Palme aux Oeufs d'Or

Catherine Hardwicke's "Thirteen" and Gus Van Sant's "Elephant". I had a very bad impression about "Elephant", after having watched "Thirteen" first: why this movie? Where is the ethic? I only see an aesthetic.

The best metaphysical exercises have always been achieved by aesthetes. To stretch time like Van Sant does before the massacre, gives a strange depth to the shallow signs of life (walk, talk, eat, take pictures, gossip, vomit).

Metaphysic is like "a jolie femme": she may become interested if you're pretending you're not. You only reach the goal "en passant". "Elephant" seems to reach a metaphysical goal. By chance?

Now, Columbine is linked up with two "Palme d'Or" in Cannes. "Palme d'Or" is also "Poule aux Oeufs d'Or". Question: is it ethic for an artist to use real people's drama as a "material"? I also do that in my new album...