TECOW EM Cell Group 1

antonioni’s tragic vision by jennynotjen
March 2, 2009, 12:07 am
Filed under: Uncategorized

So my paper due for tomorrow is all about the Italian filmmaker Michelangelo Antonioni, and the topic I chose is about the “decentering of the psyche in modernity as developed in the 1964 film Red Desert”.  Anyhoo, it might not make sense for any of you guys if you haven’t seen the film or know of Antonioni’s stylistic/thematic features…

BUT I came across a passage in my research which I thought was pertinent to our discussion today about the institution of church and all the crap that comes with it.  How do we separate ourselves from that and be purely God-centred Christians?

Substitute “individual/human” as “pure God-centred Christian”, and “the group” as “the Church” (it may be a stretch, but try to make the connection…).

Sidenote: He uses the terms “sacrifice” and “reconciliation” counter-intuitive to my argument (just because the film calls for that kind of analysis).

Undergoing Antonioni’s view of the tragedy of human existence is the belief that none of the opposites we have discussed (male and female, the individual and the group) is absolute.  Each needs the complement of the other. Yet, although the reconciliation of opposites is necessary in order to become more fully human, it is impossible to achieve. The very nature of the opposites as opposites prevents this from occurring.  For example, to be truly human is to be an individual.  To be truly an individual is to be an outsider, to refuse to submit to the pressures of the group, for by allowing oneself to become a Being-with-others, one sacrifices the conditions that are necessary to individuate oneself – i.e., the very conditions necessary for becoming fully human.  Yet one also needs others to become a real person. No reconciliation between the individual and the group is, therefore, possible, for in becoming part of a group, one sacrifices that solitariness that is requisite to becoming a true individual; yet one cannot become truly an individual, truly human without experiencing the ties that bind him or her to others.

Albeit, the writer here is talking about the tragedy of the situation of having to be associated with one thing to be another – but I think it points out that we can’t ever become “fully human” or in our case, live our lives to the full without the body of Christ (i.e., the church).

Thus, there must be reconciliation between the agents of the dichotomy.

If anyone is interested, I have the film – which I would highly recommend to anyone.  It’s a thinker.


PS.  Sorry if this post was confusing.

1 Comment so far
Leave a comment

is the individual Christian in conflict with the Church or “institutional” Church in terms of there growth as a person or Christian? i would say for the most part no, but i guess if we take the example of the individual vs group dynamic, which antonioni talks about than this is somewhat true. But this is true with any group dynamic which demonstrates the difficulty of leading groups in a way that the group may grow as well as the individual, so that each individual “sacrifice” may not be considered a sacrifice but a contribution.

Comment by 1nv35t3df41th

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: