I’m back! and boy have things on this blog gotten turned upside down… or was it inside out? Either way, having grown up in the digital continent, I decided it was time to go see the physical world with its seven! continents – or try to at least. Apparently hurtz and bytes don’t get much recognition in the physical world, and we don’t exactly issue passports. Long story short, I spent most of that time stuck in a disconnected server bank on the third floor of Notre Dame Seminary in New Orleans – not a visit a recommend unless you like mediocre theology papers and low quality videos of people pretending to say mass…
So yeah, while I was gone, this other guy, the “Preacher Man,” showed up, changed the lighting, rearranged the furniture and had the nerve to use my blog to post his homilies! And they’re not even that great… Well, we had some words, but… I kind of like the new look. Not to mention, my buddy Paul was always talking about charity and the “unity” of the “body of Christ,” so I figured I’d let him stick around… for now at least.
Anyway, the point is, I’m back and looking to dive into some more movies and what not. After all the troubling darkness and complications with Batman, I figured I’d take it easy and pick something light, fun, and simple. That led me to have a look at “Inside Out” by Pixar/Disney.
Well, I was in for a surprise! I guess I should have expected it from the same people who made that marvelous movie “UP.” Anywho, this movie was deeper than I expected and proved to be an enjoyable exploration of the (rather confusing) inner workings of an 11 year old girl. Along the way it gave food for thought on topics like human nature, relationships, maturity, and it even made fun of cats! (cuz we all know cats are evil, crazy, or both 😉 Because you guys are real people and have lives and stuff, I’ll break this into two parts to keep it short: Here’s the 1st part.
The basic premise was straightforward enough: lets make the voices in our head into characters in a movie. As it turns out, the characters they came up with are pretty close to what classical philosophy called the “passions.” True, the movie only has five when most philosophers would go with a list of 11, but if you actually follow that link (or just trust me!) you’ll see that all five of the main internal characters in the movie, Joy, Sadness, Disgust, Fear, Anger, are on that list (Disgust = “aversion”). You might also notice that it talks about these little things called “intellect” and “will” – remember that, I’ll come back to it later. As for the passions, you could, with a little thought and imagination, find all 11 passions represented in one or more characters at some point in the movie… but to actually list that out would be tedious and boring *yawn!* Suffice it to say, this approach has the potential to give viewers a realistic grasp of how their mind (or soul) works. So lets get to some key scenes and talk about “events” and “lens”
First, the opening scene, Riley’s birth. The lens is pretty positive: its the starting point, has happy music, and is voiced over by the cheerful voice of Joy. These things cue watchers to embrace this particular event as something good and true. and the object of this embrace? That the first “emotion” in Riley’s head is Joy, closely followed by Sadness.
What does that imply? I think there are two ways to go with that. On the one hand, it could just be to say that Riley is born a naturally happy person, so joy is a dominant trait for her. On the other hand, it could be taken as the pattern for every human person – that all people are meant to be happy at first, but that sadness quickly enters in. If you go with the second one, you have a nice glimpse of the human condition: Mankind is meant to be happy, but we live in a fallen world and so immediately face sadness (pain, suffering, etc.) though without losing our desire to be happy.
Another thing that stood out for me is the memories and their link to personality. This is not so much a scene as it is a central plot line. Because it is so central to the development of the movie, the lens is that what is being depicted is true and necessary. The event portrayed is that key moments become foundational for our personality. I love it because it communicates the idea that we live in time and our past is a part of us – who we are is deeply connected to our personal history: family, friends, and powerful experiences. I also love that “forgetting” these core memories, even temporarily, can lead to losing touch with ourselves and to bad decisions like Riley yelling at her father and trying to run away.
Still more, I love the fact that personality can develop without losing the old. Take family island for example. The new island looks much like the old one, but it has grown to include new memories and possibilities – continuity and discontinuity – people grow and change, but they are still inseparably connected to where they’ve been.
This is not a religious movie, so its not fair to expect a transcendent perspective, but I’d still like to make one point: in reality, there is one “core memory” that comes from a little more than just personal experiences – it is the memory of God. All throughout scripture, the repeated sin of Israel is that they “forget” God and consequently forget themselves as “creatures” and as the beloved of God. So, this movie gives a good natural perspective on accepting the reality of where we come from as part of our identity. In real life, however, we ought to consider whether we’ve taken good care of our “core memory” that God is our creator, redeemer, and Father. We should make sure that our “religious island” is still working. To expand on that – as one grows in their awareness of God, their religious island ought become more and more central and start building bridges to the other islands to influence them and connect them to a divine source.
Alright, time for something a slightly more critical comment: Remember when the mother was daydreaming about the Brazilian helicopter pilot?
 |
| Temptation… |
That scene is a bit tougher to crack open. The lens is a bit ambiguous: it’s very humorous, the pilot clearly has a calming effect on the mom’s emotions, and the teacher later on resorts to the same thing. These things seem to suggest that the viewer ought to view them in a positive or acceptable light. But, the mother later on remembers her husband’s goodness and tosses the memory, but her inner fear sneaks over to pick it back up “just in case.” What does this say? It seems to imply that its okay to use fantasies or what-ifs to comfort us when in a difficult moment. Yet, it also seems to say that we should cherish the good we do have. Still, underneath that is the possibility – what if her husband wasn’t so spectacular at that particular moment? Would she have dwelt more on that other man? I mean, it is Fear who holds onto it. Perhaps fear of a later failure in the relationship? Is that the way to deal with potential strife, dreaming of plan B? Though its a rather small point in the overall scheme of the movie, it is worthwhile to shine a little light on the subject and avoid any murkiness on topics like fidelity and dealing with imperfections in others. Whatever the ambiguity of the movie, the Truth in reality is that it is unhealthy to deal with strife by dwelling on what ifs and fantasies of a… unfaithful sort. It can lead to hidden resentments and sloth in facing life’s real challenges.
That’s it for now. I’ve got a few stray cat videos to chase out of my yard and a lease agreement to work out with that Preacher Man. I hope I’ve shed some light and given you some food for thought. Stay tuned for some thoughts on sadness, maturity, reason, and free will. Till then, Vale!