Who’s the bigger fool, the fool, or the fool who follows him?
This is an Alternet article about how the furies of Election 2004 are being expressed in some artists’ work by portraying the Bushes, etc as Satanists.
Among them, a new show at my friend Corey’s theatre group in Los Angeles, Sacred Fools, depicting the Bush family and their:
“dealings with a diabolic figure known only as “He Who Shall Not Be Named.” Their end of the bargain includes bloody rituals, sacrifices and murder plots”
That show, BTW, was what that strange collection of links to political sites including this one was all about a few weeks ago. Guerrilla marketing.
Unfortunately the folks from Sacred Fools don’t come off too well in the article from my POV. The playwright reads as a sort of petulant nihilist, and a producer as the worst kind of smug, self-satisfied liberal.
“The Bushes are attacked not because they’re Republican, but because they’re in power.”
Which I read as: I have no point of view, I take no moral stance on things like Presidential families telling us blatant lies, I just want to kick the boots of the big statues.”
“Even if you’re completely on board with the Bush agenda, you can’t help but respond to shocking allegations in some way. And that is on some level going to force you to reconsider your assumptions.”
Right, hands up anyone who thinks even one person who’s completely on board with the Bush agenda is going to respond to such shocking allegations as those above by reconsidering their assumptions. Now, anyone who thinks people respond to such confrontational challenges to their beliefs by clinging even harder to those beliefs? That’s what I thought.
Actually, it’s probably a moot point anyway–I can’t imagine a lot of people who are completely on board with the Bush agenda will be seeing this show anyway.
Please note I’m not judging the show, which I haven’t seen, just reacting to an article that may or may not be an accurate portrayal of the people involved.
