Freud and Fight Club

The book, Civilization and its discontent, and the movie, fight club, show how our happiness is repressed by civilization and our misery is inflated like a balloon as if it will explode if our contention is repressed too much. But if we were to break the laws of civilization, we will be better off into establishing happiness, despite of the fact that, ironically, there’s double edged sword by making others into misery.

In this “Civilization and Discontent”, Freud is saying that when we want happiness in our civilization, we will always have “laws” in order to assure our happiness in the society, but at the same time, we are “largely responsible for our misery” in that these “laws” are suppressing our happiness and instead making us “misery” as shown in this quote, “This contention holds that what we call our civilization is largely responsible for our misery”. Then, he says that “we should be much happier if we gave it up and returned to primitive conditions”. It should be best to return to “primitive conditions”, in other words, unconsciousness, such as affection and emotion, without any laws to support our civilization and that will make us “much happier”. This is exactly the same in the “Fight Club” in that when Tyler Dirt established the “fight club”, he established it so that it will be hidden from the civilization. By doing so, no “laws” from civilization will uphold them from beating up each other. This “fighting” is in fact making the men in “Fight club” to be animal like, to upheaval their emotions from constrained of the laws in civilization. This establishes them “happiness” without suppressing their own desires. This is exactly the same thing that happened in Faust, by Goethe. Faust is a very professional man, and he is there to stride for universal truth of the world. But, he makes a choice to break this enlightening idea in the civilization, and instead, stride for the “nature world” in other words, affection and emotions. By doing so, he has been able to gain “happiness” by gaining a girl that he likes. He is, in other words, reflects upon both Freud and “Fight Club”. He is breaking the laws of civilization, which is “enlightenment”, in order to not repress himself from misery in isolated workplace. Like “Fight Club”, these men who are in fight club are generally doing the same thing as Faust does, break the laws of civilization in order to achieve so-called happiness. But there is always double edge sword by doing so.

            According to Freud, by breaking the law of civilization, it is inevitable that we, ourselves, will become happy, but, instead, we will make others unhappy by doing so. This is shown through the movie, “fight club”. As the fight club goes on, it spreads more and more and it grows bigger as time goes on. Soon, this “fight club” turns into some kind of Terrorist organization in order to destroy the credit card companies; thus this project is called the “Project Mayhem”. Ironically, these men who wanted “freedom” from civilization, but instead they turned themselves into this organization that hurts other people’s happiness. By this “Project Mayhem”, credit card companies are destroyed in the end of the movie. It will be implied that lots of people are destroyed literally and abstractly as the towers of companies fall down. Likewise, it is the same thing in Faust too. Once he achieved his happiness, his lover is killed by doing so because he has broken the law of civilization. He, in other words, hurt someone else to gain his “happiness”. His civilization does not agree with this disgrace and it is the same for the fight club too. Freud also mention this fact in his book in that he “call this contention astonishing because, in whatever way we may define the concept of civilization, it is a certain fact that all the things with which we seek to protect ourselves against that threats that emanate from the sources of suffering are part of that very civilization”. He is astonished by the fact that we in other words turn ourselves in group in order to achieve happiness, but at the same time, we are hurting ourselves instead by hurting others.

            Thus, both the movie and the book explores how we stride for happiness, but at the same time we are hurting others and even hurting ourselves too.

Rebels = Children

Tyler Durden in Fight Club

Clementine Kruczynski in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

There is one thing that these characters share: they seem pretty crazy.

 Tyler Durden fights like crazy and does all these weird stuff that makes people wonder why he is doing. He makes erotic sounds in children movies and make soups with disgusting fat. 

Clementine dies her hair to blue, green, orange and travels around everywhere and just talks to people randomly. 

But, why did I feel sad, rather than annoyed, when I was watching them doing all these weird stuff?

It is because I knew they are LONELY PEOPLE

Tyler and Clementine fulfills their loneliness and stress that they get from people and society through doing all these crazy stuff.

To Tyler, his friend, the narrator of this movie, Edward Norton, is so precious and important. We know that the narrator is Tyler, but you know just to analyze my perspective, let's keep them separate. He gets emotional over him, and does everything with him.

To Clementine, her lover, Joel Barish, is so important to her, that he becomes her weakness. He becomes her emotions and feelings that she has in the world, and she scares the most to get hurt by him.

From my perspective, looking through their reactions towards their people, I could relate them to children. 

Children, who have to get what they want, who have to express how they feel, and who get hurt so easily, especially people whom they love. Children are fragile from outside forces and also from their own emotions. 

Tyler and Clementine, GROW UP and FACE THE WORLD AS IT IS!

Vladimir and Estragon are Dead

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, a play by Tom Stoppard which is very similar to Waiting for Godot. The story follows two minor characters (Rosencrantz and Guildenstern) in Shakespeare’s play Hamlet as they weave into and out of stage time. When off stage, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are waiting for something to happen. The plays are both absurdist tragicomedies with existential themes.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are inseparable friends to the point where they forget who is who. While Vladimir and Estragon remember each other’s names, there is a loss of identity when the boy calls Vladimir a Mr. Albert. Estragon answers his name as Adam when questioned by Pozzo. Both pairs of characters have the same back and forth dialog that accomplishes nothing. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern go as far as playing a game of questions to pass the time. The game consists of having a conversation entirely of questions without repetition. It is only when this game is played that important questions are asked, nut are unable to be answered because of the game. Glimpses of ideas and theories are heard throughout both plays, but are lost in a sea of meaningless banter.

A closer look at the characters reveals a similar foil. Estragon and Rosencrantz are easily distracted, mundane characters, while Vladimir and Guildenstern are more intelligent but with equally bad memories. Inadequate memory also plays an important role in the two pairs of characters’ decisions. Because both only have a vague idea of their purpose (waiting for Godot, or being summoned by the king), neither is sure what to do. This inaction leads to their demise, being trapped in a circular play; doomed to replay their lives spent searching in vain for meaning. In the end Rosencrantz and Guildenstern die, like the rest of the characters in Hamlet until the play is performed/read again. 

Both plays bring up the philosophical question of free will. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have fixed predetermined roles in Hamlet, but the characters themselves are unaware of this. The idea did occur to them that someone or something is controlling their lives. However, they are unable to decide on any action that would affect their fate. This is similar to Vladimir and Estragon’s inaction when they decide to leave at the end of act 1. Vladimir and Estragon seem to want to leave, to stop waiting for Godot, but are unable to move and end up repeating their endless cycle of waiting for Godot. 

Both plays also tease at the breaking of the fourth wall. The other reoccurring characters in the play bring to light subtly that the characters suspect they are in a play. Vladimir, after first meeting Pozzo runs off to the bathrooms off the set and “down the corridor.” Pozzo and Lucky’s characters give the audience a hope for something theatrical to happen. Pozzo is a theatrical character but is lost in the nothingness of the play and ultimately forgets what he is saying. Lucky and Pozzo have potential to create drama in the play but are instead reduced to gibberish monologues senseless dialogue. The expectation of the audience makes the inaction of the play more memorable.

The Player and his troupe of actors play a slightly different role in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. They add to the debate of free will. The Player seems to know the story ahead of time, but despite Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s questions, the actors act their part in the play content with their existence. Despite their apparent greater understanding of the inner workings of the play, the players do not change the course of the play to save Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s life. 

The same existential and absurdist idea are present in both Waiting for Godot and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. These ideas and themes are conveyed to the audience who begins to think about their own existence. Do we have free will? What is the nature of our reality? Are we alive or dreaming? What is the meaning of life?

Waiting for the Cake

Vladimir and Estragon, the main characters in Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, spend their days waiting for a mysterious man they have never met before named Godot. They keep waiting in the same spot near a tree with the hope to finally meet this mysterious Godot, but every evening they are told by that Godot will come the next day for sure. The next day is always the same as the last. The events just repeat themselves, albeit not exactly, but they are the same basic events.

Portal fans would get the meaning of my title, but for those who do not know what Portal is, it’s a video game about a test subject who tests a gun called a Portal Gun for a company called Aperture Science. The portal gun is what the name implies: it’s a gun that shoots portals onto walls and you can pass through them. 

Your goal throughout the entire game is to use the portal gun to make portals and solve the puzzle. Once you solve one puzzle, you take an elevator to another level and solve another puzzle. This is the basis of the game. You are required to do the same task (solving puzzles) over and over again. The person, or rather thing, conducting these “tests,” as she puts it, is a sentient robot named GLaDOS. 

Meet GLaDOS:

Friendly looking isn't she? While you are solving the puzzles, GLaDOS occasionally talks to you. She talks a lot about cake at the end of testing. She promises that once you finish testing, there will be a tasty cake waiting for you. You, well actually the person you play it, never get to see the cake, so the entire time you are promised something you do not even know is true or not. In fact, throughout the game, there are hidden messages about the cake being a lie! Don’t worry, you’ll get cake at the end if you keep reading.

Here’s one of many messages about the cake being a lie:

There are two connections that can be drawn from these two seemingly different things. I mean, comparing a video game to a book? It’s unheard of! Well, maybe not that unheard of. One point of comparison is the theme of repetition. Vladimir and Estragon are constantly living out the same day over and over again. Once they finish the day, they go their separate ways and come back to the same spot again. It seems like everything resets and starts all over again. The same can be said about Portal. You finish a puzzle and get into the elevator only to start with another puzzle to solve. In both cases, it’s almost futile to keep on trying. No matter what Vladimir and Estragon did to try to escape their cycle of waiting, they just could not. In Portal, no matter how many puzzles you solved, there would always be another puzzle on the next level.

The other point to be made is an unobtainable and mysterious endpoint both Portal and Waiting for Godot’s characters are working towards. In Waiting for Godot, the unobtainable endpoint is Godot himself. Every day the messenger boy promises them that Godot would come the next day. The next day comes, but Godot still does not show up. They are left to wait another day for him. The only thing that kept them going was the hope of meeting with Godot. In Portal, even though finishing the obstacle course of puzzle and getting cake was not the main goal of the game (the goal was really to escape the testing facility), you were still promised the cake at the end. You solve puzzles in hopes of getting closer to get the cake, but you just end up doing more and more puzzles. The person promising this cake was GLaDOS. The messenger boy and GLaDOS can be viewed as the same in that light.

In conclusion, Portal and Waiting for Godot both share the themes of repetition and a mysterious and unobtainable endpoint. Both the player in Portal and Vladimir and Estragon in Waiting for Godot must keep on with their lives and keep reliving and repeating the same thing over and over again until they reach the endpoint they have been waiting for.

And here’s the cake you’ve been promised!:

Arrested and Waiting

There once aired a comedy television series featuring the recurring motifs of a manchild with an Oedipus complex and not so implicit “cousincest.” Ridiculously funny, or perhaps largely ridiculous, apparently when it was initially on television, the show did not quite resonate with American audiences — it was cancelled after three critically successful seasons. If you do not recognize the infamous phrase “There’s always money in the banana stand!” then you probably have never seen Arrested Development.

Please experience it for yourself:

Despite the show’s untimely demise, it was a critic’s darling; they practically worshipped at the series’ altar. Additionally, it gained admiration amongst a certain sector of society. The fervor from the fans has catapulted a fourth season on Netflix for the coming year. Unlike contemporaries of Arrested Development, rarely was there a television show that was able to subtly meld both the tragedy and absurdity that is human life. The Bluths are a modern family in a post-modern medium. We might even go so far as to say that Arrested Development has redefined what we expect from television. Perhaps a similar revolutionary vehicle in its medium, Waiting for Godot, spoke to the rejected vagabonds of the 1950s. One of the early, and now quintessential, absurdist plays was a hit amongst the intellectuals, just as Arrested Development was and is. Still, more surprisingly it gained a large following among prison inmates who found meaning in the utter meaningless of it all.

Wait, Man. You mean to tell me that Godot never came? Did Godot ever even exist? Like, woah…

Just as the American audience has found value in the acceptance of the chaos and utter nonsensical nature of the modern-day family, Waiting for Godot too found its niche.  It was famously performed by inmates at the San Quentin State Prison, leading to a long-lasting arts project at the prison. Its popularity in prisons might have been because of Beckett’s willingness to address the notion of time and existence as seemingly futile, something of which prisoners could recognize the value because all of their time behind bars was spent doing just that. Although this was likely not the direct intention, by performing Waiting for Godot, the prisoners were allowed some form of diversion from their own “waiting” – like that of Estragon and Vladimir, but more concrete. This brings a whole other meaning to the phrase “don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.” 

Speaking of prisons, this is the exact location where George Bluth Sr. finds himself at the start of Arrested Development. The deterioration of a wealthy, extravagant and essentially dysfunctional family lies founded in the main plotline of a fraudulent and self-serving CEO who becomes incarcerated. What’s a family to do when their source of income goes down the tube? Of course the most reasonable option is to live in one of George Bluth Sr.’s company’s model home and work several odd jobs such as the family’s banana stand. What emerges is a wacky family full of nonsensical stories in the vein of Seinfeld. Like Waiting for Godot, Arrested Development has its fair share of repeating motifs and phrases. For example, instead of the enigmatic Godot figure, there is Ann.   

Who is Ann? 

This is the question commonly on Michael Bluth’s mind. He should know Ann. She is a constant presence, especially in his son’s life and she is also periodically mentioned throughout the show. Yet, he never seems to figure out (or remember) who she is. Ann’s character provides one of the several absurdist elements of the program, and Michael Bluth’s interaction with her also draws a parallel to Estragon’s poor memory in Waiting for Godot, like the several junctures in which he forgets if they are where he and Vladimir are supposed to wait (9).

Also, this chicken... dance?:

Beyond the silly, flamboyant and nonsensical actions that take place in both works, there is a sense of heart. In Waiting for Godot, Estragon and Vladimir are fairly dependent on each other. They count on each other for comfort and company while they are waiting for the mysterious Godot even though they argue at times for no apparent reason — the moment in which the two argue about a carrot and radish, inevitably making no significant difference either way (16). Such is also the case with the Bluths. They have seemingly inane and useless arguments, yet still care about each other and rely on each other for support. This reliance provides a means for living on; it’s a reason to care in spite of all the meaningless.  

The Tell-Tale Opera

For sale: A charming town house available to own. The dim lighting makes this small space romantic and cozy. Low cost with newly re-done floors! We also have for sale, a charming country manor home. This one is a bit of a fixer upper. This giant estate on lots of land was a prior residence of the esteemed Usher family. With a little bit of TLC this one will be a great get away for the whole family.  The last item that will be for sale is the building that housed The Opera Populare. This opera house was once a fully functioning opera house for all the latest and greatest to be debuted. This one comes complete with an auction of all the artifacts left from its heyday as a music hall in a grand estate sale. Though these abandoned properties may seem shrouded in mystery, it is this fascinating mystique that gives these properties such an eccentric charm!

Wouldn't this be a fantastic add? Oh the subtle details that are left out of descriptions sometimes. You know things like former mayhem, subterfuge, and a murder most foul. Well, as you may have guessed I’m hinting at, the horror stories of Poe and the tale of The Phantom of the Opera have a lot in common. First is the modernist Gothic element that is apparent in the two. With the stories of Poe there are the elements of light and dark, murder, deformity, decay, obsession and a hint of the unhinged. In Phantom there is … all of the exact same elements. Fancy that! For these comparisons I’m going to focus mainly on The Tell-tale heart when it comes to Poe, firstly because we discussed it in class, and secondly because I’m incredibly fond of it. The Fall of the House of Usher would be sufficiently mysterious and dreary for our purposes, but I find it a bit dull.

So, about The Tell-tale heart... One of the first characteristics that is featured in this work is that of shadows and light. The dark house with only a dimly lit lantern for illumination sets the scene for the narrative. Enter the Opera Populare that is all bright and showy, but only lit by candle. Then once you descend to the subterranean lair of our eponymous Phantom and you are enshrouded by a word of darkness with yes, only some dimly lit candles to illuminate the shadows. In the house of The Tell-tale Heart the light is brightened to illuminate the horror, the terror, and the ever repulsive eye of the old man. This deformity that is enough to drive a man mad is what is revealed with the light. Eyes are a powerful symbol in literature. While being slightly macabre as a symbol (especially disfigured ones) they are considered to be a window to the soul. If one has a gnarled eye, does that equate that one has a twisted soul? So it is interesting then that when we are introduced to The Phantom (Erik by name if you really must know) that he too has a deformity that centers around one of his eyes. In fact it is this distorted eye that is the only feature that is visible on the masked side of his face. This is especially peculiar because while The Phantom may not be the protagonist per say he is one that we are supposed to feel at least a modicum of pity for, unlike the old man of Tell-tale fame who is only met with revulsion by narrator and reader both. Oddly enough however we know nothing about the ever hated old man. For all that the reader is aware, he could be a good person and yet there is still the loathing. The Phantom on the other hand is a known murderer and kidnapper, and yet there is no hatred, only pity (from Christine) and fondness (from me.) Could it be because his eye is covered and not on display for the whole world to see then that we are given this contrast?             

The next phenomenon that connects these two cryptic tales is obsession. Both The Phantom and The Narrator have obsessive personalities. They both have that one thing that they think they need more than anything else. The reason for this of course, is because they are both off their rockers. I’m sorry, I love both of these characters but they are both mildly unhinged if not full blown crazy. The narrator of The Tell-tale Heart is obsessed with the eye of the old man and this causes him to become paranoid. Here we are let into his mind. So much worry and careful plotting devoted to one little act of murder. The Phantom on the other hand is obsessed with a woman, Christine. Here too we get the same feelings of obsession and fixation, but also paranoia. The Phantom is paranoid that the world hates him and that he is not worthy. He also however, does not let this hinder his ultimate plot.

Tragically both of these characters are foiled in their endeavors. Though they both accomplish what they want, i.e. a murder and a kidnapping, neither gets away with their scheming. The Narrator commits his murder, and then focuses on slyly getting away with his cunning homicide. He however is gotten the better of by his paranoia. The Phantom gets the girl, just like he wants. However, he is worried that she doesn't actually love him and he too lets his paranoia foil all his plans (though I admit this one may be more justified, whatever, he just needs a hug.) So, in the end both plots are vanquished through a little insecurity… and just maybe a dash of lunacy. 

In the end, these stories have a scary amount of similarity. Who would have thought that two stories considered so different would have so much in common. I think the only real thing keeping this comparison from going all the way is the fact that The Phantom of the Opera is ensconced in music. However, I imagine that it would be really awesome if The Tell-tale Heart had its own musical soundtrack (done by Danny Elfman of course {he writes really creepy and awesome music just f.y.i.}.) Also, tell-tale heart is also missing the element of a jealous boyfriend that Phantom has going. That would add quite the monkey-wrench into this classic tale of horror. Could you imagine?

Apathy in Godot and Se7en

Why were we humans put on this earth? Are our lives just a show for some greater power? Beckett explores these ideas in his tragicomedy, Waiting for Godot. The play follows two characters, Vladimir and Estragon while they wait for a man who told them to wait for him at a spot under a tree. Waiting for Godot, by Samuel Beckett is a portrayal of humanity as a play. The play represents the never-ending wait for God and how God told us to wait on this spot of the universe, called Earth. Throughout the play we see Vladimir and Estragon go about doing random things just to keep themselves from getting bored while waiting for a man named Godot to meet them at their spot under a tree. While reading this play, the reader may think, "What is the point of all of this?" Well the answer to this question, even though it is rather cynical, is that the play is trying to show that our lives are just a gigantic play on God's stage in which we are puppets made for God's entertainment.

Vladimir and Estragon bring up the theme of apathy in the play in Act II when they see Pozzo, blind at this point, fall and do nothing to help him up until he calls for help multiple times. From this example, we can see that Beckett is trying to present society as the reason for this apathy. The theme of apathy can also be found in David Fincher's movie Se7en.

For those of you who have not yet seen this movie, it is about two homicide detectives that are hunting a serial killer who uses the seven deadly sins as his method of operation.

In the movie, the serial killer who is known as John Doe brings the idea forth when he writes this quote,

“What sick, ridiculous, puppets we are. What a gross little stage we dance on. What fun we have dancing, fucking, not a care in the world, not knowing that we are nothing. We are not what was intended."

Doe also believes that everyone in society has become so apathetic to everything around him or her that if you want people to listen, “you can't just tap them on the shoulder anymore. You have to hit them with a sledgehammer, and then you'll notice you've got their strict attention.” Even though Doe is psycho, he has a point, people today have gotten so apathetic to the world around them that it is hard to just grab people’s attention or to get people to listen to you.

One of the detectives in the movie, Detective Somerset, believes in this apathy. He says that people would much rather “eat cheeseburgers, play the lotto, or watch television.” This is true because I sympathize with what Detective Somerset is saying. I would much rather eat a cheeseburger or play videogames than do schoolwork. I would much rather play basketball, tennis, or soccer than study for a midterm or final.  The funny thing about this is that I know I am not the only one who would do this. I know that I am not the only procrastinator here. Perhaps a reason as to why we have become so apathetic is our technology. Our technology has advanced to the point of where it has overlapped our humanity and there is no need for so much human interaction. People can be entertained endlessly through the Internet and social networking that there is no need to leave the house and have actual face-to-face conversations. Another reason for this could be our society. Our society is built upon what is easier. Apathy is the easier route. Caring for others takes time and is more difficult than just caring for yourself. We always decide to pick the easier route because, well, it’s easier. Even though the ending to the movie is pretty depressing, there is still a lesson to be learned here. The lesson is that we should not be apathetic; we should be open-minded and listen to the thoughts of others, but if we care too much, we might end up destroying ourselves in a blind fury.