WRIT 2: Tingle

Mon. & Wed. 4:00-5:50 PM

March 1, 2010

The Human Show

Throughout the course of human existence, our world has been plagued with war, genocide, exploitation, religious persecution, poverty, hunger, and disease; sadly, these account for only a miniscule portion of the injustices we’ve seen and still see. We may ask ourselves then: why have these problems persisted for such a long period of time and why are people not more invested, or invested at all for that matter, in eradicating them? The Truman Show, a movie starring Jim Carrey as Truman Burbank, puts this aspect of the “human predicament” into clear perspective, in many ways mirroring our modern consumer society and the culture that envelops it. The movie tells the story of a man unaware that his entire life has been fabricated and manipulated into a reality TV show for the masses. It focuses on his plight to acquire true knowledge about the world in which he’s lived his life, or in this case, hasn’t lived his life. Though his success in escaping from this superficial existence does not go without recognition, it’s his courage to confront that very mediocre existence by seeking the truth that should captivate us.

Much of what enables us, as a culture of consumers, to be suspended in a state of complacency appears frequently in The Truman Show. First and foremost, the creation of the isolated being has proven to be integral to the success of capitalism, as well as The Truman Show. Similar to the dawn of capitalism, the dawn of this bizarre, voyeuristic television program relied heavily on the ability to deprive the individual of genuine, meaningful human contact. The compartmentalization of the workplace, made possible by industrialization, was largely responsible for creating the platform from which capitalism has been able to manipulate us to internalize communal “truths” that it itself has popularized. Minimizing the amount of contact people had with one another in conjunction with the creation of a mass culture has imprisoned people in a state of false consciousness, never deviating from what they believe is the consensus of the masses rather than the fabrication of an elite few.

Creating an idyllic island community allowed Christof, creator of The Truman Show, to mimic this phenomenon. Since, as human beings, we are “unable to function adequately unless embedded in a specific cultural matrix”, Truman “must function within [Seahaven’s] particular cultural pattern: matching, maintaining, and replicating it” (Cushman, 601). Immersing Truman in an isolated community with orchestrated beliefs and routines consequently left Truman’s knowledge vulnerable to Christof’s manipulation, leading him to believe that these beliefs and routines, Seahaven’s cultural pattern, were self-evident. Thus, our innate dependency on what R. Douglas Geivett refers to as “complicit testimony: the testimony of a community that reinforces what we believe by means of social expectations, assumptions and behavior” (86), ensured that, through the Seahaven community, Christof could dictate Truman’s beliefs and that they would go unchallenged.

The ultimate goal of this, it would seem, is not necessarily to discourage independent thinking, but instead to diminish and eliminate the possibility of it. Here, Christof has taken the role of capitalism in establishing the culture of Seahaven, the way that capitalism has determined the culture of consumption of our world. However, one obvious difference between the two is that, in Seahaven, there is no possibility for a counter-culture. Where capitalism, as Christopher Lasch tells us, discourages “enterprise and independent thinking” and aims “to make the individual distrust his own judgment” (29), Christof has attempted to make it impossible for Truman to encounter anyone or anything that would propose a reality contrary to that which he has created for Seahaven’s residents and, essentially, for Truman. Truman, as R. Douglas Geivett says, “is imprisoned within a thick shell of conviction” (73). His beliefs “seem perfectly justified but happen to be utterly false” (73); he has no means by which to explore this, nor the desire to because he is deprived of contact with anyone who could provoke this independent thought-process. Therefore, Truman feels as though he is perfectly capable of thinking independently, although in reality, his thoughts are fundamentally pre-ordained by Christof and strongly resemble those of other Seahaven residents.

Eventually, Truman begins to investigate the strange incidents occurring in Seahaven, in a paranoiac realization that some pieces of this elaborate puzzle just don’t fit. One might ask oneself why it has taken Truman so long to finally embark on his quest for the truth. Certainly, the inexplicable events that take place in Truman’s life are by no means limited to the ones shown in the film. Why, then, is it that Truman had not acknowledged these events as inorganic, as being indicative of something suspicious and worth investigating, prior to the time when he did? It’s quite simple, as Geivett explains, “By force of habit, people drift into a pattern of trodding through life that suffocates their natural desire to know the most fundamental truths” (82). It is likely that this happened very frequently in his life and that over time he became accustomed to the dismissal and justification of such events. So, by “force of habit” he came to accept the explanations he was offered, however outlandish they may have been. After all, it must be considerably difficult to find reason in contemplating something for which a consensus has already been met; which brings me to my final point.

Although many of us will applaud Truman for escaping from Seahaven altogether, my heart goes out to him much earlier in the film for even having the courage to want to know the truth. Geivett says, “part of being responsible is having knowledge and acting on the basis of the knowledge we have” (74). This is why Truman is such an admirable character, because despite the gravity of his specific predicament and the potential pain it will cause him, he accepts that responsibility. Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for everyone. Most people will disregard the truth, and some will avoid it entirely, because knowing makes us accountable.

Ultimately, I believe that The Truman Show is an exaggerated portrayal of our very own lives. In this respect, it seems almost satirical. When watching the movie, one may find him/herself thinking how incredibly thick Truman must be to not realize what’s in plain sight. We pity him for being manipulated, we admire him for being courageous, and we congratulate him for persevering. Why don’t we consider ourselves in a similar light? Should we not ridicule ourselves for being consciously oblivious to the exploits of capitalism? Should we not pity ourselves for not acknowledging that human beings are being murdered everyday; that people die of hunger and disease? Should we not follow the example set by Truman and accept these as truths so that we may act accordingly and put forth an effort to end these injustices? Dorothy Thompson once said, “Courage, it would seem, is nothing less than the power to overcome danger, misfortune, fear, injustice, while continuing to affirm inwardly that life with all its sorrows is good; that everything is meaningful even if in a sense beyond our understanding; and that there is always tomorrow.”

Works Cited

Cushman, Philip. Why the Self is Empty: Toward a Historically Situated Psychology.

American Psychological Association, Inc., 1990.

Geivett, Robert Douglas. Faith, Film and Philosophy: Big Ideas On The Big Screen.

InterVarsity Press. 2007.

Lasch, Christopher. The Minimal Self: Psychic Survival in Troubled Times. New York:

W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1984.

1