Life, Love, and Liberty

Then go see The Simpsons Movie! I ended up seeing it yesterday and walked away with much satisfaction. Its generated a writing by Anthony Gregory too. It’s not a good idea to read it before you’ve seen the movie though, since it contains spoilers.

Note: In reading over this before I released it on the blog, I realized that I wanted to write an additional post to explain my conception of romantic love and sexuality. I’d also like to touch on the general nature of feminist philosophy since self-described feminists have a tendency to disagree on its meaning in the same manner that self-identified anarchists debate the nature of anarchy. I’d just like to make sure that individuals understand what conception of feminism I subscribe to since there are positions taken by self-proclaimed feminists that I disagree with. More on that to come in the future and here’s my piece:

Disney’s classic Beauty and the Beast has some positive ideas to impart about gender. Examples of a feminist — whether intentional or not — consciousness is on display with the character of Belle.

Our first taste of this is given to us in the beginning of the movie with Belle’s introduction as an incredibly beautiful — leaving aside debates about what constitutes beauty in the first place — young woman whose “peculiarity” lies in her accompanying appreciation for books. Her character is also an independent being resistant to the advances of the domineering male suitor Gaston. He simply cannot come to terms with the idea that Belle has aspirations she considers more important than a marriage to him.

What can be gleaned from all this is the utter ridiculousness of traditional assumptions about gender. Belle’s combination of intelligence with beauty is a rebuke to the common cultural idea that splits the two. Think of all the images in our culture of the beautiful blonde who is simultaneously represented as a complete dunce.

Who is frequently held up as the ideal woman to seek out? The shallow but stereotypically drop dead gorgeous girl rather than the “nerdy” or “strange” but far more interesting stereotypically ugly lady.

Gaston is interested in the dorky or weird protagonist but only for her physical beauty. His alleged romantic attraction doesn’t seem to have any room for a care in the world about her own passions or the entirety of her character.

The contrast between the persona of Gaston and the beast is very revealing. In the former, we see the archetypal buff attractive guy who doesn’t appear to have much going on in the head while the physically unappealing beast gradually becomes a rather gentle soul over time. His eventual sensitivity to Belle’s needs and desires is not accompanied by an inability to physically defend himself or others when needed. Something that runs counter to the popular identification of empathy or sensitivity with an unwillingness to physically defend yourself.

This combination of two usually opposed traits is shown in two scenes where the beast is forced on the defensive. When Belle makes an escape attempt after agreeing to perpetually stay in the castle in exchange for her father’s release, she is attacked by a pack of wolves. The beast comes to the rescue after having regretted his rough treatment of Belle. This situation is repeated near the end of the film when a struggle ensues between Gaston and the Beast because of the formers attempt to do away with him.

In the end, Beauty and the Beast offers us a vision of an androgynous individual that transcends the limitations of narrow gender roles. This is all for the better since the ability of people to comfortably create their own souls is an essential ingredient of a world worth living in. American culture has a very very long way to go in this department and I am not always optimistic about the potential for change. I still end up choosing to believe it’s possible most of the time but such a spirit isn’t always easy to maintain. Perhaps, it will be easier someday and one can only hope this comes sooner rather than later.

Not much of a general movie review but a discussion on a particular comment made in the film. For a good general review, check out this one by James Garfield.

AK Press has done a great service in reissuing this documentary for our viewing pleasure. Its strongest suit is the immense variety of footage from protests to interviews with famous radical figures. Particularly interesting are the multiple scenes with late anarchist Karl Hess. The parallels he makes between political figures or factions seen as separate are intriguing. In discussing his post-Republican study of the American anarchists, he makes two provocative comparisons involving Emma Goldman. She is said to embody what Hess thought the Republicans always stood for and the best of Ayn Rand with a better appreciation of the social aspects of existence. On the surface, this connection between socialist Goldman and capitalist Rand seems off yet is actually quite sensible upon deeper examination. Both were controversial female writers who display individualist themes in their work. Rand portrays independent heroines in both We the Living and Atlas Shrugged. In We the Living, the female protagonist Kira defies the norms of her family by vowing to become an engineer.

“But Kira! What will you do?” Maria Petrovona gasped.
“I’ll be an engineer.”
“Frankly,” said Victor, annoyed, “I do not believe that engineering is a profession for women.”
Pg.33, Signet edition 1959

This theme of a woman wanting to do what’s traditionally considered a man’s job reappears in Atlas Shrugged with railroad titan Dagny Taggert. Goldman’s individualist streak was evident in her attraction to Friedrich Nietzsche and Max Stirner. Her pamphlet The Individual, Society, and the State contains tributes to individualism like the following.

The individual is the true reality in life. A cosmos in himself, he does not exist for the State, nor for that abstraction called “society,” or the “nation,” which is only a collection of individuals. Man, the individual, has always been and, necessarily is the sole source and motive power of evolution and progress. Civilization has been a continuous struggle of the individual or of groups of individuals against the State and even against “society,” that is, against the majority subdued and hypnotized by the State and State worship.

One of her contributions to treating women as free individuals included promotion of birth control despite legal restrictions.

One of the most horrific events of the continuing Iraq war was the fighting in Fallujah. I remember watching with disgust at the destruction being visited upon the Iraqi city in the name of “liberation”. Recently, an ad in the leftist Z Magazine tipped me off to the existence of a documentary on Operation Phantom Fury. It’s a short production with only a 18 minutes running time but well worth the investment. Some proceeds also go to support Iraqi civilians in need. Whatever one’s position on the war, we should all be able to agree that suffering among civilians needs to be alleviated. This suffering is made very real in the images making up the film. The paradox of “liberation” through military force and occupation is made apparent by viewing the aftermath of battle. Refugees returning to their home town discover structures destroyed and an occupying army. The regulations and restrictions imposed from checkpoints to an ID wearing requirement show the nature of “freedom” under military rule. As for the operation’s success at winning hearts and minds, we are treated to fiery condemnations of what occurred by Fallujah citizens that leaves little room for hope in that area. For those interested in a look at a major event of the U.S. war in Iraq from an un-embedded perspective, I recommend checking out this documentary.