Documentary Film - The Trap by Adam Curtis

I just finished watching Adam Curtis' three-part documentary series The Trap: What Happened to Our Dream of Freedom, which was originally broadcast on BBC television in 2007. I cannot recommend this highly enough to everyone. As with his other documentaries, such as The Century of The Self, Curtis takes a bold look at important and complex ideas without patronising viewers.

This particular series examines the concept of freedom in the 20th and early 21st century. Specifically, he examines the most dominant conceptions of freedom that rise to power in the 20th century, such as those that come from Game Theory, Free-Market Economic Theory, U.S. Neo-Conservatism, Isaiah Berlin's twin concepts of Negative Liberty and Positive Liberty, and various revolutionary ideas of freedom inspired by intellectuals like Jean-Paul Sartre and Franz Fanon. But the notion of freedom which Curtis spends most time examining is the one that conceives of human beings as rational, self-interested, almost robotic, individuals whose ultimate motivation in life is to pursue their own, individualistic desires. And what Curtis convincingly shows is that such a notion leads only to new forms of tyranny and control, and to a meaningless, anxious world filled with self-interested individuals who trust each other (as two of his inter-titles put it: "Human beings will always betray you" and "You can only trust the numbers.")

I've watched a few of Adam Curtis' documentary series now, and what seems to be the guiding thread throughout these three at least is the concern with ideology, specifically the ideology of various elite groups and interests. In The Century of The Self Curtis looks at how ideas developed from psychoanalysis were appropriated by various elite groups for their own selfish ends: the Public Relations industry (which was almost entirely created by Freud's nephew Edward Bernays, who utilised his uncle's ideas), the corporations (who needed to persuade people to buy commodities which they didn't actually need), and finally politicians. In The Trap, Curtis looks at how these same elite groups appropriate ideas of freedom developed from various disciplines and fields, and then apply them both at home and abroad.

Whereas in the academic world the concept of ideology still has much value and is often used by political thinkers, the world of mainstream television and other media might lead one to believe that ideology is an old-fashioned, antiquated concept which became redundant with the fall of Communism. Adam Curtis' many documentaries are therefore an important exception to this general rule. Whilst he is not entirely alone in this respect - other names that spring to mind include John Pilger and Ken Loach - when put in the context of most documentaries, Curtis stands out. (When contrasted with most mainstream television in general Curtis' documentaries shine like a ray of light piercing dark clouds.)

This goes for interviews too. Witness the way in which BBC's Hardtalk programme, as well as their other interview programmes, present and then argue with thinkers like Noam Chomsky, Slavoj Zizek and David Harvey. The first thing one notices is the stance of bafflement: the BBC interviewer seems shocked that someone is presenting a different view than the consensus views we usually hear from the mainstream media. Andrew Marr's interview with Noam Chomsky, for example, tries to present Chomsky as a fool by suggesting the patronising view that the public would be baffled by his (Chomsky's) idea that propaganda is used in democratic societies. Surely ideology doesn't exist in democracies? Isn't that what we all believe in the West? Thankfully, Curtis, like Chomsky, is not afraid to stand up and invite us to critically examine the world we live in. And, thankfully the BBC broadcast Curtis' documentaries. Whilst the BBC's interviews seem to strive towards presenting some of their more intelligent guests as fools, simultaneously patronising its viewing audience, at least Curtis is allowed to present his views in a positive context and therefore engage the audience in a mode of respect, and invite them to think critically.

A predominant view in the U.K. (and no doubt in much of the Western world) is that everything is subjective, there is no absolute truth, and that partisan politics is both redundant and leads to violence and new forms of tyranny. It is highly likely that such a view is at least in part responsible for the large number of criticisms made of documentary makers like Curtis. Thankfully, there seem to be just as many around the world who support work like Curtis'. Hopefully this support will continue, and will deter measures which aim to cut funding for documentaries, as was being discussed only a few years ago in the British press. Curtis is not afraid to present his own views, and boldly examines the rise of dominant ideas in societies - like the notion that truth is always subjective.

Through his famous montage style, his inter-titles, and numerous interviews with important political thinkers, economists, and politicians, Curtis shows how ideology is still a useful concept today. Whilst we might not be ruled by a ruthless dictator and subjected to explicit propaganda and violence here in the West, are we not shaped, coerced and managed by other elite groups? Is advertising not a form of ideology in a sense? Are we not constrained in some sense by the institutions which dominate our society? Is it not clear to anyone who has thought about it and perhaps done some simple research, that there are some very powerful groups and institutions in the world which hoard wealth through exploitation? Ask yourself: why corporations spend enormous sums of money on advertising, where political candidates and parties get their money from, who owns the media, how and where can the public exercise their democratic rights? Or just watch Adam Curtis' documentaries and see for yourself how elite groups think and, more importantly, act.

Through comparative and historical analysis, Curtis demystifies, demythologises and deconstructs ideas that have become invisible, natural and taken for granted. Curtis can thus be situated in a line of radical thinkers that includes Raymond Williams, Stuart Hall, John Pilger, John Berger, David Harvey, Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, and Arundhati Roy, and many, many more. I encourage everyone who reads this blog to check out Adam Curtis' work. Most of it is available through the "usual" channels of the internet. If you think it is natural, and a universal truth, that we are rational, self-interested individuals; if you think that propaganda is not used in democratic societies; and if you think that the world is ultimately getting better and going in the right direction, then I encourage you to watch Adam Curtis' documentaries. Hopefully, he'll open your mind.

Lastly, I'd like to make two further recommendations. Firstly, Adam Curtis has a great blog which can be found by clicking this link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/

Secondly, my sister Emily works for a film company in Bristol called Testimony Films. They make excellent documentaries for various broadcasters. You can find out about their programmes at the following website: http://www.testimonyfilms.com/ I'd just like to add that I'm really proud of Emily. She works about as hard as anyone I know, and I was very impressed with the documentary she made for her undergraduate degree. I will post news here of her upcoming documentaries when they are due to be broadcast.

Thanks for reading!

A Deliberately Lived Life

"Most men lead lives of quiet desperation and go to the grave with the song still in them"

"I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. I did not wish to live what was not life, living is so dear; nor did I wish to practice resignation, unless it was quiet necessary. I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life"

These often-quoted lines from Henry David Thoreau inspire me and leave me sober in equal measure. Because they are familiar, I can pass over them quickly without feeling their force, their ability to open my eyes in order that I remember that to see is still, and always will be, an open question. These words can focus my scattered attention, bringing my thoughts to a point like lines of flight all travelling towards the horizon. Although this is only a momentary experience, and the horizon remains beyond my reach, I am not dismayed. I will continue to stretch myself out like light travelling outwards from a star that will die before the light has finished its journey.

Inspiration is a slippery notion. The same words can inspire one minute, and fail the next. Reading these lines repeatedly can deaden them, transform them into empty sounds. Printing them on a billboard can transform them into a means of selling something, selling a lifestyle perhaps. Treating them as universal wisdom, for all ages and all people, is like petrifying them and entombing them so that they fade into the background, where they will remain, invisible.

Despite all this, when I re-read these lines I can still hear them singing. Despite the temptation to be cynical, to think that today it is impossible to live deliberately, that sucking out the marrow of life has become an obligation ("Enjoy life! Actualise your potential!"), and that quiet desperation is all that awaits us, I still believe in the power of these words, I still believe in deliberate life, I still have hope.

I've read many things recently which have tested my hope. I've read about the rise of mass slums, increased social inequalities, new apartheids and forms of segregation, consolidation of wealth for the super-rich, rising unemployment, the continual erosion of real democracy and the public sphere, and so on. Perhaps the most dispiriting of all is seeing corporations and wealthy individuals appropriating inspiring ideas and words for their own, impoverished ends. When non-conformity, individuality and creativity are all embraced by multinational corporations in order to generate higher profits, it is tempting to resign oneself to what seems like our necessary and bleak fate.

And yet, something in me still flickers like the light of long-dead stars shining in the night sky. I read Thoreau's words and remember that he too faced great challenges, as every poet, writer and thinker has done. As everyone has done. I remember that it is possible to wake up, to stand up tall, and see things anew. Words such as those above can inspire us to think again, to pick up a pen and write, to talk with someone, to listen more carefully, and to be determined and creative. Even after words like these have been repeated, appropriated or buried, there remains a residue, stubbornly resisting all projects which engage them in some way. However determinedly one tries to marshal words, they always, inevitably, slip through every grasp. They are a kind of boundless life that sits at the horizon, always visible, but always slightly out of reach. Even if we close our eyes, or forget to see with our eyes, we can always learn to see again, to see anew, and to see what we've seen.

To return to my first remark: reading these lines of Thoreau leaves me both inspired and sober. The issue of how to live, of how I should live, or how I choose to live, seems to only grow as time goes by. It weighs on me more and more, as if my body were becoming denser and heavier each day. The question of how to live is like a faded image coming into relief, getting gradually clearer to the point at which I cannot ignore it. And yet, despite the heaviness of life, in a quiet moment of reflection, in reading inspiring words, or in seeing things from a new perspective, I can feel myself floating imperceptibly above the ground, like the horizon between the earth and the sky.

Reading Thoreau reminds me that even if I were to lose all my possessions, even if I were to lose my family and friends, my job, my home, my place in society, and so on, I'd still have my life to live. And even though I won't always have my life to live, until the moment when my life will end, I will still have to live it. Despite the challenges, the obstacles and the various forces of coercion and influence, it is still possible to resist, to transcend, and to surpass life as it has been, life as it is, and life as it should be.

For me, one of the few questions that I believe is worth asking continually throughout life is: can one look unflinchingly at life as it is and still affirm it? Reading Thoreau fills me with courage and hope that I can live deliberately with my eyes open.

Welcome to my Blog

Welcome to my Blog!

After much thought and some discussion with others, I've decided to start a Blog. My aims are modest: to share some of my thoughts and what I'm interested in. I find myself continually fascinated by philosophy, literature, film, politics, and many other things besides, and I'd like to share my passion and interests with others. A Blog seems like a good way to do this. Currently, there is no overriding theme to this Blog. However, the title of my Blog is intended to signal my primary interests in philosophy and literature, and their relation to life. So you can expect many posts to be either of a philosophical or literary nature, or to relate to issues in either of these fields, taken in the broadest sense. But you can also expect posts relating to other topics such as film and politics, and I'll even upload some of my photos from time to time.

So, I invite everyone and anyone to check this Blog from time to time, take a look at what I'm currently interested in, read my thoughts, and feel free to comment. I hope that this Blog facilitates a greater sharing of ideas and generates discussions (both online and offline).

I want to welcome you all once again. I hope you find what will appear here stimulating, provocative, and enriching.