No Dice for Munch Museum; “Documentary” on Wal-Mart in the Works
Last year the art world was caught off guard when thieves removed one of the most famous works of art in the world in broad daylight from The Munch Museum. “The Scream” and “Madonna,” another work stolen at the same time, have yet to be recovered. The Munch Museum remained closed for quite a while after the thefts to increase security and has no doubt taken a huge financial blow. In perhaps an honest effort to generate income for the struggling institution, The Mystery of The Scream, a board game, was being sold at their museum gift shop last week. The Museum and manufacturer argue that the game is educational while others felt it trivialized the theft. After pressure from government officials and art world critics, the game was pulled yesterday.
In the same arts brief section as the above story, the New York Times is reporting that Wal-Mart is planning a documentary on…Wal-Mart. The “film” is a response to Robert Greenwald’s none too flattering documentary on the mega-chain “"Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price" which is due to be released early next month. While Greenwald’s film is likely to shed some light on Wal-Mart’s impieties (the most recent being the company’s attempt to lower healthcare benefits and recruit younger employees who are “healthier,” via Das Haus - story here), Ron Galloway’s film about how wonderful Wal-Mart is sounds like a really long and dreadfully boring promotional video. Apparently Mr. Galloway doesn’t understand that the effectiveness of documentaries is partly derived from the criticism of the film’s target subject.
In the same arts brief section as the above story, the New York Times is reporting that Wal-Mart is planning a documentary on…Wal-Mart. The “film” is a response to Robert Greenwald’s none too flattering documentary on the mega-chain “"Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price" which is due to be released early next month. While Greenwald’s film is likely to shed some light on Wal-Mart’s impieties (the most recent being the company’s attempt to lower healthcare benefits and recruit younger employees who are “healthier,” via Das Haus - story here), Ron Galloway’s film about how wonderful Wal-Mart is sounds like a really long and dreadfully boring promotional video. Apparently Mr. Galloway doesn’t understand that the effectiveness of documentaries is partly derived from the criticism of the film’s target subject.
posted by Corey Wyckoff at 1:31 PM
2 Comments:
It's the director of "Why Wal-Mart Works," Ron Galloway.
Apparently, you don't understand you should not criticize something before you see it.
Love your "blog"
Ron - Thanks for your comment. I appreciate your position that one should not judge something before one is able to actually experience it, however in this case the documentary you are directing seems to be fairly straightforward. Your documentary, as it is described by the New York Times, praises Wal-Mart. I am quite eager to see exactly what it was that you found so praiseworthy about Wal-Mart, the company that has prospered for years at the expense of their employees and, for that matter, the larger social good. The mega-chain has effectively lowered retail and manufacturing wages in order to bring you those “every-day-low-prices.” Employees suffer benefit cut-backs in order for Wal-Mart to offer identical or comparable products at prices that are lower than its competition. In short, I believe – let me rephrase – I am convinced, that Wal-Mart’s successes have come at the expense of others (see Fast Company’s 2003 story “The WalMart You Don’t Know” for just a few examples of the companies profound negative impact on commercial business). (http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/77/walmart.html). But alas, this is a blog (no quotations necessary) that focuses on the arts. Documentaries were originally created to examine a subject matter or topic without bias, distortion or personal opinions. They were non-fiction, objective films designed to inform and educate. We know that from films like “Super Size Me,” “Bowling for Columbine,” and “Grizzly Man” that documentaries have come to include films that are something of a hybrid of information and reality-tv. Ultimately what makes these, and many other films interesting, is that there is a focus on a particular issue (be it fast food, gun control or even our understanding of bears) and a criticism of the prevailing perceptions on that issue. A pro-McDonalds documentary that attempted to explain, rationalize or in any way excuse the unhealthy food they produce should sound absurd to most people. Spurlock’s film was successful because he confirmed our suspicions about the negative effects of a fast food diet by sacrificing his own health. If people wanted to see a pro-hand gun film they would join the NRA and an ordinary documentary on grizzly bears can be found on the National Geographic channel. People enjoy documentaries because they offer a critical examination of a subject, often revealing sordid truths or harsh realities that we are normally protected from. They are aggressive, proactive and information seeking. By contrast, your film, by its very nature, sounds to be a reaction to criticisms of WalMart that sugar-coats the reality of the company’s horrible practices. For anyone still wondering: WalMart works because big business trumps humanity and compassion, because money matters not people.
Post a Comment
<< Home