Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Is the Truman Show a true man show?


Summary
 Since birth, Truman Burbank is the star of a live show but he has no idea that 5000 cameras are filming his entire life 24/7. In fact, the place where he lives, Seahaven Island, is a giant television studio monitored by Christof, the producer.
He starts questioning his life when a camera light falls in front of his house. From this point, Truman notices many strange things going on. For instance, his father who drowned years ago, appears in front of him as a hobo. When he share his worries with his mother, his friend Marlon and his wife Meryl, all of them quickly dismiss him, saying he is just paranoid. From this point, his goal is to get out of Seahaven by every mean. The production team succeeds in preventing him from escaping but one night, Truman disappears. Christof decides to “turn the sun on” to find his as soon as possible. He is ready to kill Truman if needed to keep him from the real world so when the production team finds him on a boat in the middle of the “ocean”, he creates a storm. It doesn’t weaken Truman’s determination. But the latter’s trip comes to an end when he reaches the walls of the studio. He discovers that the sky is as fake as his life. Christof then introduces himself – as a voice only – and tries one last time to persuade Truman to stay away from the dangerous outside world but he refuses.

He greets his “world” along with his viewers before stepping off the set. His viewers applaud him and change the channel.
In the movie, this quote is his catchphrase.

Truman, a product of determinism?
If Truman is a contraction of “true” and “man”, we can ask ourselves if Truman really does exist. After all, his whole life is fake, everything is decided, constructed by Christof, his destiny has already been traced. Christof  defines himself as the Creator, and indeed, when he introduced himself to Truman, he appears as a voice from above, like a God.
“Truman: Who are you?
Christof: I am the Creator - of a television show that gives hope and joy and inspiration to millions.
Truman: Then who am I?
Christof: You're the star.”
Not only is Truman a product made by Christof, but he also doesn’t belong to himself. He is the “star” of million viewers.
And what would be the meaning of this kind of life?
But then again, Christof explains it himself: “while the world he inhabits is, in some respects, counterfeit, there's nothing fake about Truman himself. No scripts, no cue cards. It isn't always Shakespeare, but it's genuine. It's a life.” While living in a fake world, Truman’s every reaction are genuine. Besides, in the end, it is impossible for the production team to control him and Truman confirms it.
“Christof: I know you better than you know yourself.
Truman: You never had a camera in my head!”

An apology of freedom
The movie is almost an allegory of the cave. Truman lives in a fake world but slowly becomes conscious of the fakeness of his surroundings. He discovers that another world exists past the walls of the studio and he wants to discover all of this by himself. Even though he knows that the outside world is dangerous, he prefers to be able to choose for himself, to decide his every action and take responsibility for himself. He wants to be a being-for-itself, if we have a sartrian analyze of this movie.
Humans are being-for-themselves by definition because “existence precedes essence”. Humans are not definable because they are not finite. They are much more than all the adjectives one can use to describe someone. Truman wants to be a human who is not only the star of a show but also a human who can make choices for himself, who can constantly define and redefine himself. Since humans must by definition make choices, humans are “condemned to be free”. Humans cannot rely on others or on God.
By wanting Truman to be a marionette which does not have his own will, which he can control as much as he wants, and even kill if he wants to, Christof reduces him to a being-in-itself. In other words, he reduces him to an object that is not conscious, neither active nor passive.
“Network Executive: For God's sake, Chris! The whole world is watching. We can't let him die in front of a live audience!
Christof: He was born in front of a live audience.”
In the end, by wanting to be a kind of God in Truman’s life, Christof denies himself and turns out to be a “business man”, to quote Kierkegaard’s expression. His life has no meaning without the Truman show. Even when the show was still playing, we can see that people don’t really care about the show. Television, rather than the show, is what is important to people.
“Garage Attendant: [the Truman Show has ceased transmission] What else is on?
Garage Attendant: Yeah, let's see what else is on.
Garage Attendant: Where's the TV guide?”

Truman is a hero who conquered his freedom while Christof’s actions are criticized. It seems that the only life worth living is the real life, one that is genuine. At the same time, the movie denounces the futility of watching the television, something that is not real nor meaningful.
“Truman: Was nothing real?
Christof: You were real. That's what made you so good to watch...”

9 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you for your post Estelle, I found it very interesting. I agree with you: even if Truman evolves in an artificial world, a fake reality, he achieves to be authentic by trying to escape from this “town” when he discovers the truth. He is ready to take charge his own existence, to have responsibilities. In a way, Truman is an allegory of the freedom.
    I think we can make a parallel between this movie and our own lives. To a lesser extent, we are in the same situation that Truman. Of course, our world is not controlled by a TV-producer, we’re not the star of a TV show like Truman. However, we are subject to an immense amount of constraints, we often play a role that society imposes us, without even being aware of this. Our lives are regulated by a series of norms, of explicit and implicit rules. If we derogate from these rules/norms, we would take the risk to be seen as a persona non grata, to be marginalized by the other members of society. In this case, can we really say that we are totally free? Aren’t we evolving in a world that is (I reiterate: in a much lesser extent than Truman Show) restricting? Hence can we pretend to have a real control on our lives? If not, should we liberate ourselves from implicit norms that dictate our comportment?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Claire ! Thank you for your comment :)
      I agree with you and I think that Sciences Po is one of the best example. Even though all of us originally come from different places, different social backgrounds, Sciences Po make us "fit in" its norm. No matter what we say, Sciences Po teaches us unconsciously to write, to speak, to behave and even to think in a specific way.
      Some of my old friends said I became a Parisian. First I didn't understand what they were talking about but by taking notice of the insignificant things I sometimes do like drinking coffee or using certain words.
      I am not saying my life is controlled by Sciences Po because I am certainly one of the oddest people in Sciences Po but it was shocking for me to realize how "politically correct" I became.

      Delete
  3. Hey Estelle !

    Yes, that was such a great blog ! Really pleasant to read.
    I would just like to say a word about your comparison between Christof and God.
    You’re saying that Christof is a god here because he created Truman’s world. And that’s true to this extend. But we’ve seen through lectures this semester that God was a character created by human’s minds to face the absurdity of the life and to give a sense to it (we can see this absurdity revealed by the spectators of the tv show, stuck in front of the tv, doing nothing, as you said). So, if Christof is a real God here, it seems that Truman should be happier than ever discovering that his life has a sense, that someone wanted him to be alive, to live. But at the end, Truman does not care about being a star, about being meaningful to Christof. He just wanna be free. And that’s where a becomes what you call a « true man » for me. He accepted that is humanity was to be condemned to freedom, in a sartrian way, and would do anything to escape from this fake world. Against the waves, he is not afraid of dying, he face it, because it’s much more absurd to live a non-sense life without freedom.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Ninon !
      Thank you for your really interesting comment ! I thought of Christof's god-llike figure in a Judeo-Christian way and it is true that if I really followed the religious way of thinking, Truman should totally be happy living in Seahaven. But if Christof makes himself appear as a god, he is only another human in Truman's eyes, and I don't think it is possible to disagree with him ^^
      Thus, being a human, he has the right and even the obligation to pursue his freedom.

      Delete
  4. Great Blogpost! I especially found the Plato reference interesting. I think the specificity of Plato’s argument is that we are not free if we do not know the TRUTH. I think for Sartre’s notion of freedom is not whether we conquer and know the TRUTH about reality, but rather that man is the definition of freedom and in that way he has to act upon that freedom (which he does not when he is acting in bad faith). Now the point I am trying to make is that I actually think that there could be an argument in suggesting that Sartre thinks that man can be free, regardless of whether the world is real or not. When you say “Truman wants to be a human who is not only the star of a show, but also a human who can make choices for himself, who can constantly define and redefine himself.” I do not see how this is not possible in the constructed world, or to put it in other words, how is it more possible in the ‘real’ world?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Mikkel !
    I think that you are right when you say that freedom is not about reality but rather about acting upon our freedom. And it is also true that living in Seahaven doesn't really prevent Truman from acting upon his freedom. But acting upon our freedom means to choose when we do have a choice but living under the control of Christof means to have less choices to make. For example, Truman really liked Lauren (or whatever her name was) and he maybe would have ended with her if Christof didn't make her disappear.
    When one has less choices to make, one has less opportunities to act upon one's freedom.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Estelle,
    I was quite surprised to read the bit of your post where you say the movie is almost an allegory of the cave. Indeed it is! Even though I am no stranger with Platon, I was always trying to read out some existentialist insights in it, and never saw it coming!

    My question about the movie I want to share is this : the actors in the Truman show, were they living a existentialist life? Leaving out the moral aspects of deceiving a guy for all of his life, they've done their job so well that some couldn't differentiate their life from the show. That's what they wanted so much to achieve as an actor... Can we say they were in Bad Faith? or are they the ones who lived their life according to their own pursuit of meaning?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Haeon !
      In a way, the actors were indeed living in Bad Faith but I personally don't have the same point of view as Sartre. They try to be who they are supposed to be so in a way, yes totally. But I think that you can call a behavior Bad Faith only from an external point of view, when you don't know the person, when it is just some stranger you won't recognize in the street. To take Sartre's exemple, a waiter is just a waiter, it is almost not a person because you don't know he's personality. The waiter is reified, he becomes a being-in-itself in a way. But when it is someone you personnaly know, when it is a relationship where each party has an opinion on the other, then I don't consider it as Bad Faith.
      For example, I worked before as a salesperson. During "normal days", whenever I have a client, I talk with them an joke with them. I don't consider this Bad Faith. But when it is sales periods, I just stay behind my cash desk all day, the only words leaving my mouth being hello, goodbye and have a good day. This is being what is required from my job and this is Bad Faith.
      If I have to quote Platon again, I would say that Bad Faith is conforming oneself to a Form, whereas not being in Bad Faith is living in the apparent world.
      So my answer is I would not say they were in Bad Faith.

      Delete