odradek

Beautiful, with a calm beauty that doesn’t need to prove anything. To be savored without haste to uncover its many delightful details.

I'm waiting to watch it with the proper calm, having missed it at the cinema. I expected a good job from Frears on this subject. I see he has done it...

I saw it at the newsstand. In fact, if the quality of the DVD isn't poor like usual... If you're lucky enough to catch it in the cinema, that's a different story. Since not everyone has seen the film in question, it would be better not to spoil any significant events, but I see that this matters little to cinema "critics"... The ending seems forced, moralistic, and pretentious to me. The film, after all, as you seem to have understood, bypasses the "aesthetic" question of monstrosity by addressing the nature of humans. And four puppets in front of a microphone represent a load of crap to me.

I am a collector of coincidences. Look what the Domenicale publishes today: a short story by Chekhov that I didn't know about.. ildomenicale.it - Le migliori risorse e informazioni sul tema: ildomenicale.

Look, Sabatino, I'm rereading Chekhov for the umpteenth time. And I'm a devotee of Carver. But this hasn’t (and will never) made me a mere dispenser of words. Which is not the only (though perhaps the greatest) quality of writing, synthesis. And it’s not the most fitting form for everyone. After all, I also love Tommaso Landolfi a lot... What matters, to me, is the ability to leave space, in one form or another, for the possibility of the unexpressed to filter and emerge, among the things said or attempted to be said. It requires a sufficient flow of air and the creation of openings, even in periods or pages afflicted by logorrhea. "Style" and accuracy in some measure allow this. Another determining factor is the willingness of the listener or reader (but this is always necessary). Finally, no less important is the fact that words convey some truth: not absolute, but so for the one who pronounces or writes them. A kind of "sincerity" that also saves from the gaping abyss of self-satisfaction. At least I hope :)

I’m listening to it... (by the way: thanks to those who know) Quite pleasant, not even a minute into the "unreleased" track, but it flows nicely: reading Caz's short page I was imagining another album... - Among the names mentioned for adding vocals to the “The Mix-Up 2” edition, I believe M.I.A. is the most suitable.

Occasionally... I read quite regularly, for various reasons, Repubblica, La Stampa, Corsera, and Il Foglio.

Sabatino, I believe it’s the same Ravasi. By the way: curious, and somehow relevant, is last Sunday’s "Mattutino." In that reference to a sobriety of language, there’s a direct warning to my logorrheic tendencies as well...

Sabatino, "re-reading" obviously presupposes a reading that has already taken place, an assumption that I fear is incorrect in most cases. Your paternalistic tone, descending from a hypothetical neutrality, does not seem appropriate for the context, in my opinion. Blood is not always that bitter; after all, we are dealing with trivialities and various human conditions. It might be worth adding that those who would benefit from that or other readings are, as always, far from considering them, lacking the curiosity regarding their biblical exegesis (by the way: this is not a judgment, but a statement of fact). I perceive, within the calm apparent wisdom of your post, a concrete futility, not too naïve or involuntary, as you have noted the widespread urgency to "express personalities" blissfully oblivious. So what’s the point? Should I imagine that what you intend to reveal is the personality of a wise, equidistant, and tolerant observer? Does that serve you, in some measure? Who knows...

@Poletti: buddy, it's best you don't use the plural with me. Tell me to fuck off individually, because I'm not part of any staff. Whether you get banned or not, it makes no difference to me. You're just another username among others, just a bit more foolish. Handle it however you like, that's all you'll ever be.