I especially enjoy the sudden and jarring transition between the tree’s presentation of his opinions as what Lou “feel[s]” to what he, in the last panel, claims to “know”. It’s as if his earlier attempts at humility in the presentation of his views have collapsed, leaving him to sink into the instinctive language of his own arrogant solipsism. It reveals, perhaps, why the other trees were unwilling to engage with Lou on the subject of Andersonian cinema, even while his language was so apparently civil: they knew that underneath he had no intellectual flexibility at all, and merely talked with others as an attempt to subject them to the force of his own views.
On the subject itself, Anderson has certainly shifted over time in his message and his art. Lou’s claim strikes me as interesting and worth considering, even if it is, in my opinion, ultimately dependent on a very shallow understanding of the subject matter of his most recent two films. That’s okay! Lou may yet grow into right opinion on this matter, should he have a few wiser friends willing to stick with the debate.
I was SO going for the whole arrogant solipsism thing, myself, but since Nate shit all over that comment by beating me to it, I’ll go for the more obvious question: If Lou fell over, would he hear himself?
New York Times Bestseller NPR/IndieBound Bestseller L.A. Times Bestseller S.F.Chronicle Bestseller Denver Post Bestseller Seattle Times Bestseller Boston Globe Bestseller Amazon Top 100 Bestseller Barnes & Noble Top 100
NPR/IndieBound Bestseller L.A. Times Bestseller S.F.Chronicle Bestseller Denver Post Bestseller Boston Globe Bestseller