Let's Talk About Literature.... Anyone? by Mattie

TALK STORY

Let's Talk About Literature.... Anyone?

POSTED BY: MATTIE
UPDATED: Friday, March 10, 2006 08:40
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7646
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, March 2, 2006 3:22 PM

I was reading a thread the other day about how Firefly helped someone get through the loss of their father (was it? hum...I'm not sure). It got me to thinking.

Firefly has definetly become the "hobby horse" to which I realate everything in my life. While friends and family members may be concerene, I consider that a good thing because it's helped me to better understand the things I read and discuss in my English classes--they're packed with philosophy and the like.

As I sit in class, I think of all these ways that scenes, lines, and subtexts of Firefly and Serenity relate to the things I discuss in class. Because I don't want to be seen as insane, and because I want to be taken serriously, I don't talk about this stuff in my classes. And, because there isn't already a really good forum or thread to discuss this in already, I wanted to post here and see if anyone would be interested in talking about literature and philosophy, and how they can be related to Firefly and vice versa.

So, here it is.... Any takers? I know that it might seem hard, and possibly nonsensical to relate something like Pride and Prejudice to Firefly, but believe me, I'm sure I could come up with something, if I haven't already.

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 2, 2006 3:46 PM

RIVERGODDESS

*Sigh* You read my mind! I love thinking about how Firefly would tie into some of our discussions, including the anti-hero, idealists, etc... I think this could be an interesting thread to explore.
I also just love picking apart and episode, or bits from the movie, to find things I might have missed to elude to themes/symbols/whatever. Hmm...*pulls out notes* Yep, this might take awhile. Great topic, though!

*~*~
Summer's response to Nathan getting his very own action figure:
"I tried to pull his head off."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 2, 2006 4:00 PM

MURKYMERC

I'm game

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 2, 2006 4:12 PM

RADAR

I'll chat a bit...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 2, 2006 5:09 PM

SHINYFAB

I'm down. I've actually thought about Frankenstein in relation to Firefly themes. So yes, very excited to jump on it!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 2, 2006 6:38 PM

MATTIE

Sweet! You are my heros!

Frankenstein and Firefly? I haven't read that, but it's on my syllabus in the next few weeks. Is is okay if we postpone that discussion? Just for a minute. I promise, I'll even title a thread just for it, it'll be called "Firefly vs. Frankenstein"

But, enough with that. Has anyone read Freud's essay on the Uncanny? Here's a link to it:
http://social.chass.ncsu.edu/wyrick/debclass/uncan.htm

Check out this quote from Freud's "The Uncanny" essay:
"the most successful devices for easily creating uncanny effects is to leave the reader in uncertainty whether a particular figure in the story is a human being or an automaton and to do it in such a way that his attention is not focused directly upon his uncertainty, so that he may not be led to go into the matter and clear it up immediately."

We obviously know that River is not an automation, but how does Joss encourage us as viewers to question whether or not she is human? Are there any other characters in Firefly that this feeling--the feeling that they may not be human--applies to? Does River's point of view make the rest of the crew, indeed, even us as viewers, question what qualifies a rational way to see the world?

Freud's conclusion to all of this is that the uncanny actually becomes the canny. He uses the defenitions of "Heimlich" and "Unheimlich" (German for canny/uncanny) to show that the familiar is actually related to the unfamiliar. To me, this ties into existentialism, a spreme underlying philosiphy in the theme of the episode Objects in Space. The way we look at the world and the meaning we give the objects in it determine those uncanny feelings.

Ahhhh!!! Epiphany! I'm so glad that I have an accepted outlet for my crazy thoughts! Thanks for listening! I'd answer my questions, but I don't want this to be an essay all by itself. I think I'll wait to hear from all of you. It helps anyway because your thoughts--as everyone else's always do--help me understand even better.

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 3, 2006 6:46 AM

DAVEC5

Quote:
Originally posted by Mattie:
Wacky fun!

after listening to Joss's commentary track on Senerity, i read the book "Nausea" by Jean Paul Sartre (Joss mentions it as something that had a rather large impact on his young life) - Sartre is a champion of Existentialism - a philosophy that has always ingrigued me.
While i'm certainly no expert on the subject, i can say that the idea has some merit. Existentialism conflicts somewhat with my own philosophy of humanism in that it seems only to offer a very bleak view of man's future.

Sartre's Theory of the Universe:
"There is no ultimate meaning or purpose inherent in human life; in this sense life is 'absurd'. We are 'forlorn', 'abandoned' in the world to look after ourselves completely. Sartre insists that the only foundation for values is human freedom, and that there can be no external or objective justification for the values anyone chooses to adopt".

How this inspired Mr. Whedon i'm not sure, but i would recommend "Nausea" for anyone looking for a little insight into the existential thought process.

...and we all shine on...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 3, 2006 7:41 AM

DAVEC5

Quote:
Originally posted by Mattie:
Check out this quote from Freud's "The Uncanny" essay:
"the most successful devices for easily creating uncanny effects is to leave the reader in uncertainty whether a particular figure in the story is a human being or an automaton and to do it in such a way that his attention is not focused directly upon his uncertainty, so that he may not be led to go into the matter and clear it up immediately."
Wacky fun!

at the risk of boring you all to tears....i continue...

some of the quotes were taken from the text listed below:

Outside of Sartre's view that life is an "unhappy consciousness," a "useless passion," much of what Sartre asserts makes sense and counters the dangerous notions of Freud and his ilk. For instance, Sartre emphatically rejects the idea advanced by Freud that certain mental events have unconscious causes. Emotions, he says, are not outside the control of our wills, if one is sad it is because one chooses to be sad; we are responsible for our emotions; we are, ultimately, responsible for our own behaviour. According to Sartre, man is free and being conscious of this fact, can bring on pain, or anguish; and typically we try to avoid the consciousness of our own freedom.

"The crucial concept in his diagnosis is that of self-deception or 'bad faith' (mauvaise foi). Bad faith is the attempt to escape anguish by pretending to ourselves that we are not free. We try to convince ourselves that our attitudes and actions are determined by our character, our situation, our role in life, or anything other than ourselves. Sartre gives two famous examples of bad faith. He pictures a girl sitting with a man who she knows very well would like to seduce her. But when he takes her hand, she tries to avoid the painful necessity of a decision to accept or reject him, by pretending not to notice, leaving her hand in his as if she were not aware of it. She pretends to herself that she is a passive object, a thing, rather than what she really is, a conscious being who is free. The second illustration of the cafe waiter who is doing his job just a little too keenly; he is obviously 'acting the part'. If there is bad faith here, it is that he is trying to identify himself completely with the role of waiter, to pretend that this particular role determines his every action and attitude. Whereas the truth is that he has chosen to take on the job, and is free to give it up at any time. He is not essentially a waiter, for no man is essentially anything."1

thanks Mattie for the opportunity for the rant... it is a rather large can of worms....but you did pop the top...

1 See Leslie Stevenson's book, Seven Theories of Human Nature (1974) (Oxford University Press, 2nd Ed., 1987); Stevenson was a reader in logic and Metaphysics at the University of St. Andrews, Scotland.

...and we all shine on...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 3, 2006 8:27 AM

WEREALLJUSTFLOATING

Quote:
But, enough with that. Has anyone read Freud's essay on the Uncanny? Here's a link to it:
http://social.chass.ncsu.edu/wyrick/debclass/uncan.htm

Check out this quote from Freud's "The Uncanny" essay:
"the most successful devices for easily creating uncanny effects is to leave the reader in uncertainty whether a particular figure in the story is a human being or an automaton and to do it in such a way that his attention is not focused directly upon his uncertainty, so that he may not be led to go into the matter and clear it up immediately."

I've read this essay, I did a class in college about Horror and SciFi films that were adapted from literature, among them Dracula, Frankenstein, Blade Runner - it was great!

I had to write an essay at the end and I chose to tie it in with that Freud essay and focus it on the use of vampires in fiction as a metaphor for the dark side of human nature.(that was the gist of it I think, it was a few years ago and I haven't reread it or anything) But I loved being able to tie all these various stories together using the idea of the uncanny. I even managed to throw in a Buffy reference somewhere!

As far as I remember I think I focused on Freud's idea of "the return of the repressed"- which you could definitley point out as a major theme in the BDM. River, being psychic, gleams the truth of what happened to the people of Miranda, and is subsequently tormented by the knowledge until she is triggered and finally leads Mal and co. to the planet to uncover the horror that lies there. Only then can she function somewhat normally. Even within the story of the Pax and the Reavers themselves you can find the same theme: namely that the Alliance, in trying to eliminate natural human aggression, merely stifle it, pushing it down in a sense, only for it to resurface in the horrific form of the Reavers.

BTW I don't think there's any coincidence in the the parallel between River's name and that of the Reavers - that Joss is a smart one afterall!

I could go on but I'd be typing all day. This discussion is fun though.

P.S I also really like the existentialist themes of the show (as mentioned above)- Objects In Space being one of the best episodes of any of Joss' episodes from his 3 shows IMO.

We're still flying.

That's not much.

It's enough.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 3, 2006 8:45 AM

MATTIE

And I take the dive into the can. Ohhh, isn't this fun?!

I actually haven't read Nausea, but I think I will, now. I read the book Finding Serenity and one of the essays in it discusses Sartre and his effect on Joss, so I kinda understand the whole "you assign things their own meaning thing". But, I had no idea that Sartre actually opposed Freud, but here we are... I swear, I learn something new every day! It makes sense, though, that Sartre would find reason to reject Freud. The example you provided really helped me to understand that.

Maybe I was making a HUGE logical leap when I connected Freud to existentialism. Maybe a clearer connection is in order?

If we can think something, then that makes that something conceivable--possible, if you will. The idea that our thoughts determine what is real relates to that idea that if your mind can think it, and can assign it, then that's what constitutes your vision of the world. You're certainly left with the ability to doubt, and that's what makes life so interesting.

I know now that Sartre, an excellent Existentialist, rejected Freud, but I think that there's a connection between them on a different level. Do I make sense, or do you totally reject my logic?

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 3, 2006 9:30 AM

DAVEC5

Quote:
Originally posted by Mattie:
Do I make sense, or do you totally reject my logic?

Wacky fun!

I certainly don't reject your logic.
The writings of Sartre are interesting works, but i don't subscribe to all of his philosophy except maybe on a really down day...like i tried to point out, existentialism can leave you in a dark and lonely place. And, while deep down, on a basic level, i may fully believe in the "useless passion" of human life, i must also believe that the inherent nature of mankind is to make our existance in this life better and more meaningful, regardless of the seemingly malevolent forces that seem to be amassing against rational and independent thought.

Back to the series - i do see some of Sartre's influence on the character of Mal. His fierce independence and realization that ultimately we are each responsible for our own actions correlates with Sartre's insistance that the only foundation for values is human freedom.

...and we all shine on...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 3, 2006 5:13 PM

MATTIE

Quote:
Originally posted by davec5:
...And, while deep down, on a basic level, i may fully believe in the "useless passion" of human life, i must also believe that the inherent nature of mankind is to make our existance in this life better and more meaningful, regardless of the seemingly malevolent forces that seem to be amassing against rational and independent thought.

Fantastic! I like your thinking. It definetly rings of Humanism. I'm taking some Renaissance Art History classes this semester, and that idea of taking the past, mingling it with the present, and creating something new, exiting, and especially important for future generations is, as I'm sure you can understand, a HUGE part of that. I think of Michelangelo and his sculpture The David. He was a genius. He mixed the feel of the ancient with the gist of the international style and created something that so many people look back on today.

It is interesting to me to think that Joss did not decide to depict an idealized future. It's paradoxical in that, by creating a world that so closely resembles our own, we are able to find idealistic traits in it--the fact that we call the main characters our Big Damn Heroes.

I digress, though.

Quote:
...i do see some of Sartre's influence on the character of Mal. His fierce independence and realization that ultimately we are each responsible for our own actions correlates with Sartre's insistance that the only foundation for values is human freedom.

I like this idea. I think I'll support it by pointing out a scene in "Out of Gas". Mal has just bought the ship and is showing it off to Zoe. He tells her that the ship is freedom. You see the dreamy look that comes across both of their faces. In the Serenity they escape from the cage that the Alliance has put around the Universe. So much of what Mal values is based on that person's or object's relation to Serenity. The things which values certainly seem to come from what he sees as his source of freedom.

I just had another thought, but I lost it! Oh, well. And this post is getting long, anyway.

Oh, oh, oh. The name of the ship and it's relation to the Battle of Serenity Valley... Why does Mal choose to name his haven after a place and time that represents when he lost everything? Hum...

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 3, 2006 5:22 PM

MATTIE

Quote:
Originally posted by werealljustfloating:
I had to write an essay at the end and I chose to tie it in with that Freud essay and focus it on the use of vampires in fiction as a metaphor for the dark side of human nature.(that was the gist of it I think, it was a few years ago and I haven't reread it or anything) But I loved being able to tie all these various stories together using the idea of the uncanny. I even managed to throw in a Buffy reference somewhere!

Isn't it a fantastic feeling when you can relate something that seems so dry as Freud to something you're so passionate about? It makes the subject come to life, and it has the tendency to make me dig deeper and look for more connections.

Quote:

As far as I remember I think I focused on Freud's idea of "the return of the repressed"- which you could definitley point out as a major theme in the BDM. River, being psychic, gleams the truth of what happened to the people of Miranda, and is subsequently tormented by the knowledge until she is triggered and finally leads Mal and co. to the planet to uncover the horror that lies there. Only then can she function somewhat normally. Even within the story of the Pax and the Reavers themselves you can find the same theme: namely that the Alliance, in trying to eliminate natural human aggression, merely stifle it, pushing it down in a sense, only for it to resurface in the horrific form of the Reavers.

BTW I don't think there's any coincidence in the the parallel between River's name and that of the Reavers - that Joss is a smart one afterall!

"Only then can she function somewhat normally". Heh, psychoanalasys doesn't solve all of the problems, does it? I don't think anyone or anything can. I like your connection! Can I just splurge for a second and say that I talked with one of my professors today. In her office she's got a quilt that highlights all of the major English theorists or theories. One of the blocks is titled "Buffyism" and on it is a pic of Sarah Michelle Gellar! So TOTALLY shiny! I'll be so embarassed if she reads this thread--ahh! But it was just SO cool.

Back to the discussion.

Thanks WAJF!

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 4, 2006 7:33 AM

DAVEC5

Quote:
Originally posted by Mattie:
Quote:
The name of the ship and it's relation to the Battle of Serenity Valley... Why does Mal choose to name his haven after a place and time that represents when he lost everything? Hum...
Wacky fun!

sorry for the delay...i actually do have a job....and am sometimes required to do actual work!....kwong-juh duh

that's a good question....i'm reminded of Mal's line, 'we may have been on the losing side, not sure it was the wrong side...' i think the battle of Serenity Valley plays a large role in the development of Mal's character. After losing the battle, Mal seems determined to win the war (at least HIS war), & naming his boat Serenity is a constant reminder of this ideology, meaning, the last battle may have been lost, but it will never be over. The name is a testament to Mal's independent nature as well as his stubborn reluctance to submit to authority. A common thread in stories that appeal to the champions of the underdog, whether it be a western or science fiction.

Thanks, Mattie for starting this thread. Keep it going....i will be back soon....

...and we all shine on...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 4, 2006 8:13 AM

CYBERSNARK

As Davec5 says, existentialism does have a certain appeal, it can lead to an unpleasant place. I'm not really one for sugarcoating, of course, but still, I just feel that there's something being left out.

I can't bring myself to hold to either pure materialism or pure idealism. Independently, I've developed a growing belief that the two realms are the same (there are four states of matter, not three: solid, liquid, gas, and plasma. If matter can move between the first three [by freezing, melting, evaporating, condensing, and sublimating], then it logically follows that the fourth state can be reached as well. What is an idea, in a materialist sense, but electrical impulses bouncing between neurons? If matter and energy are somehow linked, doesn't it follow that ideas and thoughts can influence this "physical" world?).

My particular form of "materialism," then, cannot help but include the "non-physical" as we would understand it: forces and influences (and perhaps even consciousnesses) that have no physical body, but can be perceived and function on the physical level. Inevitably, the opposite also becomes possible: physical beings and substances that can function on other levels of being (either akashic, etherial, or astral).

(The old legends of iron being deadly to faerie, and of silver to weres, suddenly become understandable, if not plausible. Of course, one must always ask how these "folktales" originated. Someone, somewhere must have had reason to believe there was something to them.)

This is another conclusion: all lies are true. Lies do not tell themselves, but are told for a reason. There are infinite possible lies, so one must wonder why some are told and retold while others are not. Is there not a truth to a consistent lie that the "real" world (assuming, of course, the existentialist perspective that life/reality is simply random chaos which simply "happens") lacks?

Can lies not become self-fulfilling prophecies, or create a "reality" (as with the Alliance's Miranda secret) distinct from history?

(Why do so many ancient cultures describe refugees from a sunken continent if it could never have existed? Why do so many report seeing lights in the sky when they aren't allowed to exist? Why is there evidence of a world-spanning serpent-worshipping religion when such a thing would not have been possible? Are we to belive that these "lies" simply appeared one day and propagate themselves through random chance and quirks of perception?)

Quote:
Originally posted by davec5:
Outside of Sartre's view that life is an "unhappy consciousness," a "useless passion," much of what Sartre asserts makes sense and counters the dangerous notions of Freud and his ilk. For instance, Sartre emphatically rejects the idea advanced by Freud that certain mental events have unconscious causes. Emotions, he says, are not outside the control of our wills, if one is sad it is because one chooses to be sad; we are responsible for our emotions;

As much as I'm a fan of Sartre, this is where he and I part ways.

I can see his point, that human will can affect emotion, but I'm not sure I agree. What, then, is the purpose of emotion?

Perhaps it's a matter of semantics; drawing a distinction between "emotion" (which is simply a brain's reaction to events) and "passion" (which becomes a part of oneself). This then would be the difference between sadness and the despair that leads one to suicide, or anger and the rage that leads to wanting to kill someone slowly, or fear and crippling phobia, or mere physical attraction and the love that holds people together even beyond any rationality or reproductive imperative.

I am, of course, a romantic, and the reduction of Love to a set of biological imperatives just doesn't seem practical or satisfying. Homosexuality is an obvious but undeniable problem (why love someone you can't breed with?), as is the idea of loving a particular individual (like falling in love with one identical twin, but not the other).

I don't deny that the biological influence is there (felt it often enough to know --also felt other things not remotely sexual, but equally undeniable), but there seem to be too many anomalies that can't be explained away as individual quirk or genetic defect.

Quote:
Originally posted by davec5:
The writings of Sartre are interesting works, but i don't subscribe to all of his philosophy except maybe on a really down day...like i tried to point out, existentialism can leave you in a dark and lonely place. And, while deep down, on a basic level, i may fully believe in the "useless passion" of human life, i must also believe that the inherent nature of mankind is to make our existance in this life better and more meaningful,

I agree. This is why Nemesis is my favourite Trek movie (to hell with the critics, I form my own opinions); it addresses this kind of philosophical issue.

At play is the argument between whether we are simply products of our environment (as Shinzon argues) or whether we have the capacity to affect individual change (as Picard asserts). On one hand, Shinzon and Picard are the same, except that one was raised in a world where virtues of compassion and integrity were rewarded, while the other was born as a pawn, then used as a slave, then thrown into combat as cannon fodder (before clawing his way into power through treachery, guile, and brutality). Data sums it up beautifully WRT his own twin: "I seek to improve myself. The B4 does not." Picard argues that Shinzon still has the ability to be a better person, to improve himself, yet Shinzon seems to insist on his doom, rushing toward his pre-determined fate, inevitably set in motion as soon as he seized power (if not before).

I love that the movie never resolves the issue, and even seems to suggest an existential nihilism, with Shinzon unredeemed, and going to his grave as though fated. At the same time, the B4 seems forever unable to improve itself, simply as a result of what it is.

Quote:
Originally posted by Mattie:
Oh, oh, oh. The name of the ship and it's relation to the Battle of Serenity Valley... Why does Mal choose to name his haven after a place and time that represents when he lost everything? Hum...

Because that was his cage (to borrow your own imagery) --the personal manifestation of Alliance domination.

Yet Mal remained unbowed. He took the cage that the Alliance put around him, and he incarnated it in that ship, made it a symbol of his freedom, and in so doing made it into something that was not a cage.

Perhaps, another "Mal" would have bought the ship, named it, then deliberately scuttled it --symbolically destroying the cage, but Mal did not. Instead, he creates triumph from his defeat. His cage becomes his armour, his home.

He could choose to leave it (whether he knows this consciously or not, he does have the will to tear himself away), but he does not. The mere existence of that choice negates the entire cage (it can't be a prison if you're there by choice).

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 4, 2006 10:05 AM

BITTERBIERCE

Well I do know one thing- those Reaver reading parties make you read John Updike novels. Reavers truly are bastards.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 4, 2006 10:12 AM

BITTERBIERCE

"I can't bring myself to hold to either pure materialism or pure idealism"

Yeah yeah. Every frickin' body is trying to reproduce Kant's trans-ident without, you know, actually using Kant. You sound like every student I've ever had.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 5, 2006 6:24 AM

WEREALLJUSTFLOATING

Quote:
Originally posted by Mattie:
Heh, psychoanalasys doesn't solve all of the problems, does it? I don't think anyone or anything can.

Not at all, I merely meant that now that truth that was burning up her brain (as Mal put it in the BDM) won't haunt her in the same way - it's made it's way to the surface. As a result of what the Alliance did to her, I see River, essentially, as a broken person. She'll never be fully recovered from all the horrors they inflicted on her, but now that she's found a home with Simon and the crew of Serenity, she has a chance to heal. I don't think psychoanalysis will be the thing to cure her, but something much more valuable - LOVE!!!

However there's probably plenty of other dangerous secrets locked inside her mind that even she's not conscious of. If we get a sequel I'm sure we'll find out. I think Blue Sun have a vested interest in her that I'd love to see played out in Serenity 2.

RE: Buffy - easliy my favourite show of all time!! It's the reason I discovered Firefly -and I can't overstate it's influence on me. Your professor knows her stuff!

On another note, have any of you read The Killer Angels, the novel that inspired Joss to create Firefly? It's by Michael Shaara, and it won the Pultzer in 1975. I read it out of curiosity, not expecting to enjoy it much as I'm not a fan of military novels. But it was much better than I hoped!! I should have known since it inspired Joss!

It's set in the American Civil War, specifically the Battle of Gettysburg. It only covers about three days, but it manages to draw a really detailed picture of what life must have been like for the men who fought on both sides. There's a lot of different characters to remember but they're all fascinating and Shaara always focuses on their personal experience of war, rather than making sweeping romantic statements about the glory or tragedy of warfare. It's very human and touching and more than once reminded me of Firefly. Reading it made me understand Mal and Zoe's experiences in the war a little better. I recommend it to any Browncoat who enjoys reading.

We're still flying.

That's not much.

It's enough.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 5, 2006 5:44 PM

MATTIE

Quote:
Originally posted by davec5:
sorry for the delay...i actually do have a job....and am sometimes required to do actual work!....kwong-juh duh

Alas! So do I! Gar! S'okay though, I understand.

Quote:

I'm reminded of Mal's line... I think the battle of Serenity Valley plays a large role in the development of Mal's character... A common thread in stories that appeal to the champions of the underdog, whether it be a western or science fiction.

I mentioned paradox earlier, but I'm gonna bring it up again. I found this definition on OED.com.:

Paradox: c. Logic. More fully logical paradox. An argument, based on (apparently) acceptable premisses and using (apparently) valid reasoning, which leads to a conclusion that is against sense, logically unacceptable, or self-contradictory; the conclusion of such an argument. Freq. with a descriptive or eponymous name.

I didn't know what eponymous meant, so here's what I found:

Eponymous: That gives (his) name to anything; said esp. of the mythical personages from whose names the names of places or peoples are reputed to be derived.

Something that does not make sense, and yet it is accepted. Cool.

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 5, 2006 6:04 PM

MATTIE

I'm working on a response to your response, but I need a little more time. I like this, but I think it requres some thought in order to respond as well as you did.

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 9:21 AM

DAVEC5

ok...just thought i'd check on the discussion...i am late to the party it appears....

Random authors, random books....things that don't really mean much in the Browncoat Verse, but once again, curiosity gets the best of me.

Speaking of existentialist writing....has anyone read the works of Jim Thompson...? This is dark and spooky stuff, but i am drawn to it for some reason. The man really saw into the life of the down-trodden and those on the extreme fringe of what some call this civilized society we live in. I mean, don't expect walt disney, fairy tale, sweetness and light with Thompson, but if you feel like getting down and dirty, holed up in a dingy hotel room with a gun and a bottle as your best friends, go read Thompson....The Killer Within captures a lot of Thompson's best (if you can call it 'best').

also, a movie based on a Thompson pulp, The Grifters, was a very underrated film...but so much better than a lot of the stuff that passes for entertainment these days...

for what it's worth....

...and we all shine on...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 10:03 AM

CHRONICTHEHEDGEHOG

Quote:
Originally posted by davec5:
Quote:
Originally posted by Mattie:
Wacky fun!

after listening to Joss's commentary track on Senerity, i read the book "Nausea" by Jean Paul Sartre (Joss mentions it as something that had a rather large impact on his young life) - Sartre is a champion of Existentialism - a philosophy that has always ingrigued me.
While i'm certainly no expert on the subject, i can say that the idea has some merit. Existentialism conflicts somewhat with my own philosophy of humanism in that it seems only to offer a very bleak view of man's future.

Sartre's Theory of the Universe:
"There is no ultimate meaning or purpose inherent in human life; in this sense life is 'absurd'. We are 'forlorn', 'abandoned' in the world to look after ourselves completely. Sartre insists that the only foundation for values is human freedom, and that there can be no external or objective justification for the values anyone chooses to adopt".

How this inspired Mr. Whedon i'm not sure, but i would recommend "Nausea" for anyone looking for a little insight into the existential thought process.

...and we all shine on...

I can't speak for why Joss finds this uplifting, but personally I find it hugely inspiring, and makes me incredibly proud of what humanity has accomplished. If there is no grand plan, no higher being pointing out what is right and wrong, no overarching reason to try to be a good person whatsoever, then the fact that there are so many good people out there is amazing, because so often we are given the opportunity to do self-serving things without punishment and we don't because we believe that doing something bad is wrong based entirely on our own moral beliefs.

Joss makes a big deal of the line in Angel where he says 'if nothing we do matter, then all that matters is what we do' which I find incredibly uplifting. I'm not being judged by a higher power, I'm not going to be rewarded for the good I do, yet I still do it, because it's right.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 12:21 PM

MATTIE

Ahh, I'm just glad that even though I'm not here all the time--I can't even check this on a daily basis--this thread is still alive. I won't let it be archived, I just won't!

Hah, now really. I've got a lot of good information for a respnse to that one response, but all I need is just one more hour in the day to put it all together and actually DO it.

As for more existentialism... hum... well, we'll jsut have to see about that. I'm already begging for ONE more hour in the day.

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 7, 2006 1:10 PM

DAVEC5

Quote:
Originally posted by chronicthehedgehog:
.......I can't speak for why Joss finds this uplifting, but personally I find it hugely inspiring, and makes me incredibly proud of what humanity has accomplished......
......Joss makes a big deal of the line in Angel where he says 'if nothing we do matter, then all that matters is what we do' ......

you make a good point....and I am inclined to agree with you about the fact that humanity, left to to determine its own destiny, can accomplish remarkable things...the good of mankind is predicated upon the responsible actions of each of us. That is to say that if there is an overall agreement that things like war, hunger, oppression, inequity, etc., only bring harm to all inhabitants of this planet, then each of us should work to ensure that these conditions are not allowed to exist.

Unfortunately, the world we live in has deep roots in the belief of an intangable, supernatural deity. That belief seperates people into groups of like minded individuals who can only castigate those who don't share their views, thus bringing about mistrust and even hatred of fellow human beings.
Until mankind, as a whole, can come to terms with who we are and what our place is in this world, without relying on a mystical guideline that may or may not (not) be there, i can only see more of the same bad news that i see each and every day.

i've probably gone on too long here, and i may not be making many friends...but you can take it for what it's worth, that's the beauty of free thinking...accept, deny...or just consider any and all information, make your own decisions and live accordingly.

i'm not trying to offend anyone...just trying to understand my place in the 'verse'.... and if my place is as just an insignificant bug on the belly of Buddha...i aim to be the best bug i can be.

...and we all shine on...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 8, 2006 10:45 AM

SAVEWASH

Now I am learning about scary.

Quote:
Originally posted by davec5:
Unfortunately, the world we live in has deep roots in the belief of an intangable, supernatural diety. That belief seperates people into groups of like minded individuals who can only castigate those who don't share their views, thus bringing about mistrust and even hatred of fellow human beings.
Until mankind, as a whole, can come to terms with who we are and what our place is in this world, without relying on a mystical guideline that may or may not (not) be there, i can only see more of the same bad news that i see each and every day.

I agree with what you say, Davec5, but I'd like to add something. As frustrated as I get by people who use religious beliefs as an excuse to treat others shamefully, I have to say that I don't think this is the only cause for humanity's problems; it's more of a symptom. From what I can tell, a large part of humanity seems to always look for what is different about others, rather than what is the same or similar, whether it's religious beliefs, race, sexual orientation, hair color, favorite music, etc. This is where the problems begin.

They end when people get over it, which may or may not happen.

"We need to keep our heads so we can ... keep our heads."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 9, 2006 12:41 PM

MATTIE

Yesss! I finally have time to write a response to this thought provoking post. I've been thinking about this for DAYS, and the fantastic part is that my theory class is actually discussing materialism and idealism. I have had something to relate those class discussions to for the last week.

So, down to business.

Quote:
I can't bring myself to hold to either pure materialism or pure idealism. Independently, I've developed a growing belief that the two realms are the same

I hate to be a middler, too, but I agree that I cannot "hold to pure materialsim or pure idealism". As to the idea that they're the same, I'd disagree, but say that one cannot exist without the other. As Louis Althuser put it: "Ideology has a material existence." In order for a ruling class (for this discussion sake, the Alliance) to successufully integrate their ideals into a society, they must manipulate the tools around them (the matter) to portray their ideals and convice others that they should hold to those ideals as well. Althuser suggests that, in order for a person to escape the bubble of ideals the ruling class has put around them, they have to completely break out of that bubble and look at it retrospectively. What would encourage this other than an outside force--or material? Hum...

Quote:
Is there not a truth to a consistent lie that the "real" world... lacks?

Absolutely! I think this is the question that constituted Marx's rejection of idealism. A lie can be the truth that comes from outside the ideological sphere. A good example of this would be something like Bugs Bunny in King Arthur's court. Bugs comes from another world where people are free to say and do as they please, and it would be shocking to anyone--let alone a cartoon rabbit--to see someone give up their free will in order to live. (An example of this from Firefly might be the scene where Mal tells YoSaffBridge that she should fight back if anyone tries to kill her.)

Quote:
I can see [Sartre's] point, that human will can affect emotion, but I'm not sure I agree. What, then, is the purpose of emotion?

I'm not quite sure if you could assign a purpose to emotions. I agree with Sartre in part when he says that "we are responsible for our emotions", because I think that we are responsible for some of them. It's that whole idea that you can choose how you feel. But when it comes to something as complex as love, or even (non-ignorant)apathy, who's to say that you are responsible. Some people can't help it if they're homosexual. Some people can't help but fall in love with someone they thought they hated. Some people can't help but not care at all--though this we may scorn more than the others. I agree, it "just doesn't seem practical or satisfying."

Quote:
At play is the argument between whether we are simply products of our environment...or whether we have the capacity to affect individual change...

How interesting is this? There are certain ideals that I hold to as an American that other people from another country would reject as stupid and trivial. However, I know that I have the capacity to change. As an American, I can study, visit, and even live in other countires. I can assimilate their ways of life into my own, and I can ultimatley pick and choose what I want to belive, how I want to live, and who I want to see myself as.
I also hold to the idea that I can influence others around me.

Now, as for my question: Why does Mal choose to name his haven after a place and time that represents when he lost everything?

The Battle of Serenity Valley was when Mal was forced out of his idealistic bubble and forced to reevaluate those ideals. Serenity Valley proved to him that he was an individual with influence--he commanded 2000 men--and that maybe his influence then wasn't guided by the right ideals. The Serenity not only represents that time in his life, but it is a symbol of his newly formed ideals, his newly acquired freedom.

Quote:
{Mal} took the cage that the Alliance put around him, and he incarnated it in that ship, made it a symbol of his freedom, and in so doing made it into something that was not a cage.

Wow, I hope my post comes close to the one Cybersnark posted. Theirs was awesome, and extremely thought provoking--especially in class. I think I could go on forever, but I'm out of time.

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 10, 2006 8:40 AM

MATTIE

Just so everyone knows, I'd like to start a new thread. I think this time I'll try something a little more specific. Let's try Samuel Taylor Coleridge's poem titled "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner". Here's a link to it:
http://www.online-literature.com/coleridge/646/

I chose this because it's mentioned in the BDM. Yay! I'll start the new thread sometime next week--it's spring break and I'll be out of town. In the meantime, if anyone's interested, you should check out this poem. I know not many people are into that kind of thing, but since this is directly linked to FF and Serenity, I thought it'd be fun.

--Mattie

Wacky fun!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE