The Soprano's Finale

It was the denouement that never came. The curtain closing on our voyeuristic pleasure of watching an ethically challenged family exist in modern America. David Chase knows how to write and to create drama and subtext that both challenge and frustrate his viewers. If you watched the series from its beginning you had to realize that it could end no other way. The perfect ending is no ending. You draw your own conclusions because the show is too smart to fall into a pattern of cliched endings. No one changes on the Sopranos. If they change at all it is to obtain some transitory goal. They are condemned by their fate, their unchanging essence to become who they are. Chase must have read his Nietzsche, because the series strikes on many of the themes written of by the famous philosopher. The dubiousness of Christian ethics and moral truths, truth from different perspectives and most importantly, amour fati, or loving or accepting ones own fate. In the end, the audience could see no more. Our glimpse into this sordid world had to end and it did, abruptly and with confusion. In the end, the Soprano's is about nostalgia. In the series pilot, Tony talks about his coming in at the end of the glory days. In the final episode, he laments of the houses that have sprung up in the back of Johnny Sack's old house. His final meeting with Uncle Junior has great relevance to our feelings of loss. Junior once ran North Jersey; now, he is a mental shell of his former self. Memories are all we have in the end, and he has suffered the ultimate punishment.

JFK and the massive new tome

The release of the new JFK assassination book by legendary and logically thorough prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, will no doubt bring the CN's (conspiracy nuts) out of their woodwork again. 1600 plus pages in length, it aims to be the somewhat last word on the case. How many people will actually read this massive project is probably minimal, but a cursory glance already reveals a completely readable text wth a lawyer's precision for the process. Already the CN's have begun their verbal and tired denunciations. What they ask of all of us who do not subscribe to some aspect of their multi layered theories, is that we willfully suspend any rational thought in thinking about the case. What they fail to do is provide any solid proof to their reams and reams of conjecture. This book will not be the last word, as conspiracy theorists are never satisfied. It is in their DNA. No one in a seemingly complicated world wants to believe in the randomness of society. Conspiracies are complex, much like we want to believe our existence really is. A single gunman, or a simple plot only underscores the arbitrary nature of life. I symphathize. I used to be a less disingenous conspiracy sympathizer. I wanted to believe in a conspiracy. I love the speculation of the "who done it" and I understand for arguing against the lone nut theory. It provides at least a explanation in a world full of uncontrollable forces. In a world of chaotic disorder, order is desired by most of us. Conspiracy thinking solves a larger issue. The Cubans, the Mafia, the CIA? Fascinating stuff but ultimately unconvincing. Reason took a hold of me years ago and would not let me go. I want to believe, I just can't be persuaded by the same, tired old theories. I am also one who loved Oliver Stone's JFK. A masterpiece of speculation and film editing. But I also realize that it is fiction, useful and entertaining fiction, but fiction nonetheless.