Chaosophy - autonomous learning

socius, but what you select are semiotic chains that are all put together
outside. This does not mean that you are a fascist or that the dream
is fascist, it proves nothing.
There is their madness, when one presses them. The father is not dead
and the girl says: "Let's call the doctor. " Then he says: "No, forget it. "
She says: "Yes, and I'll tell 'em what happened"-implying, of course,
that if one tells what happened, nothing will happen, because when the
others find out the way things happened, they'll realize he isn't guilty.
And he replies: "That won't do, " i. e., in any case they won't believe it.
It's the system; it doesn't quite fit your interpretation.
Yes, but I was careful to say at the beginning ...
. " that the story was only there to make you accept the rest ...
. " because there is something that doesn't fit. Kit, after all, is a guy
who's pretty together. In various circumstances, he shows that he's
an excellent organizer. He panics at the scene of the first murderthat
of the father-because he'd planned everything in order to
leave with the girl. He took a gun, but hadn't foreseen that it might
turn out like that. But then later he thinks things out in detail.
There is always a bit of improvisation, but as far as the essential is
concerned, nothing is left to chance. It is there that, in my opinion,
the film blunders. The way the character has been defined, it's not
at all obvious that he would end up shooting guys around like this,
systematically. The second time with Cato is still understandable,
because he is scandalized that Cato talks nonsense to him (the story
of gold pieces buried in the fields, etc.). He is terribly angry, a shot
is fired as happened with Holly's father. He is infuriated by all the
bullshit. The other murders seem really forced to fit the story.
i 255