Science Fiction has the most philosophical elements
of all the genres. The science element explores facts and knowledge, but the
fiction deals with fabrication, so it is paradoxical at the core. It is
difficult to define the genre as it has so many overlaps: horror, thriller,
western, and action-adventure. The great advantage in exploring ethics and
self-identity within this genre, is that in science fiction the antagonist is
frequently fantasy alien or technology itself, and so any philosophy
communicated is not directed at a particular section of society, and so nobody
should be offended. Therefore, such a film can deliver a powerful message,
covering such tensions and conflicts as anxieties about death, free will,
imperialism, and the definition of humanity itself. The danger for a filmmaker
is that the fantasy element involved allows an audience to transfer their
hegemonic views into a realm where they no longer need to be addressed; for
example, replicants and Klingons can take the place of despised foreigners. The
added element of time travel that exists in many films of the genre encourages
the audience to ponder on causality and the effects that slight alterations in
circumstance might have on a future world.
There are many films in which the treatment of
predominant tensions and conflicts contribute to the consideration of Science
Fiction as philosophical in nature, but particular films do have deeper
philosophical implications and assumptions. 2001:
A Space Odyssey (1968, Stanley Kubrick), The Matrix (1999, Andy Wachowski and Larry Wachowski), and Blade Runner (1982, Ridley Scott) all
question ideas that have been addressed by philosophers and film theorists,
based around the idea of what it is to be human. Such science fiction films
build on the traditions of historical precursors. Greek Myths explored
humankind’s relationship with the Divine and questioned what would happen if
man thought he could be God. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein in 1818 used a
combination of horror and technology to question what makes an individual
human. The medium of film is an excellent way of providing allegories about the
current condition to speculate on the future of contemporary society. It is no
coincidence that the 1950’s saw a huge popularity for the genre in the climate
of the Cold War and the refinement of the atom bomb. At this time, particularly
in the United States, the hegemonic belief in the importance of self-defence
and superior weaponry transferred easily into film fantasy that presented
opposing military might as an alien threat.
2001: A Space Odyssey is possibly the
most philosophical of all the three films, in that the plot takes second place
to the abstract inferences of evolution. “…Kubrick’s masterwork leads us beyond
the borders of our conventional world of familiar perceptions and invites us to
ponder abstract questions and ideas that seemingly transcend the boundaries of
the sensory and perceptual world of everyday human experience.” (M.Sanders,
Steven, 2008, The philosophy of Science
Fiction Film, The University Press of Kentucky). Every time an individual
touches the monolith they gain a new kind of understanding. The implication is
that all human development and discovery has been initiated, and perhaps even
manipulated by an alien source. Kubrick wants the audience to question ideas.
For example, why were humans put on earth and what is our true purpose? The
scene in which Dave is getting thrown through space and time after shutting
down the computer is visually beautiful and mesmerizing, whilst also causing
the audience to question what is really happening to him physically and
mentally. However the most philosophical scene has to be the last one in which
Dave (now much older) reaches out to touch the monolith and suddenly becomes a
small baby in a womb looking down on earth. The implication is that he has
reached full understanding, and is re-born. The audience is left wondering what
this new start will herald and has the rest of humanity also experienced this
same transition?
The Matrix’s main philosophical conundrum is the concept of
freedom of choice for humanity, and at what point reliance on an increasingly
intelligent technology becomes dangerous. The Matrix presents
the idea that “humans have been reduced to the role of batteries supplying
energy to a race of machines.” (King and Krzywinska, 2000, Science Fiction Cinema From outerspace to cyberspace, Wallflower
Press.) However, the film also has clear religious
references to both Christianity and Buddhism. “The film looks as if it has
metaphysics and an epistemology of its own that are akin to Plato’s and Descartes’.”
(M.Sanders, Steven, 2008, The philosophy of Science Fiction Film, The
University Press of Kentucky). Neo
(Keano Reeves) has to question the true nature of his reality and whether or
not God exists as his maker. This is explored initially in the second scene of
the film. The film also focuses on “whether the mind is a different substance
from the body” (M.Sanders, Steven, 2008, The philosophy of Science Fiction Film,
The University Press of Kentucky), this is shown clearly throughout the film.
The first time Neo goes into The Matrix and Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne)
teaches him how to fight and how to use his mind to control his power instead
of actual strength, the film diverges from the usual macho portrayal of a hero.
The casting of Reeves, of slight build and mixed race, as Neo, also enabled the
directors to explore elements of masculinity and racism. This allowed the
sequels to construct a plausible messianic figure capable of embracing both a
real and fantasy existence.
Blade Runner raises many key questions such as is it possible
to distinguish humans from artificially engineered robots, and if so what
criteria should be used; what role women have in society; and should
corporations have absolute power? The film has a strong moral message, using
the replicants to represent a race which is considered inferior but
threatening. The main theme of the film considers the consequences of the
advancements in the creation of artificial intelligence. “The replicants in Blade Runner… illustrate complex philosophical questions about the
relationship between mind and body, as well as the role played by memory, on
the one hand, and the emotions and desires, on the other, in our understanding
of human life.” (M.Sanders,
Steven, 2008, The philosophy of Science Fiction Film, The University Press of
Kentucky) All the replicants are considered highly dangerous and skilled, but the
females are also all utilized occupations which service the carnal needs of
men. This film questions whether natural is better than artificial, where
should lines be drawn in the development of technology, and even whether it is
valid to replace humans with robots in particular circumstances. This reflects
a theme that runs through many such films and shadows the very real fear that
exists of the implications of tampering with human beings. Only this week,
guidelines issued by HFEA on the manipulation of mitochondrial DNA have hit the
headlines. This film is an example of one posing the questions: “Are
scientists, and the technologies they use, heroes or villains? Is their
‘scientific rationality’ a force for the improvement of mankind or a threat?” (King and
Krzywinska, 2000, Science Fiction Cinema
From outerspace to cyberspace, Wallflower Press.) When the audience is first introduced to Deckard in
the debriefing room of the corporation, they are left in no doubt that he is
used to exterminating replicants with complete emotional detachment. The mid
point reversal of the film comes when Deckard realizes that the replicants are
completely convinced that they are human and their memories are real. The
audience then accompanies Deckard in his quest to reassure himself that he is
not also a form of artificial intelligence. This question, as to what
constitutes humanity, is still being explored in current films such as Prometheus, another Ridley Scott film
(2012). Here, Charlize Theron’s character is far more calculating and
unemotional than that of the android, David, who seems to act out of jealousy
and shows compassion in the final scene of the film as he persuades Shaw that
she will benefit from his company in her future adventure. In conjunction with
Deckard’s journey of self-discovery, the audience is also asked to consider his
involvement in such a policed, exploitative society. “Blade Runner also calls attention to the oppressive core of
capitalism and advocates revolt against exploitation.” (Kuhn, A., 1990, Alien Zone Cultural Theory and Contemporary
Science Fiction Cinema, Verso).
That the science fiction genre should be considered
philosophical in nature is undeniable. “…philosophy and science fiction are
thematically interdependent insofar as science fiction provides materials for
philosophical thinking about the logical possibility and paradoxes of time
travel, the concept of personal identity and what it means to be human, the
nature of consciousness and artificial intelligence, the moral implications of
encounters with extraterrestrials, and the transformations of the future that
will be brought about by science and technology.” (M.Sanders, Steven, 2008, The
philosophy of Science Fiction Film, The University Press of Kentucky) Since the
initial emergence of the genre, such films have attempted to address the
predominant conflicts and tensions that exist in contemporary society. In
contrasting the realistic with a fantasy alternative, the plots investigate
real implications of trends in an entertaining and non-threatening way. “Dystopia
is often presented as failed utopia, as a demonstration of the dangers of
attempting to engineer any kind of perfect world.” (King and
Krzywinska, 2000, Science Fiction Cinema
From outerspace to cyberspace, Wallflower Press.) Telotte used Todorov’s theories of the fantastic to
elucidate the many ways in which science fiction films work, identifying three
subgroups of narrative: 1. Marvellous- the impact of forces outside the human
realm; 2. Fantasy- the possibility of changes in society and culture wrought by
science and technology; 3. Uncanny- technological alterations, and substitute
versions of the self. All three of the above-mentioned films use all of these
subgroups of narrative to entertain whilst stimulating their audiences to
consider the deeper implications posed by the fictional worlds they represent.
Bibliography
Cornea, Christine, 2007, Science fiction cinema between fantasy and reality, Edinburgh
University Press
Grant,
Barry Keith, 2003, Film Genre Reader III,
Austin, University of Texas Press
Grant, Barry Keith, 2007,
Film Genre: From Iconography to Ideology,
London & NY, Wallflower
Kaveney, Roz, 2005, From Alien to the Matrix, Reading science
fiction film, I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd
King and Krzywinska,
2000, Science Fiction Cinema From
outerspace to cyberspace, Wallflower Press
Kuhn, A., 1990, Alien
Zone Cultural Theory and Contemporary Science Fiction Cinema, Verso
M.Sanders, Steven, 2008, The philosophy of Science
Fiction Film, The University Press of Kentucky
No comments:
Post a Comment