Audio Asylum Thread Printer

In Reply to: RE: errr... I'm ready for my close up now... posted by dave c on September 22, 2008 at 14:31:33

but I stand by mine....

I don't disagree with your opinion that Ian's suicide was a cowardly act, nor do I agree with it either. I just don't judge it and in hindsight can take it as logical extension of ALL of the pieces involved with making him who he was.

Of course many folks will assert that that "tortured artist" stereotype is self-indulgent bullshit and a cop out. But then, I'm no one to judge what someone is feeling inside, and whatever it was/is, and whatever chemicals, family responsibilities, business factors, may be making them "feel" a certain way.

My fundamental "problem" with the movie is that Ian, the band, and the philosophy, and the factors surrounding everything about them was NOT COVERED.

JD was a "different" band/art/embodiment of a philosophy. They were special, they were outside. I think that they were "above," but that is a terrible description. Certainly, the Fall, Buzzcocks, G.of F., etc. etc. were just not in the same league, and history is, and will continue to, reflect that. JD was able to tap deep down in, and do it in a way that few others have and will be able to do. No, they were not gods, and certainly not perfect: but there was a confluence of many factors, (and I'm including Martin Hannett), that came together to make the whole more than the sum of the individuals, and elevated the individuals as well. I've seen surprise on their faces as they played, wondering what was going on. They were tapped into some deep, dark, pure, embodiment of death, or the futility of existence, almost on a primordial level. No one else, except for maybe Kafka, and stretching it a little, Herzog, - put their finger on the button like that. And not to take it too far, but, death rock was their creation.

The fact that Ian was a Herzog fan, was only mentioned by me to point out that films like Aguirre, Fitzcarraldo, and Stroczak shared a similar artistic sensibility and namely futility against an overpowering bureaucracy or phenomenon, (natural, or more insidious; unthinkingly man-made).
I mention Herzog and Kafka and Hannett, because there were many factors which made up who Ian was, and many factors came together to make JD who they were; and both Ian's life and death had far more to it than the movie touched on.

The Doors movie presented Jim Morrison in a much more complicated light.

And Joy Division and Ian were so much more significant, influential, original, and complex than the Doors. One would know nothing of that by watching Control...

I don't mean to imply that Deborah Curtis was extraordinarily stupid, or purposely left out material. I think that she presented her "take" on the whole thing, (and in consequence her lack of understanding). Perhaps I was a bit hard on her; but at some point, somebody, should've stood up and recognized that their story was looking like a documentary and they should've taken measures to explore a few more pathways that addressed the uniqueness, wonder, originality, and sheer complexity that made up the events, relationships, and characters involved during that time.

There are 10 billion stories of love triangles, and wives cheated on, and tortured artists suicides; the interesting, compelling, and important story of JD encompasses much much more than the overwhelming blandness of a hurt housewife.
If you think you're going to faint, go out in the hallway

Hip Pop Stop

Thanks for your comments;

Post a Message!