F I G H T C L U B
and the modern male
" . . . the ability to
let
that which does not matter,
truly slide."
Article by LiveReal
Agents Ethan and Grace
Talk about it:
info@LiveReal.com

Some
critics considered the movie "Fight Club" to be
a "dark, disturbing, violence-encouraging" portrayal of
young males "releasing anxieties through violence" in
an "atmosphere of sheer nihilism and depravity."
Perhaps they are correct.
- or, perhaps,
those critics
are a bunch of possum-bellied pansies.
"We don't have a great war
in our generation,
or a Great Depression,
but we do,
we have a great war of the spirit . . .
The great depression is our lives.
We have a spiritual
depression."
Some
say that "Fight Club" is the story of an emotionally
castrated, emasculated man trying to regain his manhood. The "emasculated
man" fit in well with the world, but was miserable with himself.
The movie was the story of his attempt to change that.
Other say the movie is about an
invisible battle taking between in modern times - the "life
of the spirit" verses the life of enslavement to a dehumanizing,
senseless, uncaring machine. Or it is a version of the
search for meaning in a meaningless world, and how that search,
however noble it may sound, can go awry.
Still others say it's an incisive
snapshot of modern manhood: beaten down by broken families, political
correctness, post-feminism divorce, an empty world of cubicle-filled
day-jobs, cross-country flights, single-serving friends, clogged
vitality with no outlet for expression in modern civilization, and
emasculation from a complex blur of half-seen, half-known, inner
forces.
Others say, well, if you want to
have a meaningful conversation with somebody nowadays, you just
about need to go to addiction support group meetings.
Others say,
well, it's just a movie, that to a greater or lesser degree, is,
or isn't, just entertainment.
Let's see.
Emasculation and the Modern
Male
The
movie opens with a very subtle, almost imperceptible clue
about its meaning: a group of men are sitting together in a support
group, trying to help each other deal with the fact that they are
all emasculated.
Literally, physically emasculated.
The support group is for testicular cancer. All of the men sitting
in the room (with the exception of the narrator, who we will get
to shortly), literally have no balls.
But they seem to have been
emotionally castrated as well. Some of the first words spoken are
from what could be described as a broken man who cries as he tells
the story of his wife finally having children she wanted . . . with
another man.
In the same group is a former
bodybuilder - a man who was, once upon a time, strong. But now,
he literally has breasts. And having been betrayed (or at best helped)
by science (steroids) and business (his invention stolen, he's now
bankrupt) and family (divorced, and his "kids won't even return
(his) calls") . . . he's left with . . . well, therapy.
Many
folks would actually see all this as forms of progress. After
all, it's good for men to cry, it's good for couples
to get divorced (better than staying in a bad marriage, right?),
and it's good for men to talk about their feelings senstively
in a nurturing, supportive, therapeutically sanitized environment.
Those folks - who see this
state of affairs as a good thing - most likely wouldn't
like the movie and most likely would not ordinarily be reading this
review.
For the rest of us, let us
sum up a brief historical record that sets the cultural stage of
the story of Fight Club:
In America around the 1960's,
a certain breed of feminism sprang up. Men began to be seen as Neanderthalish,
oppressive, insensitive jerks. The "new," evolved men
were sensitive, they could cry, etc - not unlike the gentlemen in
the support group.
This phenomen is described
much more eloquently by David
Deida as "Stage 1" men (insensitive jerks) evolving
into "Stage 2" men (sensitive emasculated wimps).
Fight Club, using this terminology,
could be described as an attempt by modern men to discover what
"Stage 3" men could be.
For further elaboration on
these ideas, we recommend the work of David
Deida. In regards to the movie, this is enough of the cultural
climate to place the setting for the story, and after we get one
more piece of the puzzle in place, we will continue with the story.
That piece has to do with the realization that...
"People Will Become
A Process"
Another aspect of life in
America today is the in-your-face tyrrany of advertising, business,
and media empires that rule over almost every aspect of modern life.
This may sound like an exaggeration,
but thinking back a mere century ago - before the internet, before
personal computers, before even radio and television - it can be
difficult to imagine how radically different lifestyles of human
beings were.
But where Fight Club breaks
fresh ground is in it's critique of how this - the culture of corporate
dominance in a post-industrial age - effects the human soul.
Meaning, the assembly-line
of modern human lives.
For
example, "single-serving friends." We all understand
single-serving meals, single-serving soft-drinks, single-serving
candy bars, and so on.
But rarely before Fight Club
has the concept of single-serving-friends - actual people who have
been processed, screened, packaged, and distributed for consumption
- been examined.
Tyler Durden described his
father, who left to have more children with other families, as "setting
up franchises."
And the "product"
that is being "produced" in these franchises is, of course,
children. Literally, an assembly line of human souls.
The narrator, Ed Norton, described
his friend (the man with the breasts) in the support group such
that "his eyes were already shrink-wrapped with tears."
Shrink-wrap, of course, being
what prepackaged products come in off the assembly line, ready for
consumption; "eyes" being the "mirrors of the soul."
In less than a step, we arrive at shrink-wrapped souls.
"I think that there is nothing,
not even crime,
more opposed to poetry,
to philosophy,
ay, to life itself,
than this incessant business."
- Henry David Thoreau
But
so what? Is it just about hearing more advertisements than
we used to? Having different types of jobs - cubicles instead of
village shops or farms? Having successful companies play a big role
in the world?
No. Those are merely symptoms
of a larger, deeper process . . . one where the individual human
increasingly finds that his place in the universe is becoming less
and less important, less and less secure, less and less attractive.
He lives his life confronting an uncaring, impersonal job, apathetic,
insensitive coworkers, disloyal, loveless family members who pick
up and discard other people only when there is a way they can be
used before being thrown away - like an old prom dress, or a condom.
This is another aspect of
the setting that Fight Club takes place then. And then, it asks
the question: in a cold, uncaring, ruthless world of corporate slavery
and assembly-line experiences . . . how is it possible to still
live a life with strength, and passion, and with a soul that is
still truly alive?
Views
Some thinkers have expressed some
thoughts on this matter. Dr. Walter R. Newell, professor of political
science and philosophy at Carleton University, and author of the
recently published What Is
A Man? described Fight Club as this:
"The novel is chillingly insightful
about the unmapped psyche of young males in the nineties."
and he continues:
"The original idea for
this book (his anthology on manhood) grew out of my eighteen
years' experience as an educator. During this period, and especially
in the last decade, the young men
in my university classes have seemed especially lost -
shy, confused, lonely, afraid to assert themselves, their trepidation
broken only by occasional bursts of pointless cockiness and attitudinizing
. . . Maleness still exists, but in a baffled, confused kind of
way."
"Having failed to find an authority they can
respect, someone to guide them from boyish impetuosity to a mature
and manly vigor of judgment, they confuse authority with oppression.
Still, cast adrift in a world without
any limitations, they long to pay a price . . ."
"Boomers (of the previous generation) were
told not to be hung up about providing masculine role models for
children, reassured that we should do whatever made us happiest,
including escaping an unsatisfying marriage. After all, to hold
things together for the sake of the children would restrict both
men and women to old-fashioned "patriarchal" responsibilities.
The casualties of this hard,
bright credo of selfishness are today's underfathered young men,
many of them from broken homes, prone to identify their maleness
with aggression because they have no better model to imitate."
Another thinker and author, Thomas Moore, not
addressing the movie directly, states a similar observation:
"Over the years of practicing therapy, I came
to recognize a special kind of sadness
in some of the people I worked with. They felt subdued by what
could be called moral depression, a constriction of the spirit.
They lived with a sensation of heaviness and had difficulty finding
joy in life due to a deep-seated habit of forbidding themselves
certain pleasures and satisfactions . . . wherever eros stirs,
the soul comes to life. Unfortunately the converse is true as
well: whenever we put a lid on eros, the soul feels deprived of
breath and life.
The Problem
"Anybody who looks at the film with
any real attention can see that on a lot of levels,
the idea of fighting in this is not about the suggestion that
violence directed outward toward other people
is a solution to your frustrations . . .
It's the idea of needing to get shaken out of your own cocoon,
the idea that the fighting is, in essence, a metaphor
for stripping yourself of perceived notions and value systems
that have been applied to you
that aren't your own."
- Ed Norton
Edward Norton's nameless character at the beginning
of the movie, is suffering from . . . a certain condition. What
this "condition" is, might be the key to really understanding
the rest of the movie.
"You have a class of young
strong men and women,
and they want to give their lives to something.
Advertising has
these people chasing cars and clothes they don't need.
Generations have been working in jobs they hate,
just so they can buy what they don't really need."
As the movie starts, Norton's character is a young,
urban male living one version of the
modern American Dream. Professionally successful, great furniture,
great clothes, millions of cable tv channels, high-level job, jet-setting
around the country, and miserable. He's done everything "right"
. . . and should be happy, after all - look anywhere else in the
world, and materially, people are always worse off. He's not starving.
What's to be unhappy about?
"What you have to understand
. . .
is your father was your model for God
. . ."
What's the problem . . . can't sleep?
Not having a ball at your job? You don't leap out of bed in the
morning? Well . . . welcome to life. What's the real problem - insomnia?
Get some pills.
Hate your job? Quit and do something else. Bored? Get off your duff
and go do something. Problem? Get real. - or so they say.
But Norton's characters' problem
is not about insomnia. It isn't his job, and it's not boredom. There
is a problem, definitely a problem, because something's not right
. . . maybe somehow, these are all symptoms of something much deeper,
something he can't quite put his finger on, and can't point out
to, and can't really express or describe to anyone around him .
. . except maybe to say he can't sleep.
"The fact is that this is what
society is and always has been:
a symbolic action system, a structure of statuses and roles,
customs and rules for behavior, designed to serve as a vehicle
for earthly heroism."
- Ernest Becker
"The central problem of every society
is to define appropriate roles for the men."
- Margaret Mead
It was said that in Freud's time,
the primary "neurosis" was "hysteria" - difficulty
in accepting the instinctual side of life and the resulting conflict
between sexual impulses and social taboos. But today, especially
among young people, it's said that the
primary neurosis of our time is "meaninglessness."
It could be that the nameless character's
problem, to put a word on it, is "meaninglessness." Nothingness.
A rotting, invisible emptiness that slowly, out of the corner of
your eye, knaws constantly at your insides, quietly, constantly,
and persistently asking: "What's the point? Why? What does
it matter? Where is all this going? What's it all about? What's
the point?"
In another way, you could say that
Norton's character, believed the commercials, the teachers, the
movies and television, the promises of commercials and the society
that produced them: he believed, and so, he earned the money, bought
the clothes, dated the girls, got the apartment, worked the job,
all under the implied promise that, somehow, his efforts would be
worthwhile.
But in fact, well, he wakes up one
day and realizes, essentially, he's been had. It slowly dawns on
him that girls and relationships aren't "IT";
having money in the bank is not "IT"; owning the right
jeans, furniture, food, is not "IT" either. Promises,
broken.
"And if you never know your
father,
if your father bails out or dies or is never at home,
what do you believe about God?"
Some people can "see"
it, and know this kind of emptiness, and totally "click"
with the main character . . . and some, evidently, can't.
For those who "don't"
see it, it can often be overlooked and dismissed as depression,
hesitancy, or unfounded skepticism, an unwillingness to grow up,
or the typical, run-of-the-mill existential crisis. (That old, worn,
generic "existential crisis" story, there are plenty like
it, it's already been told, several times, it's wearing thin, and
there's no money in it. The solution to it all is simple: buck up,
dive in, and get back to work.)
In fact is, it's none of those things.
It is nothing that can be solved by dropping ten pounds, making
a thousand dollars, dating a different girl. It cannot be cured
by "cheering up," or "just diving into it."
This condition - modern meaninglessness,
or angst, or whatever you want to call it - is more like an invisible
emotional plague that, somehow, slowly and quietly, under your radar,
creeps through your psyche and devours all the color and richness
from life. And it happens, more or less, sooner or later, to just
about everybody. And the most it seems you can do is distract yourself
from it for a little while - from the emptiness - enough to, temporarily,
forget about it, until it goes away on its own.
Still, this "emptiness"
persists in the background, and more unnervingly, all the while,
there's nothing simple and concrete ("I'm too thin, too fat,
don't make enough money, etc") that anyone can point to and
say, "that's the problem" - and so, it kicks in a general
sense of alienation and loneliness to boot. Because often, no one
really sees anything wrong with you - and there's nothing that one
can easily point to that is wrong. But still, well, something
is wrong.
A crude and over-used but accurate
analogy:
Imagine
everyone around you, all the time, is busy climbing a huge
ladder. Everyone together, struggling, working, straining, continually
climbing, harder, longer, faster, climbing. The incessant climbing
goes on and on. It's just what everyone does. Why ask why?
Occasionally, a person reaches
the top of the ladder, peek over the edge, and see . . . well,
there's nothing there.
Confused, the person looks around at
everyone around him, climbing furiously . . . towards nothing .
. . and wonders, "What's
going on? Aren't they all climbing towards . . . nothing?"
. . . and from that point on, the
onlooker will never be able to climb with quite as much enthusiasm.
"I wish that someone had told
me
that when you
get to the top,
there's nothing there."
- quoted by Alister McGrath
Many thinkers talk about this condition
of "meaningless" in young people today. In this case,
the problem is not that young people "don't see enough,"
that they can't "see" the great "value" of climbing
the ladder the way everyone else can. And the solution isn't trying
to make ladder-climbing more fun, or pressuring them to become better
climbers.
The problem may well be that they,
in fact, see MORE, not less. They see, more clearly than most, that
all this work and struggle leads to . . . nothing.
In a way, the "problem"
could be described as there being nothing to believe in, at its
worst, nothing to live for. There's no compelling dream, no inspiring
goal, no grand and noble "thing" that seems to really
promise the "this IS IT" that's believable, that gets
you out of bed in the morning. There are no dragons to slay, no
damsels to save, no heroic quests; only a weary and monotonous succession
of afternoons, labor and laundry, drudgery and bills, leading, sooner
or later, to death.
If it's the case that "Where
there is no vision, the people perish," well, then, the problem,
seems to be a lack of "vision." This emptiness - more
of a "lack" of a crucial element than the presence of
something wrong, like a newly-lost tooth of the soul - is the invisible
ghost that haunts the character in the movie.
"When I think of all the books
I have read,
and of the wise words I have heard spoken,
and of the anxiety I have given to parents and grandparents,
and of the hopes that I have had,
all life weighed in the scales of my own life
seems to me
preparation for something
that never happens."
- William Butler Yeats
This, in one way, is about the Norton's character
faces at the beginning of the movie. The rest of the movie, then,
the effort to find a solution to that problem, is where things get
pretty wacky. Hallucinating, externalizing another part of himself,
Walter-Mitty-style, possibly an ideal aspect of himself that had
been closed off and shoved away, so he becomes a modern Jekyll-and-Hyde
. . . an effort to reconnect to a dismembered masculinity that is
floating, unanchored, loose in his psyche, like a rambling nuclear
reactor . . .
". . . What you end up doing
. . .
is you spend your life searching for a father and God."
A father recently talked to me about
something he noticed one day about his two sons. He would put on
his hat, and his two boys would go and put on hats. He would go
put on boots, and his sons would go and put on boots too. He ate
potatoes, his sons would eat potatoes too. He watched this routine
continue for hours, weeks, years. Talking about it one day, he told
me, essentially, "See how important I am, to them? They're
getting a sense of identity from me."
Other cultures have, or used to
have, they say, rituals where boys are initiated into manhood. It's
a clear, distinct, and important process: A boy (Step A) grows and
passes through an initiation process (Step B) becomes a man (Step
C).
Nowadays, of course, we rarely have
fathers who initiate anyone into anything. So of course, many boys
age into a growing confusion. Something's missing.
"We're thirty year-old boys."
A friend once described a problem that some zoo
keepers were having with a group of young male elephants: the young
elephants were violently killing other animals they had once grazed
with peacefully. This behavior had never happened before, and the
zoo keepers were puzzled about why it was happening.
"What you have to understand
. . .
is your father was your model for God
. . ."
Eventually, the keepers realized that this particular
group of young elephants had been separated early on from the older
males. And when the older male elephants were put back in with the
younger males . . . the young ones straightened up, quickly.
"What you have to consider
. . .
is the possibility that God doesn't like you."
We're all familiar with children who "act
up" to get attention. Take this principle a little further:
when children are ignored by their parents, it's akin to being emotionally
starved. In order to keep from being starved, often they'll misbehave
just in order to get some attention and recognition. Bad food is
better than no food at all; recognition, even if it's recognition
for "being bad," is still validation - validation that
you really do exist, and matter - and that soothes the emptiness,
at least, for a little while.
"If you could be either God's
worst enemy or nothing,
which would you choose?"
The problem, stated . . . but the solution?
It seems that Fight Club isn't really
about real "solutions" to the problems it raises. It does
succeed in pointing out what doesn't work (for example,
blowing up buildings, fairly generic vandalism, or trying some whacked-out
old Marxist idea of "redistributing wealth" - as if that
would change things.)
And as the story unfolds, FIght
Club itself, along with the main character, completley unravels
. . . even coming full circle so that, on two separate occasions,
Fight Club members threaten to castrate other men themselves.
So if we know what doesn't work
. . . what does?.
"The crisis of modern society
is precisely
that the youth no longer feel heroic
in the plan for action that their culture has set up."
- Ernest Becker
The absence of a father is one of
the strongest predictors of violence among young men in the United
States:
- "Children who grow up with only one of their
biological parents, when compared to children who grow up with
both biological parents, are three times more likely to have a
child out of wedlock, 2.5 times more likely to become teenage
mothers, twice as likely to drop out of high school, and 1.4 times
more likely to be out of school and not working."
- "Seventy-two percent of America's adolescent
murderers, 70 percent of long-term prison inmates, and 60 percent
of rapists come from fatherless homes.
(Source: David Popenoe, Life Without Father (New York: The Free
Press, 1996))
Newell continues, in describing modern
post-feminism in the aftermath of the social engineering of the
past several decades:
"All that thirty years of behavioral conditioning
has done is drive manliness underground and distort it by severing
it from traditional sources of masculine restraint and civility.
The gurus of sensitivity have tried to convince men to become
open, fluid, genderless beings who are unafraid to cry. But little
boys still want to play war and shoot up the living room with
plastic howitzers, and we can't give them all Ritalin. Psychologists
have begun to express concern about our educational institutions'
readiness to pathologize what once would have been regarded as
boyish high spirits - roughhousing, "hating" girls,
locker-room language - and the use of powerful drugs to extirpate
their perfectly ordinary immaturity."
"Again, the point is to channel these energies
into the development of character.
Boys and young men still want to be heroes, and the way to teach
them to treat girls and women with respect is to appeal to their
heroism, not try to blot it out."
(see also Eminem
and Eight
Mile)
And finally:
"In Homer's Odyssey, Telemachus,
son of the great war hero Odysseus, embarks on a search to find
his missing father and thereby save his mother from the oppressive
noblemen who want her to give up her husband for dead and marry
one of them.
As he searches for his father, in
an adventure parallel to Odysseus's own search for a way home to
his long-lost wife and child, Telemachus is educated by his adventures
and grows from a boy into a man, guided by the wise goddess Athena
who is also his father's best friend among the gods. Telemachus's
search for his missing father, guided by the goddess, in effect
provides him with the upbringing Odysseus was unable to give him.
Even so, Odysseus still inspires his son from afar, because Telemachus
learns during his travel of his father's exploits and wants to prove
himself the hero's worthy son.
Whenever I describe Telemachus, this
boy from a broken home, forced at a too-early age to be his mother's
protector from oppressive men, compelled to bring himself up in
a way that he hopes his absent father will be proud of, the young
men in my undergraduate classes tend to become very quiet and reflective.
They are Telemachus."
Talk about it
info@livereal.com
Related Articles
Meaninglessness
Why
Are We Here?
An
Introduction to David Deida
What
is "Success"?
The
Battle for Your Mind Arena
|