The Fight Club-A literary Redux
PROLOGUE
Nietzsche
in ‘Thus Spoke Zarathustra’ asks
"This life as you now live it
and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more;
and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought
and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to
return to you — all in the same succession and sequence."
How would you respond, yes? Or No?
In
other words, if your life was cyclic and you had a chance to live the life you
have lived once again. Would you be enthusiastically say yes, or would
you rather choose another life?
Fight
Club is one such Novel and subsequently a film that grapples with that
existential dilemma using the modern man as its muse.
Some
films are entertaining, some are visually and dramatically stunning and then
some films punch you in the face. Leaving you philosophically bleeding and
wondering what the hell happened to your own carefully constructed
face(persona) and why despite the pain , the overwhelming feeling is that of
recognition of something true and real.
It
is a film the mainstream is not
comfortable with. A film that critics feel compelled to admire, analyze and
marvel, all while quarantining its ideas as dangerous and misogynist. Cultural
pundits have worried about its influence on youth and the youth seem to have
given them much to be worried about.
"It's about two men who
start a boxing club for underprivileged youth, and the woman who comes between
them."
-Brad Pitt
The Plot of
the movie is based on a novel by Charles Michael Palahniuk an American author.
The film is directed by David Fincher and Stars Edward Norton, Brad Pitt and
Helena Bonham Charter.
The
Narrator is a 90’s Office Worker (Jack) with a rather emasculated,
monotonous, hedonistic lifestyle and an insomniac to boot. His strange way of
de-stressing is going to anonymous sympathy groups as a fellow sufferer and
bawling his heart out Infront of strangers.
His life
takes a surreal turn when he meets Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt) on a plane
and a strange series of events makes him move in with Tyler . Gradually Tyler
takes over every aspect of Jacks life (including his romantic relationship with
a girl, Marla) and destroys his comfortable notions of life. Soon ,
during a fight they discover the liberating nature of a open fight and soon
start knuckle fighting on a regular basis in a basement. As they fight
more and more men join in and they start
a underground club , named simply as ‘Fight Club’. Rules are simple, men come
in and fight one to one till one of them passes out. There are no formalities
but rules. As Tyler declares
‘The
first rule of Fight Club is: you do not talk about Fight Club. The second rule
of Fight Club is: you DO NOT talk about Fight Club! Third rule of Fight Club:
someone yells "stop!", goes limp, taps out, the fight is over. Fourth
rule: only two guys to a fight. Fifth rule: one fight at a time, fellas. Sixth
rule: No shirts, no shoes. Seventh rule: fights will go on as long as they have
to. And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club,
you have to fight.’
Soon men
pour in and the club takes on the structure of a brotherhood of men willing to
take a leap out of their meaningless enervated existence. The Fight becomes an
initiation ritual while the club grows into a tribe.
Tyler soon
reveals that the Fight Club is ready to take on a bigger Project to liberate
the present hedonistic and emasculating world and thus Project Mayhem is born.
However, Jack is not so sure and there in lies the conflict that defines this
film.
Fight Club
is to be as politely put, a polarizing film. Some critics have found it
unsettling, politically incorrect and toxic on one side while the other side
has found it philosophically rich and layered with insights and metaphysical
motifs.
. Here is
what the Left-Wing newspaper The guardian Wrote about it
‘David
Fincher’s bone-splintering, soft-tissue-pulping Fight Club is the ultraviolent
hipster-fantasy about a depressed white-collar nerd befriended by a supercool
alpha male and inducted into a secret bare-knuckle combat cult whose purpose is
to restore real masculinity.’
Technical Analyses of film-making
Before
jumping right into the thematic and symbolic undertones of the film, it would
behoove us to study and analyze the technical aspects of the film.
Cinematography[1]- The Cinematographer and Director
use a special chemical saturation process to the films giving it a signature
metallic sheen. Extreme closeups and theatrical cuts reinforce ‘advertisement
like’ look. This plays well into the ultra-capitalist narrative of the film.
Specially jarring is the opening sequence which travels through the brain of
the narrator to a barrel of the gun which almost jolts the viewer into the techno
dystopian oeuvre that the film opens into.
Editing
and Temporal Architecture[2]. James Hawgood’s editing is pure
weaponization of the filmic grammer, with cut rates matching the tempo of the
narrator’s mental state and ending in a crescendo as everything comes crashing
down. It is impressionistic editing at its finest.
Sound
Design and score[3]. The Sound design is actually the
most sophisticated element of this masterpiece. It operates simultaneously on three levels: the diegetic (sounds
that originate in the story world), the non-diegetic (score and sound effects
that do not), and a third level that the film uniquely exploits — sounds of
uncertain diegetic status whose ambiguity is itself a function of the
Narrator's unreliable perception. Ben Klyce sound stage sets the opening for
the ‘Dust Brothers’ band who fill the soundtrack with sample based electronic
compositions. The sound is disturbing by design without overwhelming the story.
Production Design and
Visual Effects[4]. Alex McDowells the
production designer of the film and his specialty seems to be in creating
superlative and matching visual textures matching the nihilist and dilapidated
narrative of the movie. He excels especially in creating the paper street house
which subtly ages as the film progresses.
Theme – The Capitalistic Emasculation of a generation
The central
theme of the movie centers around the world where a generation of men is being
gradually emasculated via a slew of consumerist and capitalistic propaganda. It
is a world which the narrator finds himself a part of in the beginning of the
movie. In a world where men are told to
men by people who are hardly men, the narrator finds himself a drone fueled by
impulse buying, senseless hoarding and incessant advertising. His plight is
further elaborated when we realize that there is-no support system for men like
him. He is a part of men who have lost the masculine battle. A part of a
generation of men with weak or absent fathers, a generation of men without
their support systems who are forced to lean on to whoever and whatever that
they can use as a support. A generation of men without their tribe and their
imitation rituals. A generation of men who are lost and purposeless without
their careers and consumption. The following sub- themes resonate throughout
the film
The
feminization of male identity through consumerism The Fight Club proposes a
hypothesis that men in today’s urban setup have given up everything that once
made them men. They have ‘feminized’. Adopted feminine values and ways to fit
in and survive. But at what cost?
And that is the sole reason that
they find themselves struggling with severe depression and purposeless. It
shows that as a solution the society sells men consumption and not purpose. And
that consumption again fuels a need for money which further pushes men into the
capitalist meat grinder thus starting the chain again. The saddest part in all
this the realization that instead of even recognizing that men are the sustains
of this capitalist spending machine, the machine treats them like a lowly
drone. A toilet paper to be used and thrown away. A consumable good.
The
Narrator (Jack) being the sufferer of this dystopian thesis roams around lost.
HE seeks comfort in addiction, consumption and even unhealthy support groups.
Finding that these things do not fulfill him as a man, as he slips further into
insomnia and weird hallucinogenic delusions.
The film
indicates that consumption, counselling, therapy etc. are feminized solutions
to a masculine problem. The problems and solutions of men is not the same as is
advertised in a capitalistic society. Men do not need a capitalistic but a
Tribalistic solution.
From Capitalism to Tribalism
The
film shows men as inherently suppressed in a capitalistic society due to its
ethos of mindless consumption, automation and individualism. A capitalistic
society lacks purpose and values that fulfill a man and seeking solutions from
the same mechanism that creates them is a logical blunder that men are
committing today. Men need to take a radical break to discover that instead of
capitalism it is tribalism that fulfils them. To see tribalism as
intellectually inferior has been the greatest trick the capitalistic society
has pulled on men to harness them and keep them as compliant drones.
The collapse of masculine structures.
The reason for
men to have suffered capitalism is the collapse of traditional tribal
structures that gave men the ‘will to live’ . These structures like male
mentorship, hierarchy , ordeal and initiation rituals are vital to a man’s
growth and well-being. Without them men will end up becoming ‘defective women’
. A society with weak men ultimately will collapse unto itself.
The rise.
The rise of men
can only begin when they understand how the present system is emasculating
them. That realization creates the will to ‘be’ what a man should be. Possessor
and creator of his own destiny instead of an obedient groveling servant. For
that to happen men must give up the comfort of capitalism and build those
social structures and rituals that once made them men.
The female or the lack of the female in the film.
Marla, the love
interest of Jack is the only female in this film and the most charitable
compliment one can give is that she is the side show. In reality she is shown
as a distraction to Jacks pursuit of value and purpose. Her presence serves as
a foil to the subservient Jack but she wilts under the power and rawness of
Tyler. Her presence is almost always sexual and irreverent given her lines like
"Condom is the glass slipper of our generation", She almost
constantly regrets her decisions to be with Jack admitting ‘You're the worst
thing that's ever happened to me’.
For a film
with an almost surrealistic and absurd plot the underpinnings of Philosophy is not
surprising. Let us start with the superficial layers and some light word play
before we tackle the soul of the film.
Sartre, Camus and Freud.
For
instance, when the film examines the narrator’s aimless life it touches upon
the Existentialism of Sartre and Camus as The Crisis of ‘Authentic Being ‘where
existence precedes essence; and individuals must create their own meaning. Here
Narrator and Tyler do manage to create their own meaning and call it the ‘Fight
Club’ . The film rejects meaning, only looking at the process as the end, a
shoutout to Nihilism or The Rejection of Meaning. The narrator’s scene of IKEA
buying and subsequent burning down of his IKEA collection is a critique of
Consumer Capitalism where identity is shaped by materialistic pursuits rather
than pursuit of a mission. A dual personality theme aka an ode to Freuds
psychoanalyst and Absurdism or Confronting Meaninglessness. They all are part
of the film.
However the
film is not about Sartre, Freud or Camus…It is about the dark German Philosophers
in tradition of Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard and the crowning glory ..Fredric
Nietzsche.
Übermensch-The Soul of Fight Club
The Fight
Club is almost the fever dream of Nietzsche. and only ‘Almost’ because while it
manages to grab to the honesty and brutal diagnosis of Nietzsche it flinches at
the solution. In ‘Thus spoke Zarasthura’ Nietzsche explores the
following themes as evolution of humanity.
Herd
Morality-The present humanity or social status quo is based on ‘moral values’
of weak men ie. Mediocrity Equality,
Safety, Conformity. Nietzsche calls it the herd morality. He presents it as
a set of values created by weak men due to lack of strength. This morality
draws its legitimacy not from empirical nature but from ‘God’ or Divinity, who
is just a placeholder for the inability of weak men to ‘do’.
The Death
of God – When ‘God’ or the moral authority of the herd faces an
intellectual death (due to scientific or intellectual awakenings etc) the
society responds it in form of two ways, one it becomes nihilist and fatalist
while the other rises ‘over’ it to create a new set of values which do not
require any divine authority but the ‘Will of man’. One is called the ‘Last
Man’ while the other is the ‘Superman’(Übermensch)
The Last
Man -The concept of the Last man is that of a complacent man who is
obedient, subservient and above all a consumer of social lies. He accepts
morals and authority because he is a conformist. His morals are morals of the
‘weak and toothless’. He is emasculated, intellectually castrated and
perpetually seeking validation from society. He
The
Übermensch (Overman/Superman). He represents the rising of men. A
strong man who creates his own radical values without the need for any
supernatural help. He is the ideal of the society whose will to power drives
his rise from the ashes of a weak and dying society. He is the resurrection of
humanity.
The Will
to Power – Nietzsche sees Power as the driving factor in mortality of
the society and sees lack of power as a weakness and not a virtue. Power drives
the very structure of society and humanity and the ideal man to lead humanity
is a man who has the will and desire to possess and exercise power. Power, for
Nietzsche is not a means to an end but the end it itself which gives rise to a
well-developed humanity. As an ideal man his Übermensch possesses this will to
power himself without any pretensions of herd morality. He doesn’t defer to institutions,
Eternal
Recurrence. The test of weather one wants to be an Übermensch or the
Last man, is proposed as this. If you had to live your life once again, would
you be happy with it?
The Last Man meets the Übermensch
Tyler is
Nietzsche’s Übermensch. The self-created man who doesn’t care for
societal structures or morals. He recognizes the social morality for what it is
a dying weak society clutching at divinity which does not exist. He proclaims
‘Listen. Your father was your model for God. And if your father bailed out,
what does that tell you about God?[5]’ in
the same vein of ‘God is dead’. He is a builder of values afresh. HE is
the Nietzschean project at its rawest. He exhibits the will to power .The
fundamental drive in all life is not survival or pleasure, but the will to
power — the urge to grow, create, and assert oneself. Nietzsche's
foundation for ethics and
existence.
The Society of
Jack is the Herd. It has a set of values that prioritizes conformity
over vitality, weakness before power and subservience before leadership. This
herd has started dying as Nietzsche had predicted. Killed by its own ennui and
inaction.
Jack is the Last Man — Nietzsche's most damning archetype.
Comfortable. Numb. Consuming IKEA furniture as a substitute for a soul. He has
no genuine experience having traded his soul for comfort. He is the end of
modern capitalism, shallow, pathetic and hollow.
Jack being
confronted by Tyler is the eternal recurrence , forcing him to ask the question
every man dreads. Would I want to relive my life if given a chance?
The Fight Club
and Project Mayhem is the redemption of the Last Man evolving into the
Übermensch through struggle and pain , exactly how Nietzsche sees the
resurrection as. To top it all Marla is what Nietzsche visualizes women as , a
distraction.
Nietzsche Stabbed.
While the film
takes on Nietzsche in all honesty, it flinches at the end. Tyler is
shown as a distraction and not the solution to Jack. Project Mayhem fails as
Jack regains his ‘original’ self, seeing Tyler as a disease to be cured of instead of as a medicine to be taken. Perhaps
as an ironic surrender to mass culture and political correctness, David
Fincher, swerves his juggernaut to the ‘safe’ area instead of taking on the
logical end.
Its as if the
vehicle created to take on capitalism had to make amends at the doors of its
nemesis. One can almost hear the director exclaiming ‘the spirit was willing
but the flesh was weak’.
Nietzsche would
have smirked from behind his bushy moustache
[1]
Cronenweth, Jeff.
"Painting with Shadows: The Cinematography of Fight Club." American
Cinematographer, vol. 80, no. 10, 1999, pp. 32–46
[2]
Haygood, James.
"Cutting Against the Grain: Editing Fight Club." In The
Conversations: Walter Murch and the Art of Editing Film, ed. Michael Ondaatje.
Knopf, 2002.
[3]
Klyce, Ren.
"Sound Design for Fight Club." Film Sound Design Quarterly, vol. 7,
2000.
[4]
McDowell, Alex.
"Designing Decay: The Production Design of Fight Club." Art Direction
in Film, vol. 12, 2000, pp. 18–29.
[5]
Uhls, Jim. Fight Club:
The Screenplay. HarperCollins, 1999.
Comments