Film, Literature, & the Human Condition

When Star Wars was released back in 1977, it unleashed a cultural phenomenon, one that only cultivated with the release of its two sequels. Over the years, these films have achieved a level of recognition both for the breadth of its popularity and for its cinematic brilliance. To some people, the Star Wars universe transcends beyond movies. I am one of those people, but not in the sense you may think. If you tried to start a conversation with me about the different makes of starships or models of lightsabers, my expression would turn into a chasm of obliviousness. My favorite of the original trilogy of movies is The Empire Strikes Back, because it most deeply explores the reason I am drawn to this world, going into a profound meditation about some of the themes that were introduced in the first film. It begins exploring the mystery and power of the Force. George Lucas only gives us vague impressions of what the Force is exactly. It could be a religion judging by the way both the Jedi and Sith lead their lives in accordance to it, but the Force is not something they worship. It is created by life, not the creator of life. It is closer to philosophy, but there is still an inherent spiritual element that elevates it to something more. Whatever the Force may be, in the space of three movies, it made a simple, yet powerful statement about existence, that the universe thrives on a conflict between two equally matched spiritual forces, one good, the other evil. And we need to pick a side. (continue reading…)

Plato’s Republic is one of the most influential works in all philosophy. It is heavy stuff, but at the root of it, the discussion is about one idea: what would the world be like if philosophers ruled? This simple statement, eight words long, seems harmless enough, but it actually brings about a tirade of intense moral and ethical dilemmas, inherently questioning everything we know to be right and wrong. Many consider philosophers to be cockeyed idealists who are afraid to get their hands dirty in the dust fields of reality. Truth be told, some of the opinions that philosophers put forward are very dangerous when considered within the fragile, airtight social, political, and economic systems our world runs on. These are systems that resort to compromise, something I don’t think most philosophers and idealists believe in, at least not in a practical sense. The breed of compromise they understand inherently requires everyone to be on the same wavelength, or as close to it as possible. Looking at it from that viewpoint, their notions are very chivalrous and can even send chills of greatheartedness down one’s spine. But, alas, I believe the world would collapse in on itself to be governed in such a way. So what are we left with? The world as it is. And after pondering the glorious convictions of human truth put forth by philosophers, we are left with a dispirited and nihilistic portrait of existence. (continue reading…)