Thursday, October 9, 2008

How can we put value on "realities" and why do we need "real reality"

My point in class today was not whether or not “tainting” reality was bad, our discussion preconceived this in relation to Baudrillard’s successive phases of the image (reflects reality (good), masks and denatures reality (evil), masks the absence of reality (sorcery), no relation to reality (simulacric)). Rather, how can one interpretation of reality be deemed better than another and why does that matter? First, the consideration of a work to “mask and denature reality” is completely arbitrary because, as discussed in previous classes, the notion of reality changes from perspective to perspective.

The “United” film’s goal was most likely to interpret and reflect reality, not mask and denature it. Just because there were elements of “fictional” reality in the film, does not necessarily mean it wants to toy with reality because in the premise of that film, some parts of the reality are never to be known, and the movie does not commit “sorcery” because it announces the “possible” attributes. Technically, the film, as any fictional narrative, could be interpreted at reflecting reality, and be considered “good”. Some may disagree with the film’s notion of reality, but how is the film’s notion any less valid than any of our notions? None of us were on that plane; none of us had a first hand account. How can we say what did and did not occur any more than the film?

My second argument accepts the idea of a higher valued “reality” and asks, why does the value matter? This is similar to the theme of Momento. Why does “real reality” matter? Presumably it would be to live out the “truth”, but we make our own “truth”, so how is this even possible? Is it, as I suggested in class, that we prolong the idea of the real reality for other generations or people who may have no knowledge of it? Why else does “real reality” matter, at least in terms of putting it into our movies, if not to spread its “truth”?

(By notion and interpretation, I am referring to the image of reality)

No comments: