V For Vendetta: Understanding via Relevant MetaphorsBy GregG | February 15, 2007 |
|||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
![[article image]](/imagelib//276b79f3f57a4c75-e9e0b5f-110c694b0bf-1d44142855996.jpg)
With the release of this movie on DVD, I thought a reflection is in order. The Wachowski brothers, with their screen adaptation of Alan Moore’s “V For Vendetta,” have given us a startling and frightening glimpse into the life under an Islamofacist Great Britain. Maybe it wasn’t their original intent, but the metaphor is undeniable. First, let me explain the principle of relevant metaphor replacement theory (RMRT), and it’s importance to appreciating this film. Some authors, in order to get controversial content across to their readers, surround a story’s message in a metaphor. Sometimes, however, the metaphor can’t be too obvious (political correctness, you know). In these cases, the metaphor will be relevant, and thus form a replacement position. Under this guise, they can be held harmless, so to speak, for the reaction to the story’s content. I won’t completely retell the “V for Vendetta” story. Suffice it to say that it is set in a dystopic Great Britain with a 1984-like regime in power, the United States is in military and social turmoil, and individualism is suppressed. A lone figure arises to fight back, masses are looking for guidance, yada, yada, yada. Now you know the plot. In fact, this story was originally written by Alan Moore way back in the early 1980’s as a warning against Thatcher and the British Conservatives. In reality, the Labour Party has been in power since the early 90’s and it is the Labour Party that has suppressed individual rights in Britain and installed a gazillion cameras throughout the country, as well as outlawing self-defense. But here comes the pure genius of this film’s use of RMRT. The British conservative/fascist scenario has never materialized and the film’s anti-American view is also hopelessly comical. So here’s my premise: under RMRT, all one needs to do in order to fully understand the true meaning of the film’s message is to replace certain content in the film with the relevant metaphorical replacement content the producers could not originally utilize out of fear of being called racist, homophobe, Islamophobe, whateverphobe. Here is a road map of the Wachowski brother’s genius. 1. Wherever there is an anti-Christian element, replace it with one that is anti-Islam. Voila, now the movie makes sense. In this film, the Anglican Church is in league with the fascist British government. A pedophilic bishop, seeking a young girl as an object of his perversion, is courted by the government as a way of keeping order. But as we all know, if the film’s producers were really making an anti British/anti-Christian statement, they would have made the bishop request a young boy. We all know that Christian bishops are homosexuals, right? Since the film didn’t portray him as such, we need to go to RMRT and substitute a Muslim cleric. Now the content works. As we all know, it is in the Islamic world where we find political/religious hegemony today. It is in the Muslim world where individual freedoms are suppressed. And it is in Islamic controlled countries where one can be killed for being a homosexual. In those countries religious law is the same as social law. 2. In the film, there is a scene that shows a Qur’an lovingly displayed on a set piece. With RMRT, the producers force us to substitute a Bible in order to make any sense of it. Natalie Portman’s character, Evey, is saved by a homosexual TV show host, played most excellently by Stephen Fry. The character, Deitrich (I love it, right out of pre WWII “Cabaret” Germany), takes Evey into his confidence and shows her his treasure of hidden artwork. Along with his surreptitious paintings and sculptures, is the aforementioned Qur’an (written in the original Arabic). When asked by an incredulous Evey, he confesses that he can’t read Arabic, but opines that should not stop one from appreciating the beauty of it. Apparently, his copy must contain some pretty pictures. As previously mentioned, Deitrich is a homosexual. In this UK New Order, it’s a crime to be gay. Here again is the concept of RMRT must be invoked. As we all know, Great Britain is a haven of cheeky gay guys…for crying out load, it’s de rigueur. It’s obvious; we must substitute the Bible for the Qur’an. Remember, it is the Bible that enjoins us to hate the sin but love the sinner. In Islamic countries, having a Bible is forbidden and being a homosexual, as previously mentioned, is punishable by death. Here, the Bible is the real forbidden book and it is repressive Islam that truly hates homosexuals. By the way, there is a concurrent lesbian plot as well; so all gay factions are covered. With RMRT, it all makes sense. In Great Britain, no one would ever be executed for being gay. For goodness sake, it’s a matter of British pride these days. But in Islam, being gay with a Bible, you are toast. Actually, only one out of two is necessary. 3. Finally, one need’s to substitute the repressive leader of the government, played by one of my all time favorites, John Hurt (remember “I was a Naked Civil Servant?”), with the implied RMRT replacement. This fascist leader, Adam Sutler, becomes a one-man government with ties to the church (that run death squads and torture chambers). The movie reveals this with quick glimpses of torture. These Abu Grabesqe (did I coin a new phrase?) images are there to remind us of the awful things that happened recently in Iraq. But Iraq is a Muslim country very much steeped in torture techniques (can anybody say “meat grinder?”) That is why you must use RMRT to make any sense of it. Substitute Ayatollah Khomeini, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, or any other of your favorite Muslim despots, and it all becomes clear. Christians and homosexuals are condemned for execution. Indeed, today in Afghanistan, a man by the name of Abdul Rahman is facing a death sentence for his conversion to Christianity. There are many scenes of John Hurt’s evil character on wide screens speaking ardently about what needs to be done about dissenters. In reality, these type of depictions are played out in Iran and Saddam’s Iraq, as well as in many other Muslim nations. It’s not difficult to acknowledge this, just pick up any copy of Newsweek or Time since the 1990’s. This movie isn’t painting a frightening look of the future of the western world; it is painting a frightening, albeit real, look at Islam today. For their courageous use of the Relevant Metaphor Replacement Theory, I commend the Brothers Wachowski. If they disagree with my analysis, to them I say, “Bullocks!” |
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
 |
 |
||||||||||||||
| V For Vendetta: Understanding via Relevant Metaphors | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| Post New Comment to the Discussion | |||||||||||||||||||
|
You must login to discuss this item. |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
