Isn’t CK about a magnate’s suppressed insecurity which turns out to be rooted in the unresolved traumas of his distant past? The Oedipal narrative never goes out of style.
And - just like Oedipus - EM & DT both denounced their own oracles (anyone in a position to offer good advice). They both elect to determine their own truth, and Thebes must remain ungovernable as a result.
Interesting thread from this (thanks) but ultimately, aren't lesser variations of Kane made all the time? They just aren't as singular. Bit like The Traitors somehow replacing traditional country house murders. Novel, but you can only take so much of all that omigodding instead of actual writing.
OTOH, There Will Be Blood & Phantom Thread come to mind as singular studies of Kane-like power, albeit on very different scales. And DDL is the ideal actor to wear Welles' mantle.
It’s like how every tv show or film where there’s a line like “we need to tell the President!” has been spoiled by the knowledge of who that guy actually would be now
And actually I’ve found the few modern examples in tv/film where the president is an idiot like Trump are disappointing dramatically. We want the president to have gravitas otherwise what’s the point? Having an idiot only works in a joke or satire. Which I guess is what we’re living in now.
The cognitive fuck up that “the job / status itself has gravitas” is what’s got us here - “he can’t be an idiot, he’s the president / the richest man on earth”. Hijacking meritocracy. But you’re right, as soon as you think the logic through properly, it strips the role of all its inherent value.
It’s like seeing a swish supercar and thinking “well that’s a status symbol, whoever is behind the wheel must be of enormous value to society to be rewarded within our system” and then seeing the mimsy midlife crisis arsehole who actually gets out when the gull wings go up.
We are now in 'The emperors new clothes' season 2. Although the emperor has been called out, he doubles down on his nudity, and goes all in with his wealthy buddies on convincing the people his nude ugliness is somehow cool. And enough of them truly believe.
"we need to tell the president" - unsaid but I hear added on "he obviously won't do anything. But the rules say we have to tell him. Let's also tell A, B and C. Maybe they have an idea"
That’s interesting, because I have always thought CK was based on the idea that the richest guy on earth was monstrous. This isn’t me picking a fight, only absorbing an alternative perspective.
He became monstrous when rich but he did at least have an interesting journey, and there was a possibility it could have been otherwise. Musk has just always been rich and until recently hid his monstrosity well.
I always thought it was about how there are multiple versions of each one of us, and the fact of becoming the richest man in the world doesn’t erase your secret self, even if you want it to. I’m utterly convinced the whole thing was nicked from Lermontov’s brilliant (and short!) A Hero of Our Time.
Maybe super rich guys are interesting when they’ve done something to achieve that state. If they just started rich, then invested in other people’s stuff, that’s not interesting. I mean, EM really doesn’t have a Social Network in him, does he? Cos he’s done piss-all. He was just near things.
Not sure painting Musk as just a lucky rich kid is helpful. He’s definitely now gone way out of his competence zone (and didn’t mean to buy Twitter), but he was a genuinely innovative high- and low-level engineering project manager who was able to drive significant advances. https://youtu.be/t705r8ICkRw?feature=shared
His money was earned by investing in the most doomed Dead Tech idea ever invented (city maps and guides for local newspapers). Then selling and buying during a speculative bubble. I refuse to see any worth in him past that.
As soon as you’re richer than god, there’s nothing admirable in “doing some mad ideas”. Cos there’s zero risk. You’re not an interesting person. And have nothing to teach the rest of us. You’re out of the human race.
one of the things that made succession (the sitcom) work was that the characters never faced consequences for being grotesque, so could be gloriously, hilariously rude to each other. and then what made succession (the drama) so compelling was the eventual dawning of consequence upon them
Being fascinated by the behaviour of the super rich is like telling tales of gods. Only their mortal weaknesses are borderline interesting. Otherwise they don’t exist within our world. We learn nothing from them.
I think that’s a key point and something people seem to find difficult to grasp. It might be the curse of aspiration: they aren’t gods, they’re just us WHEN we win the lottery etc. We do society untold damage by pretending these extra-societal beings are connected to us in any way at all.
It could never be "Citizen" Musk. Neither he nor the #OrangeOaf arose from the masses, they're the aspiring emperors the US constitution was supposed to prevent above anything. Kane's tragedy is that can't get back to where he once belonged: theirs is that they never belonged in the first place.
In the sense of it being based on Hearst, of the central character being a media manipulator and gatekeeper of “news,” there are similarities, I s’pose. Kane’s shadow grows larger in that final shot; a trick of forced-perspective stature. EM’s will shrink to fit the vacuum within.
His socioeconomic class genuinely believe that paying for something to be done is the same as (if not better than) doing something. To them, insisting on being titled "Founder" in a company you've bought into is completely reasonable.
Comments
"Hide the Ketchup, we need to tell the President"
So, Mr Bean.