Omegahero09 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 So I've watched Sons of Anarchy- most of it. Recently the old lady asked me about the show and if I had any interest in it because the characters in it are anarchists sort of? I dismissed it by reminding her that anarchists are non-violent and abhor violence and we both agree the show is pretty dumb. After that I started to think- are people even thinking about anarchy when they watch some movies and tv? Off the top of my head anarchy has a pretty bad rap. The Joker from the Christopher Nolan Batman movies was an anarchist. Hurray. Anarchy also is a huge unspoken element in The Walking Dead, and watching it again through season three with the Governor and Woodsbury shows a whole new light on the show and the situations in that show which makes the show so great. Anyone see any commentary on anarchy in SoA and TWD? Or in other popular movies and tv? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatrickC Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Yeah, misinformation about the definition of anarchy is standard, particularly in film and TV. Ironically anarchism is very likely to be the future, except it wont be the dystopic vison of todays directors. I'm glad to say that the few people I've talked about the topic with. Whilst they may disagree with it's ambitions, they no longer view anarchists as violent revolutionaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 I do not have any particular commentary on these (as I have not seen most of them), but to say that it is expected when that is how anarchy is defined in the minds of people. However, if you are interested in an interesting portrayal of an Anarchist is the superhero Anarky in the Batman series. He was created as an anarcho-syndacalist type and then evolved into a libertarian-anarchist type as the author's view changed along similar lines. He has some occasions where he is trying to stop the evils of the state and he works against Batman and thus in the eyes of the reader he either is an anti-villan (a person using good ideas and means to achieve an evil end) or a hero. Anarky has pages where he puts out long bits of philosophical reasoning to his dog (and thus the reader) and is designed to make the reader at least sympathetic to him even if he is a bad guy in their mind. Other times, there is a evil guy and Anarky and Batman team up in order to take them down and then Anarky disappears before he can be caught by Batman. There have been other authors that have messed with the character some and made him willing to kill enemies when originally he wasn't meant to. He also made an appearance in the newest Batman game Arkham: Origins (which I have yet to play). Thus, in the Batman universe there is some counter-play to the anarchist ideas besides the obviously evil and chaotically violent actions of the Joker. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarky He seems to be getting more use as a character recently, and we will see how he develops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornellius Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Apparently, Franz Ferdinand was killed by "anarchists" thus setting off World War 1. Thanks Anarchy like OMG! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lians Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 I like to remind myself of an ancient story whenever I'm thinking about the media's relationship with the truth. The story takes place in Athens, more than two millennia ago. It's something I've assembled out of our existing knowledge of the Ancient Greeks. I hope you don't mind if I post it here. I think there's something to learn from it. The earliest account of Socrates comes from Aristophanes, a famous Athenian playwright. In a comedy called The Clouds Aristophanes portrays Socrates as a quirky teacher of natural philosophy, a discipline that is as scientific as it gets when it comes to the ancients. This was no harmless humour. At the time, people accused of practising or teaching natural philosophy were tried by the State and executed for atheism. Years later, after his trial, Socrates, freed from the fear of dying, openly admits to pursuing natural philosophy in his youth. In his early philosophical journey he couldn't refute the idea of having Gods as primary movers in the world, so he embarked on what he called a second sailing - a philosophy that is focused on people rather than nature. Socrates' acknowledgement affirms that Aristophanes was no slanderer. However, there's something much more sinister about the comedy. As the plot unfolds, Socrates is revealed as someone who corrupts the young and turns them against their parents. Having received the teachings of Socrates, Pheidippides, the son of Strepsiades, argues that it's just for a wise son to beat a foolish father. Aren't the elderly permitted to punish the young because of their superior wisdom? Strepsiades, despite getting beaten by Pheidippides over a dispute, accepts his son's superior reasoning. Mind you, beating your parents was about the most deplorable thing a Greek could do back in those days. When Pheidippides threatens to beat his mother as well, Strepsiades snaps and swears revenge on Socrates for corrupting his son. The play ends with the vengeful father burning down Socrates' school of natural philosophy. The story presented in Aristophanes' comedy is remarkably similar to what we have to deal with, isn't it? This was two and a half millennia ago! Indeed, the power of philosophy was very clear even back then. Needless to say, the play had a profound impact on the way Athenian society perceived Socrates and philosophy as a whole. Here we have an example of how the media, and art in particular, attacks everyone that challenges the existing power paradigm. Emotional arguments can be a terrible vehicle for corruption. The story doesn't end here. After Socrates' execution, Plato published a transcription of his teacher's final speech. In it, Socrates makes the cursed argument that Athenians should obey the laws of the State. Naturally, this transcription had a profound impact on Socrates' reputation. The public was now on his side. Enter Xenophon and Plato who both published vindications of Socrates in the form of stories about their teacher. Xenophon, a student of Socrates, was one of the most prolific writers in all of antiquity. Up until the Dark Ages, everyone who was considered learned had to read his work. Plato himself was a renowned rhetorician. These two made Socrates famous. When the balance of the social scales tipped in favour of Socrates, art and media suddenly found themselves on his side. There's great power as well as terrible danger in the artistic mediums. I don't think we'll have much support from the media until the general public acknowledges the messages we're trying to spread. I'm not holding my breath for this possibility, but I really wish that, for once in history, mainstream art got behind just causes that are unpopular. For philosophy to be successful, it has to be embedded in the very fabric of society. No one does that better than artists. Thanks for reading my musings! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mishelle Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Nicely done! I really know next to nothing about ancient history, which is sad, I need to fix this lack in my education. Still, I completely agree with your final lines: "For philosophy to be successful, it has to be embedded in the very fabric of society. No one does that better than artists." I wonder how we could contribute to changing this, I think a lot about it. Much of great art is driven by pain and other very deep emotion--it comes from a "body" space, not a head space, if I can generalize a bit and sound rather New Agey. Great poets don't write because they are happy, they write because they are exalted, or miserable. This is why I don't think happiness really contributes much to the world so it cannot be the raison d'etre! Passion inspires great art. If philosophy is focused on happiness or "good living" or however you want to call it as the end goal, and virtue as the path to getting there, it does seem a bit shallow to me for producing great art. But I'm still working on this, surely I must be missing something important! On the note of the topic--Sons of Anarchy, I've also watched this, and like it. But I don't call this anarchy, because everything in their culture is still based on hierarchy and a very rigid top-down structure. There's still a master-slave component, it's only anarchy against the state, not the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lians Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 "For philosophy to be successful, it has to be embedded in the very fabric of society. No one does that better than artists." I wonder how we could contribute to changing this, I think a lot about it. Much of great art is driven by pain and other very deep emotion--it comes from a "body" space, not a head space, if I can generalize a bit and sound rather New Agey. Great poets don't write because they are happy, they write because they are exalted, or miserable. This is why I don't think happiness really contributes much to the world so it cannot be the raison d'etre! Passion inspires great art. If philosophy is focused on happiness or "good living" or however you want to call it as the end goal, and virtue as the path to getting there, it does seem a bit shallow to me for producing great art. But I'm still working on this, surely I must be missing something important! I think the best way to go about doing this is to lead by example. Stef's doing that himself. All his wonderful metaphors come from his arts background, not philosophy in itself. Have a listen to this: FDR1449 'Arch' - A Poem http://cdn.media.freedomainradio.com/feed/FDR_1449_arch_a_poem_analysis.mp3 Personally, philosophy rekindled my passion for beauty and added so much more to it. When it comes to artistic drive, happiness and love in the service of reason can be just as effective as the pain and sadness caused by evil. I say this from experience! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lians Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Just realized I never actually explained how Aristophanes' comedy is related to this show. I watched a few episodes when Sons of Anarchy first came out. To analyse the show's impact, you have to take the whole story in; both the emotional and intellectual content. If I remember correctly, the protagonists were brutish, miserable and unfulfilled. The whole environment was ripe with dysfunction. I doubt much of this has changed in later episodes. What's the message here? Here's what happens to those who fight unjust power. This is what's born out of anarchy. These are her sons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omegahero09 Posted December 26, 2013 Author Share Posted December 26, 2013 If I remember correctly, the protagonists were brutish, miserable and unfulfilled. The whole environment was ripe with dysfunction. I doubt much of this has changed in later episodes. Bingo- I don't really remember the show delving into the philosophy of anarchy at all, the only reason the name was there I think was because it sounded good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quickstine Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 What a great discussion ... I've run out of positive votes today, or I'd put them all over here. @ Lians, thanks for digging into the archives sharing the poem with us. I enjoyed your notes about Socrates and Aristophanes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coreforcruxes Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I had to chime in and say thanks Lians, your posts on this thread have been very interesting and educational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceD Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Yesterday I saw the Lego movie with my kid and was surprised to see a positive representation of anarchy in it. At one point in the story as the main characters are fleeing from the secret police, who had black and white vehicles that closely resemble the black and white cars used by most police forces in America. They then arrive at a new place that's up in the clouds and are introduced to a new character who explains where they are. Alongside images showing this place is populated with people who are obviously living a much more enjoyable life then everywhere else you've seen in the movie the character listing all the positive aspects of this place starts with "we have no government!" The icing on the cake was when some minutes later the same villains that closely resemble the US police force bust in and destroy everything. While the messages in the movie weren't perfect I was so happy to see anarchy displayed positively and the government and it's police force shown in an appropriately negative light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omegahero09 Posted February 22, 2014 Author Share Posted February 22, 2014 Yesterday I saw the Lego movie with my kid and was surprised to see a positive representation of anarchy in it. Aaaaaand now I'm going to go watch the lego movie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceD Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Aaaaaand now I'm going to go watch the lego movieI'm excited to hear what you think of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptArcher Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Did Socrates truly say that people ought to obey the State? Or were his name and 'ideas' merely co-opted by the State after his death? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lians Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 Did Socrates truly say that people ought to obey the State? Or were his name and 'ideas' merely co-opted by the State after his death? We'll never know but the shift occurred with the change in perception, which is all that really matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts