[snip]
by
>going into the beauty business after Flint has collapsed, i.e. Moore mocks
>the underdog.
>
>I didn't interpret it like that. I saw it simply as a demonstration of the
>sort of cruel absurdities capitalism forces people into, with a hilarious
>humourous twist, and thus very effective.
>
>I think the scene with the waitress should be interpreted the same way.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Trond Andresen
I understand this reading to. But envision this: the waitress and color analyst are in the movie theater, wathching themselves on the screen, and hearing the guffaws of those all around them. How do you think they're feeling now?
This is precisely the sort of ethical question anthropologists, for example, deal with every time the start to re-present the things a "key informant" has shared with them.
I for one (a) laughed when I saw Roger and Me, and (b) did feel it was unkind and exploitative to some "key informants". As a field based researcher myself, I feel one ground rule is that you don't construct clever situations to provoke belly laughs with the stuff of other's lives, without securing some kind of consent/complicity.
Tom
Tom Kruse / Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia Tel/Fax: (591-42) 48242 Email: tkruse at albatros.cnb.net