In the movie “Avatar”, Cameron depicts what life would and could be like with a different master narrative. He does this by revealing a fantasy world that a certain species, the Na’vi, live in and how they view and use the world around them. Simultaneously, Cameron is showing what “real-world” influences have on the Na’vi and their land. It couldn’t be a better way of showing how much the two ways of thinking contrast each other. He does a great job of using this contrast in a way that makes the viewer think about how living their everyday lives are affecting the planet.
Many philosophical views are embedded throughout the film to give the viewer a chance to either emphasize or question certain points for themselves. An example of this being the obvious fact that the land the Na’vis live in, coincidentally called Pandora, is one with extremely feminine characteristics. As Collard states, “As for Pandora, so maligned in the patriarchal version of her myth, she too is the Primitive Matriarch, all-giving, all-knowing, and loved by all. Hidden in her bosom are numerous earth spirits that correspond to human emotion- joy, love, sorrow, loneliness” (Collard 10). This idea of femininity can be see clearly in the healing ceremony scene when Grace is being brought to the tree. Not only do the vibrancy of the colors effect how one feels when they look at this scene, but also the dialog that is used. They refer to nature and the life source from the tree as “Mother” or “All Mother”. By the way the Na’vi are sitting for the ceremony they are emulating people sitting in a sanctuary in church. This is symbolizes to the viewer how important their “mother”, or earth, is. This gives nature a religious or spiritual undertone to how these people view nature and the world around them.
One can also see the dualism quite evidently throughout the film. One example of this is the scene in which the humans come into the Na’vis’ land and start destroying it for selfish reasons. In this anthropocentric way of thinking, the humans don’t care who, what, or how they are destroying the land. The only thing they want is what is under the Na’vis’ sacred tree and they don’t see anything wrong with making this happen no matter what. In this scene, the colors the opposing forces have make it quite obvious what is happening. The Na’vi and their land are again, vibrant and colorful. As the definition of femininity states, their land is delicate and pretty. When the humans come in you can see that their colors are almost opposite. It is filled with greys and browns and even their shapes represent ruggedness and strength. Because of these qualities, this side is seen as more masculine and tough. This clear dualism mirrors the linking postulates that occur throughout the movie. On one hand we see the delicate forest people as weak and unable to maintain themselves. Then we have the strong and bold humans going after and getting what they want. This idea goes well beyond men versus women- it bleeds into many issues in society today. One example of this is America versus other countries and how as Americans we are entitled to get what we want. We live the American dream by working hard and getting rewarded for it.
Another thing that is interesting is how both sides have a patriarchical way of thinking. The movie makes it very clear how different these two sides are in how they act and the way they think. However, both sides seem to have a system that places its members into levels and groupings. It would seem at first that this way of thinking is more an American way of thinking-those who work harder deserve more. However, even in the society that seems to not think this way they have this, though it may be for other reasons. Regardless of the reasonings, however, both cultures rely on their leader for guidance, and in a way doesn’t that make both sides guilty and somewhat contradictory? It is ironic that though two different societies have two different paradigms they can still be so similar. There are many parallels between the two worlds, but because they can't understand each other they naturally think the other is bad. For instance, they both are wanting the hometree, but for different reasons. From their points of view the reason that is not their own is bad. However, when one can see that both groups are wanting the hometree for separate reasons that will benefit their society the “bad guys” don’t seem as bad.
by: Alek Trail
No comments:
Post a Comment