There are many elements of end of the nineteenth century sort of bourgeois morality that now we think are totally ridiculous, right? Soif that's the argument, then i think that many people would say, yes, you know, right on. I mean, this is what sort of interesting about him. Denied, he thought it was based on a kind of incoherent that you could self create yourself. On the one hand, he denied this idea that we can be self-caused but also wanted to develop human being who wouldn't be held back by social norms.
Special guest Yoel Inbar (author of Hitchcock’s Women: From Margaret Sullivan to Tippi Hedren) joins us to talk about Hitchcock’s long take masterpiece/gimmick Rope. Based loosely on the case of Leopold and Loeb, Rope tells the story of two young men who have read Nietzsche and decide to murder a schoolmate in order to cement their Übermensch status. Did they read Nietzsche correctly? Is conventional morality nothing but a construct to keep the inferior masses in line? Are professors accountable for what they teach? (Please God, no.) Plus, we delve deeper into Julie and Mark’s motivation, and Yoel plays a round of “Does the government deem this trademark scandalous?”
Links
Support Very Bad Wizards