Existential Crisis

That's what I feel like every time I watch Requiem For A Dream.

Been out of town, new posts impending, I promise.

Primitivism in Contemporary Science Ficiton

I've been noticing a growing tendency in popular science fiction to express an ideology of romantic primitivism. As Wikipedia summarizes, the concept holds that "life was better or more moral during the early stages of mankind or among primitive peoples (or children) and has deteriorated with the growth of civilization." Unless you're one of the two people on the planet who didn't see Avatar you should easily be able to see the relevance of primitivism in popular culture. Furthermore a few other major sci-fi properties express similar philosophical leanings: the TV show Battlestar Galactica concluded last year with (spoiler warning) a futuristic human society abandoning all of their technology and knowledge to colonize a primitive Earth; now Steven Spielberg's upcoming show, Terra Nova, will apparently show a family from the year 2149 who go back to the time of the dinosaurs to alter history and save humanity from its "devotion to science."

Ok, so what the fuck?

Where is this sudden regressive impulse coming from? The philosophy certainly isn't new but its prevalence in science fiction lately is noteworthy and unnerving. Science fiction has always existed as a vehicle through which to consider and critique human society by imagining a different one. The genre allows us to question aspects of human life such as political structures or belief systems, and in that way to really question ourselves. Now the most popular sci-fi stories are placing the blame for humanity's woes squarely on the shoulders of technology and the individuals who propagate it... Huh?

This type of reductive thinking produces no room for analysis or discussion but instead encourages a moralistic mob mentality and a "get rid of the bad guys / things" type response, as seen at the end of Avatar. BSG started out as a liberal and critically minded examination of contemporary politics through the lens of a space opera, promoting new ways of thinking about concepts like race, religion, and war. When the show ended it suddenly devolved into an imperialistic treatise about faith, cyclical patterns, and the evils of technology. This ran completely counter to many of show's focal points, including the idea that the "evil" Cylons were for all intents and purposes people, a reflection of their human creators. The show's conclusion didn't make sense thematically, and fans of the show reacted accordingly.

Tellingly the endings of BSG and Avatar were essentially the same: 

the main characters integrated with alien noble savages by fucking them

What is the deal with all this romantic primitivism? The root of all human problems is always the humans themselves, and sci-fi has traditionally been a medium for exploring this issue in all its complexities. Now some of the most prominent examples of the genre are spouting off some ridiculous ideology about how technology is to blame and we should all abandon it to be more in touch with nature? I say again, what the fuck? I'm all for environmentalism but don't try to sell me some two-bit theory that shirks our responsibility and ignores the vast amounts of good that has come as a result of technological advancement. The solution's not as simple as that, and frankly it's not as stupid either. We need better answers and we deserve better stories.

Slavoj Zizek on Vegetarians

A friend posted this on Facebook and it's too funny not to share here. I always enjoy Zizek's rants, they make me feel like an undergrad again. For more of his thoughts check out the related videos on YouTube (Love is Evil displays some particularly interesting rhetoric) or go watch his movie. Oh, he's also written a few books...

Examined Life

The other night I went and saw a movie at Cinema du Parc with a friend, a documentary called Examined Life. The film interspersed a number of interviews with philosophers/theorists like Slavoj Zizek, Judith Butler, and Cornel West. Zizek was incredible and totally punk rock, describing the conservative impulse behind ecologist ideology and decrying it, arguing what seemed to be a conception of nature as including humanity and our products. It was a confusing rant that neither I nor my companion completely understood, but it was interesting to watch and intriguing to hear conservative and liberal doctrines reversed with regards to the environment. Judith Butler was in fine form as well, describing frustrating attitudes about human morphology and “correctness” in a conversation with the director’s sister, who suffers from a disease that fuses her joints. It was an interesting discussion of “natural” humanness, and an interesting look at San Francisco, which is evidently very open to disabled people, for lack of a better descriptor immediately on hand.

The real star of the show, though, was West, with his comparisons between jazz and poetry and life and philosophy. The film cleverly used his at the beginning, middle, and end of the film, and he provided not only some of the most poignant moments of empathy but also the best jokes from any of the philosophers. You couldn’t help but laugh with him and take as much pleasure in his ideas as he clearly takes in life. He espoused a day-by-day type approach that really resonated with me, but that I’m having a hard time explaining here. I’m going to link a few videos here to try and give a sense of what he’s talking about, but honestly the movie itself should just be seen, end of story. Maybe I’ll watch it again and take another crack at ths in a more refined form. Cornel's ideas certainly deserve the time and thought. I absolutely loved his citations of everything from Ruskin to Wordsworth to Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther, it was a treat to hear him blend in so many different sources into his incredible ideology. What an incredible speaker...

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1qc8r_cornel-west-on-knowledge_events
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex1XV52L3OQ

There's an article on the movie in The McGill Tribune that decently summarizes a few of the speakers, and so I'm posting it here:

FILM: Discussing ethics on Fifth Avenue

Walking and talking with contemporary philosophers in Examined Life

Carolyn Gregoire

Issue date: 4/7/09 Section: A & E

Outside of luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan, philosopher Peter Singer-author of the well-known essay "Famine, Affluence, and Morality"-explains his theories of distributive justice and the ethical implications of wealth and poverty. Singer is one of eight contemporary thinkers featured in Examined Life, a documentary that explores unquestioned assumptions engrained in the Western psyche, and reminds us that great ideas can emerge from everyday life.

Directed by Astra Taylor, the film is structured around 10-minute-long "walks" with philosophers through places that are particularly meaningful to them, ranging from an airport terminal to Central Park. While on a walk through a sunny city park, one of the philosophers, Avital Ronell, introduces the Heideggerian notion of paths that lead nowhere to explain that it's the journey that matters.

Gliding along a moving sidewalk in a major international airport [Toronto's Pearson - Max], suitcase in hand, Anthony Appiah discusses his theory of "cosmopolitanism"-being a citizen of the cosmos in the Greek sense, or the world as a whole-in the context of globalization and modernity. He explains how in one trip to an airport we confront more people than a member of a primitive civilization would have in a lifetime. University of Chicago professor of political philosophy and ethics Martha Nussbaum walks along the shores of Lake Ontario discussing Aristotle's theory of justice and the social contract, while Michael Hardt talks revolution from a rowboat in the Central Park pond.

Slavoj Zizek, the subject of Taylor's documentary Zizek! which premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in 2005, also makes an appearance. Zizek discusses his theory of the "ideology of ecology" at a garbage dump. Surrounded by waste, he explains that just as true love is not idealistic but sees perfection in someone even with all of their flaws, we must love the world and see perfection in all of its imperfection.

From the backseat of a car, American philosopher and civil rights activist Cornel West emphasizes philosophy as a way of dealing with our finite situation as human beings. West's humour livens up the film, particularly in his discussion of aesthetic pleasure-he explains that sometimes he'll be reading Ruskin or Melville and will just need to throw the book against the wall because he feels so alive. He compares philosophy to Romantic poetry, Beethoven's sonatas, and the blues to emphasize how invigorating philosophical inquiry can be.

Examined Life promises to be a highly enjoyable and intellectually stimulating experience for philosophy buffs or the naturally inquisitive. However, an hour and a half of continuous philosophical discourse clearly doesn't comprise the ideal movie night for everyone. While the film succeeds in its concept-bringing philosophical theories from academic ivory towers to the real world-it's not particularly well-made and loses momentum towards the end. The music is ill-chosen and at times distracting, while the flat cinematographic style certainly doesn't enhance the overall experience. Those without a strong interest in philosophical inquiry may be hard-pressed to sit through this film without dozing off.

Examined Life succeeds in its endeavor to disprove the common misgiving that philosophy is so tied up in abstractions, circular reasoning, and lofty theorems that it is essentially inapplicable to the real world. Taking a cinematic walk with these contemporary philosophers substantiates Plato's famous dictum "the unexamined life is not worth living," emphasizing that self-examination and the search for meaning extends far beyond the domain of academic philosophy.