Plato's "Allegory of
the Cave" describes the process of reaching understanding. In
his most famous metaphor, Plato depicts a group of people who have been
watching shadows for the entirety of their lives and shows the process of one
member of the group realizing: first, the shadows are caused by light
around some objects; second, the objects' movement is caused by humans; third,
those humans manipulated the objects in imitation of The Forms (or the outside
world); fourth, that the ability to see the outside world is caused by the Sun.
The process of the man being dragged along this journey is supposed to imitate
the process of education; that the ultimate good is not merely knowledge, but
understanding. It is important to note that understanding is different than
knowledge in that one can have knowledge of a subject, or a cause and effect
without understanding why either exists. That "why" is crucial, and
it would seem that documentaries, first defined as factual reports or records,
cannot provide the Platonic "dragging," but this is untrue; they have
that potential.
Recall for a moment what we
learned from Aristotle about tragedies, they allow us to experience emotions,
specifically pity and fear, that would otherwise be unbearable to experience in
reality. The imitative nature of art is what allows this process to occur.
Therein lies the problem of the Documentary genre.
Documentaries are real, that is, there is
usually no script or acting involved. Super Size Me, for example,
involves nothing more than a plan to combine Spurlock's gluttonous journey with
information about the fast food industry and the current nature of obesity in
the U.S. This manifests itself in an on-screen product with a factual basis
that no one is likely to dispute, but that provides little more than base
knowledge about one subject. Spurlock is choosing to go on a fast-food rampage,
the parts of the movie that follow him, to me, have the least value. Because we
understand his motivation, there is little to be gained from the effects of
McDonald’s on his body that is higher than factual and physical data. More
interesting are the interviews of students on where they like to eat their
meals and how often they eat fast food-but the movie still does little to help
the viewer understand "why." I believe that this is due in part to
the way that we watch documentaries. Because the movie is perceived as real,
and as revolving around its facts, the deeper interactions within are either
less apparent to the viewer, or too extreme (think Aristotle) for the viewer to
comprehend without the use of imitation. Of course, seeing a man like Petit
from Man on Wire explain the nature of success in the last few
minutes of the movie should be more powerful, valid, and valuable, than
a made-up character or plot device doing the same, but this is simply not the
case.
The “Allegory of the Cave” shows the importance
of an idea, as opposed to its tangible counterpart. Art and film are valued in
part for their ability to represent complex ideas in a way that allows the
viewer to reveal them for him or herself. It is not that documentaries lack the
ideas, but that they are bare-free from the veil of imitation. Ironically, this
makes them harder for the viewer to digest, so we usually walk away from
documentaries with more knowledge than understanding.
I think your last statement is really powerful, yet I think it is missing one aspect, especially considering the film Super Size Me, where a bit of knowledge and understanding come into light. I believe you are correctly splitting the film into to parts: the scientific facts and the experience of eating fast food regularly. This would split into knowledge and understanding respectively since we can apply the given knowledge in similar experiences as the film. Most people in our class have most likely indulged in fast food and felt, at one point or another, sick or fatigued. Hell we all experience the commercialism of fast food on a day to day basis. This only expands your final paragraph to extend the knowledge that we take for granted as true to apply to our own experiences... We are taking the bottled salt water back to the ocean and seeing that it is the same.
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with your argument here entirely. In my opinion, the allegory of the cave can be applied to Supersize Me but not in the way you are looking at it. I would say that the simple knowledge is the fact that "fast food is bad for you," which is common knowledge for just about anyone these days. The understanding, however, is what exactly that entails. Supersize Me gives the audience a much greater understanding on just what the unhealthiness of the food means, because although people know the fast food is bad, they probably wouldn't expect it to be as bad as it gets in the movie, and so afterwards they can understand just what weight the knowledge holds. Regardless, this is just another take on the allegory that I feel is quite viable.
ReplyDeleteHenry, I have to agree with Eric on this one. I believe it is pretty common knowledge that fast food is bad for you, yet most people don't understand exactly how bad it is. The film explicates on their presumptions about fast food's effects on the body, and helps them to understand further what they thought they knew. I don't agree with your statement that "we usually walk away from documentaries with more knowledge than understanding," or at least not in this example of Super Size Me. After watching this, i think most people walk away with the understanding of how bad fast food is if consumed on a regular basis, rather than the factual knowledge given throughout the movie.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that both the commenters and the original post are in fact aiming towards the same "truth", just from different angles. Henry is arguing that "truth", when defined as realizations and "ecstatic truth", can be found just as readily in films not based in fact as it can be found in documentaries. On the flip side, the commenters are arguing that despite a documentary's basis in fact, many viewers will translate these facts into a higher "truth" that holds more weight than just facts.
ReplyDeleteI think both traditional-style movies and documentaries are certainly capable of displaying higher truth, and the distinction comes not from the style of film but from the actual content of the film itself. "Truth", being elusive and not at all concrete, can come in many forms, and all types of movies (and all types of art in general) can evoke it.