read

You do not have to declare yourself a die-hard film fan, or even a Die Hard fan, to be fully acquainted with this year’s record-breaking blockbuster. Research by the Center For Responsive Politics (CRP) estimated in October that this year’s election would top a record breaking £6.6 billion, with Clinton and Trump alone – at that point – already outspending the 2012 cycle by £100 million. It was enough to start your day-long armchair meditation and tune into virtual vastness.

Karl Marx once said: “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.” In the cyclical nature of its spectacle, where the same characters and themes seem to resurface again and again, tragedy and farce are never far away.  But, as the case of Donald Trump shows, it is often hard to tell exactly where the tragedy ends and the farce begins. For Trump to be considered a farce, Obama’s presidency has to be considered a tragedy (Though Obama was first Afro-American president in the history of USA, reality was still tarnished by galvanising racist scandals. And now tacky racist non-sense gained legitimacy? /// Even though Obama reformed health-care system, he did not manage to eradicate the worst disease of racism /// Obama’s hope vanished into thin air). Trump has fixed ideas and desperately craves materialising them. Muscle flexing for the angry. He’s has pulled the sword from the stone, but now he has to use it.

Karl Marx once said: “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.”

However, Trump thinks to himself to be especially ingenious. He intentionally aggravated the country’s rifts along class, racial and gender lines to pit one group against another. Xenophobic hysteria was the basis for a majority party’s agenda. Nevertheless, he still reckons he is the best guy in the world, so obsessed with himself I’m sure he will write his own hagiography too, more likely than not in the first person.

In all fairness, our titular character is not as endemic as made out, but emblematic. For the world-weary isolationists watching on the silver screen, they’ve bought into his self-proclaimed status as ultimate anti-hero and are ready for the sequel. The ultimate anti-hero, he’s somehow harnessed the unease of conspiracy theory combined, so simultaneously, so elaborately and ridiculously that it is impossible to refute. (Not a single mood swing or climate change are addressed?/// What will his (re)definition of American Beauty be ??) Thus far, he has shown himself to be an ignorant narcissist. How does he expect to compromise his chaotic, often psychotic worldview will be problematic?

I fear the worst is yet to come, the election has been merely an extraordinary adventure, uncannily simple in comparison to what actual challenges could look like. (Let’s be honest: Trump can die in tempest without slightest shove to acknowledge climate change/// With *special* characters real-life complexity is always shrouded in the background/// His triumph combined with Republicans nesting in Congress we have double rainbow and a not so rosy future over it /// If we had dipped into his stream of consciousness, we would have known from the outset that he maintains he was born to rewrite history.)

Lastly, despite the plot seeming enthusiastically dynamic, its architecture is marked by schematic predictability. Paradoxically, there is almost always an element of surprise towards the end, hopefully ours won’t be as climatic as a nuclear war with the West’s most contemporary villain, Putin. Fiction of this genre always needs polarisation, the sword is temporarily his, whoever is on the receiving end is yet to be written…