Children of Men

Review

            For this weeks review I would like to focus on the premise of the film Children of Men. The 2006 film written and directed by Alfonso Cuarón depicts our world in the not-so-distant future; the Earth is in a quasi-dystopian state. For some reason, the world’s population no longer has the ability to bear children. The mechanics of each human’s sex organs have stopped producing offspring; this has gone on for years. At the beginning point of the movie, the youngest person on earth is 18 years old. People are in a state of panic, with the knowledge that they will have to endure death knowing that their family name and bloodline will forever cease to exist. Mans only way towards immortality has been extinguished. In theory, within seventy to one hundred years, the human race will be extinct

            A second aspect of the film that I wish to discuss is the scene where Theo is visiting his friend Nigel to get transit papers. While the two are eating dinner, there in the dinning room, is an over sized copy of Picasso’s painting Guernica, which is depicts the bombing of the small village of Guernica in Spain during the Spanish Civil War. The image is that of chaos. The mood of the painting, with its dull greys and blues, projects pain, fear, and uncertainty of survival.  People and animals are huddled around each other in a dark room, screaming and waiting for either the next Sun to rise, or for death to take them.

Reaction

            I am part of a counter culture in today’s society that revels in the thought of dystopian societies, so of course I enjoyed this film. Recently I had my first child, a boy. Every day I get to look into his face and imagine his future. I think of not only his future, but of my bloodline for generations to come. I ask myself questions like, what kind of father is he going to be, what kind of grandfather, or will his life be cut short by war. Children are our only source of immortality. Weather a person realizes or not, there is a biological urge to pass on our genes. If we as society cannot do that, then we have no purpose. My entire life at this point is now focused on providing for my son Grayson. I am going to school to give him a good life. I stay out of trouble so that I can be around to guide him. I write down my thoughts, wisdom, and stories in a journal, so that he will have it in case I am not around to teach him. Without the thought of providing for future generations, my life has little purpose.

Interpretation

            My interpretation and understanding of Line of Flight is that it is closely related to destiny. Every person has choices in life, those choices can drastically alter the nature of one’s existence, but one can only experience a finite amount of variation from the choices they make, yet each new experience adds more paths. For instance, a mechanic from a small town who never leaves said town, can only experience the simple life that a small town mechanic can afford. If that mechanic decides to take on a random hobby, or meet new people, then his Line of Flight expands. On the other hand, a well-traveled professor can experience a much wider variety of experience, due to the scale of her encounters with diverse and random influences. The professor’s state of being can stretch farther because her Line of Flight has more avenues. Those avenues of life are what give each of us our reason for being, if one decides not to exist anymore, e.g. suicide, then all one has to do if deny themselves the entities that allow them to live. In this sense, Line of Flight, (peoples way of being) is what drives us to continue to exist.

            Another way of thinking of Line of Flight is the often-used analogy of the lightning bolt. Lightning bolts exist; they can only exist because the atmosphere around the bolt allows them to exist and move. Lightning bolts are all unique in appearance, and mass, but the scope of their nature and function is limited, much like the small town mechanic who can only be involved in so much.

            The world that Cuarón tries to convey in his film Children of Men, is in a state of destruction. The population understands that they are doomed; they will live a full life, but never have children to pass on their genes and accumulative knowledge. It does not matter, in a temporal sense, what decisions each individual makes, because once that person grows old and dies, his entire existence expires. Not only does his or her body ceases to exist, but also every talent and bit of knowledge will not be passed down to a following successor. Line of Flight is tied into this scene in that one only exists because the world around them enables one to exist. Now, nature has decided has produced an atmosphere where the existence of humans will no longer be tolerated, and thus wiped out. No matter how far a person branches out, they will abruptly end.

            I believe that the director put Picassos’ painting Guernica, is in the film, because it echoes the same point of Line of Flight as the movies’ premise. Those people huddled around each other in Guernica, Spain during the bombing of 26 April 1937, were faced with potential annihilation. It did not matter what kind of lives each of those villagers lead, if they were talented, lazy, saints or heathens, they all shared the same end. At any time a bomb could have blown past the defenses and ended them all. Alternatively, they could have all survive and live another day. Each person’s life up until the instant they set foot in bomb shelter, their previous lives, creativity, and morals are moot.

Work Cited

Children of Men. Dir. Alfonso. Cuarón. Perf. Clive Owen. 2006. DVD.

Fournier, M. (2016). Lines of Flight. Retrieved June 16, 2016, from            http://tsq.dukejournals.org/content/1/1-2/121.full

Deuchars, Robert, “Creating Lines of Flight and Activating Resistance: Deleuze and          Guattari’s War Machine”, in AntePodium, Victoria University Wellington, 2011

Rayner, T. (2013, June 18). Lines of flight: Deleuze and nomadic creativity. Retrieved       June 16, 2016, from             https://philosophyforchange.wordpress.com/2013/06/18/lines-of-flight-deleuze-    and-nomadic-creativity/

Guernica (Picasso). (n.d.). Retrieved June 16, 2016, from     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guernica_(Picasso)

Dead Man

Review

            As the days go by, William Blake the main character, inches closer towards the city of Machine. Machine is known as the end of line, not only for the train, but also of civilization itself. As the train dives deeper into unfamiliar territory the people start becoming rougher in appearance. The cabin fills with tuff mountain men, with guns at the ready. Seemingly out of nowhere, the men hooting and howling, fire their rifles out the window into a heard of buffalo, shooting not for material gain, but as a means to end the species. Besides the obvious need for entertainment, the mountain men are killing as a way to turn the uncivilized west into what they perceive as civilization.

“Look... they are shooting buffalo, government says... it killed a million of 'em last year alone.”

Reaction

            As this course has progressed, my interest in the movies has steadily increased. Currently, Dead Man is the most entertaining thus far. The dry humor, the dialog, and the awkward cameos, all made for an entertaining two hours. I find deterritorialization and reterritorialization intriguing, so I started the film with the intent of looking to exemplify those terms. There were many examples that characterized deterritorialization in Dead Man, such as Williams Blake’s transformation from a timid nobody to a wanted killer, back to a timid man in the canoe, but the example of the buffalo scene stands out in my mind most, perhaps because of my historian outlook on life.

Interpretation

            Deterritorialization and deterritorialization is the transformation of a symbol from one meaning to another. Deterritorialization is the braking down of the symbol, to a baser meaning; in other words, the symbol is frowned upon and almost destroyed. Reterritorialization is when the broken symbol starts to be characterized as something new and is admired, by those who sought to destroy it.

            In the late 1800’s the government had ambitions of settling in the west, but the Indians still occupied much of the prairie land. The government’s grand plan was for citizens to treat the buffalo as if they were pests. The buffalo herds were vital to the survival of the natives. Other than being a spiritual symbol for the natives, buffalo were the main source of food and material for making clothes and shelter. The native’s entire existence depended on predicting the migration patterns of the buffalo herds. The government’s logic in this was both to starve the people, and break their will to fight.

            I cannot think of a better example of deterritorialization than the extermination of buffalo. The government intentionally tried to destroy a symbol for life for a race of people. They were able to get common white citizens to shoot buffalo on sight. The intentional extinction was effective. The buffalo population went from sixty million in 1800, to only twenty-five single specimens in 1894.

            I do not know when the reterritorialization of the American buffalo occurred, or when it started, but today buffalo are synonymous with majesty, and power. They symbolize the old west, a simpler time that modern Americans will never get to experience (These analogies came from my California raised wife).

            The reterritorialization of the buffalo as a symbol, gave raise the reintroduction of buffalo herds in America. Buffalo have been reintroduced in Yellowstone National Park, and in various places around Montana. Eating buffalo meat has become an attraction for visitors to experience real Montana at places such as Teds Montana Grill on Main Street. Americans seem envious of simpler times, and the buffalo helps us imagine that we are in stuck in time in the old west. We have sought that feeling so much that the buffalo has become Americas national mammal. 
           As was discussed in class, deterritorialization and reterritorialization is not static, but is cyclical. To put this in terms of the buffalo, the buffalo were revered by the indigenous people, later the buffalo were seen as a nescience, by white Americans, and killed off. Now the cycle has come around full swing, the buffalo it’s the symbol there of, is put on a pedestal, perhaps given more time, the buffalo will become a pest one more.

            Dead Man further exemplifies deterritorialization and reterritorialization by how the characters viewed civilization. As William rides further from Cincinnati, and closer to Machine, the landscape becomes less civilized, while the other passengers become more unsavory, to the point that William no longer fells comfortable leaving his luggage unattended. The city of Machine is perceived as  civilization by the ones whom benefit from it. The perception of the definition of civilization varies from culture to culture. One man’s civilization, is another man’s wasteland. The indigenous population would argue that the land on which Machine was built was in its ideal state before white men struck ground. To the white workers, the city was an improvement upon the land, and previously held no material value,while William would argue that neither is civilization when compared to Cincinnati. Just like the symbol of the buffalo, the land itself and the perception of civilization is ever-flowing.

             

Work Cited

Deleuze, G. (1983). What Is a Minor Literature. Mississippi Review, 11, 13-33. Retrieved from    http://www.jstor.org/stable/20133921

E. (2012). Manuel DeLanda. Assemblage Theory, Society, and Deleuze. 2011. Retrieved June      09, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-I5e7ixw78

The Decent of Civilization: The Extermination of the American Buffalo. (n.d.). Retrieved June      09, 2016, from http://www.pbs.org/wnet/frontierhouse/frontierlife/essay8.html

Koyaanisqatsi

Review

            The most obvious faction of this film, and the one I am sure most people will comment on, is the shift from location to location (is there another aspect of this movie?). The camera slowly pans over various locations, seemingly going from a more natural world to a more modern and industrialized world. One scene depicts the desert, with its overhearing hear, sandy terrain, and orange glow. Another scene is of the inner city; cars move bumper to bumper, people live in squalor with disheveled homes and garbage-ridden streets. Another location was vacant high altitude mountains with clouds climbing over the tops like water over a rock. As the movie progressed the scene grow more focused on human activity. The music changed to a faster paced up swing beat, and the time laps became noticeably more rapid. The pace became more and more rapid almost to the point of anxiety.

 Reaction

            koyaanisqatsi is a background movie at best; something to put on while one is working on something else. It is not a movie to sit down and watch for fun. To sit at watch this hour and a half movie, without any other distraction was difficult to say the least. I was still waiting for the movie to start thirty minutes in, before I gave up and accepted that the movie did not have any dialog, plot, or story arch, or any other norms of basic story structure. Yet it did prove to be easy to find a niche to write about concerning philosophy. I don’t think that interpretation will be at all unique to the rest of the class. I am sure that most of the other students will share a similar understanding of koyaanisqatsi.

Interpretation

            Some of the locations shown in the film are opposite of each other, i.e. desert, bat infested caves, inner city etc. Each place has proved habitable by humans and other animals, given the correct circumstance. Each plane of existence comes with its own set of unique rules. To survive in any given location, it is vital to play by each location’s rules or social norms. It is common sense that if a person wants to thrive in a mountainous climate, then preparing for lowland desert conditions is counterproductive and will likely end in death. In order to be successful in the civilized world, or any world where people are involved, one must live by the social norms, or at least mimic the social norms, so as not to be viewed as an outsider. Driving on the streets requires enormous amounts of cooperation and adherence to laws and social norms, if this were not so, then driving or walking around streets would be a vastly more dangerous place.

            The rules of working on a construction site are different from that of the social norms of going to church. Many of the rules are not interchangeable; for instance swearing and making noise is normal on a job site, but highly discouraged at church. This is the basis for Deleuze's interpretation of Foucault’s theory of disciplinary societies. If these location-based rules are broken the individual can find him or herself demoted in social standing. Alternatively, if the rules are followed and expectations of are exceeded, the individual can be promoted. Without social norms people would have no reason to feel connected to one another, thus it would be more difficult for us to form communities. 

            The fast paced nature of the movie towards the end indicates that in order to survive in the modern world where technology dominates, one must adapt a fasted paced consumerist lifestyle. To live a social and prosperous life, one needs to adapt the characteristics of society, such as eating the local foods, buying buss passes, and getting drivers license. To deny ones self of these qualities means to live as an outcaste, thus demoting themselves in the eyes of society.

            The fact that the film itself shares no resemblance to most other films, also could characterize Foucault’s theory The film industry, should not be exempt form thriving on general guidelines, but it is. Generally, in order for a film, or book for that matter to be popular it should follow typical story structure guidelines. Most stories have a protagonist, a plot, a setting or even dialog. This film did not need any of that to get the points across. The music and images were enough to tell a full story. After a little research I found out that koyaanisqatsi ranks # 97 in best documentaries since its release date in 1983, which is fairly good, falling short of Blackfish by only 9 spots. This means that Foucault is wrong in this aspect. This director made a movie outside of the box, and it seems to have captured an audience. To me this means that the film industry defies the theory of disciplinary societies. Perhaps in artistic professions, it is advantageous to occasionally break the mold, and try something new and diverse.

Work Cited

Deleuze, G. (2011). Postscript on Societies of Control. Mit Press, 59, 3-7. Retrieved from           http://www.jstor.org/stable/778828 .

Documentary. (n.d.). Retrieved June 01, 2016, from   http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=documentary.htm

Kerr, S. (2015). Three Minute Theory: What are Societies of Control? Retrieved June 01, 2016, from         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onZ1U4jKJdk

The Trial

            A nameless man wakes in his bed to find a mysterious figure entering his bedroom. The unknown male personage walks into the room, dressed like a detective and immediately establishes himself as the dominant figure. He immediately interrogates the waking man, asking questions with the purpose of exposing any faults in the waking mans answers. The waking man whom is later identified as Josef, is baffled at the random circumstances of his waking and stumbles through his answers, making the detective more suspicious. It is obvious that Josef is nervous, weather it be because he is guilty, or that he is out of his element. The scene grows more and more strange as further detectives walk in and out of the room asking questions, making accusations, and twisting Josef’s words. Orson Wells, the narrator opens the movie by stating that the logic of the movie is that of the logic of a dream of a nightmare, indeed this is true. The plot and setting are never explained the movie forces the audience fill in the holes and make their own assumptions about the theme of the film (The Trial 0:300-0:1700).

            The Trial is full of contradictory themes and logic, yet the full of the movie seems to represent different aspects of poststructuralist theory. It may seem cheap to write a review of the first fifteen minutes of the movie. To some it can be viewed as lazy, as if this was the first and only portion watched, yet just these few minutes emulate poststructuralist theory in a multitude of ways. There are definite themes of literary realism, Ferdinand de Saussure’s theory of linguistics, and the genealogy of knowledge.

            “It has been said that the logic of this story is the logic of a dream of a nightmare” (The Trial, 3:52). Right off the bat, the movie screams of literary realism. The Trial is a story that of meta-fiction, it is a story of a story of a story. Reality and logic are blurred because the story is removed from reality three times; at this point, anything is possible. Logic can be blurred and misshapen, yet still appear realistic (Bolton, 2012).

             Saussure ‘s contribution to the poststructuralist theory concerning linguistics shows that words and their sounds are not directly associated with the entity that it portrays. Language is generally objective in nature. New words derive from previous words or encounters with words. For example, if humans had more relative association in their daily lives, they would simply call a lion, a rawr, since that sound directly relates to the sound that a lion might make, thus making a direct association between the physical object and the word; instead the word comes from the Latin word Leo and the French word lion, which means hero. There is still some relativity, since the English and French word piggy packs off of the Latin root, but there is still a large difference from the symbol of a lion to the signifier Leo (Etymology Online, 2016).

            As the detectives cross examine Josef, they come across a discoloration on the floor in the shape of an oval. The men continually ask, what the “ovaly” shape is on the floor, after which Josef exclaims that ovaly is not a word. Why would the men make up this word? There is a direct link between the signified and signifier of the word ovaly. The men took a word, which was already known to them, oval, and turned the word into an adjective. Not only was it easy for the detectives to create the word, but also it is easy for one to instantly relate the new word from the oval shape. The term has so much objective association, that if Josef did not explain that ovaly was not a word, many audience members would not have known.

            The dialog of the detectives reveals them to be relational thinkers; so much so that it reaches an extreme level, yet their rational has limits. The questions they ask Josef are as if they posses no objectivity. Since they did not witness anything that Josef has done, then they do not believe that it has happened or could happen. Later, the head detective comes across this conversation in his notes left by the other officers as he comes across the word ovaly, he immediately knows the word to be incorrect grammar and dismisses it as foolish babbling. The head inspector assumes that the word play is Josef’s doing, he is unable to understand the meaning of the word, or its relevancy to the task at hand. The head inspector and the other officers are two extreme representations of humanity, some people are able to play with the meaning of words, and use past experiences to alter the future of syntax. Others, like the head inspector do not have this ability to use their past to alter their future. The head inspector’s inability to understand the knowledge passed through the chain of command also shows a lacking of genealogy of knowledge. Knowledge could not be passed from one to another (What is Poststructuralism?).

             If I had watched this movie outside the context of this class, I would have not enjoyed it. I would not have been able to enjoy the film without knowing anything about postructuralist theory. The film was fun because it was awkward. The seemingly strange dialog and random setting was humorous. The Trial helped me take the theory off of paper and see it in real life context.  

References

[Bolton Christopher]. (2012, November 9). Animating Poststructuralism. [Video File].      Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a2dLVx8THA

Online Etymology Dictionary. (n.d.). Retrieved May 19, 2016, from          http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=lion

Welles, O. (Director), Welles, O., Ledrut, J., Richard, E., & Muller, F. (Writers), & Salkind, M., & Salkind,         A. (Producers). (2002). The trial [Motion picture]. Los Angelos, CA: Miracle Pictures.

What is poststructuralism? (n.d.). Retrieved May 19, 2016, from    http://www.readysteadybook.com/Article.aspx?page=whatispoststructuralism