I don't understand this part of HyperNormalisation where he quotes a British journalist (to me it kinda feels like Curtis agrees with the journalist, the way he's quoting him) about how Assad was ok but then he got betrayed by the Big Bad Am*rican and turned evil.
Here's the doc the part i'm talking about goes from 15:40 to ±18:45
youtu.be
...
Every now and then, his docs have salient points, like vid related.
It's useful as an intro to the history/meaning of neoliberalism and "neoliberal subjectivity" as theorists call it. Curtis' documentaries are not as accessible as they could be. There's a lot of repetitive music, the same kind of cuts, and each "documentary" feels like I'm reading an essay written by a grad student.
Still, he does work that could be considered "useful" for the "anti-neoliberal left" if that is actually a thing. It's broad, and as many people have said, doesn't really involve class/labor analysis. At times the narrative seems to get pretty "out there" conceptually and stops being as materially grounded as it could be.
his work has a great aesthetic
Very good at describing the way things are but no attempt at describing a way out, to the point it makes it look like change is impossible.
I'm Sorry to Bother You did a good job of mocking the liberal absorption of any attempt at change (coke ad about the strike). But still had the good guys win in the end.
?
Adam Curtis thread. Noone talking about The Century of the Self, his most important work.