Episode 184: A Face in the Crowd

2 Mar

In this episode, Tyler is joined by Jeff Newburg to discuss Elia Kazan’s A Face in the Crowd, and a lot of politics.

2 Responses to “Episode 184: A Face in the Crowd”

  1. Nice March 2, 2017 at 5:44 pm #

    Good, challenging ep.

    I have to ask, in the spectrum you posit of the old days where you’d pick your sort of “elite” to the modern times where you go with someone personally appealing to you, where you put the BernieBros? I feel like he was neither totally ideologically in line with younger supporters, nor a real charismatic Pied Piper leading people to his platform.

    It warms my heart to see very different opinionated people still disagree and pick apart the disagreement without getting mad, means there’s still some grace left

  2. Steve B. March 7, 2017 at 10:52 am #

    Thanks for making me aware of the existence of “A Face in the Crowd.” It’s no surprise that there are a number of Twitter accounts out there with variations on the name Lonesome Rhodes, and a Google news search on the name of the film brings up a lot of recent articles.

    I am an often left-leaning political independent and a Christian, but I felt similar to Tyler at election time and voted the same way with similar reservations. I was a bit more optimistic about Gary Johnson’s abilities if he could be elected because I believe he told the truth when he said he would hire qualified experts at cabinet positions, and that he would be realistic in his expectations of working with R’s and D’s as a third party president. If he spoke better and was a “figurehead” maybe his message would have worked because the content of his speeches worked on me, especially on some key issues that the majority party candidates didn’t touch on.

    Lonesome Rhodes has been compared to Trump, but many politicians of both parties often put up a false facade when dealing with the public. They can do it from behind a keyboard, camera, or microphone. But then I think of how some current members of congress have no idea how to engage vocal constituents in a face-to face town hall – to the point of not even accepting an invitation to one out of fear.

    Thanks for also bringing up the term “political expediency.” It is truly a shame that that is the ultimate motivator for any decision in Washington. Why can’t freedom, justice, and truth co-exist? I appreciate that the conversation in this episode shows that maybe it can, if people can talk and listen. But I wonder real conversation really can exist among actual politicians who are entrenched in the habits of lawyer-speak and power-brokering.

Leave a Reply