That statement about bullfighting being indefensible and irresistible contains so much truth and complexity. It taps in to some primal man/animal encounter ritual that evolved into a drama of elegance, eroticism, and death that some people are drawn to. I don't believe they go there out of bloodlust or a need to see the bull slaughtered as much as they go to see this kind of Passion play or enactment of something beyond words or intellect.
He calls the bull fighter brave though and they are not usually imo the fights are fixed the bull is usually wounded prior so rarely is it a fair fight. Rodeo clowns are probably braver than most of the traditional bull fighters. It's like dog fighting or cock fighting in that unlike 2 men who consent to going into a ring to compete in battle for money the animal has no choice and is not paid or compensated like a person. That's why I don't like it.
@@AnnaLVajda You have every right to not like it. I respect your opinion. But it's not true that they wound the bull before the fight. I've seen many documentaries of complete fights and when the bull charges in to the ring they are never bleeding or injured. A bull is 1500 pounds and wild so it can easily kill a matador if it gores them. And this happens often. So the matador is brave to face the bull. In documentaries the matadors sometimes show the scars they have all over their bodies. And if the bull fights bravely the crowd will call for the bull to be spared sometimes. I'm not trying to get you to like bullfighting, just to see that is more complex and has a meaning for people that is not like the base savagery of dog fighting or like activities.
I was very interested in bullfighting as a teenager living not far from Mexico. I remember the great Carlos Arruza . My friend and I wept when he was killed in a car accident.
This show with bulls in Spain have more of two thousand years. It begin with the Roman Empire, continue with the Arab conquest (from there is original the word "ole", than is a transformation of the word "Allah" that in Spanish is pronounced "Ala") is in the century XVIII when it begin to be a show with rules and the people begin to see it as an art. The proof os this is that from this moment painters (as Goya or Picasso), writers (as Ortega y Gasset or Federico García Lorca) and others important personalities call it as art. It is part of my culture and therefore part of me. Respect please.
@IM O well if you are an hunter you like the animals, Hemingway did not the hunt with evil intentions, cause hunting at the times were something of adventorous
Bullfighting is cruelty of the most horrid kind. And I cheer every time one of those bastard bullfighters dies from whatever reason-especially if they get it in the stomach from the bull and go slowly. Criminal, cruel, bastards...
Not sure what to say. Here's a man who was cruel to animals and misguided in his views on animals for years, as he himself admits. Now he's seen the light. At least that's something. Can't say I admire him though. If the plain, stark cruelty of a bullfight doesn't immediately slap you in the face when you see it, you aren't worthy of admiration. Your action of seeing the light and giving up an interest in such barbarity is worthy of being commended though, but that's about it. (Replace bulls with humans, and think through it, and you will see my position.)
The cruelty might be stark to you or I, but we have the luxury of judging bullfighting from a modern Western perspective where it's almost universally viewed as being cruel. Meanwhile, you only have to go back a couple hundred years and most people wouldn't have thought twice about kicking a stray dog in the street (you see abhorrent treatment of animals all the time in classic literature) - and here we are listening to a man who was born in 1915. It might sound like an exaggeration, but I feel it's hard to quantify just how much attitudes towards such matters have changed in the past century or so. The Sun Also Rises is a good example of that, where the women are shown as being quite affected by the deaths of horses but not at all by those of the bulls. That's certainly strange to me: horse or bull, I wouldn't want to see either hurt or killed. It's only recently that many animals have been humanised in the way which makes their suffering relatable, and even so there's many places in the world where that's unfortunately not the case. Not that either of our opinions on Welles really matters - guy's been dead for a long time - I just think it's good food for thought!
That statement about bullfighting being indefensible and irresistible contains so much truth and complexity. It taps in to some primal man/animal encounter ritual that evolved into a drama of elegance, eroticism, and death that some people are drawn to. I don't believe they go there out of bloodlust or a need to see the bull slaughtered as much as they go to see this kind of Passion play or enactment of something beyond words or intellect.
He calls the bull fighter brave though and they are not usually imo the fights are fixed the bull is usually wounded prior so rarely is it a fair fight. Rodeo clowns are probably braver than most of the traditional bull fighters. It's like dog fighting or cock fighting in that unlike 2 men who consent to going into a ring to compete in battle for money the animal has no choice and is not paid or compensated like a person. That's why I don't like it.
@@AnnaLVajda You have every right to not like it. I respect your opinion. But it's not true that they wound the bull before the fight. I've seen many documentaries of complete fights and when the bull charges in to the ring they are never bleeding or injured. A bull is 1500 pounds and wild so it can easily kill a matador if it gores them. And this happens often. So the matador is brave to face the bull. In documentaries the matadors sometimes show the scars they have all over their bodies. And if the bull fights bravely the crowd will call for the bull to be spared sometimes. I'm not trying to get you to like bullfighting, just to see that is more complex and has a meaning for people that is not like the base savagery of dog fighting or like activities.
@@AnnaLVajda this is simply not true at all.
❤❤❤
I was very interested in bullfighting as a teenager living not far from Mexico. I remember the great Carlos Arruza . My friend and I wept when he was killed in a car accident.
@Serendipity what`s the problem with it ??
Didn't weep for the bulls? Silly old woman.
I hate bullfighting, but I love when the bull winning over the matador.
what a brilliant man "just do anything?"
This show with bulls in Spain have more of two thousand years. It begin with the Roman Empire, continue with the Arab conquest (from there is original the word "ole", than is a transformation of the word "Allah" that in Spanish is pronounced "Ala") is in the century XVIII when it begin to be a show with rules and the people begin to see it as an art. The proof os this is that from this moment painters (as Goya or Picasso), writers (as Ortega y Gasset or Federico García Lorca) and others important personalities call it as art.
It is part of my culture and therefore part of me.
Respect please.
It's part of my culture to hate inferior races and cultures like your own. It began with the Sumerian City States. Respect please.
@@ExtraDimensionalWarlordwhat is really part of you is your lack of thinking as an adult.
Slavery was also tradition.
"It needs a lot af Japanese in the front row to keep going"
Orson was really trying to follow the footsteps of Hemingway... it seems.
Welles and Hemingway were cut from the same cloth in many ways. Both were nostalgic for a sort of masculine ethos of yesterday.
@IM O well if you are an hunter you like the animals, Hemingway did not the hunt with evil intentions, cause hunting at the times were something of adventorous
@IM O he writes a lot about the beauty of nature and he understood killing quickly and giving the animal due respect
Bullfighting is cruelty of the most horrid kind. And I cheer every time one of those bastard bullfighters dies from whatever reason-especially if they get it in the stomach from the bull and go slowly. Criminal, cruel, bastards...
phoenixtimes2 as you eat steaks and hamburgers. These bulls live a much better life than the cows who provide your hamburgers
Not sure what to say. Here's a man who was cruel to animals and misguided in his views on animals for years, as he himself admits. Now he's seen the light. At least that's something. Can't say I admire him though. If the plain, stark cruelty of a bullfight doesn't immediately slap you in the face when you see it, you aren't worthy of admiration. Your action of seeing the light and giving up an interest in such barbarity is worthy of being commended though, but that's about it. (Replace bulls with humans, and think through it, and you will see my position.)
The cruelty might be stark to you or I, but we have the luxury of judging bullfighting from a modern Western perspective where it's almost universally viewed as being cruel. Meanwhile, you only have to go back a couple hundred years and most people wouldn't have thought twice about kicking a stray dog in the street (you see abhorrent treatment of animals all the time in classic literature) - and here we are listening to a man who was born in 1915.
It might sound like an exaggeration, but I feel it's hard to quantify just how much attitudes towards such matters have changed in the past century or so. The Sun Also Rises is a good example of that, where the women are shown as being quite affected by the deaths of horses but not at all by those of the bulls. That's certainly strange to me: horse or bull, I wouldn't want to see either hurt or killed. It's only recently that many animals have been humanised in the way which makes their suffering relatable, and even so there's many places in the world where that's unfortunately not the case.
Not that either of our opinions on Welles really matters - guy's been dead for a long time - I just think it's good food for thought!