an article after reading this in the opening. I think it's unfortunate to be so dismissive of an article over one quote from one person that you disagree with. Yo…
I really, really want to cite Joe Franks "The Dictator" here, notably the scene where he's eating the vegetables that have grown on himself (if I'm remembering correctly), but...I really doubt anyone will get the reference.
Re: How to feed a dictator
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
He does figure briefly in the discussion at the end and doesn't qualify for the full treatment yet as he's a dictator-in-waiting. In any case what is there to say about McDonald's? The man is as boring and tasteless as he is appaling.
[flagged]
It is disconcerting that a large portion of people (many in government) actually believe Trump was appointed by God to lead the United States. If any US president could become a dictator, it's him, and I don't blame people for being worried.