Fun Experiment

On this political compass, where do we see Project Mayhem?

The x-axis is left/right leaning regarding distribution of wealth/production means (should it be collectively or individually owned?), whereas the y-axis is social permissiveness (should the people decide what goes, or should a state or ruler decide?).

Marxism and the Individual in Fight Club

The basic premise of Fight Club seems pretty blatant: capitalism, consumerism, the "condo life," is destroying the human experience. Tyler Durden awakens the (importantly unnamed) narrator from his insomnia and his boring lifestyle and argues against the conformity and dullness of the corporate, white-collar life. The first time I watched this movie years ago, I was attracted mostly to the concept of individuality in an increasingly corporate world, which this movie also addresses (e.g. Microsoft galaxy and Planet Starbucks). Yet after this time, I'm struggling with the concept of individuality in relation to the movie's socialist and Marxist themes. It's like the movie simultaneously encourages and undermines individuality.

Part of it has to do with the movie's handling of capitalist structures. The "single serving" everything that the narrator always talks about when traveling everywhere shows the material and temporary side to the life that we lead, devaluing human relationships and individual fulfillment in favor of business trips and white shirts. Ikea catalogs, the automated voice on the telephone, and the lack of interest in the surrounding world (emphasized by the insomnia: "everything is a copy of a copy of a copy") emphasize the bore of the corporate world. So I thought that the path that the movie would take me would be the one about following your heart, not succumbing to the dull material life, and so on.

But Tyler Durden's ideals almost entirely contradict the promotion of the individual as well; his statements are when I realize that while Marxist theories and individualism aren't entirely mutually exclusive, if the film were to pursue its Marxist themes, then individualism would have to step aside for a little bit. The anonymity of the men in the fight club, along with his "you-are-not-special" speeches emphasize is lack of interest in the value of the individual. It's actually all about leveling the playing field and destroying the capitalistic machines.

-Carrie

Mixed Dregs of Queerness

In Jacks post on Fight Club, he does a queer reading of the film. Jack points out all the days the narrator and Tyler resemble a couple. They live together. The narrator fixes Tyler's tie, sits with Tyler as Tyler bathes, and becomes jealous of Marla and the beautiful blonde recruit. The narrator is easier to read as a queer character. The narrator additionally seems to love all male spaces. He is bothered by Marla's presence in his prostate cancer group and he tells her that fight club is "men only."
Here's a fun video of the pair as a couple: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iALDVdbkKjM

Unfortunately, Tyler is harder to read as queer character. Yes, he dresses flamboyantly. He looks like many guys and gals ideal masc hunk of man. But his actions seem terribly straight. He's attracted to Marla right off the bat and seems surprised that the narrator isn't as well. Tyler expects the narrator to be straight. Here's a video that explores a reading that Tyler is what the narrator wishes he was, a straight man.
https://m.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DIaRT4S0AWBM&h=BAQFOglJj&s=1

Self-Improvement vs. Self-Destruction

The line that I found the most interesting in Fight Club was Brad Pitt's line, "Self-improvement is masturbation. Self-destruction..." implying that self-destruction is akin to sex.

This fascination and obsession with self-destruction that pervades throughout the movie is really telling of various characters. Considering that Tyler (as embodied by Brad Pitt) is just a figment of the narrator's imagination, the self-destruction ultimately becomes his own. One thing that puzzled me about Tyler's character throughout the film (before we found out who he really was) was that he talks about being nameless and being nothing, and sacrificing one's identity for a higher purpose. And yet he turned himself into practically a God, with a Christ-like following. He glamorized himself very intensely, and really seemed to be enjoying the level of worship he was getting from his disciples. But when we realize that Brad Pitt is actually just a part of Edward Norton's character, it takes on an entirely new meaning.No longer concerned with glamour, Tyler hides his own powerful identity from himself, making his conscious side feel inferior to his more charismatic self. The fact that he hides himself from his consciousness is an embodiment of the "zero" identity he preaches his followers must take on.

Tyler Durden and Walmart

Even though Tyler is supposed to represent everything that Jack isn't, from the moment Tyler begins building up an army you begin to see references to the corporatism that he claims to hate so much. Not only is Tyler/Jack constantly called "sir" (pretty clearly opposing Tyler's original assertion that there is no leader to fight club), but at some point Jack returns to the house to find a bunch of the army-member-people answering phones, with labelled filing folders stuck to the wall. Kind of looks like Jack's old office building to me. The most striking example of this was when Jack was trying to find Tyler, and he goes into the laundromat and the man he asks there responds with "I'm not supposed to speak any such information to you, nor would I even if I had said information you want at this juncture be able (or something like that he's kind of mumbling)". Regardless, it sounds a) incredibly rehearsed and b) exactly like every customer service phone person at every company ever. Also he gets a lot of really special treatment from the general public. And free food.

The way that I interpreted this, in the context of the ideological state apparatuses, is in its affect on Jake/Tyler. While he is clearly trying to seize state power and control of repressive state apparatuses through project Mayhem, it is apparent that the ideological state apparatuses put in place by the corporate bourgeois (that of organization, hierarchy, and the like) have still managed to get to Tyler and he seems to act along those principles. Thus the true "hunter-gatherer" society he envisions will never be possible as long as this ideology is so firmly engrained in even the most subversive of characters.

"His name is Robert Paulson"

Tyler Durden's Project Mayhem serves as a manifestation of society's anxiety toward its own increasing "feminization" via consumerism and self-obsession. Tyler Durden's seeks to restore masculinity to society with his army of identity-less, destructive male fighters. The only man who is given a name by Tyler's army at the end of the movie is Robert Paulson, undoubtably the most effeminate man of the group. A survivor of testicular cancer, Paulson lost his testicles and grew what the narrator refers to as "bitch tits" resulting from elevated levels of estrogen. It is also revealed that Paulson lost his wife and his family. He serves as the ultimate representation in fight club of what Durden's force fears most: dehumanization and the loss of masculinity resulting from the failures of postmodern developments. When Paulson dies tragically in a Project Mayhem venture, he is transformed into an iconic symbol of the movement. The men begin chanting "his name is Robert Paulson," and Paulson's name is carried across the country to the farthest ends of the Mayhem force. Paulson’s presence in the film is essential to the portrayal of male-based panic of fleeting masculinity. He also serves to illuminate an essential aspect of project mayhem: anonymity. In life, the individual members of the force are dehumanized; they are meant only to serve and strive toward a common goal against the ultimate enemy. 

Bob also serves as a key point of disagreement between the narrator and Tyler. Whereas Tyler would have taken Paulson's death as an anonymous sacrifice toward the greater good, the narrator insists that Robert Paulson be recognized in death. At this point, the narrator's inevitable internal/external conflict with Tyler becomes apparent.

-Kayla

Not a Hypocrite. Also, Don’t Forget about Edward Norton.

First of all, oh my gosh, Edward Norton. Don’t need to see him shirtless to be physically attracted to this guy (which is funny, because he’s naked in a lot of other movies).

Second of all, I don’t know if Tyler Durden is an actual hypocrite. He gets his physique from fighting and possibly working out on the side, but I think what’s important is not how he gets his physique or what his physique looks like, but why. And this can be proven using what Tyler said himself to the Narrator. He points out how men in society want the Calvin Klein look because that’s what society tells them looks good; they are controlled and imprisoned by society’s standards. Tyler, on the other hand, never even comments on his own physique, nor does he seem to notice it. If he did acknowledge his physique, he would probably only point out that his body is a byproduct of what he has done. This byproduct idea applies to the uglier aspects of his body, as well. The scars on his body, as well as the painful process that accompanies earning such scars, are merely a means to an end. The end is to overcome; to overcome pain, materialism, consumerism. Do all this, and you are truly freed. Thus, Tyler is able to confront the pain head-on, and forces the Narrator to do so, too, when he burns him, because the point of all that pain is to get over it.

Get over it, says Angel Face 

-Ly

Daddy Issues in Fight Club

If Tyler Durden had a strong father figure would fight club still exist?

                      

Here are a few quotes that I thought really showed how significant the lack of a father figure is to Jack/Tyler:

Tyler Durden: I'd fight my dad.
Narrator: I don't know my dad. I mean, I know him, but... he left when I was like six years old. Married this other woman, had some other kids. He like did this every six years, he goes to a new city and starts a new family.

Tyler Durden: Shut up! Our fathers were our models for God. If our fathers bailed, what does that tell you about God?

It kind of makes sense, the idea that Tyler suffers from daddy issues. He is trying to find meaning in the world. If his father left him, inevitably he believes God has left him as well. The schizophrenia and existential crisis are both cries for help. And in Jack’s case, having a split personality allows him to escape these suppressors. Also, I took note of the fact that the one woman that appears in the film, Marla, is portrayed as a weak bottom feeder. She describes herself in the third person as "…infectious human waste…confused and afraid to commit to the wrong thing so she won't commit to anything.” Maybe weak parental figures are more so the issue at hand?

Jack Moore suffers from daddy issues, insomnia, schizophrenia, and an existential crisis. He suffers from a calamity of mental issues, and should probably be admitted into a psyche ward at his earliest convenience. However, I think his daddy issues are the biggest contributor to Jack’s problems.

Let's Play A Game - Google it

Last Thursday in class, a professor of mine suggested that googling a word then looking at the suggested searches reflects something important/interesting upon society. So in class, we did, and it prompted interesting discussion. I thought it would be fun to do the same for Fight Club, and the results were interesting. Many of the results were expected; "fight club" prompted "quotes," "full movie," and "rules." I googled the main actors and David Fincher, but only googling Brad Pitt prompted Fight Club:

Why is it that only Pitt's name prompts Fight Club? Why is Fight Club the only movie prompted of all his many films? Following the prompt provides some interesting insight:

So that's why people were so interested in brad pitt fight club. They weren't interested in Tyler Durden as a character, nor his best quotes. Frankly, they weren't even interested in Brad Pitt as Tyler Durden; they were only interested in his abs, and how to get them. If we take the google prompts as a reflection upon society, it the message is clear. It seems really obvious to say Brad Pitt is a sex symbol, but isn't it interesting that Tyler Durden is perhaps his greatest embodiment of this, when Tyler Durden says the opposite.

"I felt sorry for guys packed into gyms, trying to look like how Calvin Klein or Tommy Hilfiger said they should. Is that what a man should look like?"

Becca mentions that quote in her blog, and very aptly points out that Brad Pitt looks similar to the model in the ad. For reference, they look almost exactly the same:

 
Tyler is a great character. But yeah, he is a hypocrite. He preaches one thing and practices another. What does it say about Tyler that the first question the movie prompts isn't "how can I free myself from consumerism?" but "how can I look like Tyler does with his shirt off?" Maybe I should rephrase the question: what does this say about society?

Andrew T

Random Acts of Classism and Heavy Doses of Homoeroticism in Fight Club

Brad Pitt. UNF. Moving on.

So, Tyler Durden’s political message is edgy and masculine and fun and all that, but it isn’t exactly consistent. One moment in particular stood out to me and it’s when Tyler Durden threatens to kill the gas station attendant to liberate him from his “pathetic” life and encourage him to pursue the job he’s always wanted. And sure enough, it turns out that the man wants to be a veterinarian. But the initial assumption of an underlying aspiration betrays Tyler’s classist prejudice.

I don’t know about Tyler, but I’ve actually known gas station attendants that love their job and don’t feel like they’re stuck in a crap job. And I think it says something that Tyler assumed that couldn’t possibly be the case. I mean, it’s not like he walked into Merrill Lynch and pulled that shit. I suppose you could make the case that Tyler is a cynic, but I still think that moment betrays the way in which Tyler himself has fed into the messages put out by the system he seeks to destroy.

Moving back. UNF. Brad Pitt.

Seriously, though, 50% of the fun of watching that movie comes from the fact that Tyler Durden and the narrator basically function as an asexual gay couple. Which, let’s be real, isn’t that far from how gay couples are in the movies and on TV nowadays (*cough* Modern Family *cough*). Anyway, the two of them live together, get sweaty and shirtless together, almost have a threesome, and then there’s that morning tie-tying scene. The narrator even vehemently denies being attracted to Marla and expresses disgust when asked by Tyler. And then there’s Tyler’s ultra-flamboyant outfits that make him look like a gay-man’s version of Macklemore.

The movie is practically begging to have a gay porn parody be made. Actually, scratch that, I just checked and there’s mostly just a “lesbian” porn parody series. Ugh. Straight male gaze. Gross.

I don’t really have much more to say about the movie. Do I think it’s gay friendly? No. Do I think it’s a hypocritical version of anti-classism that comes from a wealthy, white straight male perspective dressed up in Hollywood glamour-grime? Yeah, basically. Do I think it condones violence? Nah. Is it a movie I enjoy in the end? If only for Brad Pitt’s itty-bitty tank tops, yes.

Hypocrite.

Tyler Durden is a stylized deconstructionist. No, literally- here's a list of all the things he says to reject ideas of self based on consumerism:

• "It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything" 
• "The things you own end up owning you" 
• "You're not how much money you have in the bank. You're not the car you drive. You're not the contents of your wallet. You're not your fucking khakis. You're the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world"
• "Is that what a real man is supposed to look like?" (looking at the male model in the underwear ad on the bus)

But for a man who scoffs at the idea that things bought can define a person better than inherent characteristics, Tyler dresses pretty sharp. Knee-length fur coat or red leather jacket, patent leather loafs with gold buckles, statement type sun glasses, and the classic bro tank. What is more, his body is very similar to that of the underwear model's. Tyler has the look of a person who stands out in the crowd, not of the anonymous pragmatic hunter-gatherer type that he professes to be. 

Tyler's hypocrisy of using symbols of wealth to distinguish himself from the other characters in the film points to the issues of destructionism. The idea is nice, of course, but it is damned near impossible to have a completely equalized system. There has to be a leader somewhere, and often times that leader employs exactly the practices he is fighting against in order to retain his power. In the end, the narrator fails to dissociate success from consumerism. Does this mean that at the end of it all, Fight Club is actually saying that material power is the only tool that works? Is it supporting the very same system seen destroyed throughout the film? 

While exhilarating in a twisted kind of way as these men all come together to fight and destroy and hit rock bottom, ultimately it left me feeling very hollow inside. The end is so flippant, and though I really enjoyed the humor, I was left without an answer about how we should define ourselves, what success or satisfaction really is, and whether we should really conquer our demons. I guess that's something we all have to figure out for ourselves, step by destructive step.

-Becca

Ernest Dialogue

Dialogue. That's what I enjoyed most about this novel.

Hemingway's Jake's narration reads like being spoken to. It's a conversation I was, for the most part, happy to let Ernie;s Jake carry. Jake's speech deftly characterizes him. From the way Jake speaks to me- his calm, his manners, and his total willingness to share information with us, I liked him. I also trusted him to tell the story truthfully. When Jake spoke differently to other characters than he had with me, I was a little surprised. To other members of Hemingway's cast, Jake can speak rudely, vulgarly, and dishonestly. That he reserved total manners and honesty for me alone made me like Jake all the more.

Unlike some writers, Hemingway writes his characters to talk differently from one another. Not only does each person speak with different vocabularies (Brett loves to say 'chap' for example, and Jake's word choice is more informal) the characters also speak out of line from the page's, chapter's, or book's subject at hand. They're always ignoring or interrupting one another, advocating for their story, giving the book's dialogue a rich texture.