guilhermeconstant

Being-there-ness “Human beings can be understood neither as substances with fixed properties, nor as subjects interacting with a world of objects.” This is the root of existentialism, a philosophical belief that that human existence cannot be proved through only the physical. The human mind and spirit, the intangibles, are essential in explaining our whole being, not just empirical scientific evidence. Kosinski explores this belief with Chance’s character in the book Being There as does Ashby in the film, Being There. Chance is always present in the moment; he has a “literally immediacy,” as Dr. Mahin points out. He has no past, and he has no future. He has no choice but to live right here and right now. Humans are always told to live in the present, but what is the present when it’s always fleeting? He has no reflections and no regrets about the past to cloud his current judgment. He has no ambition or vision to act on in the future. He simply exists from moment to moment letting fate take him where it may. He has free will, but he does not know how to use it, since he doesn’t know what it is to choose. “I am here,” he says in the book, a simple, yet powerful existential statement. Chance does not reveal his own thoughts, so the outside world projects their thoughts about him onto him. He is a “blank page,” yet he is muddled with the public eyes’ false interpretations of him. He is everything to everybody: “intense,” “sense of humor,” “admirable balance,” “peaceful,” “poetic,” “brilliant,” “down-to-earth,” “laconic,” and “natural.” The world attributes positive personality traits to a man they really know nothing about, a man who cannot read nor write, a man who has no professional responsibility or social life. Dark Comedy The film version of the novel is not as darkly comedic as the novel. Because there is a narrator present in the book, we understand Chance more. The narrative disruptions allow Chance’s character to feel, decide, and think; he is permitted to have human existential sensations that are completely absent in the film. The book is metafictional, fiction about fiction, while the film does not convey the same hyper fictional elements. However, the television’s presence, is fiction within fiction (cartoons, movies) and nonfiction within fiction (news, talk shows) in both the film and novel. Because we are closer to Chance’s thoughts in the book, the world outside of him is even more darkly comedic. We know what the characters don’t. We ridicule them for their stupidity for not knowing Chance’s own ignorance. The film creates a distance between the audience and Chance’s character precisely to alienate us. We have to discover and conjecture what Chance’s ‘true self’ really is.

2023-01-22 04:57