Debating Cinema and Space - Essay Example

DEBATING CINEMA AND SPACE 0 Introduction 1 Hospitality as a social tool Hospitality has generally been accepted as a social tool, used to expressthe kind of relationship that exists between two people, normally, a guest and host in such a manner that shows that the host is welcoming to the guest, rather than hostile. In most cases, certain countries, states and group of people have made hospitality part of their identified culture to mean that they are highly welcoming to all kinds of strangers who approach them. It is in this context that a number of reviewers have taken the duty of deeply researching how feasible is it for a person or group of persons to tag themselves as social perfectionists because they are highly hospitable1. The quest of most of such reviewers including Derrida has been to send across a message that hospitality cannot happen naturally to some people because if it did, it would mean that hospitality has always been an unconditional social phenomenon2. But from every bit of his argument, Derrida put across the perception that people are hospitable conditionally. 1.2 Film as a social tool Like hospitability, films have also been used as a social tool to define the trend within which a group of people may leave together in a very compatible social setting. There are a number of ways that this has been done including the use of films to depict social situations that generally give people a sense of meaning to the daily social issues that happen around them. Such explanations are expected to give solutions and answers to people who have several questions to answer about the psychological social phenomenon. Again, the filming reception, which includes the act of taking people to watch movies in cinemas, has also been used as a social principle. What is more, films are used as mirrors to reflect the wrongs and rights of society. One of such films that have succeeded in one way or the other to play all such three roles is Dogville (2003). The social phenomenon that the film has portrayed is that of hospitality. To this end, the paper shall be discussed using Derrida’s approach on hospitability to critically evaluate the film, Dogville (2003)3. 2.0 Elements of Derrida’s approach on hospitality in relation to Dogville (2003) Derrida approaches the issue of hospitality from a number of approaches. Interestingly, most of these perspectives are directly reflected in the film, Dogville (2003). To this end, some of the most outstanding elements in the approach are discussed hand in hand with the theme of the film. 2.1 Hospitality for sale One of the loudest elements of Derrida’s approach on hospitality is that hospitality never takes place unconditionally but that people would always give out the act of being hospitable in exchange for something beneficial to the hosts4. By this, point is being made of how hospitability cannot be a natural innate situation that comes from people by itself. In Dogville (2003), there is a direct depiction of this situation at the immediate moment Grace received what was to be a hospitable support from Tom. This is people Tom actually accepted a gift from the gang that had been pursuing Grace for helping the gang with information. Even though Tom did not request for the gift from the gangsters, at least saying no to the gift or giving it back to Grace would have spoken a lot of how unconditional he was on his mission of hospitality. Even more, Grace was made to undertake basic chores for the community because the community had supposedly been hospitable to her – clearly, this was hospitability for sale. 2.2 Hospitality as a legal right Contrary to Immanuel Kant who argues that hospitability is a natural law, Derrida believes that hospitability is actually a legal right. Some of the points used to defend this argument are that states and nations impose so many conditions on factors that can make a person receive reception or make that state refuse reception to the person. In Dogville (2003), this element of the legality of hospitability rather than it being a natural law is highly exhibited. Clear scenarios could be given to support this argument from the film. This has to do with the fact that the police brought notices to the village on two different occasions trying to send the message that Grace did not legally deserve to be hosted hospitably and that she needed to be owned up. First, it was a notice that Grace was missing but on the second instance, it got even worse because the notice said she was wanted. So if people who are wanted cannot be housed because they have issues with the law, then there is evidence that hospitability is strongly governed by legal principles rather than natural laws5. 2.3 Temporality of Hospitability Again according to Derrida, hospitability is very temporal rather than permanent6. This is because in his opinion, once people feel that they have been hospitable enough, they begin to eat back their good deeds and begins to show acts of contention. As depicted in Dogville (2003), there was a stage among the people in the village where the familiarity of Grace amongst them started breeding contempt. Due to this, they started treating her with contempt and acted very cruelly towards her. Painfully enough, these wicked practices did not exist at the early stages when Grace first set feet in the community. There is evidence therefore to support Derrida that hospitability is highly temporal and that it fades with time. Worse of all, once it begins to fade, the guest receives worse treatment from the host than a person who had not been said to be hospitable would be7. 2.4 Hospitality in its opposite After Grace lived in Dogville for a while, she attempted to flee from the village that had once been a welcoming abode for her. The reasons were very simple! She was being manhandled. The manhandling was so bad that almost every other adult male in the community raped her. These acts are clear indications that hospitability could well exist in its opposite as showcased in Derrida’s arguments. In the view of Derrida, hospitability is not an act of being welcoming but hostile to guests and strangers. After all, the host does all the ‘nice’ acts of hospitality out of a mental compulsion rather than a personal will. In order worse, though there may be the exhibition of kindness and love from the outside, nothing but the opposite of that exists in the inside because the acts are not out of will. Until such a time when people will learn to present themselves to others without any inner feelings of undertaking a social mandate, which if left on their own they would not, the argument by Derrida that hospitability is in its opposite still stands8. 3.0 Analysis of Dogville from a hospitality perspective In this section of the paper, Dogville (2003) is analyzed independently from the perspective of hospitability. Earlier, the themes of Dogville (2003) had been discussed in relation to Derrida’s approach to hospitability. This time round, the film shall be looked at independently by looking at some of its major motives and forms. 3.1 Editing The editing of films plays very important roles in determining the final product that the audience receives as end users of the product of the film9. In effect, the editing of films should be able to send the right message of what the producer has in his sleeves to the audience. Arguing from this background, it can be said that the makers of Dogville (2003) were very loud in using their work to outline how the American society could get highly intemperate if not guided. The producers did this by refusing to cut out on some of the acts of violence and weakness that went on in the film. Some of these were acts of rape, shooting and burning of buildings. From the perspective of hospitability, it could be said that the film was edited in such a way that it sent a message of failed campaign of hospitality about the American people10. Even though some people have had different schools of thought of how the editing was used to send the wrong signal, the final product remains that hospitability is not as free and true in its essence as it is made to appear in the social realm. 3.2 Sound From a perspective of hospitability, it is expected that a movie like Dogville (2003) would have such sound qualities that are warm, quiet, friendly and mutual. This is because when people who are supposedly living a hospitable life meet, the audio environment that is expected to exist around them is one that should be full of humour and mutualism11. Especially as the people of Dogville were proving to Grace that they were being nice to her for harbouring her in their midst, all of these qualities should have existed in the sound of the film. Rather, audience is presented with loud screams of pain and agony, often coming from the element supposed to be receiving peace from her hosts. There were also sounds of loud shouts that orders instructions, coming from people who were supposed to be acting as hospitable hosts. Clearly, the sound quality of the film is an indication and an invisible voice ridiculing the irony that existed in the minds of the people of Dogville. 3.3 Storyline Much of the content of the irony of global hospitability is depicted in the storyline of Dogville (2003). As many philosophers have argued, hospitability will take place conditionally and for a temporary moment and if forced to continue, will end up in violence12. The story line of Dogville (2003) was the exact depiction of such description where Grace is first met and welcomed into the homes of the people of Dogville because they had taken conditions for doing so. Next, the good living that the people had with her started fading and she started receiving treatment like one of the ordinary people who were no guest. Later, the condition deteriorated and got so bad that she had to attempt to flee because she was constantly raped and physically assaulted. As all these were happening, the people kept believing in their self-made ideology that they were being highly sociable to Grace and being of help to her because they had refused to hand her over to the police. 3.4 Characterization Characterization involves the selection of characters and the roles that are given to them to play. As much as possible, the characters must carry themselves in their roles so well and help in making the themes of the stories known through their acting. In Dogville (2003), Grace, a female being chased by gangsters was made to play the led role. Normally, females are thought to be feeble gender and so would not be made to receive such treatment. So the people of Dogville, who knew her story, were expected to play the roles of sympathizers, who would not add insults to injury. But Grace received the opposite from almost every other character in the movie, including her own father. If there was any character that showed Grace some humane attitude, then it was Tom. Tom’s role was important in championing the call that to every rule there would be some exceptions. So even if most people would trumpet hospitability and practice it, there could perhaps be others who could genuinely be hospitable13. 3.5 Theme The theme of any film has been an important motive for sending down to the viewer, the core message within the film that the filmmaker wants to put across14. Most often than not, films will one central theme that is surrounded and supported by different number of sub-themes. In the film, there is a central theme that touches on hospitality. However, this theme is presented in a more satiric manner to the audience in that the very people who were thought to be hospitable were acting otherwise. Invariably, the filmmaker was making mockery of how the entire social system of hospitability has failed and yet people keep praising themselves for being instruments and trumpeters of hospitability15. Within this theme, the filmmaker also touches on a highly related issue, which borders on lawlessness. Indeed, it was through the very acts of lawlessness that the film portrayed that the failed attempt by the people to be hospitable emerged. In a rather difficult situation, the people were faced with selecting between honouring the laws of the land by owning up a girl who was accused of theft and keeping the girl from the possible hardships that she could face in the hands of the law16. An irony is however created as the girl did not experience the through definition of escape from the hands of the law as there was no peace of mind for her where she was. In effect, a lesson is well established through the contents of the film that he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day because at end of the day, Grace found herself in the hands of the people who had been seeking for her since the very beginning. 3.6 Idealism A number of characters had idealism in the film, particularly Jack and the people of Dogville, Tom and Grace’s father. Jack and the people of Dogville had the ideal of being highly hospitable to a stranger who had showed much innocence but was still being accused of theft. This ideal how did not live for long as it changed in the course of the film. At a point in time, the people would turn their backs on Grace and prey on her like a piece of meat. The older males used her to satisfy their sexual pleasure and presented her only with things that were most appalling to her. Tom on the other hand did not change his ideal of being a good host to Grace. It is not for nothing that when power rested with Grace in the long run, she decided to destroy all but Tom. On the part of Grace’s father, his ideal was living his inheritance for his daughter as a way of showing great fatherliness. But indeed for the act that he wanted his daughter to be involved, there was no way she would have accepted it if not for the fact that she wanted to use it to pay her enemies back. 4.0 Hospitality and the act of cinema in the American context 4.1 Cinemas as a hosting institution Arguably, America, and for that matter the United States has the world’s biggest film industry17. As part of the film industry is the strong quest for people to visit cinemas to watch films week in and week out. The practice of watching movies in cinemas is perhaps the secret behind the huge box offices that are received on movies. Generally therefore, it could be said that cinemas are used as hosting institutions in the United States. Commonly, people will go to cinemas in groups of family and friends. In cases where guests are received into homes, cinemas serve as truly refreshing destinations for them. But as much as the merits of using cinemas as hosting institutions are concerned, concerns have also been raised on how cinemas are used by people shift their roles of personally being sociable and hospitable to cinemas18. In essence therefore, the act of taking guests to cinemas should not be an end in its self but a means to an end. 5.0 Conclusion The paper will be concluded with a reflection on all the topical issues that have been raised and a closer look at the issue of modern day hospitality as it transcends in both films and from the perspective of Immanuel Kant and Derrida. Generally, Dogville (2003) has been a direct advocate and supporter of what Derrida had long preached that hospitality never comes unconditionally and that people who are thought to be hospitable do so with much reluctance and as a legal obligation rather than a natural law. Whiles writing on ‘to perpetual peace: a philosophical sketch’ (1795) however, Immanuel Kant posited that people hold the cosmopolitan right to hospitality. In his opinion therefore, all people who enter a given state must be treated with equal justice and without hostility19. Noting these two divergent schools of thought, the best conclusion to draw is to look at a typical modern day scenario where by despite the numerous economic pacts that are being signed among nations to make the movement of people and good free and accessible, there still exist numerous migration laws and legislations. Each of these laws and legislations ought to be adhered to, to the latter. One would therefore ask that if hospitality was indeed natural, why all people would not be welcomed to just any other state. Even for countries that accept to harbour refugees, they do so by giving so many laws out there to the refugees and the guest nations. In some cases, they demand benefits from the United Nations before doing these. So until such a moment that some of these modern practices seize, the view held by Derrida and the one portrayed in Dogville (2003) would be shared by the writer that “conditions of state-hood, imposing an agreement between states, therefore it is not a natural law but a legal right”20 REFERENCE LIST Adams R. T 2011, Organs of Organizational Growth and Strategic Development. London: Alpha Press Limited Bernasconi R, “Deconstruction and the Possibility of Ethics,” in Deconstruction and Philosophy, ed. by John Sallis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), 135. Brophy, J. M., Perspectives from the past: primary sources in Western civilizations; Adam Smith, Wealth of nations, 2002. pg. 225-231 Derrida J, Acts of Religion, “Hostipitality,” trans. by Gil Anidjar (New York: Routledge, 2002), 362. Derrida J, Adieu, trans. by Pascale-Anne Brault and Micheal Naas (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999), 51. Doniger, W. Splitting the difference. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1999. Print. Gardner, B. and Petit, Seidu. 2006, A Study of the UK Economy’ s Requirements for People with Experience of Working in Cinemas Cardio: University of Wales. Hent de Vries, Religion and Violence (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002), 304. Kamuf, P, “From Now On,” in Epoche, 10:2 (Spring 2006), 203-220 Kant I, Perpetual Peace, trans. by H.B Nisbet (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 105. Lawlor, L, Derrida and Husserl: The Basic Problem of Phenomenology (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2002). Leonard Lawlor L, Derrida and Husserl (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2002), 213. Levinas E, Otherwise than Being or Beyond Essence, trans. by Alphonso Lingis (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1981), 112. Levinas E, Totality and Infinity, trans. by Alphonso Lingis (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1969), 172. Miller H. J, “The Critic as Host,” in Deconstruction and Criticism (New York: Continuum, 1985), 221. Naas M, Taking on the Tradition: Jacques Derrida and the Legacies of Deconstruction (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003), 157 Robert, B, “Deconstruction and Possibility of Ethics,” in Deconstruction and Philosophy: The Texts of Jacques Derrida, ed. by John Sallis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988). Weber S, “In the Name of the Law,” in Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice, ed. by Drucilla Cornell, Michel Rosenfeld, and David Gray Carlson (New York: Routledge, 1992), 251. Westmoreland M. W, 2008, Interruptions: Derrida and Hospitality. Kritike Volume Two Number One (June 2008) 1-10 Read More