The internet website allaboutphilosophy.org informs me that existentialism is a philosophy centered upon the analysis of existence and the way humans find themselves existing in the world. The notion is that humans exist first and then each individual spends a lifetime changing their essence or nature. Put simply, existentialism is a philosophy concerned with finding self and the meaning of life through free will, choice, and personal responsibility.
Last week in my other subject of English we discussed issues of gender and how society constructs and molds the individual. This and an influential quote from the French writer Simone de Beauvoir is highly relevant to the theme of existentialism. Simone de Beauvoir wrote in her book The Second Sex that, "One is not born a woman, one becomes one." It was her belief in existentialist feminism that the social construction of a woman is paramount to oppression. Beauvoir anticipated that women were moving beyond this constraint and would reach a position where they would take personal responsibilities for their own choices.
This view neatly corresponds with the philosophy of Existentialism. A person is at their best when struggling against their individual nature, with the human free will to discover their self.
Wednesday, 10 March 2010
Nietzsche's Fight Club
A couple of weeks back I blogged on the impact Nietzsche's work had on Stanley Kubrick's film 2001: A Space Odyssey. Last night, as part of a conscious attempt to view films I really should have seen by now, I watched Fight Club. Once the big twist hit me I discovered the influence our German friend has had on another film. Tyler Durden is the mental creation of the narrator. He is everything he wished he was. Out of the despair and confusion he finds residing in his life, the narrator creates his very own 'Nietzschean Overman'. The super-human that embraces violence with superior will to power.
Interesting to see Friedrich pop up again. I'll be keeping my eye out for him.
Interesting to see Friedrich pop up again. I'll be keeping my eye out for him.
Wednesday, 24 February 2010
Nietzsche's Space Odyssey
Critics have called Stanley Kubrick's film 2001: A Space Odyssey "the first Nietzchean film", stating that its essential thematic influence is derived from Nietzsche's concept of man's evolution from ape to human to super-human.
I first came across the film during a GCSE music class where we were studying the opening chapter, The Dawn of Man in preparation for a task to compose a film score for a fictional scene. My first impression of the opening scenes in 2001: A Space Odyssey was one of incomprehension. At the height of my immaturity I found the howls and foot-stomping of various blokes attired in monkey suits extremely humourous. At no point did it occur to me the significance of the appearance of a geometrically perfect black monolith, nor did I really understand why some monkey was bashing about a load of bones. However, looking at this scene with my (only slightly) maturer manner, I can see the importance of the impact of philosophy and in particular the works of Nietzsche had on the art form.
Director Kubrick has said of the meaning of the film that; "You're free to speculate as you wish about the philosophical and allegorical meaning of the film." However, it is difficult to not include Nietzsche's beliefs as a clear reference point in the film.
Nietzsche's belief in the 'will to power' is clearly evident in the The Dawn of Man. Nietzsche stated that the human race will be superseded by a successor species who will rise due to their superior will to power. This replacing of authority is conveyed in the scene where one of the apes begins to think about the animal bones in front of him and devises how to create a deadly weapon out of them to assist him in further acts of violence towards other apes and to kill animals for food. In this act we can see the first Super-Ape, which is thus, the first human.This process will then continue within the human race, where a Super-Human will emerge. This idea of a Super-Human is a key concept of Nietzsche. He believes this has already happened through the figures of Jesus Christ, Napoleon, Alexander the Great etc. Interesting for Nietzsche is that in these evolutionary surges forward occurs in the personality of the individual.
In 2001: A Space Odyssey the moments of evolutionary advancements are preceded by the appearance of the mysterious black monolith which seems to act as a marker for the different stages in the journey of humankind.
Wednesday, 10 February 2010
Nietzsche
So another semester beckons with History and Context of Journalism Part Four commencing tomorrow afternoon. The first topic is concerning Frederick Nietzsche.
For Nietzsche the greatest, most powerful, and honest emotion is that of hatred. He was a man who embraced 'ruthlessness, war, and aristocratic pride.' He was of the opinion that evil was good as its end result was the production of 'a great man'. Bertrand Russell writes of Nietzsche in his book History of Western Philosophy that 'he alludes habitually to ordinary human beings as the 'bungled and botched', and sees no objection to their suffering if its necessary for the production of a great man.' Russel cites the example of Napoleon to convey this point. So does this indicate that Nietzsche would be complementary of other 'great men' who have inflicted mass suffering to the 'bungled and botched' such as Hitler and Stalin? Would he be in favour of Tony Blair and George Bush for their implicit responsibility for bringing suffering to the 'bungled and botched' in Iraq and Afghanistan? For Nietzsche 'the misery of a whole nation is of less importance than the suffering of a great individual.'
Chris described in his webcast lecture on Nietzsche how he agreed with him that hatred is the most powerful and honest emotion. Chris used the example of football fans as evidence to convey Nietzsche's belief. I have to agree with Chris on this one. If you conduct a study of football fans terrace chants you are likely to find more references to hatred of the other team rather than the glorification of your own side. This can also be seen through the booing of opposition players. Just because they turn out in different colours, the powerful and honest emotion of hatred comes to the forefront. The hatred for the opposition is the more powerful emotion than the want for your own team to win.
For Nietzsche the greatest, most powerful, and honest emotion is that of hatred. He was a man who embraced 'ruthlessness, war, and aristocratic pride.' He was of the opinion that evil was good as its end result was the production of 'a great man'. Bertrand Russell writes of Nietzsche in his book History of Western Philosophy that 'he alludes habitually to ordinary human beings as the 'bungled and botched', and sees no objection to their suffering if its necessary for the production of a great man.' Russel cites the example of Napoleon to convey this point. So does this indicate that Nietzsche would be complementary of other 'great men' who have inflicted mass suffering to the 'bungled and botched' such as Hitler and Stalin? Would he be in favour of Tony Blair and George Bush for their implicit responsibility for bringing suffering to the 'bungled and botched' in Iraq and Afghanistan? For Nietzsche 'the misery of a whole nation is of less importance than the suffering of a great individual.'
Chris described in his webcast lecture on Nietzsche how he agreed with him that hatred is the most powerful and honest emotion. Chris used the example of football fans as evidence to convey Nietzsche's belief. I have to agree with Chris on this one. If you conduct a study of football fans terrace chants you are likely to find more references to hatred of the other team rather than the glorification of your own side. This can also be seen through the booing of opposition players. Just because they turn out in different colours, the powerful and honest emotion of hatred comes to the forefront. The hatred for the opposition is the more powerful emotion than the want for your own team to win.
Monday, 25 January 2010
Tuesday, 15 December 2009
Information for 'unseen' test on Thursday
Been a while since I've blogged so its redemption time. I'm treating this blog post as a revision aid for the test on Thursday; basically just typing my notes into the form of legible sentences.
The first question we looked at in the elaborate 'symposium' was in reference to modernisn, James Joyce's Ulysses, and how they have no single point of view...
It's pretty clear to me that the literary work of Joyce conveys the complexion of the modernist movement that he himself pioneered. In life, and in the mind of the individual there is no single point of view, but many versions and diverse ways of looking at things. Joyce uses the narrative technique of a 'stream of consciousness' to convey this idea. It creates a de-centred narrative with no single point of view. Through the use of this form of narrative Joyce has broken free from traditional forms of literature, where the structure of beginning - middle - end rule the book. Life is not like this, it contains a vast amount of beginnings, middles, and endings, with many ways of looking at each. There is a clear Freud influence in Joyce's work, just look at the sexual content of Molly Bloom's soliloquy!
The second question was to summarize the work of Freud and his cultural impact...
The first point I think of when looking at Freud's works is his obsession with sex. Freud detailed that all of our actions were revolved around sex, with motivations defined through sexual desires. He noted that many of his patients had sexual hang ups and he stated that this caused mental issues. He viewed that civilisation causes people to suppress their natural urges, which damages the individual. For example, a young child wishes to defecate freely, but society creates rules that this is unacceptable. Also, there is a masturbation taboo, when it is a natural human desire.
Freud's analysis method was to interpret peoples dreams. He said that 'dreams are the royal highway to the sub-conscious'. He stated that in each human mind there was a constant conflict between the conscious and sub-conscious which caused mental distress.
The cultural impact Freud's work has had is huge. His work has been viewed as sexist (he stated that women are hysterical because they have 'penis envy') and thus he has had a great impact of the debate of gender politics. Also the impact of Freud in advertising is highly significant. Companies have used Freud's work as a guide of how to appeal to consumers desires.
The third question we looked at was how the control of language can control behaviour and thought with reference to George Orwell's 1984...
In '1984' Orwell suggests that the control of language by an authoritarian government is such a powerful notion to the extent that if they were to remove a word, they remove the idea. For example, without the word 'rebellion' there can be no action of rebellion. Through the control of language, the government in the novel are able to control the thoughts and actions of the people. The new edition of the Newspeak dictionary in the novel is described as 'going to be tiny', clearly showing the eradication of words, and thus the ability to think about the meanings behind the words. The government also changed meanings of words to control the thoughts of people, for example, 'love is hate' and 'peace is war'. This Orwellian idea can be seen in modern terms. For example, the British Army used to be ruled by the Ministry of War, but now the exact same ministry is known as the Ministry of Defence. The use of language changes the implication of meaning.
The fourth question was a look at Steinbeck's great novel The Grapes of Wrath and whether it was a work of journalism...
Steinbeck's novel was a very controversial book, with some people criticizing Steinbeck accusing him of exaggerating the conditions of the migrants in the book. The book itself was born from a photojournalism project for Life magazine. Steinbeck wrote the book as a journalistic campaign to highlight the experience he had seen through his research into the plight of the migrating people. It is a very political book, a propaganda book even. A campaign for massive state aid in the wake of the Great Depression which resulted in worldwide economic meltdown and mass unemployment.
It is a journalistic book, written in a very journalistic style. In fact it has been used as a guide for journalists to write in the correct style. It is clear to see the journalistic style research Steinbeck conducted before writing the book in his dialogue, with quotes conveying a journalistic form. The novel gives a voice to the voiceless, which is what all good journalism should do.
The fact that the book won the Nobel Prize conveys it in a literary light, not a work of journalism.
The fifth and final question was an extremely long winded question about Emile Zola's Germinal, social inequality, violence and realism...
Zola's novel is an example of the movement of realism. The vivid descriptions within the book are like none I have ever read, with many moments of genuine breathlessness. The best example is when the miners are escaping from the flooded mine, with the only means of escape through a rusty metal ladder which sliced through them like razors. The book is an incredibly crude metaphor of people with different political outlooks dropped under ground like seeds that germinate. It is a sensational and phenomenally violent book describing the politics of anarchism and the embracing of violence - a very Nietzsche idea, with violence being good.
Woman are described in the novel much more realistically than had previously been seen in much of literary works. They are described as pillars of strength, keeping society going in the most inhumane conditions.
Now I just have to remember all this for Thursday...
The first question we looked at in the elaborate 'symposium' was in reference to modernisn, James Joyce's Ulysses, and how they have no single point of view...
It's pretty clear to me that the literary work of Joyce conveys the complexion of the modernist movement that he himself pioneered. In life, and in the mind of the individual there is no single point of view, but many versions and diverse ways of looking at things. Joyce uses the narrative technique of a 'stream of consciousness' to convey this idea. It creates a de-centred narrative with no single point of view. Through the use of this form of narrative Joyce has broken free from traditional forms of literature, where the structure of beginning - middle - end rule the book. Life is not like this, it contains a vast amount of beginnings, middles, and endings, with many ways of looking at each. There is a clear Freud influence in Joyce's work, just look at the sexual content of Molly Bloom's soliloquy!
The second question was to summarize the work of Freud and his cultural impact...
The first point I think of when looking at Freud's works is his obsession with sex. Freud detailed that all of our actions were revolved around sex, with motivations defined through sexual desires. He noted that many of his patients had sexual hang ups and he stated that this caused mental issues. He viewed that civilisation causes people to suppress their natural urges, which damages the individual. For example, a young child wishes to defecate freely, but society creates rules that this is unacceptable. Also, there is a masturbation taboo, when it is a natural human desire.
Freud's analysis method was to interpret peoples dreams. He said that 'dreams are the royal highway to the sub-conscious'. He stated that in each human mind there was a constant conflict between the conscious and sub-conscious which caused mental distress.
The cultural impact Freud's work has had is huge. His work has been viewed as sexist (he stated that women are hysterical because they have 'penis envy') and thus he has had a great impact of the debate of gender politics. Also the impact of Freud in advertising is highly significant. Companies have used Freud's work as a guide of how to appeal to consumers desires.
The third question we looked at was how the control of language can control behaviour and thought with reference to George Orwell's 1984...
In '1984' Orwell suggests that the control of language by an authoritarian government is such a powerful notion to the extent that if they were to remove a word, they remove the idea. For example, without the word 'rebellion' there can be no action of rebellion. Through the control of language, the government in the novel are able to control the thoughts and actions of the people. The new edition of the Newspeak dictionary in the novel is described as 'going to be tiny', clearly showing the eradication of words, and thus the ability to think about the meanings behind the words. The government also changed meanings of words to control the thoughts of people, for example, 'love is hate' and 'peace is war'. This Orwellian idea can be seen in modern terms. For example, the British Army used to be ruled by the Ministry of War, but now the exact same ministry is known as the Ministry of Defence. The use of language changes the implication of meaning.
The fourth question was a look at Steinbeck's great novel The Grapes of Wrath and whether it was a work of journalism...
Steinbeck's novel was a very controversial book, with some people criticizing Steinbeck accusing him of exaggerating the conditions of the migrants in the book. The book itself was born from a photojournalism project for Life magazine. Steinbeck wrote the book as a journalistic campaign to highlight the experience he had seen through his research into the plight of the migrating people. It is a very political book, a propaganda book even. A campaign for massive state aid in the wake of the Great Depression which resulted in worldwide economic meltdown and mass unemployment.
It is a journalistic book, written in a very journalistic style. In fact it has been used as a guide for journalists to write in the correct style. It is clear to see the journalistic style research Steinbeck conducted before writing the book in his dialogue, with quotes conveying a journalistic form. The novel gives a voice to the voiceless, which is what all good journalism should do.
The fact that the book won the Nobel Prize conveys it in a literary light, not a work of journalism.
The fifth and final question was an extremely long winded question about Emile Zola's Germinal, social inequality, violence and realism...
Zola's novel is an example of the movement of realism. The vivid descriptions within the book are like none I have ever read, with many moments of genuine breathlessness. The best example is when the miners are escaping from the flooded mine, with the only means of escape through a rusty metal ladder which sliced through them like razors. The book is an incredibly crude metaphor of people with different political outlooks dropped under ground like seeds that germinate. It is a sensational and phenomenally violent book describing the politics of anarchism and the embracing of violence - a very Nietzsche idea, with violence being good.
Woman are described in the novel much more realistically than had previously been seen in much of literary works. They are described as pillars of strength, keeping society going in the most inhumane conditions.
Now I just have to remember all this for Thursday...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)