fiquata

Good job, Gustavo. You have to listen to them and YOU HAVE TO listen to them after the Stadio.

beautiful beautiful, the only note is on that "biggest hardcore experience ever" ...the greatest were Black Flag in my opinion, and the proof is that just as the Flag put Cadena on guitar, even a band like Minor Threat, not exactly amateurs, absorbed the idea. This is also the cover of the Demo Tape, which was released posthumously and features Henry Rollins on backing vocals.

And I thought that the legend of Corgan/Super Vicky was a typical product of my high school. What a disappointment.

mammamia what a sadness you put... no, seriously. still alternative in quotation marks as if we were thirteen years old. Alright, I'll leave you to stew in your own mess and maybe go visit him at Capovilla, go where he works, tell him and see how he responds. I’d bet a testicle that he laughs in your face, rightly so... things are given when you have an emotional or morbid connection with what you do, when you don’t want to turn yourself into a commodity... but what do you do? what do you produce, what do you play, what do you smear, what do you write? So what the hell are we talking about? Arrivedorci.

Got it, Bob, I’m waiting for you... don’t dodge the issue. You have to tell Capovilla how to earn a living and what it has to do with Bugo. Send an email to Capovilla, tell him you're looking for a One Dimensional record and see if he charges you for it... got it? Don't hold back on anyone you know and don't judge the artist because if you do, you won't compare him to Bugo... after all, Bugo has been with a major label forever while Capovilla works his ass off (I’ve seen it with my own eyes) and then goes to perform and unloads the instruments. I’m waiting for you, alright?

Why does Capovilla play? Huh, know-it-all? Do you know how Capovilla earns his bread? Good, good... you’re all so clever, little critics from the hellish living room. Good, good. Ashanti threw down the gauntlet ("I don't see them as different from the Debaserian lineage, which boasts illustrious ancestors, the Pixies, and that doesn't shy away from Gialappa's and a kind of humor that is as fleeting as it is light-hearted. Like us, the same.") and indeed, here you are. But you.

Puny, I would send you to hell but that would be like shooting at the Red Cross, and tonight I really don't feel like it... but you can consider it as if I had done it. Bye

I forgot the vote. Mustacchio, the answer to your question is given by Pasolini himself live from Biagi, and it's the same reason why a review of Pirandello gets sixty comments and a new one about a novel by Pasolini doesn’t even reach twenty. Because "democracy is a flat sea, where no one sinks and no one emerges," said de Tocqueville.

Well. It's as if you've stuck a syringe into the film and drained all the signifiers and meanings that Pasolini embedded. "The submissive power is born within us and destroys us." This is exactly the opposite of what Pasolini thought. He explicitly states that "The only anarchy is that of power," meaning, in line with Hobbes, the first reactionary and anti-modern thinker, that natural law no longer exists... only profane law exists, which is what humans, without any moral or cultural reference, without any reference at all, decide is right for themselves and the community, and if a phantom Duce or Premier tells you that you must eat ("And eat!"), then you must eat. "Shit carcasses eating shit." Not exactly. Pasolini, with his idea of shit (which is the only thing that strikes those who don't understand a damn thing about the film), intended to represent the concept of reiteration so dear to Marx. That is, man eats what he produces, conditioned by the social and cultural environment he lives in... that's why the powerful in this film all have powerful and relevant roles in society. "We are all a bit victims and a bit executioners." This goes against all, but ALL, of Pasolini's work. He repeatedly stated throughout his life that people no longer have a morality, a feeling, a soul, as Curzio Malaparte would say, because they are not asked for this. Does the man come before the chicken? This is unknown, but for Pasolini, the amorality of power comes first, and then that of man who is no longer a man (because he only cares about saving his skin, as Curzio Malaparte would say again), but a mere individual (there's an editorial from '75, published in Corriere della Sera, where Pasolini imagines the trial of the four DC masters, whose faces on the dock are washed clean of insolence and the mask of power)... borrowing this concept from Rousseau (one of Pasolini's beacons who did not accidentally tackle Gennariello). For heaven's sake, absolute relativism, including ethical relativism, is a given, but Pasolini, knowing he is an aristocrat of knowledge, explained time and again what the keys to interpreting this film and all his other works were. In other words: you could have informed yourself, as it does not sit well to contradict him.

First literary duplicate? You could have spared us that... now we await the arrival of luminaries, sociologists, and the like... of course, luminaries from the sofa.