identity – Parts Per Billion

Feminine Side of Masculinity

Most of the times, we are forgetting that when we are promoting and asking for individual freedom, individual expression, individual identity we have ignored what it means to reserve the same rights for others. Ernest Hemingway’s short story called “In Another country” from his collection called ‘Men Without Women’ shows what men lose when they have no one of their own to open up, express, share. Hemingway’s writings although were heavily influenced by his personal experiences of war, the ways in which his men handled emotions is exactly same as how modern men are still handling their own emotions. They are not handling them at all, they are suppressing them, running away from them.
Men are so strongly conditioned with the trait of showing themselves unaffected by whatever life throws at them that now they have accepted it as their second nature. There is a specific psychological term called Alexithymia which literally means “a lack of words for emotions.” You can see alexithymia in Hemingway’s “so-called” masculine characters.
The remedy to all these complications is creation of more open spaces for men. We need men to open up at least among themselves, at least a man needs to treat other man’s emotional, expressive side, others will eventually follow.

Ernest Hemingway’s Men Without Women

The Paradox of Individualism

It is always interesting to question what would happen if we were not exposed to certain things, experiences especially the people. What we would be of us if those events, those people had not crossed our life path? We definitely would have been someone else. In a sense we are what is happened to us and where we lived and with whom we lived. One can say that man himself is enough to justify his own existence, he doesn’t need anything else or anyone else to live through his life, to pass through it and there is no denying in that.

One must understand that people can spend their whole existence as an isolated being, a person unaffected by the surrounding and molded completely by his/ her own being, not by others and without the influence of the surrounding. You will see that what I explained in the last sentence seems illogical. How could a person be completely be detached throughout his whole time on earth filled with many things, events, people? The answer to this confusion is that the person assumes that he/she was alone all along the time thereby mentally erasing every instance where they had a company, such people have mastered the art of removing every influence their surrounding had on them. Human children are anyways some of the weakest off-springs among the many species on earth. A new born baby continuously needs support from parents/ surroundings to finally become self-dependent. Now, one cannot deny the fact that even if you can live on your own, what you call as “your own” which substitutes for the void of the external influences is ultimately created from that very surrounding you are trying to deny to prove your individualism. This “your own” internal support could be anything – your identity, your habits, your religion, your mind, your way of thinking, your way of seeing things. Now you must appreciate that even though we can control what we are, once we are matured/ independent we cannot completely erase what brought us here.

The concept of individualism itself needs supporting justification, there is nothing like an isolated being. In order to define isolated or individual, you have to define what it is not and that invites everything that exists out there.

The whole point of starting the discussion with the idea of futility of individualism is one short story I came across, rather the book’s whole point is the denial of individualism. It shows that even if one justifies their individualism, it immediately rips them from their real version. The person creates a defense mechanism to avoid certain unsettling feelings just to satisfy their version of self. Men need safe space of women or at least a feminine side of humanity to express, to vent out or at least to acknowledge what they are feeling in front of other human being. If men are not given such space, they are no longer men, not even human.

The book I am talking about is Ernest Hemingway’s collection of short stories called Men Without Women. These stories show how men are flawed when they try to erase or are forced from external factors the influence of women from their lives, how it steals their true masculinity, true humanity. I will deep dive into these aspects as discussion evolves.

The short story from Men Without Women which intrigued me is “In Another Country”. I like this story because is direct reflection of who Ernest Hemingway was. It is written in first person point of view and the factual details of Hemingway’s biography overlap with the locations, events mentioned in the story, so the Hemingway’s fiction brings a realism.

In Another Country – Summary

I won’t go into every nook and cranny of the story, because I want to invite you into reading that 15 min short story all for your own interest.

Even if I spoil the story here, reading the details of the story and building your own interpretations are one personal and exquisite experience. This is because of the iceberg theory attributed to Hemingway’s characteristic writing style. He will not explain everything or show everything that is there in the story. The limited narrative and limited details make the reader to evaluate multiple attributes and possibilities and thereby interpretations so Hemingway’s writing create a very subjective and personal experience in readers. I think only a piece of great art, only a masterpiece can create subjective experiences in people. And that is exactly why art is important, it makes people see what they already had but always denied because they were busy in creating something totally irrelevant – the irrelevant which they didn’t even want in first place.

So, here goes the summary –

The narrator talks about his routine to a hospital for a therapy session for those injured in the war in Milan. He is American but fighting for Italy and is decorated for his sacrifice. He is accompanied by three decorated Italian officers and one more boy who was disfigured on the very first day at the front of the war. They go to this therapy session to somehow restore their original physical functions. The narrator is always made aware through the surroundings and people around him that even though he sacrificed himself for the people he still is an outsider. It is just because he was dutiful that he deserves respect from the localites. In his therapy he is accompanied by a Major who treats the narrator good and is also helping him to improve his Italian. One day while casually discussing what their future would be, the Major gets triggered by the mention that the narrator wishes to get married. He aggressively suggests the narrator to not get married because it will bring the pain and suffering in the end. He suggests that if one knows that he is going to lose something then one must turn away from attaching to it in first place.

The Major then immediately leaves the discussion and goes to make a phone call where he receives the sad news of the demise of his wife. The major apologizes to the narrator and remains absent for few days and rejoins the therapy session although he has no expectation to fully recover from this therapy session.

Deep Analysis of In Another Country

As I have already mentioned that Hemingway’s stories are like icebergs, they reveal very little than what they carry below. I would invite you to explore Ernest Hemingway’s biography to understand why it might be so. He faced multiple injuries, illnesses, traumas throughout his whole life. If you see the list of the illnesses Hemingway went through you will definitely say that the life loved him. Tragically he ended his life by himself. On surface reading you will see that Hemingway is a strong proponent of strong masculinity but deep down just like an iceberg he was not what he showed. I have reasons to prove that just through this single short story. Just keep in mind that there is more to what Hemingway said and showed to his readers and it was truly an imagery of what was going in his own mind.

Lack Of Warmth

The ways story opens, the narrator talks about the cold season of fall in Milan. The meat of hunted animals is hanging and the foxes were just there in the snow. There are three canal crossing bridges along the path to the hospital. The narrator would prefer the bridge where woman who roasted the chestnut used to sit. The narrator mentions that her charcoal fire and the roasted chestnuts ensured enough warmth before reaching the hospital.

This is Hemingway’s way to tell that the surroundings were completely hostile for the narrator, the short-lived warmth of the charcoal fire and the hot chestnuts in pocket thereafter thus highlight how much the narrator valued warmth. Even though narrator is not ordered to go on war and perform his duty now it was not a better situation too. There was no one to provide ‘that’ warmth of familiarity, relationship, love to the narrator. If it wasn’t for the duty, he would not have got into this.

Duty murders the true identity and the ambition of men to become their true version

We are told that the narrator is accompanied by four Italian soldiers for a therapy session in the hospital. They are practiced with some machines to improve their physical movements which were the result of war injuries. A major with hand injury is also undergoing physical therapy to recover from war injury.

Three of the Italians who accompanied the narrator wished to become something different before the war started. One of them wanted to be a lawyer, one wanted to become the painter and third one wanted to become a soldier. The Major suffered from hand injury was the greatest fencer in Italy – a technique where the dexterity of hand is crucial.

There was one more boy whose face was disfigured the very first day he was sent on the war front. He had lost his nose.

You must now understand it’s not just a character introduction or description in Hemingway’s short story. Hemingway very subtly shows how men sacrifice their own ambitions to carry out their duties. Two of the three Italian soldiers wished to become something totally different than what they are now just because war demanded the sacrifice of their own ambitions, dreams. The Major sacrificed his precious, skillful hand while carrying out the same duty of war.

The boy with disfigured lost his identity even before understanding what he was entering into. The disfigured face is not mere description of the grave injuries. Hemingway shows readers that men lost their identities in the war.

Men sacrificed their wishes to carry out the duties given to them, they did it because that is what every man should do.

Men are loved just because they are dutiful and not for who they truly are

I really appreciate how Hemingway maintained subtlety in his writing while making us feel like he is just describing the characters of his story.

The readers are now well aware that this is about a group of well decorated, brave, dutiful soldiers who were undergoing rehabilitation in the hospital. They are not some losers who just suffered because of negligence or disinterest towards going to war. Rather even though against their will and wish, they went all in with the sense of duty. Then Hemingway tells us about how the localites treated them.

People from communist quarters of Milan actively hated them. After the therapy sessions, the group has routine to visit the café, where the narrator comes across the locals. When the narrator is asked about his medals by the locals, he is somewhat happy that people care for what he had done for them. This happiness is short lived for him and not really a happiness. The moment localites see that he is an American, they immediately changed their behavior towards him. He is immediately made to feel like an outsider.

You must understand how painful this feeling is. The moment people see treat like you are not one of them even after you sacrificed yourself for the same people is a betrayal for such man, a man of honor and duty. It’s equivalent of death for such men.

This is also one way of Hemingway to show that generally society appreciates men, loves men for what they can do for the society. Society in deeper sense never appreciated men for what they are. The moment men stop the duty towards others they are worthless. The moment men will try to show what they are very few will be appreciated for what they are, very few men are loved and liked for what they are. Hemingway also shows how the war crushed the human-ness among the people.

Together But Lonely – Alienation Among Men

Hemingway effectively shows how the military instincts or trainings have conditioned men of different personalities to come together and work toward a common duty.

“We were all a little detached, and there was nothing that held us together except that we met every afternoon at the hospital”

At first narrator shows us that there is some sense of collective-ness in this group of soldiers. Even people from the communist quarters hate them collectively.

But soon you will see that they are not quite there for each other, it’s just that the circumstances are in that way.

This is evident when the narrator calls three of the decorated officers as “hunting -hawks” and denies to be one of them.

You will also see that the narrator craves for meaningful company when he mentions how his group has to “jostle” through the crowd of men and women from the wine-shops.

For now, the only meaningful connect he has with his group is the trauma of war shared amongst these soldiers. You will see that the narrator finds it difficult to relate to the mainstream crowd – the crowd from wine-shops and the streets of the Milan.

“We felt held by there being something that had happened that they, the people who disliked us, did not understand.”

The narrator has this subconscious feeling of being unliked by the people around him. This is some sort self-rejection, self-loathing because even after sacrifice he is made to feel like an outsider.

Self-pity And Surrogate Sympathy

You will see that the narrator feels some authentic connection with the boy with disfigured face and the fencing master Major who is undergoing therapy for his hands. The reasons to feel this connection are actually not that authentic, it’s just the narrator’s psyche which is trying to find a pivot of relatability to create a sense of belonging.

You will see this when the narrator mentions that while he sees the three Italian soldiers like “hunting hawks” not counting himself like them, he feels a connect with the one who has his face disfigured. The justification is purely intellectual. It’s because the ill fate that boy faced at the war front and he wasn’t even decorated for anything. The narrator sees this as an ill-fate for the boy because he didn’t get anything in return for what he sacrificed. The narrator at least got some recognition so he sees himself in better condition than the boy. It’s that feeling where the person himself sees him in a poor condition but when he sees others in even worse condition, he creates a sense of satisfaction just because others are living way worse than they deserve. There is nothing wrong in this feeling. It’s just how a person going through trauma tries to find a sense of belonging through pity and sympathy.

Men’s Inability To Communicate And Express Emotions Clearly

Hemingway’s iceberg style writing peaks here.

The narrator is seen to make an attempt to speak in Italian with Major. He feels that he is able to speak Italian fluently but the moment Major asks him to speak with the awareness of Italian grammar, the narrator feels that speaking Italian is difficult.

It is an indirect indication how men always fail to express their emotions as they are. The “mainstream definition” and “perception” of what masculinity prevents men to sacrifice their real version just to demonstrate superiority in the dominance hierarchy. If you cannot dominate others, how would you establish control? How would you prove your manliness?

So, men subconsciously develop a tendency to distance themselves away from what they are feeling, because they know there is no way they will get any sympathy towards such emotions. Instead, the moment they express their true emotions, it’s like blowing up their cover, exposing themselves. Society is ready to devour them, forget about dominance.

Narrator’s struggle to speak in Italian is thus a metaphor to show how men are continuously challenged when they want to express something freely. You must understand that even if they do it, every man has some bad experience of how they were betrayed when they tried to open up. Now you can only imagine how this feeling gets amplified in men with trauma. Over the time, men have trained their minds to intentionally cordon off such feelings because they know and they have experienced this before that nobody care about how they feel.

Emotional Numbness – Alexithymia – Hemingway For Today’s World

In the last part of the story you will see that the Major gets triggered the moment narrator expresses his wish to get married once this is all over. He is unsettled not out of jealousy or the pain due to the war. He is restless due to even worse pain – the pain of the loss of the loved one.

“If he is to lose everything, he should not place himself in a position to lose that. He should not place himself in a position to lose. He should find things he cannot lose.”

And in the end, we come to know that the Major always feared that he is about to lose his beloved wife. He was always scared that he will lose his beloved wife anytime and he cannot do anything about it. (Understand that this man is a disciplined and War-seasoned major who has tricked death now is feared of something).

He stood there biting his lower lip. “It is very difficult,” he said. “I cannot resign myself.”

Who says that men are rigid, tough, insensitive to emotions!

This is a tight slap to those who say that Hemingway was a strong supporter of the masculinity. People twisted Hemingway’s character to convey what they wanted for themselves.

There is a specific psychological term called Alexithymia which literally means “a lack of words for emotions.”

You can see alexithymia in Hemingway’s “so-called” masculine characters. The narrator himself is unable to express his emotions to his group in Italy, even though he is with his acquaintances he feels alienated. You will see he craves for warmth from his observations on the roasted chestnuts. The warmth is not just a matter of temperature.

The three decorated soldiers have murdered their personal ambitions for the duty to serve the nation in the war. Each of them had their own plans about their future. Hemingway gives us one detail about one of these guys. One of those three soldiers who wished to become lawyer had three medals for his valor in war, was a lieutenant. Hemingway through narrator shows us that he had seen so many deaths in war that he was isolated from his surroundings. Note that this guy had a company of at least two native faces who had gone through somewhat similar hardships. The trauma of war and in addition to inability to express what he was going through detached him. He had familiar faces to do so because of the relatability, but the trauma prevented him from openly expressing what he felt.

The narrator also shows us that these three Italian soldiers were like hunting hawks. It is a way to show how they showed off their valor and medals to prove their worth to the society. You must understand that before going to war, their ambitions were completely different than earning medals. But as the conditions forced them to show up for duty, they helplessly gave up on their dreams and accepted the life for what it was. This hawk like attitude is the reinforcement of the masculinity assigned by the society through the medals, decoration which society gave them. As they have no one intimate to open up to they assumed this display of manhood as the means to show strength.

The boy with disfigured face, who didn’t even get recognized for his sacrifice is another story in itself. You will see that there is very limited mention of his presence in this story. He is just their as an additional character. For me, upon a very meticulous style of Hemingway’s writing style – I see it as an intentional limitation. Hemingway shows us that how some of the greatest sacrificing men will always go unnoticed, how society won’t even care for them for the reason that they cannot provide back to the society. The great sacrifice of identity by this soldier feels worthless.

This is Hemingway’s way to show that a man who cannot provide is a worthless man in society, societal structure will make sure that he is perceived as worthless. There is no single person to blame why it happens in this way. People especially men are nurtured to subconsciously assume it in this way. Society will only accept men for what they provide and not what they are.

The Major has no hope to recover from his therapy session for his hand. The narrator gives us surety of that through the discussion between the Major and Doctor. The Major has suppressed his nihilistic attitude by submitting to the routine of physical therapy. This is an active indication of Alexithymia. Him trying to help the narrator to learn the Italian in proper grammatical way is his conscious choice to cast away the real emotions of his worthlessness after the injury. Narrator mentions that even though Major has no hope from the therapy machines he showed up regularly. This is definitely indicative that major rejected his real feelings with the distraction of the therapy routine.

The moment Major gets triggered by the awareness narrator’s plan to settle with marriage he realizes that he too had this suppressed wish to settle with the woman of his life. He senses that he too had same wish as the narrator but now is scared to lose someone he loved with his life. He immediately rejects that feeling by speaking “angrily and bitterly” with the narrator to not get married.

It’s not the Major despising women – some people may call it toxic masculinity. It is actually rejection of reality of the sad emotion of the loss of the loved ones to avoid the trauma and pain that follows after that. But Hemingway lets out some sadness through him to show how helpless men are.

“He looked straight past me and out through the window. Then he began to cry. “I am utterly unable to resign myself,” he said and choked. And then crying, his head up looking at nothing, carrying himself straight and soldierly, with tears on both his cheeks and biting his lips, he walked past the machines and out the door.”

His Woman Is Everything For Any Man True To Himself

As the title of the book suggests, this is Hemingway’s attempt to show what a man loses when he has no one of his own to open up. Why women are important instead of men here? Because men are so strongly conditioned with the trait of showing themselves as unaffected by whatever life throws at them that now they have accepted it as their second nature. If you are swayed easily by hardships, you are not ‘man’ enough. If you are not able to provide, you are not ‘man’ enough. If you whine at every adversity, you are not ‘man’ enough. If you express your vulnerability, you are not ‘man’ enough, in addition to that the society will make sure that you are made joker out of your vulnerability because it is the survival of fittest.

So, the best shortcut men’s minds have started taking is to become completely numb to the sensitive emotions, expressions of those emotions and have resorted to divert to something which looks ‘manly/ masculine’ or rejecting the emotions they are having.

Now imagine how would a man would open up to another man who he knows would already be numb to what he is expressing. For that you should see how group of women discuss their personal problems Vs how men discuss their personal problem in a group of men.

That is exactly why a comfort of woman’s emotional sensitivity is important for a man to get rid of their numbness to emotions. Otherwise, men without women are not truly men, rather they cannot even become human in first place. As the times are evolving, a man may not solely need exclusively a woman to open up but the fact that men are always forced to numb their emotional sensitivity to demonstrate their masculinity still remains the fact.

For any human being’s personality – identity, absence or withdrawal of certain aspect of life is always traumatic, insecure and unsettling. If this aspect is immediately linked to a person, then the effect is very strong. To cope with that insecurity the person undergoes rejection of the very version his/ her self which once was associated with the person they lost or the person they wished they could have been with.

For me the tragedy is the ways in which men are exposed to the world experiences. Almost all of the men have subconsciously trained their minds to ignore such exact unsettling losses, emotions under the label of masculinity.

Conclusion – The Feminine Side Of The Real Masculinity

I would take this part to connect the Hemingway’s writing to the modern times in which we live. It is a curse to us humans that we cannot understand things unless we differentiate between them, the very process of differentiation in order to understand nature steals certain characteristic attributes of those things which made them really special.

Same happened with what society first called as masculinity, modified it to something totally different then calling it toxic masculinity – that is why men (true men) now became just the providers – not even humans in modern times.

Hemingway’s men are not that different from the modern men. The older ones suffered from the trauma of war the modern ones are suffering from the responsibility to carry forward the skewed definitions of masculinity. Nobody sees that changing times disfigured the definition of what it really means to be a man. Then there is a group who calls out that new definition as a toxic one. No wonder some people see Hemingway as a proponent of toxic masculinity.

The key thing to understand here is that it’s not about whether feminism is lesser or masculinity is getting redefined in toxic ways. It is about how fast we are losing the touch of humanity to support and justify one of these sides.

Now you will see that this is Hemingway’s lament, a call for help in a way that if there were women for such helpless men, their lives would have been completely different. You must understand that this was his silent call for help or an unexpressed, suppressed feeling when you look at Hemingway’s biography.

That is exactly why when I am connecting the link between Hemingway’s short story “In another country” with Alexithymia, I am neither promoting masculinity and denying feminism. I fear that if this continues the world will see even worse versions of toxic masculinity. Imagine a human which has rejected what he feels, it’s not a human anymore.

Most of the times, we are forgetting that when we are promoting and asking for individual freedom, individual expression, individual identity we have ignored what it means to reserve the same rights for others. Hemingway’s writings although were heavily influenced by his personal experiences of war, the ways in which his men handled emotions is exactly same as how modern men are still handling their own emotions. They are not handling them at all, they are suppressing them, running away from them.

The remedy to all these complications is creation of more open spaces for men. We need men to open up at least among themselves, at least a man needs to treat other man’s emotional, expressive side. Women will eventually fall into it as they are naturally and also societally more open to it (e.g. see the group of ladies and their discussions). There is nothing wrong for a man to cry like a sissy.

(I know it’s hard to do than to say it in few words. Men are more comfortable in rejection of sensitivity that to be made fun for the same. But once one sees that there is nothing like only feminine or only masculine in real nature of how we pass through this life we would see that it’s better to let it flow than to accumulate it like a stagnating trash. And someone has to start somewhere even though the journey seems impossible.)

Ernest Hemingway – the greatest manly man world would ever see again. (At least he let his own emotions, expressions – whatever they may be flow through his writings. Trust me, it takes courage. You will appreciate this when you notice how unaware you are about the very man sitting next to you is going through and is successfully masking it. I hope that we will start crossing that barrier for the good of all.)

The Lullaby of Eternal Rediscovery of Existence and Identity

Being social animals, we compare our lives with the lives of the others, we create our baselines and set our targets based on what others have achieved and done in their lives. In our current times when the life expectancy is better than ever, when we have a better cover of social safety than ever, the primitive instinct of survival from natural predators has been replaced by the modern instinct of philosophical- ideological survival which is the ‘preservation of our identity’ – the idea of our own image. The realisation of the philosophical death of our being should come with the awareness that your idea of self, your consciousness was just created by your desires and after this philosophical death you are returning to the fundamental forces of what made them. The endless possibilities for your becoming are opened in this point. This is the true eternal existence – to get broken down into the fundamental blocks of being and be recreated again. Juliet Ivy in her song ‘We’re all eating each other’ beautifully brings the sense of life that is made up of eternal creations and destructions.

Juliet Ivy’s song “We’re all eating each other”

Genuine poetry can communicate before it is understood

– T S Elliot

There exists a special category of songs which sound very jolly, full of life, giving the impression of the light hearted joy, calmness, relaxation everyone desires; on close inspection you end up realizing that the lyrics of that same song is so dark that one would question the mindset in which the song was written and composed. These songs are the songs to which people would dance happily due to its music but the moment lyrics of this songs is opened for discussion you will end up questioning your existence. It feels ironic.

There are many songs to name which fall in this category, I stumbled upon one such song by Juliet Ivy called “We’re all eating each other” from her album playpen.

The song is written by Lucas Sim and Juliet Ivy Ortiz.

The great thing about this song is the way its melodies try to befriend you. It’s so simple yet effective and the song’s rhythm is not continuously varying which creates an impression of safe and calm space of familiarity.

What's the point of living without dying for an ego?
So we validate our fantasies to feel like we are special inside
You know we love to lie

I was literally shocked when I started digging into the lyrics. How could one simply state a brutal fact of life as if someone is asked to simply pass salt and pepper on dining table?

For me it creates an impression of life being so simple at its core yet we always choosing the complicated version to justify “our” way of life and “our” ways of truth. Juliet beautifully and very clearly puts this observation in few words of wisdom.

The life we are living, the identity we carry is all we have when everything is taken away from us. This identity is created and molded into a specific shape and size from the life experiences we have. They are mostly subjective and are created from inside. That is exactly why we are completely attached to our identity. This identity has two facets – the identity we truly know ourselves and the identity we project on people around us to show them who we are. Trust me both could be totally different. We are always trying to preserve our identity. This is what Juliet is calling the ego here.

In order to preserve our identity – our ego, we let go of the objective truths and accept certain illusions, fantasies. This is done to create a sense of security otherwise our mind would keep running everywhere in panic. We create some lies, ignore some painful truths to calm our mind down; no wonder they say ignorance is bliss.

The biggest lie is the lie we tell ourselves in the distorted visions we have of ourselves, blocking out some sections, enhancing others. What remains are not the cold facts of life, but how we perceive them. That’s really who we are.

– Kirk Douglas

We like grabbing onto anything to feel like we're important
Not a moment that is shorter than a hiccup or a blink of an eye
You know we're scared of time

Here Juliet shows how the limited span of life brings in the urgency to justify our existence so that we will be satisfied with the feeling that we are special. But we chose to ignore the fact that the ideologies, things that we are clinging to justify our special-ness also have limited lifespan just like the lives we are living. Even though we want to live for hundreds of years, on the grand scale of creation we are not even a blink – not even blink of the blink!

This is more than enough to leave all those false things which we are trying to justify our life, our special-ness with. The moment we let go of the feeling that we are something superior than anything in the world is the moment we lose the fear of not existing. The loss of this fear of not existing would make one eternal. We don’t want to lose the identity we created when we became conscious of our existence. That is why dying without getting any recognition, remembrance is a painful idea for all of us. But that remembrance, those memories will fade away. This should humble everyone.

The worst lies are the lies we tell ourselves. We live in denial of what we do, even what we think. We do this because we’re afraid.

We fear we will not find love, and when we find it we fear we’ll lose it. We fear that if we don’t have love, we will be unhappy.

– Richard Bach

But we're all gonna die
Decompose into daffodils and dandelions
The bees will use our flowers for whatever they like
Make the honey that our grand-kids will put inside their morning tea
It's the thing of life
We're all eating each other
The thing of life
Nobody lives forever
The thing of life

The urge to ‘consciously’ exist forever is the only lie we need to let go to become truly eternal, free. We are so attached to our so called “self-created identity” that we consider everything going against is as a potential threat to our existence – the existence which eventually will fade away into nothingness. It is way better to accept the finite-ness of life and be useful to each other rather than carrying that false sense of superiority, higher ego to justify our lies of life.

Juliet puts higher perspective to sooth our confusion of “conscious existence”. We are justifying our egos because we don’t want to die, we don’t want our identity to die, we don’t want our memories to die, we want to be remembered by people even when we are not existing in the world. The urge to preserve our conscious identity thereby our personality becomes the ultimate goal of life.

I am using ‘conscious’ word here to show that we are scared of losing the “I”, “Me” from our life because that is how we experience the life. We create the sense of existence from inside that is why sense of “I” is very important for our existence but if you closely observe the way things exist in the nature it is really difficult to pinpoint what makes that “I” – the “I”. Is it my brain? Or is it my body? is it my property? is it my super-car? is it my villa? is it my designation/ salary? is it my family? What exactly defines us?

You will get the answer once you accept that this thing that you have assigned your identity to – your existence to will not remain forever. When we say it will not remain forever it means that the combinations which created that existence. The existence would crumble down into nothingness.

Now here is an interesting part. We call the crumbles of nothingness “nothing” because they do not immediately affect, improve or help the existence we were trying to hold on to – our identity. We forget that it was the same set of some “nothings” which came together in a specific way to create “something” – this something became our existence.

Juliet beautifully brings in this perspective by saying that we will end up into flowers then into the honey that our future generation will put in their morning tea.

While we are trying to hold onto our special identity which is short lived, which would disappear in a blink we are forgetting the fact that the nothingness from which we were created is more eternal than the identity we are trying to maintain. This nothingness is the truth, its that something which is getting recycled all the time. On the other hand, we are in this constant battle to justify our falsely created, mortal identity.

We should understand that we are actually eternal but this false sense of ‘being’, this false sense of ‘conscious’ steals the real eternal existence.

We don't know how to accept we're just a product of a chance
And less like gods but more like plants
Who can't stop making up reasons we're alive
(We're alive, we're alive, we're alive)
You know we love to deny
(To deny, to deny, to deny)

Juliet is again waging war with our falsely created sense of “special”. We intentionally highlight the facts that justify our superiority and ignore the facts which actually show that we might be the result of few overlapped coincidences. Even if we have not come out of chances and coincidences our existence is not that grand in the whole scheme of existence. On the level of creation, we are as close to plants than the powers which created all of us.

So we paint our face with intellect
Pretending we're not curious
Too busy, super serious
Don't have the time to do what we like
(What we like, what we like, what we like)
Baby look at the sky

In spite of knowing that we are insignificant, knowing that the creation is way bigger than what we are trying to justify ourselves, we are always in the race to prove our superiority. Why does that happen? Why are we always trying to justify our superiority with some lies while we call ourselves the smartest species? Why ‘we’ the smartest ones fail to recognize the objective truths of the world when we know that there is not meaning to chase everything all at once? Why we are always trying to win the race and justify our worth with something?

The reason is that we think our existence is limited, our time of remaining conscious of our being is limited.

We very well know that we will die someday, that is exactly why we try to justify every moment of our conscious existence to something, some idea, some object which we call our job, duty, faith, passion. We don’t want to die with the regret that we have nothing that will remain forever after we die. We are so wound up in justifying the life, memories after our death that we have invested our present into the pursuit of lies which are creating the illusion of our specialty.

Our heads are so engrossed down into the pursuit to create that false identity of worth-ness that we are unable to look up and appreciate the beauty around us, the reality around us.

The urge to lookout for the meaning of life and then assigning that meaning to something so superficial will eventually end into the pain and regret of not enjoying the time we had to its fullest, the moments we had to fullest. We are always trading the real awareness of “present” to gain the illusive comfort of safe “future”. That is how we justify meaning.

The real meaning of life should come with the understanding that whatever it may come next, one will never attach the sense of being to something which amplifies ego. Ego too will perish in the flow of time. The rejection of ego comes when one lets go of their sense of identity being special.

'Cause we're all gonna die
Decompose into daffodils and dandelions
The bees will use our flowers for whatever they like
Make the honey that our grand-kids will put inside their morning tea
It's the thing of life
We're all just eating each other
The thing of life
Nobody lives forever
The thing of life
We're all just eating each other
The thing of life
Nobody lives forever
The thing of life

The rejection of ego will make you free, will show you what your real worth is. Even though you are not special – in the end, you are something of value when you synergize with others. Even though your conscious being is not eternal, the things which made your conscious being are eternal and that awareness should free you from all the urges to justify your identity, your specialty.

You are given a chance to experience the universe in the most sophisticated manner possible which many of the other species might not even have. What more could sooth your existential confusion! Once you realize that you are already made up of eternity, you will let go this mortal identity which you are always trying to preserve with some subjective perspective and lies. This is the real freedom and it requires innocence. Innocence is one of the basic indicators that the person has no ulterior motive to achieve something, it brings in the sense of acting on things without expecting anything in return. Please understand that innocence does not mean that the person should become a fool. Remaining innocent in spite of knowing everything is really hard, that is how you will know that you are not fooling yourselves. This song shows us that innocence.

Conclusion

Juliet Ivy very beautifully brings the sense of life that is made up of eternal creations and destructions. We attach the meaning of our lives, the purpose of our lives to certain things while realizing that they too will perish in the flow of time – this is what would unsettle even the dumbest person. This feeling is also experienced by the highest specimen of humans. In order to come out of this unsettling fear of unjustified – worthless living, we take support from our surrounding. We selectively choose certain aspects that will create an illusion of safety and comfort. Being social animals, we compare our lives with the lives of the others, we create our baselines and set our targets based on what others have achieved and done in their lives.

You know what? Even after achieving such goals which we defined based on our surrounding we are not happy. Even after those material victories, we see that the happiness is short lived. So, we shift our goals to something which is immaterial, something which is spiritual. Something which we think is more eternal than the material things. We make certain ideologies the meaning of our lives. Religion is one of such examples.

René Girard – a French philosopher coined the concept of Mimetic theory where he tries to answer how we decide what to do and why to do. Mimesis roughly means imitation, trying to resemble. When we are stuck with no information or loads of information in either cases, we will be overwhelmed. The best way to come out of such conditions would be to see what others are doing around you. We set our standards based on the baselines of our surroundings. We create lies to justify these baselines and goals we want to achieve. Our ego is thus created to ensure that we maintain the sanity in the times of clueless-ness. It will prioritize survival of body in materialistic races and survival of its own sense of existence its identity in the spiritual races. In the end, both victories will fade away. (That also should not mean that one should not engage in the pursuit of certain victories. It should imply that the non-eternal nature of everything should humble the person.)

The most important point to understand is the ways in which everything great (also everything worse) will be broken down to their most fundamental building blocks. The idea is to not get attached with what you created which got destroyed.

In our current times when the life expectancy is better than ever, when we have a better cover of social safety than ever, the primitive instinct of survival from natural predators has been replaced by the recently created – modern instinct of philosophical – ideological survival which is the ‘preservation of our identity’ – the idea of our own image. (Social media is the booster for such way of life. It is also how the mimesis is happening strongly.) Philosophical death seems more painful than actual death. That is why in certain cases people gather courage to do self-harm. The best way to come out of such mentality is to question the very thing which brought this philosophical death; I know it is difficult to pick on the injury which already is painful to bear. The idea to work in such confusions is to notice one important behavior every one of us maintains when we define our life. We always strive to amplify things which bring happiness and ignore things which bring sadness. We define our life selectively on such choices in spite of knowing that both hold same potential to realize in actual life. This desire to selectively attach to certain aspect brings pain in life.

The moment we accept that there is no end to the cycles of creation and destruction (of both good and bad) we will see that we are nothing but a recycled versions of everything that is there in the existence.

The realization of the actual death of our body should come with the awareness that you are returning to materials which made you.

The realization of the philosophical death of our being should come with the awareness that your idea of self, your consciousness was just created by your desires and after this philosophical death you are returning to the fundamental forces of what made them and thereby what made you. The endless possibilities for your becoming are opened in this point. This is the true eternal existence – to get broken down into the fundamental blocks of being and be recreated again.

Juliet Ivy said all this in one simple sentence “We’re all eating each other.”

The cosmos is within us. We are made of star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself.

― Carl Sagan

Joker: Folie à deux – The Dark, Twisted Fate of Internal Conflict

The polarizing reception of Joker: Folie à deux shows how deeply we are attached to certain fictional characters. Whatever might be the reception of this film, the character design and writing of Arthur Fleck in Folie à deux will go down as one of the best representations of the psychotic villain in the history of cinema. Even though the film doesn’t cater to the fan service, it will definitely become one of the best depictions of the inner conflicts of a mentally challenged person swinging between reality and delusion. There is an interesting mental dilemma of identity common to both the Batman and the Joker. How they chose to deal with it made them who they are. The movie also points to the importance of inner compass for a healthy mental state altogether with surroundings nurturing empathy, kindness, appreciation, and love.

Character study of Todd Philips’s Arthur Fleck in Joker: Folie à deux

Recently Joker 2 or should I say Joker: Folie à deux released in theaters and people almost lost it. Most of the movie goers especially the comic book fandom was highly disappointed. There is another side of this same movie experience where people are really appreciating what the film presents in its narrative even though it is not completely loyal to the source material. Some are praising the liberties the film makers took to show the world what it means to become the truest of the villain of them all and why villains are praised more (maybe they deserve to be praised more) than the hero, even though hero wins in the end (this emotion is strongest in terms of the batman villains to be honest).

I am taking the side of what the Joker duo-logy presents itself to the audience rather than its correctness to the source material or the fan service. It is really a daring move from the creators of this second film to use all their creative power to show the world how dangerous character of Joker could be in real life. When I am saying this, I know fans can say that its just a movie and we only watch it for the sake of the entertainment; we do not want every movie to be a lesson on good or bad, right or wrong, truth or lie. But trust me when you are completely in the mood of bliss and entertainment, engrossed in the world created, even a lie would seem true and a wrong would feel right. It leaves an impression on our mind. A great entertainer can convince you to twist the ideas of certain truths in a person’s mind. Advertisements are a crude example to prove this point. Movies, cinema, stories are a potent media to change the minds, perspectives of the masses in an impactful way.

Mark my words, after few years of “marination” this movie will go as one of the best materials to study the writing and the design of a psychotic person. The movie will definitely regain its value as the ‘cult classic’ in coming decades. I am not saying that people are fool to not appreciate this film; I am saying that some of the things which disappointed people are actually way ahead of their time, people will take time to get comfortable around them and appreciate them.

The ability of movies like this to create a polarization of opinions amongst audience shows how potent the medium of cinema and storytelling is! We are humans – we love stories (especially those which unsettle us)

I am taking this opportunity to show appreciation for how the character of Arthur Fleck is written in this Joker Duo-logy. This is not the critic of what the comic book says and what could have been done in a right way to make movie goers happy. As the makers of these movies had already said, it was pretty clear that we are not in for what is generally expected from the mainstream, fan-worshiped representation of Joker from comics.

This is a story of a failed Joker to be very clear. The ways in which music and singing is injected in the narrative is highly effective. Most of the people found the musical aspect of the movie unnecessary and stretching but it had a proper intent. It is not draggy in any sense. You must understand how a psychotic person’s mind works in order to appreciate the whole movie.

(The fact that people despised this way of representing the Joker of Arthur Fleck, shows that most of us are sane and good-hearted people.)

I will be deep diving into the psyche of Arthur Fleck’s Joker and there will be heavy spoilers (if you care) I will try to touch the nuances in the character design of this Joker and why it all should make sense. For that you must accept that this is not the Joker which ‘our’ Batman had.

This is the Joker who found his way back to sanity but the society rejected him. (I will discuss this in detail further.)

Last warning – SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

Me and My Shadow

The cartoon poses a question – if a person has multiple dissociated personalities inside him and one of the hibernating personalities made him commit the crime which is not who he is generally; then how should the person be punished?

The answer has many aspects.

If we are pardoning the person because he is psychologically challenged then the masses who are watching this proceeding would consider that even a heinous crime can go pardoned if the person is not sane. This creates a gray area for the real perpetrators to commit more heinous crimes. Judicial system is well aware of such consequences that is why an example needs to be put in front of the masses.

To show men that crimes can be pardoned, and that punishment is not their inevitable consequence, encourages the illusion of impunity and induces the belief that, since there are pardons, those sentences which are not pardoned are violent acts of force rather than the products of justice.

Cesare Beccaria

Next question-

The mentally challenged person who committed this crime is also a human being in the end. If we go on giving capital punishments to every human being fitting in similar situations, then what human part are we supposed to preserve of the humanity through law and order?

The answer lies in the psyche of this psychotic perpetrator.

The answer is what this psychotic criminal considers himself. Trust me this is not an easy choice. Bear in mind that this in not a normal sane person we are talking about. It is more difficult when such person is carrying multiple personalities inside him. It is difficult for such person to submit to only one identity out of the many he carries inside. One of the reasons for a person to undergo personality dissociation and have multiple personalities is to have a coping mechanism to outside events. Same was the case with Arthur Fleck, the personality of Joker was his coping mechanism against the society. They are polar opposites. His problematic childhood is the key reason.

Who is the real Arthur? – The interview with Dr. Beatty

This interview with Dr. Beatty should justify why the movie ultimately becomes a musical in overall. You will understand from this interview that the real opportunity for the personality of Joker to shine out was in the Murray Franklin show. Arthur was actually intending to commit suicide on national television but knowing this would eradicate the existence of the other personality – the Joker takes the charge of Arthur’s ‘body’. There he kills Murray and makes statement and vents out all those emotions he had suppressed. That is exactly why Arthur is not concerned and doesn’t remember that he murdered some people in that show; he associates to the music of the show on that day. Because in that musical moment he felt free.

Also, keep in mind that Arthur has other personalities other than Joker. His mother’s mirror personality is also inside his head. The changed accent of attorney in which Arthur talks with Mr. Puddles in not just a performance to mock the court, it is a personality Arthur created so that he can defend the adverse external conditions which Arthur is incapable of handling.

It’s not just about Arthur and Joker.

Joker’s (Not Arthur’s) Smoking Addiction

Psychotic person resort to a habit which helps them to relieve the suppressed emotions or identities. It could be any small habit and mostly would seem harmless. In this case it is smoking. In the first Joker movie smoking is just a way to release the tension in his mind but as the Joker’s personality gets the hold of his ‘body’ the smoking intensifies. In the interview with Dr. Beatty when she asks Arthur if she can talk to the Joker inside him, the gaze that Arthur throws at the recording camera is more than enough to let us know that the smoking personality was the Joker himself. (Joaquin Pheonix is just perfect here!)

There is also a moment in Arkham Asylum when Arthur is watching Harvey Dent’s statement implying that only a fool would consider Arthur a martyr, this further reinforces Joker to consider himself more powerful and influential. He is smoking there too.

Before going live in interview with Paddy, Arthur’s attorney Maryanne tells him to stop smoking in front of the camera during the interview because it makes him look like a ‘cavalier’ – reckless. This is exactly where we should get a clear idea. The Joker is reckless, carefree – ‘cavalier’. Smoking becomes an extension of this very idea of recklessness that Joker has in his personality.

But for the good of Arthur, he controls Joker inside during interview. The moment he realizes that it’s just to create sensation, the Joker takes control and again smoking starts.

When Arthur’s private diary is being read out loud in court and when Ms. Dumond is testifying, saying that Arthur’s whole identity that his mother created was fake; you will see that Joker is just there absorbing everything because all these things are very uncomfortable for Arthur to handle. Arthur cannot handle such public humiliation and identity crisis. Joker is truly his coping mechanism.

There is also a scene where the Joker breathes out the smoke into the Harley ‘Lee’. It is very dramatic and feels like they are exchanging their very souls, their identities. Now they are inseparable.

(Todd Philips deserves appreciation for creating such characteristic moments throughout the movie. There is one moment in the start of movie where Arthur gets a lip cut during shaving and the blood drop flows down his chin creating a sad face. It is impressively symbolic of the state of the mind Arthur is in. Applauds to Todd again!)

The ‘Kick’ Dance

The most characteristic attribute of Joker being present and active in Arthur is his dance. The specific step of kicking fiercely in the air is very poetic. This kick shows how reckless Joker is. The Joker is literally kicking the society which led to the downfall of an innocent person like Arthur, the society which created Joker himself. It is a tight slap to the degraded social system which led to the formation of such psychotic character.

Very subtle but the ‘kick dance’ has its purpose in the whole narrative and character of the Joker. Later ‘Lee’ mirrors the same dance showing that Joker and Lee are now in sync.

The Musical

I have never ever seen the medium of musical to demonstrate the state of the mind of the character especially a completely negative character. (I am not a big musical fan) Whenever I have tried to appreciate the musical it feels to break the continuity of the realism of the narrative and dreaminess of the character or given scene. Although there are many good examples where musical just fits in perfectly.

But, this musical in completely negative and dark setup is very impactful. I know most of the moviegoers absolutely thrashed the musical approach and underwhelming utilization of Lady Gaga but trust me it was all intentional. It was supposed to make you uncomfortable.

The unsettling musical is actually a peek into the psyche of Joker and how uncomfortable his character is. It’s a warning to those who glorify Joker as villain or consider him an anti-hero.

Every musical had clear purpose and it also landed perfectly. You have to be slightly ‘mad’ and must fool yourself for the given moment to appreciate importance of musical in the whole narrative of the Joker. I will reiterate that people not appreciating the Joker musical is a subtle proof that the real society we are living in is still in a healthy mental condition in overall. If you didn’t like the musical, it is totally fine, and that was the intent of the creators.

Joker strongly associates himself with music, that is the pivot of his identity. Music allowed him to express freely and also supported his recklessness. The moment he discovered ‘Lee’ in music session that bond with music got further reinforced. That is exactly why his delusions, their delusions are fully filled with music.

Now, it’s lyrics appreciation time:

The opening cartoon song

Everyone needs love
There are already enough mountains

What Arthur helplessly wanted was appreciation and love from his people around. “Mountains” used here and used extensively in further narrative of the movie indicate the hardships, difficulties in everyone’s life. Even after these difficulties, if you are loved you can come over these mountains. Sadly, exactly opposite happens with Arthur.

In later parts of the movie, where Lee says that we will build a mountain from hill. She is actually saying that we will raise chaos everywhere and make other people’s lives difficult because they deserve it.

The Arkham Asylum musical

For once in my life, I have someone who needs me
For once in my life
I won’t let sorrow hurt me
Not like it has hurt me before
For once I have someone
I know won’t desert me
And I am not alone anymore
For once I can say this is mine and you can’t take it

This is Joker singing in Arkham realizing that people may consider him a martyr and he has also got the company of ‘Lee’. The sense of belonging to something for a person like Arthur through accepting the identity of Joker made him feel invincible. This is exactly what is sung in this asylum scene. Arthur wanted somewhere to belong and someone to care for him in the end.

The ‘B-Ward’ movie scene –

When the patients are watching the movie where Arthur and Lee are sitting together there is musical which goes like this:

We are all entertainers
Everything that happens in life
Can happen in a show
You can make’em laugh
You can make’em cry
Anything can go
Anything

We must understand that there are lots of creative choices while making a sincere film. Even though it feels useless, this movie musical scene has a purpose. It is exact reflection of how Joker thinks. For him it is all a performance, it makes him free, same goes for Lee. But sadly, society questions Arthur if he is doing a performance and not Joker. The very lyrics here show why Joker is reckless. This delusion of performance enables him to remain carefree, reckless in the ‘real’ reality.

The Hotel Arkham Dance –

In our minds, we’d be just fine
If it were only us two
They might say that we’re crazy
But I’m just in love with you

This shows how pivotal ‘Lee’ is for Joker. She fuels him. As Arthur is meek, loveless and innocent nobody appreciates him, loves him or cares for him. Being bold, carefree, dashing through Joker, at least he gets ‘Lee’ to love him, appreciate him. The identity of Arthur needs something to lean on, to fulfill his humanly needs – mental and physical. These needs would only get fulfilled if Joker comes out as dominant one. If not Arthur then at least Joker would make this personality free. This song is just about that. Even though delusional but Joker gets all the mental support to justify his personality in reality through ‘Lee’.

The interview with Patty

Before this interview Arthur has full control over the Joker, he has suppressed him to demonstrate his innocence. But the moment Arthur realizes that this interview is just happening for the sensational content, he loses it all and allows Joker to take control. (while starting to smoke characteristically in front of the camera!)

I’m wild again
Beguiled again
A simpering whimpering child again
Bewitched
Bothered and bewildered
Am I
Lost my heart but what of it
She can laugh and I can love it
Although the laugh’s on me
I’ll sing to her
Bring spring to her
And long for the day
When I cling to her
Bewitched
Bothered and bewildered
Am I

Here, Joker is making statement that he is the in-charge of Arthur’s body thereby his complete identity. When he realizes that Arthur will not get any help and it is just a sensationalism in the society, Joker shows the society that he is not alone anymore for the society to take care of him, He has someone who care for him now. This is his way of telling the society that it can go ‘freak’ itself now. The society pretending to help him to create one more drama is a conniving move for Joker. So this song is the final warning to the society that he doesn’t need this pity help from the people. He has his ‘Lee’ to love and appreciate him.

Lee’s makeup song

Most of the scenes when Joker and Lee are sharing the screen while singing are the delusions running in the mind of Arthur. In the third act of the movie when Lee is singing alone while applying all make-up, she is alone. This is where the reality of what Lee is becomes clear.

What a world, what a life 
I’m in love
I’ve got a song that I sing
I can make the rain go
Anytime I move my finger
Lucky me can’t you see, I’m in love
Life is a beautiful thing
As long as I hold that string
I’d be silly so and so
If I should ever let it go

This clarifies that Lee is manipulating Arthur to reinforce the Joker in him and using him to justify her own delusions. She knows she has all the strings in her hands to create the delusions she wants with Joker.

The Guard’s humming in Arkham asylum in the last part of the movie

When Arthur truly accepts the reality and rejects the persona of Joker he is actually on the path to new and healthy life.

When Arthur is sitting in front of the TV in asylum after this event, the asylum guard Sullivan sings this near him and another guard asks him not to sing this again.

We are not crowd 
My echo, my shadow and me

The guard is hinting Arthur that reality is the only thing where we truly exist. Whatever Arthur thought of himself having a different personality to take charge of his body while committing a crime is just a lie. It’s Sulivan’s way to mock Arthur to show that he will get the punishment in the end by court.

Another guard fears that this might trigger Joker to defend the joke on Arthur that is exactly why he tells Sullivan not to sing it in front of Arthur again. This also shows that Arthur is really trying to bring himself back to reality as this doesn’t trigger him. There was some hope for his recovery.

The Cognitive Dissonance – inner conflict for real identity

During the proceedings of the court when the events of Arthur’s childhood are brought in light again to prove that the Joker is a defensive identity that Arthur has created to cope with the trauma and adversities in his life, you will understand that what Arthur lacked was clear identity.

The identity crisis actually led to the creation of intense defense mechanism through the creation of his shadow as Joker. There are specific reasons behind this:

Arthur learns that what his mother told him about his parenthood was a lie
He learns that even though his mother told him that his purpose was to make people happy, she was not a big fan of his jokes. Ms. Dumond in her testimony clarifies this, which shakes Arthur to core
Arthur had created his whole personality around making people happy. The career choice to become a standup comedian was all driven by this sole thing. This is what defined his life

But the moment when Arthur realized that all the truths on which he created his life and his character were lie, he undergoes cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is a state when a person enters in paradox about the truths that made him who he is today.

Same cognitive dissonance happened for Batman when he learnt that his parents also took help of the very criminals he is fighting against today to hide their family’s dark truths in the past.

My point here is that both Batman and Joker underwent the state of the cognitive dissonance, the identity crisis, what they stand for. How they came out of this cognitive dissonance made them hero and the villain.

Batman chose to move away from the only motto of vengeance quoting that ‘Vengeance cannot change the past’. Batman then decided to stand as a symbol of hope for the degrading society.

Arthur – Joker in this case blamed society for the very state of mind he is in now. And there is nothing wrong in it. The very situations, events, people that Arthur got exposed to, made him chose that side. If he would have got proper support from the society and people, there really was a hope for him.

That is exactly why you must appreciate the act of Arthur to not become Joker in the end of this movie. Although the guards of Arkham had beat him to show that he is really weak in reality and Joke is not the reality. Arthur arguably had less privilege than Bruce Wayne to chose the right side and even after these hardships Arthur in this movie choosing reality of Arthur instead of delusion of Joker is a bold move. This makes Arthur’s character transformation far bigger, better and glorious than the transformation of Batman. (I am not saying that Joker is superior than Batman morally. I am saying the mental efforts that Arthur took to reject his Joker personality are way bigger, humongous than the mental efforts that Batman took to redefine his identity.)

There is very symbolic moment of Arthur running away from the Joker persona in the end of the movie to show how badly he wanted to escape that delusion.

You know what? This is exactly where the city of Gotham went wrong. People wanted an agent of chaos. Not the guardian of hope. Chaos is more sensational and attractive.

The Society and The Sensationalism

You should closely observe how Arthur behaves in the interview with Patty. He has dialed down Joker perfectly. But the moment Arthur understands that these people are not here to help him or work with him, they just want something sensational to show to the people watching TV, he loses the hope for the society. This is where Joker truly gets reinforced.

The way in which the character of Arthur Fleck is designed by the writers, it is a result of the overall failure of the social systems. The rising unrest in common people led to the reinforcement of Joker in Arthur Fleck even though he knew that he committed crimes.

Common people of Gotham somehow, anyhow wanted the rich and powerful people to be held accountable for the problems they were going through. Even though it was a group motive it was a very selfish motive. Joker doing certain murders was just a sensational direction people wanted so that they would get this feeling of redemption against the corrupt system.

Arthur was just a person in need of fame and appreciation for who he was. Only sad thing was that people only loved his Joker persona. That is exactly why Arthur chose the delusion of Joker to satisfy the delusion of redemption from riches for the society.

The real Folie à deux is not just about the shared delusion between Joker and Lee. It is between Joker and the society. It is between Todd Phillips’s Joker and the fandom. Deep down we too wanted this Joker to do some scandalous acts, exceptional crimes, and sensational interviews. We paid for the movie tickets to see the chaos that Joker creates in society thereby glorifying him as one of the best villains.

But, in reality we cannot handle such sensationalism. On surface it feels great while reading some spicy news, conflicts in our day to day lives but the moment they start affecting our very lives we know how horrible these things can turn out.

This movie actually made an effort to show how twisted a psychotic criminal is inside even though his life may seem sensational and happening outside.

The Loneliness and Kindness

There are many moments where Arthur clearly says that all he wanted was someone to understand him and love him for who he is. The only reason Arthur submits to Joker’s persona was the fact that this is what the surrounding around him wanted from him. The DA wants him to be the Joker so that they can punish him. This would also make him a martyr among the common people of Gotham. People of Gotham wanted him to be the Joker because it was their way to vent out their anger for the riches and powerful of the city. Harley wanted him to be the Joker because he symbiotically supported her delusions, he was ready to do whatever she wanted.

You will realize that there were also some moments where this was possible, it was possible to tell Arthur that he is not alone. Some events actually do happen but not everyone is thinking the same about him. That is what creates conflict in Arthur’s mind. There is a scene where Arthur is singing a book with good intent but the moment the guard mocks him, Joker takes over and signs maliciously.

You see this is intense when the person is challenged mentally, such people are ready to resort to any part of their persona provided that they get what they long for. That is successfully depicted in the psyche of Arthur Fleck.

Conclusion

A society on moral, social, political decline – a degenerate society – a society on the brink of collapse – will always reject Arthur and welcome Joker.

It is very evident from this duo-logy that the surroundings, society plays a crucial role in the character development of every person. We chose certain attributes of who we are based on what we actually want. This is decided by how society responds to our actions. Based on the such selected attributes, then our behavior, action on such attributes and the reaction from society on such action mold our personality. This is roughly how our personality, our identity is created. If we are fully dependent of society to define who we are, then our personality would exactly reflect what the society. That is what happened with Joker. Arthur was completely empty inside. You will see this when he accepts all his crimes honestly while ending with a Joke.

- Knock, Knock
- Who’s there?
- Arthur Fleck
- Arthur Fleck who?

It shows that Arthur accepted that he was nobody. Society just poured inside his empty jar of personality, made him the agent of chaos.

That is why having an inner compass is very important in personal development. Our internal beliefs may sometimes get challenged and it is completely fine to change them, upgrade them. But the moment one starts to pivot his/her identity purely on outside factors it may create internal conflicts, mental conflicts. That is where Arthur lost his battle for personal identity. Even though the ideas are fictional they prepare us for the adversities occurring in reality, that is for me is the real power of storytelling. May everyone in reality find their true identity in a healthy and sustainable way.

We are full of biases and we are always in search for the things which reinforce our internal belief system. It is a normal human tendency to justify one’s identity. Those who are ready to change and modify their understandings about the surrounding are closer to the reality and those who are stubborn to change their belief system will get hit by the reality until they have learnt their lesson.

This Joker movie indirectly keeps on highlighting how difficult it is to gauge what goes in the mind of a mentally challenged person. Most of the time our instincts repel us from such people but what such people need is a sense of being loved and sense of belonging. If they are felt loved in reality, maybe there is some hope that they will let go of their delusions. Being kind is the only way.

For me the movie actually presents a choice in front of the audience for the fate of the Joker. As a human being Arthur coming out of his Joker persona was a very healthy and hopeful character development. But that is not what we wanted from him. We, just like the people of Gotham city wanted him to create chaos. This movie shows that hidden dark part in our minds. I am not saying that all of us are sadistic. I am saying we all have a dark part in our psyche and its normal. Everyone should be aware of their own darkness to remain mentally healthy. It improves decision making.

My favorite moment from Warner Bros. Joker: Folie à deux

The Free Spirit – Beyond Good and Evil

The journey to the freedom demands solitude thereby making man responsible, accountable for the consequences of his every thought and action. Friedrich Nietzsche in his book Beyond Good and Evil paved a way for future philosophers to establish their own new perspectives about the truth where there are no two sides – good-bad, sad-happy, moral-immoral, beautiful-ugly, calm-disturbing but a revised and better version of the older truth. Nietzsche in this book focused on the refinement of our perspectives, our versions of truths for the real freedom because immediately surrendering to already established versions of ideologies is the worst imprisonment any man can have. Nietzsche showed how badly our ignorance creates an illusion of freedom and how to come out of it. This is to remember Friedrich Nietzsche on his death anniversary.

Remembering Friedrich Nietzsche on his death anniversary

Friedrich Nietzsche is one of the most impactful philosophers we as a humanity have ever seen. Reading Nietzsche is a task in itself. But the moment you start getting hold of the things that Nietzsche is trying point to, you will literally undergo transformation. The path that Nietzsche paved inspired many modern philosophers, thinkers, writers. To not mention Nietzsche is to do injustice with our understanding of ourselves as the human beings. This is one attempt to revisit Nietzsche’s ideas in his famous book called “Beyond Good and Evil”, especially his ideas on free Spirit.

Nietzsche in his special style clarified what it means to be really free and how we develop our perceptions, philosophies about the world around us and ourselves.

This is me remembering Nietzsche on his death anniversary. His ideas will keep on living forever.

Oversimplification kills the nuances thereby changing the big picture

Nietzsche strikes powerfully on the idea of understanding the life as simple and easy. It’s a humorous way in which he tried to convey how we consider living life as way to goodness, happiness, pleasure and freedom. The sentences that Nietzsche used to put his ideas about life are built in such a way that you will start questioning the happy nature of the life we desire. You will realize that during the process of understanding life as a pleasurable, happy experience we have submitted our thought process only to the side of pleasure, happiness, and truth. This presumption about life always deviates our search for the truth – “the happiness” that we lookout for as a biased pursuit. Here Nietzsche is not saying that if ‘this’ which you are trying to justify life with is true then it’s opposite is wrong; he is trying to point us towards the idea that as we have attributed life to a happy and pleasurable experience, this attribution has oversimplified what life actually is. Oversimplification has happened because not everyone can understand complex ideas on equal level. It’s not because people are dumb, it is because we have our own ways of interpreting the world around us and the ways through which we interpret the world are totally subjective. Thus, the truth if it exists, it will never be absolute but based on perspectives one has.

“We have contrived to retain our ignorance in order to enjoy an almost inconceivable freedom, thoughtlessness, imprudence, heartiness, and gaiety – in order to enjoy life!”

In order to make everyone appreciate given idea of life on same level we have oversimplified what life is and such oversimplified foundation has led to building even more oversimplified versions of so-called truth. In the pursuit of clarity and ease of interpretation and communication our lives have become false!

That is why Nietzsche here tried to attack the very fundamental way in which we try to break down the things we come across when we live through them. See it in this way, if life by default was supposed to be simple then it is implied that we would have grip on every aspect of life and existence. We know that’s is not the reality. So, if it is not simple then it must be complicated is our next thought. Thus, if life is complicated in reality then oversimplification eliminates certain aspects of life which we keep on missing in the search of truth.

You know what, Nietzsche further explains that when we are denying that life is not simple and happy that also should not invite it being opposite of what was earlier thought i.e., sad and complicated. Nietzsche rejects the idea of polar opposite to portray the lives we live. He calls life, knowledge as the process of “refinement”.

It’s not duality of any aspect of the philosophy, good and bad side of life but the ways and times they have refined themselves which should be the parameter of their worth.

The Death of Philosopher

Nietzsche had his way to express verbal anguish. The sentences are so dense that the prose feels literally repulsive. I think it was intentional. His writings were never meant to be read while sipping coffee or to romanticize the philosophy or the idea of life. They will make sense to those who really want to understand what he is trying to say. Nietzsche in his next idea talks about how every philosopher is trying to find the meaning of life and thereby his/her truth of life. He despises the idea of life or philosophy being explained with a single idea. That is why he sarcastically calls philosophers as the protectors of truth, the thing which itself doesn’t need protection in first place!

Nietzsche thus calls out to the philosopher to get ready accept the martyrdom, the death of their idea of philosophy. The philosopher can only carry his point forward for further refinement but he/she must not – cannot define the life in whole with that simple idea. That idea has to die in the process so that newer refined ideas can be built out of its broken pieces.

In order for philosophy to exist it has to end, it has to kill its older version – that is what is the tragedy of philosophy is as Nietzsche goes.

The Freedom Paradox

When Nietzsche is trying to initiate treatise on freedom, he starts with what it means to be free for any person. One important observation he puts in front is how we get freedom on personal level. On surface it feels if the person is free on personal level, then it is easy to be free in society as a whole. But Nietzsche shows that these ideas of freedom are paradoxical! Man goes inward for the freedom because he/she knows that there is no one else to tie, bound him/her inside his privacy. The man seeking freedom when interacts with the crowd soon realizes that his experiences of life are bound to how crowd handles him, reacts to him, treats him, shapes him. That is unsettling, the burden is difficult to carry for single person hence the man again resorts to privacy, in order to do that he has to let go of certain truths and create his own little lies so that the external crowd won’t disturb his “freedom”.

“(the man) he was not made, he was not predestined for knowledge”

The point Nietzsche is trying to make here is that the taste of freedom comes with the unsettling feeling of existence. But as a man we are not seeking that freedom for us; freedom is some citadel, a happy place where we expect to have control over course of things. The real freedom as Nietzsche explains will be gained by being in touch with crowd (which sounds paradoxical again) It’s like saying you will understand what you real singular identity is when you start mixing yourselves with the crowd!

Nietzsche further advises philosophers of the future to not turn away from the unsettling ideas about philosophy. He takes support of cynicism to make his point. Cynicism bases itself on the idea that people are selfish, self-interested (so in simple words if anything doesn’t go the way a cynic wants, they would whine and create reasons to justify it.) Nietzsche expects the future philosophers to understand the difference between ill-speaker and bad speaker. The lovers of knowledge should also be able to understand what is unsettling, maybe their lies the next opportunity for better version of their philosophy.

The Freedom of Expression

Nietzsche had already explained how things lose their essence in oversimplification. In same fashion it becomes difficult to interpret what a fast thinker is thinking and then explain it to the relatively slow thinkers and make them appreciate the same idea on same level. Even in our thinking we are not free. You can create an explanation for others to understand what you are thinking but they themselves have to climb up (or climb down sometimes) to your level to appreciate what you are thinking, you may succeed in expression but interpretation, comprehension and its appreciation gets limited by the levels on which others are thinking. (My question, if this is the case then even if you are a free thinker, are you truly a free thinker? I know Nietzsche is paradoxical most of the times)

“What is most difficult to render from one language into another is the tempo of its style, which has its basis in the character of the race, or to speak more physiologically, in the average tempo of the assimilation of its nutriment.”

Nietzsche further builds this “so called” freedom of expression using the limitations of the language. Language is the culmination and mirror of the culture it originated from. So, naturally each language has its own style, flow, breaks, rules and ways to highlight certain aspects of narration. When such languages is used to express an individual’s ideas, the speaker has to let go of the nuances of his culture, his primary way of life so that others having another culture, another way of life can appreciate and understand what he is trying to convey, but what if the nuances were the only thing which made that idea influential? Then the influence of the idea would be lost because of the translation. (This is Nietzsche’s way saying lost in translation!)

The Tragedy of Independence

Another way to become free is to become independent. The very few lines Nietzsche uses to explain independence are equivalent of an atomic bomb! (trust me it is still not an overstatement!!!)

People who become independent are few as Nietzsche says and those who are strong can easily achieve it. This independence is also one way to be free. When a man becomes independent, he is on his own, there is no one like him – he is alone. Nothing is anything alike him – he is alone. Thus the whole world becomes a puzzle for him as he is on his own. Any direction becomes new path for him. As he is the only one like himself, there is no one who would reach to his level and match his thinking. And in such case if he needs sympathy, people cannot even sympathize with him because they are not on his level. What a tragedy! The sadness he has in his heart, mind is rendered useless because others around him are not able to comprehend it – sympathizing gets ruled out automatically.

This is Nietzsche’s way of saying what Hemingway said. (I mean both meant the same although Hemingway came later, but you get the point) You must understand that happiness is not the real pursuit of life, then you won’t feel tragic about what Hemingway is trying to convey here, same is what Nietzsche trying to convey here. Freedom by independence can be a tragedy for the person who was expecting glory out of it.

Foolishness Hides Chances For New Insights

Nietzsche here is trying to remove the lines between what is good and what is bad, what is allowed and what is forbidden.

“That which serves the higher class of men for nourishment or refreshment, must be almost poison to an entirely different and lower order of human beings”

In modern crude sense, Nietzsche says “one man’s trash is another man’s treasure”!

Same idea, same act will have different perception of morality, scale of right and wrong. A rebel thinker in common poor public could be attributed to a philosopher amongst the riches. A murderer who killed an evil landlord could become a saint among the people who were victims of this landlord’s oppression.

So, Nietzsche’s attribution of foolishness is a way to point out the exceptional, outlier acts, prohibited acts, crimes to find the better truths. That will make you freer than others.

The Freedom of Youth

The stage of youth feels like the freest stage of all the stages of life and it is so because it has let go of the nuances. It also feels free because the youth in the stage of exploration never submits to right or wrong, yes or no to the life as Nietzsche says. But as the time passes when the youth is exposed to disillusions, broken expectations they try to modify themselves in a way that will get things done the way they wanted – the compromise starts to enter. The moment this happens the same youth tries to punish themselves as Nietzsche says. The freedom exists no more, so is the youth.

The Freedom of Actions

(Again, this a hydrogen bomb on morality!!!)

How can we say that the given action is right or wrong?

Nietzsche has very interesting thought process on this question. In the starting times the action was right or wrong based on what it led to – its consequences – the effect. The problem with this thinking is that one has to wait to let the action happen to decide its rightness or wrongness. If the stakes are high, such attribution of right or wrong can be devastating.

So, Nietzsche takes support of Chinese idea where the parents are responsible for the betterment of their child. Meaning that the origin of the thought which led to that action should be the decider of whether the action is right or wrong. Nietzsche called this pre-moral period of mankind. And sarcastically he points out that we have made a total turn around the idea of right or wrong action. Earlier it was what happened after the action i.e., consequences; now it is what led to that action, meaning what was happening before that action i.e., the origin which is the decider of right and wrong of any action!

This is where the origin of action gets named as ‘moral’ which is generated from self- knowledge. Later these morals evolved into “intentions”. As Nietzsche says, intentions serve as the origin of any action.

“people were agreed in the belief that the value of an action lay in the value of its intention. The intention as the sole origin and antecedent history of an action: under the influence of this prejudice moral praise and blame have been bestowed, and men have judged and even philosophized almost up to the present day”

Nietzsche then drops another bomb called – unintentional actions. We are clear that whether action is right or wrong can be decided by the intent. But what if there was no intent or there are no other ways to pinpoint the intent behind certain actions? There is a possibility that the intent may get mistranslated, misinterpreted during the unfolding of events, then how would you decide the attribution of given action.

In such case we would again go to the effect- the consequences of that action!!! You see what is happening here? We might have to resort to that older measuring system of action based on their consequences.

This is Nietzsche’s style to question how we think of morality in general and also on deeper level.

(I can’t resist praising Nietzsche lesser but deep down I know he would question his own worship too!)

The next attack Nietzsche does by using morality is the sentiment of sacrifice. The basis of his thought process is that you should question everything that gives you pleasure at least once. Here, he shows how fake the feeling of sacrifice for others, surrender could be if it is intended to display how moral and virtuous you are!

“There is far too much witchery and sugar in the sentiments “for others” and “not for myself””

In simple words, you are saying that I like to help others because it makes me happy. So, in order to help others you have to become selfless, but if becoming selfless to help others makes you happy, doesn’t that make you selfish? You are selfless because you are selfish!!! (Disclaimer: Nietzsche is paradoxical.) The paradox is resolved when you accept that you are just taking support of morality to display you higher value. Being selfless is just a better excuse to display your high morality. It there was any cruel way to display your high morality no wonder you would have gone for that!!!

In modern ways, it’s fox’s way to say the grapes are sour or I am a virgin because I am waiting for someone special (In reality fox cannot reach the grapes and the person is not able to appreciate other person or people rejected that person continuously – please note that I am not blaming someone’s character – it’s the limitation of language that prevents me from expressing what I am thinking for oversimplification. As Nietzsche has already shown that oversimplification kills the nuances. You get the point!)

The Immoral Philosopher – The Free Philosopher

Building upon the ideas of nuances lost in translation, right and wrong in morality Nietzsche calls the future philosophers to go beyond the dichotomy of philosophy and also distrust the morality in the development of new philosophy, new truth.

“In all seriousness the innocence of thinkers has something touching and respect-inspiring in it, which even nowadays permits them to wait upon the consciousness with the request that it will give them honest answers”

This is Nietzsche’s way to show that in order to find the new truth new philosophy, new philosophers have submitted themselves childishly and blindly to the principles of morality hoping that morality will give them new answers. But it is the same tinted glass of morality that prevents them from getting new perspectives. Hence, he calls them naïve here. They must let go of this childishness.

“The belief in “immediate certainties” is a moral naivete which does honor to us philosophers; but – we have now to cease being “merely moral” men!”

This is Nietzsche’s way of saying it’s good to be bad!

For Nietzsche, morality shows only two sides of reality- right or wrong, this works fine if reality is really dichotomized. But we know there is no such thing as right or wrong for every real-life scenario. So, in order to find the real truth, you have to let go of morality, then you will see that reality has its spectrum and people residing on different biases of such reality have their own attribution of right and wrong for the same action. Morality is the subset of newer truth, not the other way around.

‘il ne cherche le vrai que pour faire le bien‘

(he who searches truth to do good) – I wager he finds nothing!

Nietzsche make his point by him being the first bad-philosopher!!! (This is why I am loving him more and more. It’s like a brainiac with full grown muscles if you want to picture him thematically!)

The Freedom From Passions and Reality – Will to Power

Nietzsche makes an attempt to show that the reality could also be made up of something totally different that we can even comprehend. What if the world is more real than what we can experience? And if such reality exists, our senses will limit us from experiencing it. So, in order to be free in such reality we have to rise above our senses. That would be the new freedom. Our senses are bound to desires and passions whose interactions – impulses are creating thoughts.

So, building on these impulses Nietzsche says that many emotions, processes are created in “our reality”. What would make any of such impulses, process free from others? He introduces the idea of causality to show the flow and root of everything. If cause leads to an effect and further that effect becomes cause to newer effect then it is possible that the root cause of all would make us really free. Nietzsche further explains that it can also be one of the processes which would overpower others to become free and not the root one. (For example, the first unicellular organisms would be the most powerful organisms on earth today, that is not the case.)

Here Nietzsche introduces the concept of Will to Power. Whatever overpowers the other processes has the potential to remain in the big game and thus has real chance to be free. Will to power in any process allows it to gain more freedom.

This is Nietzsche’s Darwinian theory of evolution – the survival of the fittest. (I know it is a bastardized translation, but again I summon the loss of nuances during translation.)

Then Nietzsche puts the idea that by this way of thinking the originator does not necessarily be the most powerful one, thereby questioning the existence of the God! Because if the God was the originator, then then he/she would exist only if he/she has the highest Will to Power. That also does not mean that if God does not exist then devil exists or has the highest Will to Power. It could be anything! We are not sure for now. (typical philosophical answer!)

Using causality, Nietzsche also questions the morality of French revolution. If for the locals the royalty was cruel that is why the revolution happened then why didn’t the remotely located people who considered them noble in first place considered them cruel too? In the eyes of remotely located people the French royalty had a noble past. (The question is intended to think on it not to find the right and wrong. It shows how flawed our thinking becomes when we stick to morality blindly.) Whoever came in power overthrew the less powerful. That is one way to explain Nietzsche’s Will to Power. According to Nietzsche, if Napoleon would have been continuously invested in the morality of his actions he wouldn’t have become the great emperor.

Freedom From Truth

Here Nietzsche starts with the very obvious and common fact that some truths are unsettling. Not every truth ensures happiness. Only an idealist, as Nietzsche says would submit the idea of truth that brings joy, happiness, and beauty.

Here comes Nietzsche’s biggest drop-

“the strength of a mind might be measured by the amount of “truth” it could endure – or to speak more plainly, by the extent to which it required truth attenuated, veiled, sweetened, damped, and falsified”

This is self-explanatory. It is just our unsettlement that we need to take care of while looking for the truth. We are thinking animals and thinking is a result of our impulses, desires, and passions. So, not every truth is destined to bring us peace. ‘We would die if we eat poison’ – is a truth which unsettles everyone but that is not how we react to such truths, we prepare for such bad events, that is the wisdom what Nietzsche is talking about in a crude way here.

“There is no doubt that for the discovery of certain portions of truth the wicked and unfortunate are more favorably situated and have greater likelihood of success; not to speak wicked of who are happy- a species about whom moralist are silent. Perhaps severity and craft are more favorable conditions for the development of strong, independent spirits and philosophers than gentle, refined, yielding good-nature, and habit of taking things easily, which are prized, and rightly prized in a learned man.”

Nietzsche prefers learned man more than the moralistic or the virtuous one. A learned man knows the consequences of learning new truth, or sometimes even unaware of it but he does not pivot his happiness on the discovery of new truth. What else could you make freer when you are ready to accept the truth in its crude and real form! This freedom will bring clarity, new perspective and not happiness or sadness or chaos or calmness.

Truth will not decide how and what you are. You just will have added new tinted glass in your collection of perspectives towards life and reality and the philosophy behind all of them. If your Will to Power is good your truth may become the truth for all others.

Freedom From Identity

The profoundness demands the rejection of submission to any side of existence. If one promotes certain ideology the people around him/ her will try to comprehend that person using the tags they have in their own minds for that idea. The mask thus brings in that ambiguity where people are not associating, tagging you to one definite truth. Even your mind can start creating bias if you let it. That is why Nietzsche focuses on mask in profoundness.

“A man who has depths in his shame meets his destiny and his delicate decisions upon paths which few ever reach, and with regard to the existence of which his nearest and most intimate friends may be ignorant; his mortal danger conceals itself from their eyes, and equally so his regained security.”

The mask frees you from attribution thereby biases and even the socio-economical influences. You will never let honor or shame, right or wrong, good or bad, happy or sad justify the events in your life. You will never ever flinch to enter an unsettling adventure which guarantees your growth personally. Embarrassment, failure will just be another emotional response for you (please note that this does not mean that you will be emotionless, it means that you will be able to recognize your emotions and let them pass.)

This is exactly why I would force everyone to understand Nietzsche on their own level!!!

“Every profound spirit needs a mask; nay, more, around every profound spirit there continually grows a mask, owing to the constantly false, that is to say, superficial interpretation of every word he utters, every step he takes, every sign of life he manifests”

This could also be one reason why some the greatest personality humanity has ever seen had a layer of controversial ambiguity around them.

From the idea of mask, Nietzsche moves to the idea of its conservation. The conservation is meant to define the philosophy of containing who you are rather that you submitting to some ideology. Whatever you have collected as an individual, whatever you are on philosophical level personally, how you have upgraded – refined your philosophy you must conserve that instead of giving to some ideology. The mask helps to conserve who you are.

“One must know how to conserve oneself – the best test of independence”

(this could be the reason why superheroes wear masks!!! Joke aside but it is one powerful thought)

Further Nietzsche warns new future philosophers to not be people pleaser or submitter to temptations. That will steal them of their judgement and independence.

Freedom From Your Version of Truth

The ways in which Nietzsche is trying to close his arguments are really beautiful. He knows that when the future philosophers will have discovered their new truths in their journey of blood, sweat and tears, it is natural that they will get attached to it. Such is the human tendency. He wants us to get rid of the obsession with this new truth. This truth even if it’s the newer one will create boundaries in your perception, you won’t be free anymore! Nietzsche wants to let the future philosophers let go of the dogma.

“In the end things must be as they are and have always been – the great things remain for the great, the abysses for the profound, the delicacies and thrills for the refined, and, to sum up shortly, everything rare for the rare”

Freedom From Illusion of Freedom

On closing notes Nietzsche has advised new philosophers to be careful of the “freedom” they are being offered under new socio-political ideas. Nietzsche focuses here on the ways new philosophers are embarking on the journey to new truths. He tells that having fluency in speech and effective grip on written communication will not define you as the new philosophers, even though they are one aspect of it. But the systems having higher Will to Power will use same tools to control new philosophers and change the course to their versions of truth.

New philosophers will be misled with words like “Equality of Rights”, “Sympathy with All Sufferers”, “Modern Ideas” but they should be careful about them. They should be aware that the moment they create a thought process the people on different levels with different Will to Power will interpret these same ideas for their own benefit especially the ideas which are polar opposites of your ideas. Once such separation happens nobody, not even you cannot get the real freedom.

Nietzsche offers the rule of solitude while embarking on such journey. Only you can free yourself.

Dune: Psychology in Science Fiction

Our identity is heavily influenced by the surroundings we live in. A healthy understanding of the gap between ‘labels given to us by our surrounding’ and ‘what we consider ourselves at core’ defines how we perform, how we behave in given situations. Frank Herbert effectively used these ideas of human psyche in his Dune Saga. The antihero story of Paul Atreides indicates psychological ideas of cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias, and Pygmalion effect. It is interesting to understand how our minds are so sensitive at the levels of self and group simultaneously.

How Frank Herbert used human psyche in the creation of Dune’s antihero?

We saw how some fantastic philosophical ideas come alive in the character arc of Paul Atreides. The discussion hereon is the extension of the previous philosophical one, now we will dive deeper into the psychological aspects of Dune Part Two.

There will be heavy spoilers for Dune Part Two hereon!!!

Existentialism in Dune Part Two

As Paul gets more and more involved in the events on Arrakis with Fremen, he finds out what needs to be done, he finds clarity and purpose. He is renouncing the leadership in the early part because he does not know what to do with it. The moment he decides to become the Lisan al-Gaib, the moment he finds the purpose of his being, he gets the clarity.

According to Existentialism, there is no other meaning to the life but the meaning you give it yourself. Existentialism says that man is born free and can chose any actions to live but in the end he/ she will feel like they lived for nothing. They will remove this ‘existential angst’ only when they decide what they want to do with their life. The moment people consider themselves responsible for the events and consequences in their lives, take deliberate actions to achieve them that is the exact the moment where they find the meaning in life. Then everything, every action every decision starts to make sense. You feel like you exist for something.

This existential journey of self-discovery is exactly what we see in Paul’s journey to become the Mahdi. Avenging his father’s life becomes the ultimate goal of Paul in early moments but later on things take different turn. This is existentialism on personal level.

Fremen of Arrakis are the best example of existentialism in masses. The Fremen people are able to sustain in the hostile environment of Arrakis not because that is the only choice. They also have a strong belief, a hope that someone from outer world will save them one day and make their planet the Paradise, the Lisan al-Gaib will come to save them. Although Paul and Jessica know that it is a story properly planned by Bene Gesserit, although there are also Fremen who oppose this prophecy (Chani is one of them) still it gives them all hope, a reason to live for, a reason to survive for. Everyone makes sense of this prophecy in their own ways, their own belief systems.

Do you see what is happening here?

There is one group who is religiously putting their faith in the hope of the messiah for their survival and on the other hand there is a group who dismisses this idea and think that they themselves have to take care of their survival. The messiah will be one of them, not someone sent from the outer world.

We know what happens in the end. But from an objective point of view we see that people create there own perspective for survival. It doesn’t matter who was right and who was wrong in the end. What matters is whether is guaranteed the survival of Fremen. No wonder Jessica considers the artificially planted faith for Lisan al-Gaib among Fremen as an act of giving them a hope.

In either way, some sort of meaning would ensure survival of the Fremen.

The meaning of the life given to us is the meaning we assign to it.

The Prophecy – A Perfect Example of Confirmation Bias

The Prophecy plays key role in deciding the fate of key characters in Dune Part Two. Although we are aware that the prophecy a highly detailed plan to get the hold on Arrakis there are certain moments which fool us in believing that the prophecy might really be true. There is one justification for the correctness and validity for the prophecy. Somehow any powerful member from Bene Gesserit could have unlocked the exact power to see the future like Paul or Lady Jessica this person who could have seen the future and made this prophecy. We get no such signs in the narrative, but the story has enough resources and reasons to make it a valid point.

The event of Paul riding an elder worm, the worm stopping for Paul and Jessica in Dune Part One while crossing the dessert, Chani’s teardrop bringing back Paul alive (although she is manipulated to do that) are such events which confuse us when we try to reject the Prophecy. Either Bene Gesserit were too good to plan the people and resources for making the prophecy a reality or the person who made prophecy also unlocked the powers which Paul unlocked.

It is very interesting when Fremen come in one-to-one contact with Paul and Jessica. They are so influenced by this prophecy that whatever Paul may do, they attribute it to the prophecy. In early part at Sietch Tabr when Stilgar (who is one of the fundamentalists) is having discussion with the Fremen elders, we are given a hint of this strong Confirmatory Bias in Fremen, especially the fundamentalists.

Stilgar – I saw things.
Elder – Stilgar, your faith is playing tricks on you.

This is an indication to how a blind faith could drive people into looking for signs and making sense from anything that supports that faith.

You must understand that, the existentialism makes life as a meaningless affair – we try to calm our mind/ our senses by assigning a meaning, a perspective to make sense out of the creation. Cognitive Bias lies on the negative extreme of such existentialism. An existence where we are only accepting the events, signs which support out beliefs. This also the transition region where spirituality is converted into pure religion. Stilgar is the perfect example of one such religious follower suffering from Cognitive Bias.

It is also very understandable for the people like Fremen who have nothing hopeful to live and nothing to pivot on, the idea of savior from outer world fuels them to continue the fight for survival.

There is subtle hint that Paul may not be the only messiah that Arrakis might have seen. The Emperor in his discussion with Princess Irulan mentions Muad’Dib as “some new Fremen Prophet”.

Confirmation Bias is the prejudice where we try to accept the proofs which support our beliefs and reject those which don’t. Fremen people demonstrate such high levels of confirmation bias because Arrakis is the only reality they live in. People living outside the Arrakis like the emperor, Bene Geserit very well know that this is an intentionally planned act. And they very effectively implant such prophecies over the generations. It also shows how difficult it is to reject and go against the conventional beliefs especially the religious ones.

Did you ever have had an encounter with people who tell that this was already written in the older documents, scriptures? When we made certain scientific breakthroughs only then we are seeing them clearly mentioned in older writings, how is it possible? It feels counterintuitive but I would say going by the data instead of the intuition always helps to break such biases.

It feels against our mind because our mind only accepts that which will support the current beliefs. If the current belief gets falsified then our mind will start looking for another belief system which is much more like an existential angst – the existential confusion and the sadness that comes with it. If one meaning is falsified the mind must stick itself to a newer one otherwise life will feel worthless.

Image source: sketchplanations.com by Jono Hey

Cognitive Dissonance and Identity – What Makes Paul to Seek the Ultimate Power?

The confirmation bias is more powerful when it comes to the questions like ‘who you are?’, ‘what is your identity?’

Generally speaking, you are the best person who knows who you are (except your parents and some people close to you). What would happen if you are presented with the data, proofs which indicate that your parents are not your parents, your friends are not really your friends? They are just some paid actors (just like in the movie Truman Show).

Paul is portrayed as the Prince belonging to the House Atreides which is powerful and believes in fairness, justice, and the truth. The ideas associated with House Atreides support constructiveness, upliftment of those who are getting used for others’ benefits. Paul also strongly associates himself with these ideas even when his house is attacked by Harkonnens. He never tries to take advantage of the Fremen beliefs for personal gains. That can also be explained by one of the reasons he has to reject the Fremen Prophecy.

Then what makes Paul to accept this prophecy even when he knows that there are more proofs to reject the prophecy than to accept it?

It is when he knows the truth about his identity. The moment when he drinks water of life.

Upon understanding the ultimate truth, we come to know that Paul’s mother Lady Jessica is the daughter of Baron Vladimir Harkonnen. Paul understands that he is as Harkonnen as his villainous cousin Feyd-Rautha.

This is where his identity of Atreides filled with justice clashes with the cruel and much more powerful identity of Harkonnen. You can see him telling his mother that this is the way they survive – by being a Harkonnen.

When a person goes through such uncomfortable events where his/ her beliefs clash it creates a in harmony. These are the events where the person is confused about what exactly he/ she should believe in. As the early beliefs which were true for him, on which the person lived whole life were inherently false what defines him now?

Paul faces this cognitive dissonance about his identity. He himself is a Harkonnes – the Harkonnes whom he was considering the villains of his life and the lives of the Fremens.

What identity would Paul chose makes him the hero or the antihero in the end.

And Paul chooses the Harkonnen identity which make him the antihero. Please understand that he could have chosen a fair Atreides or Fremen ways to fight for the cause. The circumstances created around Paul supported him to become as ruthless as the Harkonnens. The Emperor and the great houses denying his ascension further fuel his wish to remain ruthless to justify the actions. The moment Paul associates himself with the Harkonnens, he justifies his urge for power as a valid one. Paul forgets his Atreides roots which could have made him the hero of the Dune’s story.

The Pygmalion Effect – Is Paul Really the Messiah?

The difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how she behaves, but how she’s treated.
Pygmalion by George Bernard Shaw

One factor in Paul’s journey to become the leader of the Fremen and ultimately the Emperor can be largely credited to the support system created around him. It is clear that he goes through many hardships and sacrifices to achieve his goal but you cannot deny the inherent public support he receives through Fremen. It only because of the support from the Fremen people you will see Paul build the confidence even though in Dune Part One this was the exact person who tried to deny future leadership in front of his father.

How a person refusing leadership of his own house later accepted the leadership of the most controversial group, that to in very adverse conditions? Leading house Atreides was Paul’s birthright, an easy one. But, leading Fremen in clear opposition of the House Harkonnen, the emperor and the great houses was one very daring act to follow. What gave him all this strength?

The answer is – Pygmalion Effect

In psychology, Pygmalion Effect is the effect where high expectation from a person lead them to perform highly and effectively even in adverse condition.

Pygmalion word comes from the story of a Greek sculptor called Pygmalion who falls in love with his sculpture so much that the statue comes to life.

It’s like worshiping the rock can make it a God which could ultimately is believed to fulfill wishes.

The Bene Geserrit propaganda very smartly takes advantage of this idea. They create such support system around Paul which create one powerful leader in the universe who in his early life was not considering himself worthy.

Pygmalion effect highlights how the environments in which we live, how the people around who put their trust in us can boot our performance. According to Pygmalion effect, if a high performing person can deliver poorly if the environment and people are not supportive, it also is true the opposite way, any low performing person would deliver exceptionally when he is trusted by the people and the environment around him.

Pygmalion effect is also known as Rosenthal Effect in psychology. Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson conducted a study on classroom students where they found that the students who are inherently reinforced to be the smarter perform better whereas students who are told that they are worthless already show under-performance.

Pygmalion effect shows us that we internalize or identity based on the surroundings we live in. No wonder they say that when you want to be a great man be in the company of great people. This internalization of or beliefs lay the foundation of our performance. That is exactly why so many Fremens believing in Paul gave him the power to stand against the Harkonnens, the Emperor, the Great Houses – entire Universe.

This is exactly why Pygmalion effect is highly associated with the self-fulfilling prophecies. The declaration of such prophecy irrespective of the knowledge of the future conditions people to create ways for such prophesied person; the person who show some signs aligning with the prophecy gets a boost which ultimately follows the prophesied path as the environment now completely supports that path – that is the path of least resistance leading to the glory.

Supporting environment creates high performers

Paul could have chosen another path to fight just like Chani chooses in the end but the Pygmalion effects kicks in, leading him to become the antihero – a high performing powerful antihero.

You should appreciate that Pygmalion effect also shows how the opposite and downgrading environment will create a villain. A famous and itching question can be answered using this explanation. If baby Hitler was killed way before, would it have prevented the occurrence of the future world war? The answer is – NO. The conditions were developed in such way that even after killing baby Hitler someone else would have risen among that much hatred who would have led to the end effect, the name would have been different but the acts would be roughly same and inhumane. That is why our environment is an important part of our identity, even if the environment is hostile, what we consider ourselves at the core is equally important.

Nonsupporting environment creates low performers

(You can see that, even in adverse nonsupporting conditions of cognitive dissonance and identity crisis, a person can chose to remain good, can choose one identity over the other. I have discussed such scenarios in pop culture before. Read more about that here.)

The Prophecy – Does ‘Free Will’ Really Exist in Dune?

The identity which Paul chooses after a cognitive dissonance about his origin and the Pygmalion effect from his environment make his the prophesied Lisan al-Gaib. Now it feels like it truly was the plan all along. This goes against the idea of free will.

Existentialism is based on the idea that as man is born free. It is in his mind, his responsibility to assign the meaning to his/ her own life. The ways and reasons for which Paul consistently rejects the prophecy is because he knows he is not ‘the one’. He knows that he is the son of Leto Atreides and should avenge his father’s death, hence his only purpose was to use the ‘desert power’ to defeat the Harkonnens and the Emperor.

Paul despises everything that is connected to the Prophecy. It is his interest in Fremen people and purpose of completing the vision of his father which drives him into becoming one of the Fremen. You will see Paul rejecting the idea of him being the Messiah in the early discussions with Chani.

The creation of prophecy and instilling the faith into Fremen for Paul indirectly always pushes him into doing what is expected. Paul never makes any decision out of the box. There are chances where he could have created other opportunities but the people around him, his blind followers could never let that happen. Paul is center of attraction for everyone that is why he is always bound to do what they want, otherwise he knows that he will lose that advantage and desert will immediately consume him like any common outsider. The advantage of being the center of attraction of your followers is that your followers will justify your every action; But in the end, you will also be bound to their expectations.

The powers of Bene Gesserit to manipulate people to do what they want, the unfolding of events leading to the war during the Fremen rebellion against the Harkonnen, the necessity to prove injustice with Leto Atreides to the Great Houses ultimately make the realization of prophecy possible.

That is exactly why Paul gets tied up in the expectations of Fremen, his own self-respect and his own duty as a son. He knows he can avoid this path but chooses that path because that is how he will have ultimate power.

On the other side you will see Chani, she is fighting the same war but can chose her own ways to accomplish that goal. Remaining out of the focus of the religious followers gives her more freedom.

Lady Jessica also falls victim to the prophecy. Stilgar informs her in Sietch Tabr that if she doesn’t become the Reverend Mother she would have to die and Fremen people won’t save Paul. Even when she knows that the prophecy is false, she accepts it as a way to get things done according to her wishes. But again, the pressure from the faithful Fremen followers force her to follow the prophecy. Things doesn’t go right for her in the end. Lady Jessica also faces the cognitive dissonance like Paul about her origin as Harkonnen and chooses the predefined path of being the Reverend Mother.

One must appreciate how Frank Herbert created the story of Dune where the psyche of person drives the narrative. Frank Herbert was heavily influenced by Carl Jung’s archetypes and Dune reflects those archetypes. Dune also gives the psychological justifications behind the blind hero worship through some important character arcs.

It becomes very important to notice our end goals and whether our surroundings, our people are supportive of that. We as humans, are the beings of infinite capabilities, what we consider ourselves internally at core becomes very important in the end. Otherwise, the world is already prepared to overwhelm us with its preconceived notions of living a life.

References and further reading:

Lifelong freedom for an hour

The societal construct, the men and even the women in society have created certain conditions where other women receive false freedom. This false freedom facilitates women to deliver benefits to society but somehow the society is not liable to return the favor back to these women. That is exactly where feminism becomes important. Kate Chopin’s short story called “The Story of an Hour” gives us a glimpse into what sacrifice and freedom means for a woman. This short story is summoned to be one of the important and earliest pieces of the feminist literature.

The ideas of feminism from Kate Chopin’s short story “The Story of an Hour”

Inception of feminism

Kate Chopin’s short story called “The Story of an Hour” gives us a glimpse into what sacrifice and freedom means for a woman. This short story is called as one of the most influential and early parts of feminist literature. It shows how women in those times sacrificed their freedom under the influence of the society just to maintain and continue the system as it was. People (still today) say that ‘it is very difficult to gauge what is going on in a woman’s head’ or ‘it is very difficult to know what a woman is thinking’. Kate Chopin’s ‘The Story of an Hour’ gives us a peek into a woman’s mind when she is allowed to think what she wants to think. Physical freedom is one part of freedom but mental freedom is the truest form of the freedom, I would say.

The story of an hour was first published titled ‘the Dream of an Hour’ in Vogue magazine on 1894 later it was republished as ‘the Story of an Hour’ in 1895. We will see why and how this short story represents feminism in its truest form and possibly in the most misunderstood (compared to the modern interpretations of feminism) ways.

Summary

We come to know that Mrs. Mallard is a heart patient who is about to be informed about the news of the death of her husband in a railroad accident. Her sister Josephine and Mr. Mallard’s close friend share this news with her. Mrs. Mallard is obviously sad hearing the news of the demise of her beloved husband. She then teams with some moments of solitude to handle this sorrow. Where she suddenly realizes that she could be free now as she won’t be under any obligations from society and her husband. She feels her rebirth and onset of new life with absolute freedom approaching towards her. She wants to cherish this realization of freedom in her room alone for some moments but suddenly she notices that some person has arrived on door. Upon the request of her sister, Mrs. Mallard goes to see the person at the door and founds that the person is Mr. Mallard – unharmed and alive. She dies in the shock. Doctors diagnose her death due to the heart attack from extreme joy.

Life of the author – Kate Chopin

Kate Chopin was born on 8 February 1850. When she was just five years old, her father died in a rail accident. Her mother was the second wife of her father. In 1870, she got married and had six children in the period of 1871 to 1879. Her husband died in 1882 from malaria and left a huge debt on her head equivalent to $1.27 million in today’s valuation. She worked her ways out to bring the business back to life which she sold after two years. Her mother died in 1885.

Kate became depressed with sudden loss of her husband followed by her mother. Her friend Dr. Kolbenheyer suggested her to use writing as a therapy, a way to vent out and express her emotions and as a way to sustain income.

The most important novel published in 1899 by Kate called “the Awakening” was very controversial and scandalous to those times due to unacceptable feminine point of views.

As her writings were considered controversial, Kate much more resorted to short story writing. She died on 22^nd August 1904 due to stroke.

Realistic fiction

The genre of Kate’s writing is a realistic fiction. Where the setting of the story is intended to feel realistic. The characters have all human limitations, practical interactions and nothing is stretched out of imagination to feel unreal, inorganic or magical. You will see Kate’s own life is reflected in her writings. People say that one can trace out her whole biography through her writings.

Now let us understand the Story of an Hour.

A woman’s whole world – her husband (?…)

Mr. Mallard’s death in railroad accident is drawn from the death of Kate’s father who exactly died in rail accident. She starts the events in this story from the point of view of her mother in a way. Kate was one of five children her father had and she too had six children. In a way, she resonated with her mother who was responsible for taking care of children. That is why she starts the story with the death of the husband in a rail accident to establish the connect between how her mother would have felt when she heard the death about her husband – Kate’s father.

She thus considers her mother as one powerful woman. Please note that after her father’s death Kate spent her days with her widowed mother, widowed grand mother and also widowed great grandmother who never remarried. Her use of the father’s death in rail accident is actually a setup used to link the emotions of her mother in this story.

“She did not hear the story as many women have heard the same, with a paralyzed inability to accept its significance.”

One will only appreciate the depth of this sentence when they are told about the situation of three generational widows Kate grew up with. The ability of Mrs. Mallard to accept the consequences of the death of her husband is thus the reflection of how her maternal side handled the consequences of the death of the man of their house.

A woman feeling helpless after the death of her husband is the most acceptable reaction even today but Kate’s protagonist not reacting in that way was the first shock to the society of those times. It’s not like she went paranoid and numb due to shock from the news of her husband’s death. Kate’s choice of words in this sentence hence is very deliberate.

Please understand that there is no way to indicate that she hated her husband throughout the story.

So, the initial setup and reactions of the protagonist are Kate’s ways to show that a woman’s life was never only limited to her husband. You should also understand that after her own husband’s death, Kate was burdened with huge death incurred from him. Getting out of such death surely might have made her more practical and objective. That is also an important reason which shows how her protagonist reacts to such news in a practical way. She understands that it’s huge loss but she also knows that her remaining life is standing in front of her.

Painting the scenery of freedom

The elements used in the early setting of the story ensure the successful impact Kate leaves on the minds of the readers. She gives just enough information about the weak heart condition of Mrs. Mallard and surety of sources for Mr. Mallard’s death in the rail accident.

Then the story solely focuses on the protagonist of the story – Mrs. Mallard.

Mrs. Mallard now submits to solitude in her room. Each and every description of events and objects used hereon by Kate are very deliberate to reflect how the mind of Mrs. Mallard is reacting to the realization of the loss of her husband. She is yet to understand the freedom she is about to enjoy but how she come to that realization of freedom is one such “brain-candy” for the readers. They are not given direct explanation on how the protagonist is feeling rather they are made to feel the exact emotions of the protagonist. That is the beauty of Kate’s writing. She creates a portrait of a scene which readers enjoy interpreting.

So, here goes the scene, every sentence in this story hereon is one hidden urge of every normal human being but especially a woman here:

“She would have no one to follow her”

– indicates a person’s longing to leave life on their terms and without the judgments and prejudices of the society.

“- trees (in the open square) that were all aquiver with the new spring life”

– indicates a new beginning full of hope, a restart to living life without restrictions

“- the delicious breath of rain was in the air”

– indicates that even air was seeming tasty and ready to sow new beginnings. It is that extreme joy which was buried deep down which got the chance to come out which is making even the air “delicious”.

Please understand that this joy is not the effect of the death of her husband and many readers always connect wrongly. It is innocent joy of the upcoming realization of freedom – just realization -the real freedom has not achieved yet. Just its realization is joyous, imagine what would real freedom would do to our protagonist!

“a peddler was crying his wares”

– indicates high importance given to general and normal phenomenon.

What does a street seller do? He screams, calls out the items he sells. There nothing exciting in it.

But when you are full of joy and excitement, even a mundane, normal thing feels like a happy, jolly event.

Mrs. Mallard noticing such normal activity out of all the beautiful things is the indication of what it really means for her to realize freedom. Kate would have dropped the moment of Mrs. Mallard noticing the peddler but she injects the realism in the fantastical, fanciful feeling of freedom for a woman. (Kate would have made unicorns dance on the streets for Mrs. Mallard but that totally destroys the realism and sincerity and thereby seriousness of the emotions of the woman. That is Kate Chopin for you! It is cinematic – feeling-wise but completely real from observational POV)

Mrs. Mallard noticing a distant, faint son with twitter of sparrow shows how she is now receptive to even a small joyous event. You should understand that when a person is sad especially depressed even the happiest thing in the world can’t make them happy easily and reverse is also true. When you are truly happy your brain will notice even the minuscule events of joy around you.

“The clouds piling up in the sky” is used to show the readers that the emotions Mrs. Mallard had seemed like her life itself had become a beautiful scene nature has painted itself.

The objects and emotions used to express emotions of the protagonist in this scene by Kate Chopin actually show the innocent nature of freedom the woman was longing for. The happiness is not due to the death of her husband. Only a fool will assign this happiness of Mrs. Mallard to a devilish attribute as the protagonist had no hatred towards her husband. Just for a moment the woman has detached herself from the definitions of the society, she got to experience this moment only when the news of Mr. Mallard actually detached her from the obligations of the society.

The readers will clearly appreciate this in the next moments of the story.

Repression and Sacrifice

Kate Chopin very carefully presents the emotions of her protagonist. She has made every attempt to clarify the feelings of freedom Mrs. Mallard are not devilish. She justifies feelings of happiness for the freedom and the feelings of regaining the control over the course her life for a woman in a pretty convincing and real way. The efforts made are sincere and pious.

“-as a child who has cried itself to sleep continues to sob in its dreams”

It shows that the sorrow has impacted Mrs. Mallard very deeply. She is surrounded by various types of feelings. It is this turmoil of different emotions and you are confused about how to label certain type of emotion you are trying to feel out of it.

What happens next is – I would say – the core of every woman’s multifaceted feeling. The beauty of Kate’s writing here is the ways in which she tries to portray the innocent longing of a woman for her freedom. The readers should think with clear intent with no prejudices to judge the feelings of Mrs. Mallard here.

“There was something coming to her and she was waiting for it, fearfully. What was it? She did not know; it was too subtle and elusive to name. But she felt it, creeping out of the sky, reaching toward her through the sounds, the scents, the color that filled the air.”

The cautious use of words here is phenomenal! She describes the feeling approaching the protagonist. Its like it was not born from inside, its like the protagonists didn’t intend to “feel” that feeling. The sounds, scents and the colors portrayed in the painting of happiness that Mrs. Mallard was experiencing were just the surface. Something different was hidden behind, buried deep down in that happiness. The sounds, scents and colors were just the mediators of these emotions she intentionally didn’t want to feel. The sentences presented here by Kate to the readers are meant to show the feelings intentionally buried deep by her protagonist.

The protagonist had killed her ambitions wishes so deep that now these feelings were completely strange for her. She had denied these feelings initially just for the sake of the betterment of her family and society. What society considered as wrong, she silently accepted it as wrong even though it may compromise her ambitions and wishes. This is a subtle reference to how a woman suppresses her emotions for the betterment of her loved ones.

“She was beginning to recognize this thing that was approaching to possess her and she was striving to beat it back with her will – as powerless as her two white slender hands would have been.”

The feeling approaching Mrs. Mallard is explained in a way as if some devil is trying to conjure her. It is very important decision taken by Kate Chopin to indicate that how even the fundamental feeling of freedom for a woman of that time was considered as a sin. She tries to reject the freedom for the betterment of the society, she sacrifices, kills her growth, aspirations and toils for the success of the others on such an extreme devotion so that it becomes her second nature. That is why when she thinks for her well-being, society labels it as a crime. Then she also accepts that reality and remaining powerless she succumbs to this monstrous way of the society.

The third person characterization of the feeling of freedom in the form of devil is intentionally used to show how the society has devalued even the fundamental emotion of freedom for a normal woman to rock bottom.

Today this will not seem like a big deal, but the time when this story was published Kate Chopin made an attempt for women to feel free from the deep rooted traditional patriarchal setup. It makes others understand how women were forced to suppress their wills and wishes, how the societal structures undervalued them and at the same times it makes the women realize that what feeling they are having are in no way bad, there is no way to suppress such feelings of freedom.

“free, free, free!”

Kate points directly to what a woman actually misses when she has lost her true identity. She misses her freedom. Freedom to decide the course of their own lives is the fundamental right of every person. Its not just about women, but Kate’s attempt here is to make others understand how women were more exploited due to the societal setup of that times. As she herself had gone through such experiences she was successful to pen down these feelings to her readers.

“She knew that she would weep again when she saw the kind, tender hands folded in death; the face that had never looked save with love upon her, fixed and grey and dead. But she saw beyond that bitter moment a long procession of years to come that would belong to her absolutely. And she opened and spread her arms out to them in welcome.”

Kate wants readers to understand the purity and innocence of the emotions her protagonist has. It’s not like she longed for freedom because her husband treated her badly or tortured her. Rather Mr. Mallard is shown as a kind and loving husband here. His own wife thinks so; what other proof do you need?

Mrs. Mallard was sad for the loss of her loved husband. But at the same time, it was the societal construct which restricted her from deciding the course of her own life. Death of her husband exposed this flaw in front of everyone. That is exactly why she misses her husband but also understand that this is the how she can be truly free – the pressure from society is released through the death of her husband. It’s not like she despised her husband but his death definitely exposed the cruel construct of the society created to limit the feminine potential.

It is human nature, we always need a pivot to judge something, understand something. When we are shown a picture as a good, we love to interpret exactly opposite of this picture as the bad one. It is basic flaw in our general thinking to attribute opposites two separate parts, good and bad. In alignment of same thought, if a woman desires to become free general thought goes like this: if she wants freedom then she would not need support of others, she can do things on her own, it is just the society that is suppressing her, she can do all things just like men do. This is the moment where the modern feminism starts losing its core – the tender yet powerful feminine emotions. There are countless examples in modern feminism where women are trying to prove the point by doing exactly what men do. This is the part from where the feminism starts losing its real meaning.

Kate made a successful attempt to define what is the meaning of freedom for a woman. Giving woman her freedom will surely not make her not care for her loved ones – especially the male loved ones. In the end, women are more capable to nurture love and affection. Freedom to do anything in their ways will not steal the femininity from women – that is where their real advantage lies. That is the core of feminism lies I would say. It is not about doing what exactly men do to prove the point. It is about equal exposure of both men and women to everything the nature, the life has to offer. Feminism was never about competition to catch up with the privileged masculine gender. It is about the freedom to decide and preserve one’s identity especially women.

“There would be no one to live for during those coming years; she would live for herself. There would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature.”

“She would love for herself” is not just a simple set of word to describe the value of freedom for a woman. It also shows how many sacrifices women make to let others around them grow. Please note that it’s not only the men who keep on impose their own will to suppress women, there are other women too who try to force their wishes on such women. That is exactly why Kate has both men and women for the down fall of such women. So, it’s not fully about patriarchy only, it is about whole societal construct. There are many good examples where women themselves were responsible for the suppression another woman. Kate consciously, deliberately wrote these sentences along with the concept of “a private will” to show that only men are not to blame. Many people especially highly celebrated feminists miss this point. But there is still hope given that this clarity was already there when the concept of feminism was in its inception which is somewhat comforting for humanity. Kate is not pointing towards certain gender for the downfall of a woman, she is suggesting a reform in the mentality of both men and women thereby whole society.

“And yet she had loved him – sometimes. Often she had not. What did it matter! What could love, the unsolved mystery count for in the face of the possession of self-assertion which she suddenly recognized as the strongest impulse of her being!”

“Free! Body and soul free!” she kept whispering.

This is the most important part of the Kate Chopin’s story. It is the moment when her protagonist understands what she gave up when she loved her husband. She gave up her true identity, her freedom. It’s not like she received something in return for such sacrifice of her identity. That is why the gain of fundamental right to freedom becomes more important to a woman rather every human being. Kate thus also establishes that the real love will not demand the challenge the fundamental nature/ identity of a person, rather it should elevate such aspects. That is why the freedom after her husband’s death becomes heavier than the love she had for him, because she lost her identity in that process. Please understand that it’s not limited to women, men may also go through similar emotions. It is just that women are more exploited in such emotions.

The tragedy

After going through all these feelings of freedom, Kate decided that she will trick her readers into a tragic end for her protagonist Mrs. Louise Mallard. The confidence she built in reader of this story in the early part of the story is revealed to be a misinformation. Mr. Mallard knocks on the door unhurt, showing no sign of going through a deadly accident. In that shock Mrs. Mallard dies from the heart attack (a heart attack due to an uncontrollable joy as the doctors in the story diagnose)

It is the magic of Kate’s story telling which shows what she actually thinks for the women in society especially women of her generation. She has very less hope for the empowerment of women, women like her to be very specific. That is why she has inserted this tragedy in her story. This tragedy is a metaphor for her low hopes for society to change to grant women their fundamental right to freedom. (Luckily that is not the reality today)

The death of Louise is in a way the indication that if society denies the freedom for a woman, then the only way she can have her freedom is by embracing death. Death is better that such societal imprisonment and repression. This is very serious but goes unnoticed many times in this story because there is no way everyone will understand and appreciate the seriousness of this tragedy. One has to either go through or closely observe such instances. For the times of Kate death was the true freedom for women.

Whether Louise died from happiness or not is also the most misinterpreted part of this short story. There is no medical evidence to prove whether a person’s heart attack was a result of extreme joy or sadness. At least there wasn’t any at that time. The doctors in the story might have guessed joy as the reason for heart attack due to the happiness Louise was experiencing when she realized her freedom. The joy was so certain and long lasting for her that she had no time to react to the shock of the news of Mr. Mallard being alive. It shows how feminine emotions, ambitions will always remain misunderstood to the mainstream society. That is the real tragedy of the story.

Feminism – Freedom and respect for everyone in the end

Man is born free. Freedom and human being are two inseparable concepts. Many great people in history have sacrificed their lives, spent their precious lives to make others free. Freedom both physical and mental is one important aspect of every person’s identity. Freedom enables a person to have their own way of living the life, nobody can force others to live their life in certain way.

So, when we define freedom as the ability of people to do anything they want in the ways they want, we end up in a peculiar dilemma – a paradox. If a person is ‘influenced’ by his surroundings to make a choice in certain ways, will it be called as the true freedom? On surface you will see that the person him/herself is the one making decisions and taking actions in their own ways; So, it seems to represent the freedom. But when you understand that so called ‘free’ person was influenced by his/her surrounding to take certain course of action in a certain way the word ‘freedom’ feels like a misnomer. Even though the person was free to take any action, the action he/she took was under an influence rendering the meaning behind “to take any action” useless.

When such freedom to take actions is unknowingly influencing the subject, it can be called as a false-freedom but when the person knowingly takes the same action even when they know that they are taken due to the influence of the society then it becomes a sacrifice, the person undergoes repression. This is a conscious sacrifice made by the person to maintain the order in the system. A sacrifice made by this person of his/her own freedom. When this sacrifice is fully voluntary decision, it is rarely accounted to be valuable because very few people truly understand what it means to be free. The more indirect the influence the more people feel free.

That is exactly where feminism becomes important. The societal construct, the men and even the women in society created certain conditions where other women receive false freedom. This false freedom facilitates women to deliver benefits to society but somehow the society is not liable to return the favor back to these women. This exactly what is wrong with the conventional societal construct. This renders the sacrifices made by women useless. No wonder why modern feminism sometimes focuses on doing exactly what men do to prove the point. That is why the ideas, emotions presented by Kate Chopin through her short story ‘The Story of an Hour’ are very important.

Ernest Hemingway’s Men Without Women

The Paradox of Individualism

In Another Country – Summary

Deep Analysis of In Another Country

Lack Of Warmth

Together But Lonely – Alienation Among Men

Self-pity And Surrogate Sympathy

Men’s Inability To Communicate And Express Emotions Clearly

Emotional Numbness – Alexithymia – Hemingway For Today’s World

His Woman Is Everything For Any Man True To Himself

Conclusion – The Feminine Side Of The Real Masculinity

You can share this:

Juliet Ivy’s song “We’re all eating each other”

Conclusion

You can share this:

Character study of Todd Philips’s Arthur Fleck in Joker: Folie à deux

Me and My Shadow

Who is the real Arthur? – The interview with Dr. Beatty

Joker’s (Not Arthur’s) Smoking Addiction

The ‘Kick’ Dance

The Musical

The opening cartoon song

The Arkham Asylum musical

The ‘B-Ward’ movie scene –

The Hotel Arkham Dance –

The interview with Patty

Lee’s makeup song

The Cognitive Dissonance – inner conflict for real identity

The Society and The Sensationalism

The Loneliness and Kindness

Conclusion

A society on moral, social, political decline – a degenerate society – a society on the brink of collapse – will always reject Arthur and welcome Joker.

You can share this:

Remembering Friedrich Nietzsche on his death anniversary

Oversimplification kills the nuances thereby changing the big picture

The Death of Philosopher

The Freedom Paradox

The Freedom of Expression

The Tragedy of Independence

Foolishness Hides Chances For New Insights

The Freedom of Youth

The Freedom of Actions

The Immoral Philosopher – The Free Philosopher

The Freedom From Passions and Reality – Will to Power

Freedom From Truth

Freedom From Identity

Freedom From Your Version of Truth

Freedom From Illusion of Freedom

You can share this:

How Frank Herbert used human psyche in the creation of Dune’s antihero?

Existentialism in Dune Part Two

The Prophecy – A Perfect Example of Confirmation Bias

Cognitive Dissonance and Identity – What Makes Paul to Seek the Ultimate Power?

The Pygmalion Effect – Is Paul Really the Messiah?

The Prophecy – Does ‘Free Will’ Really Exist in Dune?

You can share this:

The ideas of feminism from Kate Chopin’s short story “The Story of an Hour”

Inception of feminism

Summary

Life of the author – Kate Chopin

Realistic fiction

A woman’s whole world – her husband (?…)

Painting the scenery of freedom

Repression and Sacrifice

The tragedy

Feminism – Freedom and respect for everyone in the end

You can share this: