What is Babel Really About?
This is a comment post from TMBC that I'm posting here and modifying slightly, because I think it could make for an interesting discussion...
I found Babel riveting to watch during every frame, but when it was over, I realized that the movie’s purpose was not to say something, but rather, to show us something and to help us experience something.
Some reviewers claim that there is a message of white privilege here. I really didn't get that at all. I would like to suggest a completely different explanation for the deeper purpose of this movie.
In thread 1 a Moroccan family suffers. In thread 2 and American husband and wife suffer. In thread 3 a Mexican vigilante suffers. In thread 4 a deaf Japanese Girl suffers. What is unique about these various sufferings, though, is that they are all caused by some intersection of a cultural sort. But I don’t think it’s about other cultures intersecting with a white culture. That doesn't carry across the threads for one thing.
For the Moroccan shepherd family, the culture they intersect with is not a white American privileged culture. It’s not a tourist culture either. That’s barely an intersection at all, separated by gunpowder and glass and hundreds of meters. Rather, what the Moroccan family intersects with is the rifle. They touch it. They see it. They buy it. They use it. It is the rifle that is so awkward and foreign to them. It is this rifle from the outside that is so mysterious and intriguing to them. It is the rifle that is so different from what they know and experience. And it is the rifle that drives the attitudes and actions of the boys in a peculiar way. When the rifle is being handed from the seller to the father we are meant to feel that the rifle does not belong there. There is something wrong with that transaction - something dangerous and foreign. There is a lack of respect for the rifle because there is a lack of understanding about the rifle. The filmmaker wants us to sense this tension. There should be a warning in our hearts. No, don’t take it. You are intersecting with the wrong thing – the wrong world. This is foreign to you. This is dangerous. There is no hint of white privilege in this thread.
For the American husband and wife, the culture they intersect with is not primarily a Moroccan culture. This is more an intersection with the “venturous culture.” This is highlighted from the very first frame in this thread. There is no explanation for why they are there. The husband cannot explain to the wife. They could have as easily been in Djibouti as in Morocco. It’s not about Morocco. It’s about going away. It’s about escaping. But while the husband forces them to be venturesome, he does not understand the implications of adventure. He does not understand the risks or even the purpose. He does not understand the culture of the particular place they happened to find themselves. From the first scene when the husband and wife are in a Moroccan restaurant the filmmaker wants us to feel something – that these people don’t belong there. It’s not because they are white and privileged…it’s because they just don’t belong there. It’s just not right. Something is wrong with it. It can’t be explained. There’s no reason. It just has to be felt.
For the two children being dragged along by the Mexican caretaker, the culture they intersect with is certainly a Mexican one, but there is something deeper. We feel that same sense of “they don’t belong here” but it has nothing to do with the fact that they are white and they are in Mexico. This isn’t about Mexicans and whites. This is about innocence and answerability. The children are brought into a world that is not their own and become appendages to the understandable, but still irresponsible machinations of their caretaker. Even as things start out fairly innocent and her desires and actions are understood, we are meant to feel that there is something dangerous about what the caretaker is planning. There is some warning in our heart that this cultural intersection will turn out badly. This feeling deepens every moment that this thread continues. Even the apparent fun that the kids are having has an ominous cloud over it. There is a shocking adultness that the children are forced into. Ironically, while the children are intersecting in a world that is not their own, the caretaker is also intersecting with the world that is not her own. Perhaps it used to be her world, but we can see and sense that she has grown apart from that world. In some sense even she does not seem to belong there. And then she finally intersects with the carelessness and immaturity as she rests her fait in the hands of a young and suave drunk with an attitude. But again, this is hardly about white privilege. This is about intersections that just feel wrong. They can’t be explained. They can only be felt.
Finally, the deaf Japanese girl, driven by her loneliness, is intersecting with a culture of carefree irresponsibility and fun. We sense that something is wrong when she resolves to flash the guys. We can sense that they are in different worlds and that there is something dangerous and foreign about her trying to enter that world of partying and drugs and sex. There is something wrong with that intersection. We can sense it, but she cannot.
Long story short: the point is that some things just don’t belong. You can’t just create a list of principles that express what does and doesn’t belong where. This is not about where guns belong or where deaf girls belong. You cannot say where these things belong. Rather, we can only see and feel when something is not right. The filmmaker wants us to feel that something is not right with these cultural intersections. Something or someone is in the wrong place. This is not a statement. It is an experience – an experience of being in the wrong place. That’s why when the movie ends the experience ends.
There is no greater statement of white privilege here. The point of the various cultures is simply to show that this experience transcends and crosses all cultures. But the point of the movie itself is to hone our senses - to waken them. We may find ourselves intersecting with something, but what we see and experience in Babel is that when you are the intersector, it is easy to be blind to that danger. It is easy to quell that warning in our hearts. We are meant to experience the tension of a bad intersection, be it with an item, a culture, or a person, so that we will recognize the warning in our heart when we come up against it.
I found Babel riveting to watch during every frame, but when it was over, I realized that the movie’s purpose was not to say something, but rather, to show us something and to help us experience something.
Some reviewers claim that there is a message of white privilege here. I really didn't get that at all. I would like to suggest a completely different explanation for the deeper purpose of this movie.
In thread 1 a Moroccan family suffers. In thread 2 and American husband and wife suffer. In thread 3 a Mexican vigilante suffers. In thread 4 a deaf Japanese Girl suffers. What is unique about these various sufferings, though, is that they are all caused by some intersection of a cultural sort. But I don’t think it’s about other cultures intersecting with a white culture. That doesn't carry across the threads for one thing.
For the Moroccan shepherd family, the culture they intersect with is not a white American privileged culture. It’s not a tourist culture either. That’s barely an intersection at all, separated by gunpowder and glass and hundreds of meters. Rather, what the Moroccan family intersects with is the rifle. They touch it. They see it. They buy it. They use it. It is the rifle that is so awkward and foreign to them. It is this rifle from the outside that is so mysterious and intriguing to them. It is the rifle that is so different from what they know and experience. And it is the rifle that drives the attitudes and actions of the boys in a peculiar way. When the rifle is being handed from the seller to the father we are meant to feel that the rifle does not belong there. There is something wrong with that transaction - something dangerous and foreign. There is a lack of respect for the rifle because there is a lack of understanding about the rifle. The filmmaker wants us to sense this tension. There should be a warning in our hearts. No, don’t take it. You are intersecting with the wrong thing – the wrong world. This is foreign to you. This is dangerous. There is no hint of white privilege in this thread.
For the American husband and wife, the culture they intersect with is not primarily a Moroccan culture. This is more an intersection with the “venturous culture.” This is highlighted from the very first frame in this thread. There is no explanation for why they are there. The husband cannot explain to the wife. They could have as easily been in Djibouti as in Morocco. It’s not about Morocco. It’s about going away. It’s about escaping. But while the husband forces them to be venturesome, he does not understand the implications of adventure. He does not understand the risks or even the purpose. He does not understand the culture of the particular place they happened to find themselves. From the first scene when the husband and wife are in a Moroccan restaurant the filmmaker wants us to feel something – that these people don’t belong there. It’s not because they are white and privileged…it’s because they just don’t belong there. It’s just not right. Something is wrong with it. It can’t be explained. There’s no reason. It just has to be felt.
For the two children being dragged along by the Mexican caretaker, the culture they intersect with is certainly a Mexican one, but there is something deeper. We feel that same sense of “they don’t belong here” but it has nothing to do with the fact that they are white and they are in Mexico. This isn’t about Mexicans and whites. This is about innocence and answerability. The children are brought into a world that is not their own and become appendages to the understandable, but still irresponsible machinations of their caretaker. Even as things start out fairly innocent and her desires and actions are understood, we are meant to feel that there is something dangerous about what the caretaker is planning. There is some warning in our heart that this cultural intersection will turn out badly. This feeling deepens every moment that this thread continues. Even the apparent fun that the kids are having has an ominous cloud over it. There is a shocking adultness that the children are forced into. Ironically, while the children are intersecting in a world that is not their own, the caretaker is also intersecting with the world that is not her own. Perhaps it used to be her world, but we can see and sense that she has grown apart from that world. In some sense even she does not seem to belong there. And then she finally intersects with the carelessness and immaturity as she rests her fait in the hands of a young and suave drunk with an attitude. But again, this is hardly about white privilege. This is about intersections that just feel wrong. They can’t be explained. They can only be felt.
Finally, the deaf Japanese girl, driven by her loneliness, is intersecting with a culture of carefree irresponsibility and fun. We sense that something is wrong when she resolves to flash the guys. We can sense that they are in different worlds and that there is something dangerous and foreign about her trying to enter that world of partying and drugs and sex. There is something wrong with that intersection. We can sense it, but she cannot.
Long story short: the point is that some things just don’t belong. You can’t just create a list of principles that express what does and doesn’t belong where. This is not about where guns belong or where deaf girls belong. You cannot say where these things belong. Rather, we can only see and feel when something is not right. The filmmaker wants us to feel that something is not right with these cultural intersections. Something or someone is in the wrong place. This is not a statement. It is an experience – an experience of being in the wrong place. That’s why when the movie ends the experience ends.
There is no greater statement of white privilege here. The point of the various cultures is simply to show that this experience transcends and crosses all cultures. But the point of the movie itself is to hone our senses - to waken them. We may find ourselves intersecting with something, but what we see and experience in Babel is that when you are the intersector, it is easy to be blind to that danger. It is easy to quell that warning in our hearts. We are meant to experience the tension of a bad intersection, be it with an item, a culture, or a person, so that we will recognize the warning in our heart when we come up against it.
posted by Anonymous at 3:46 PM
4 Comments:
Definitely an interesting take, Number Three, and not really one I disagree with at all.
I fully agree that Babel is meant to be an experience more than a message or a story. It's a very visceral movie, and I don't disagree with any of the feelings you mentioned the viewers were meant to get from the different strands.
However, I'd also imagine it's the sort of movie that would prompt different reactions from different people. Heck, if I watched it again (and I'd like to sometime soon) I might have a different reaction to it. But I know that when I watched it last weekend, what struck me and stuck with me most was what I mentioned in the review: that sense of Western entitlement.
But heavens knows that's not the only message one could have gotten from Babel, so if anyone else has seen it and cares to comment, I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Hmm...we may very well be the only ones who've seen it yet. Interesting...
i've seen it now, so i can comment intelligently. the only thing i have to add at this time, though, is about the Japanese girl, Chieko. i think the main thrust to her motivation is wanting to feel something. she's filled with anger, both at her deafness and at what happened to her mother. she's trapped in this silent world where she doesn't feel she belongs, and constantly tries to escape from it. that's where the drugs and the drinking and the raves come in. when she flashed the boys, i think it was more out of anger than naughtiness. one of her senses doesn't work, and she has to live with that all the time, so she's trying to compensate in any way she can think of. unfortunately, she translates that into making inappropriate sexual advances on people. but what she does has very little to do with sex, and a lot to do with getting some sort of sensation out of it, good or bad. when the policeman rejected her advances, that was the straw that broke the camel's back. but unlike her other experiments, the policeman reacted in tenderness and concern instead of anger. had he reacted in anger, i think she would have killed herself.
Yeah, that's a good observation PM. Not only is she intersecting with a world not her own, but she is trying to escape, and feels as if she doesn't belong in her own world. Very interesting.
Post a Comment
<< Home