Arguing The World (Political Documentary)
Picture: C+
Sound: C+ Extras: C+ Documentary: B
The stereotype of the New York Intellectual is addressed
by default in producer/director Joseph Dorman’s Arguing The World (1997)
look sat their rise through four men: Daniel Bell, Nathan Glazer, Irving Howe
and Irving Kristol. It traces their
lives from their childhoods in immigrant New York neighborhoods to their leap
from students, to ideological duelers, to dealing with anti-Semitism, the rise
of Stalin, McCarthy witch hunts, WWII and what the future could hold. They were also revolutionaries and radicals,
trying to pick what they though would work best.
So here they were, throwing around Capitalism, Communism,
Fascism, Socialism, Radicalism and what Democracy and Freedom did or did not
mean. If it is not Capitalism,
alternate ideas today are considered laughable and are minimalized or
marginalized. In real life, these ideas
are still with us and always will be, unless you Forest Gump your way
though real life and how the world works.
We learn about how they participated in the New Front of the 1930s and
New Left of the 1960s, but by the time of this program, had split off into very
differing directions that reflect the splits in U.S. political discourse
today. Of course, like to many of the
political debate shows, the viewpoints are overwhelmingly male and the program
is incapable of dealing with Feminism and other civil rights issues. This is a glaring problem in that it
oversimplifies things as if you can just think you know what is going on and
that will protect you. This also shows
in the differences between the men later, some of who are surprised by some of
the things the other men are saying.
It is the kind of dangerous pretension we are suffering
through today as bad things happen while those with a voice say one thing and
think that is adequate while millions suffer.
This is the same mentality on a less intellectual scale that allowed
George W. Bush to beat Democrats twice, despite his great lack of
popularity. When finished watching the
program, one wishes these men had taken more verbal, legal and forward
action. Some of the naïve revolutionary
ideas were doomed form the start, but at least they were not as dumbed down as
discourse in mass media is today. That
is why on public television could have made this show possible, which is
required viewing at least once. Too bad
it skips the pain of the times, but there goes that intellectual false sense of
security again.
The 1.33 X 1 image is typical of TV productions of the
time, with the newer footage taped in the NTSC format and adding a healthy mix
of old film footage. This is a clean
copy considering the type of sourcing.
The Dolby Digital 2.0 features simple stereo that is still clean, if not
remarkable, for its time. The
combination is just fine. Extras
include a text statement by director Dorman, bios on him and the four “leads”
of the program, a stills section, how to get the book tie-in to this show,
trailers for two other political First Run DVDs, and a good-but-brief Dorman TV
interview that runs about 9.5 minutes.
Bell is amusing when he claims to be “a Socialist in
Economics, a Liberal in Politics a Conservative in Culture” whatever that
means. Does this really keep one open
to new ideas? It still sounds too safe,
but he does take Kristol to task over factoring out corporate responsibility as
he built the think tanks that made Neo-Cons possible. Diana Trilling is a literary critic who talks about hearing from
Kristol’s wife about giving her name to a “Democrats For Nixon” newspaper
ad. She was no McGovern fan, but
refused. The ad was printed and
included the names of various Democrats in 1972. She sites this as the beginning of Neo-Conservatism and in
effect, the beginning of the selling-out of the party. It is the saddest and most poignant moment
in the program. That Democrats and
liberals were so stupid is mind-boggling, and then let Neo-Cons spew rhetoric
about the free market when they made merger mania, rollback of civil rights and
the gutting of the S&Ls for starters possible. That would make a good documentary.
- Nicholas Sheffo
