As Melissa presented today, anti-sentimentalism is when the literature is portrayed by stressing reason over emotion and sentimentalism is when the literature is portrayed by emotion not reason. By knowing the definitions of both anti-sentimentalism and sentimentalism we are able to determine that Children of Invention directed by Tze Chun is in fact a sentimentalist film. Some examples and justifications of this are that we were attached to Tina and Raymond throughout most of the film. When Tina thinks about the old house or when she realizes that she no longer going to live there, she becomes sad and the audience feels sympathy with her. When Elaine gets frustrated with the kids and ends up slapping Tina, we see Tina’s reaction and feel as if we are standing nearby witnessing the entire event. Although Raymond stays neutral most of the film, we still see that he has feelings about what is going on with the family and his mother’s struggles. When Tina and Raymond go through the events of looking for the bank and finding food they can afford, we see that Raymond takes the role of being the bigger brother and the burdens of the role, through his emotions. Although most of Raymond’s emotion is frustration we, as the audience, still feel pity for Raymond and Tina.
Elaine’s feelings and emotions center around her having to provide for children when there is no money. She goes at all lengths to achieve success. As we see Elaine going into the trap of the pyramid scheme, we see that the end does not look promising for Elaine. She does not see the signs of failure because she is naïve.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Lyndsay, you bring up an interesting point and I fully understand your reasoning; however, I would argue that "Children of Invention" is in fact an anti-sentimentalism piece. This can be seen in one main example.
ReplyDeleteDirector Tze Chun tells the story of Elaine, her family and the struggles that they face. Because they are of Chinese descent, their immigrant status makes it almost impossible for them to fully integrate into American society.
This piece becomes anti-sentimental because Elaine believes only one thing to be important, and that is to be successful and to have money. Although this reasoning is skewed, it drives Elaine to act in the way she does. While she still pays attention to her children, she puts her job first. Therefore, she is not making a connection to the emotional connection of family.
I have to agree with Lyndsay. I don't think that Elaine "believes only one thing to be important." While it appears that she is putting her job before her children, it's obvious she is trying to do what it takes to provide for her children. The fact that she's trying to get money any way she can, such as the pyramid schemes, shows that she cares. Furthermore you can look at how emotion plays a role in the movie to see how she feels. One example of this can be seen when Elaine gets mad at Raymond for not looking after his sister. His lack of emotion for his sister angers her. Another example can be seen when Elaine gets home really late one night and notices that the children have already taken care of their own dinner. The way the camera goes from Elain when she enters the house to the two empty noodle cups emphasizes her feelings. The best example however is at the end of the movie. Elaine sees how she has failed her children, and instead of getting mad at Raymond for his comment about being better off without her, she breaks down and realizes that this might be true. The whole story comes together when you see Elaine crying and embracing her two children. I believe the director used these scenes of emotion and others alike them to tell his story.
ReplyDelete