Equilibrium

The film’s rich symbolism and irony made me think deeply about society, its rules and how they effect individual human beings.

False Security and Abuse of Power
The drug Prozium, which is prescribed to eliminate threatening emotions (anger, jealousy, sadness, etc.), and emotions in general, induced something more monstrous: disconnectedness with the self and others.  In reality, Sethi et al., (2015) claim psychopathy to include antisocial behaviour and emotional detachment/ lack of affect, and apathy (lack of interest, enthusiasm, or concern).  Interestingly, emotional detachment is a component of psychopathology, which constitutes roughly 15-20% of the prison population (Sethi et al., 2015).

Emotions are what make people human, and removing them equates to characteristics of psychopathology.  The dramatic irony is the mass prescription of a pathological numbing agent by a public leader named Father.  The word father has deeply rooted meanings that centre on the importance of trust and love (particularly in states of vulnerability).  The fearful society believes the Father figure’s prescription of Prozium is the answer to the scary emotions that can lead to the end of the world (through world war 3).  The Father then abuses the vulnerability and trust of the people to gain control and abuse the rights of others.  Since art imitates life, we see a real representation of this form of power abuse in modern reality.

The Father in Modern Society
Winston Churchill once said, “The empires of the future are the empires of the mind.” Empires will be run through the mass-mind-washing of prescriptive ideologies.  We live in a time with constant bombardment of advertisements and programming everywhere; on television, radio, movies, Youtube, webpages, etc.  Similarly, the Father displays himself 24/7 on all televisions, radios, and large screens in every scene throughout the film.  Father understands that social norm prescriptions are learned through the incidental exposure to stimulus objects (Kwan, Suhui, & Chi-Yue, 2015).  In other words, the psychological phenomena known as the mere-exposure effect: instances where people develop preferences for things because of their persistent exposure to them (Kwan et al., 2015).  Do people always develop preferences for things because of their persistent exposure to them? As previously mentioned, people are often unaware of the control the effects of mere-exposure have on them.  This excerpt from the film My Dinner with Andre has an interesting narrative on being awake vs being asleep to realities we subconsciously accept.

The awakened state of personal distinctiveness is evident during an artistic scene in Equilibrium when white-dressed Preston is running and moving against the slow moving, dark-clothed, uniform crowd.  Additionally, animator and writer for Salad Fingers (David Firth) describes some of the psychological strain of such exposure; “I cannot believe how bad TV has gotten- and it almost inspires me to react to it somehow…, it should be really my choice of what to see, but if I see 10 posters in a row of Bruno Mars’s latest album, by the 9^th one I am usually seething.  So, I just can’t help but write something just to vent my anger, and if it makes its way into a cartoon then, why not (BBC, 2009).” Mr.  Firth perfectly captures the mere exposure effect in a in his rebellious short titled, Music Guess, 2009. 

Mere-Exposure Effect and Equilibrium
The mere-exposure effect is most likely to be effective when a person experiences a strong motivation for social connectedness (Kwan et al., 2015).  Interestingly, Preston deviated from his familiar and trusting Father and sought his own meaning in halting his Prozium doses.  This took a lot of courage, as it is insanely difficult to stray from what is seemingly safe and familiar; people have psychological tendencies to stick with what is consistent, and predictable (Schulz, 1976).  Nothing could be more predictable than feeling nothing and having a set agenda, however, Preston’s need for personal distinctiveness (Kwan et al., 2015) is likely what drove his courage to end his Prozium doses.  This means, that personal distinction and emotional life experiences are important for social connectedness.  The Equilibrium society is uniform and similar, yet, disembodied and disconnected.  Interestingly, our minds are hardwired to perceive connection when groups are similar to one another as strong bonds are assumed in this solidarity.  The most important message in this film is that a society can appear to be connected, yet be horribly detached.  You cannot form real connections with others without a real connection with yourself.  Erich Fromm mentions how a pathological society limits human needs; The need for relatedness and unity, transcendence and a sense of effectiveness, rootedness, sense of identity, frame of orientation and an object of devotion, excitation and stimulation.  None of these basic needs can be met when your right to experience the world is taken from you (i.e., your emotions).  Pathology of normalcy adjusts individuals to the pathological demands of society.  “the fact that millions of people share the same forms of mental pathology does not make these people sane”(Fromm, 2013, p.  15).  The prescribed normalcy from Equilibrium’s Father is socially enforced between people, “you forget its my job to know what you are thinking!”

Emotions, Knowledge, Pathology , Growth and Social Connectedness
Emotions teach us the world is always changing and with change comes with growth.  University Psychology Professor, Claude Lamontagne, provides a clear explanation how the roots of psychopathology stem from rigid thinking and inability to appropriately reflect and accept new ideas; “the whole idea is the growth of knowledge where hypotheses are made and conclusions are formed.  There is a process of making generalities of what reality is…, then generalities are proposed.  If generalities fail, is another generality opened up? A better or greater truth…? Pathology arises when you start creating things that are not open to refutation anymore, or that are so open to refutation, that they get refuted all the time.  “

The Father figure dictates an irrefutable truth which denies people the right to draw their own conclusions.  Indeed, he projects the philosophies of his damaged (ideal) self onto others and stunts the growth that can be offered by a persons’ unique and rich experience provided by emotions (denying real connectedness.)  The more extreme the disorder of the personality, the more social predators enjoy harming or humiliating and dominating other people (Hunter,2015).  Emotions are central to preventing or allowing conclusions to form and people are naturally attuned to trusting their emotions toward the acquisition of knowledge and growth.  Growth is love, “love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite” (Mandela, 1995).

The Pathological Society (Equilibrium)
Neurosis begets neurosis.  As Fromm states, “the culture provides patterns which enable them to live with a defect without becoming ill.  It is as if each culture provided the remedy against the outbreak of manifest neurotic symptoms which would result from defect produced by it.  If the opiate against the socially patterned defect were withdrawn, the manifest illness would make its appearance.  (Fromm, 2013, p. 17)” Within the Equilibrium society, this remedy is the Prozium drug, whereas in our society the remedy is likely technology/social media based.  If we removed this remedy, it would be interesting to see what happens and what the manifest illness is.  Freedom to do and have versus freedom to be; the importance of facing yourself, rather than fixing yourself.

The John Preston Challenge
This is a challenge that a professor of mine, Mariusz Zadrag, proposed to his students: Go four weeks without: the internet (except for work/ other important things), Facebook, MySspace, etc.  (see the people in person), iPod, cd-player, tv, movies music (go see it live instead), no magazines (read good books instead), no phone (only emergency use.)  By doing this, we are forced to face ourselves rather than fix ourselves. Technology (artificial interaction) has become like Prozium in equilibrium society. What do you gain in your life when you remove the societal opiate of choice?

If you choose to take the John Preston Challenge, please leave your comments and insights below.

References
aedt2150.  (2013, February 26).  8.3 Interview with Dr.  François Desjardins and Dr.  Claude Lamontagne (part 1) [Video File].  Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlg3gQigeqo&t=231s.
BBC.  (2009, May, 29) .Fat pie’s David Firth ridicules 2009’s music scene – BBC comedy extra [Video File].  Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pehHOqx7JXg
Blahmedia.  (2011, April, 2).  A conversation about reality- My dinner with Andre [Video File].  Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68JLWyPxt7g
Fromm, E.  (2013).  Sane Society Ils 252.  Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Hunter, M.  (2015).  Can relationships with people who have borderline personalities be saved? Retrieved from https://www.newways4families.com/articles/2016/7/13/can-relationships-with-people-who-have-borderline-personalities-be-saved
HuHa 2.  (2013, July 28) .David Firth.  Heroes of animation with Bing [Video File].  Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wARTupdJVW8.  (2013)
Kwan, L.  Y., Yap, S., & Chiu, C.  (2015).  Mere exposure affects perceived descriptive norms: Implications for personal preferences and trust.  Organizational Behavior And Human Decision Processes, 129(SI: Social Norms and Cultural Dynamics), 48-58.  doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.12.002
Sethi, A., Gregory, S., Dell’Acqua, F., Thomas, E.  P., Simmons, A., Murphy, D.  M., & Craig, M.  C.  (2015).  Emotional detachment in psychopathy: Involvement of dorsal default-mode connections.  Cortex: A Journal Devoted To The Study Of The Nervous System And Behavior, 6211-19.  doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2014.07.018<
Schulz, R.  (1976).  Effects of control and predictability on the physical and psychological well-being of the institutionalized aged.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33(5), 563-573.  Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.33.5.563

In an interview with Kevin McCarthy from Fox DC 5, Jordan Peele explicitly states his intention to let his audience know Get Out is directed by a black man. He wants his audience to know he intentionally layered hidden, subtle messages within the film to address how racism is not a feature of the past, but rather, an ever-present issue that is constantly skirted. That is, ignorance begets more racism and re-lived mistakes of the past. This is evident in the scene where the main character, the black man Chris meets white girlfriend Rose’s relatives at the weekend family reunion. Most members remark on how they would vote Obama for a second, third, or fourth term, and how their favourite sports players are black, etcetera. Peele says this scene depicts how most people will use popular and well known people from his race as a way of “extending an olive branch”, however, in reality, this is objectification. The premise for such action defies the point that we can all relate on the basis of being human. That is, Peele finds people try to connect with him on a racial basis first, rather than a person to person basis, signifying a discomfort with pre-perceived, latent, unidentified racial issues.

The film has its moments of satire and humor between Chris (Daniel Kaluuya) and his friend (Lil Rel Howery), however, the true nature of the film is horrifying, intense and suspenseful.

The story begins with Chris and Rose (Allison Williams), a young couple who embark on a trip to a remote, suburban town located outside the city to visit her parents, Missy and Dean (Catherine Keener and Bradly Whitford). At first, Chris has apprehensions of meeting Rose’s parents because he expects there could be conflicts on the basis of their interracial relationship. Despite Missy and Dean’s seemingly warm and accommodating behaviour, as the weekend visit progresses, Chris’s initial fears are realised with the progression of increasingly disturbing discoveries of Rose’s familial attitudes toward racism.

The first 15 minutes of the film give you a taste for the severity of the racial experience as you view the racial harassment of a young black man in a suburban neighbourhood, the racial profiling of Chris’s friend by an older woman, and then, at Chris’s apartment where Rose meets him, he begins asking her whether her parents are ok with him being black and their relationship being interracial. The immediate saturation of racial topics and issues in these scenes push to give the viewer a perspective, or taste of what it is like to be a part of the non-dominant, or target minority within the population. It is my opinion that the consistent topic of race is meant to initiate viewers to question whether they know how it is for someone who is black in modern society. During my second year in the Counselling Psychology program I read an article by Peggy Macintosh titled White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Napsack. The article revealed how many areas of life can affect a person who either fits or does not fit the prescribed dominant populace, or racial ideal. That is, white, male, heterosexual, Christian, able-bodied, Anglo saxon, young, and so on. Not fitting the majority of these prescribed dominant ideals means suffering the loss of privilege within Western society, despite the current paradigmatic push for pro multi-cultural values. Indeed, this is why this film is so big, as it shows the prevalence of racist values counter to the progressive multicultural movement. Racial struggles and loss of privileged rights are depicted in the symbolism used in this film to convey the disabling and complex emotions of helplessness, internal conflict, personal violation, and so on.

Our life experiences can be so powerful at times that we may experience full-on alexithymia (trouble or inability of putting our experiences into words). Indeed, this is why such artistic modes of expression exist; to portray such experiences in ways that words cannot describe. Get Out exemplifies the realities of social injustices through the art form; embedded in human nature as a universal healing method that acts as a narrative to reveal subconscious material embedded within the mind (Tan, 2012). The characters involved in this film embody the powerful struggles one may experience in a racist societal context; the white girlfriend, and her professional parents, Missy and Dean; one a neurosurgeon (Dean), the other, a psychiatrist (Missy). Both powerful, both from professions that are historically feared by many as enforcers of societal norms; i.e., if you deviate outside the norm, there is a treatment/ prescription for that. Further, such professionals tend to be blind to their privilege as Norcross and Karpiak (2012) state that the percentage of clinical psychologists who identify as part of a racial or ethnic minority group is under 10 percent. This fear of others in higher social positions dictating the criteria for normal, is a fear embodied and realised by several contemporary films like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, A Dangerous Method, A Therapy, Side Effects, and so on. Considering that the form of art provides meaning making, and the power to express without restriction or the oppressive refutation of others (Potash, Copland, & Stepney, 2015), I argue that this piece of art provides deep insight into the horror of what it is like to experience racism through symbolic portrayals of helplessness and assigned objectification.

Symbolism of the Deer and Racist Attitudes:

Peele uses deer throughout the film to symbolize helplessness and highlight effects of racism. For example, when Chris hits a deer he feels helpless and tortures himself over it. Conversely, Rose’s parents believe the deer being hit as a victory as “Every deer I see dead on the road, I think, It’s a start.” Chris’s care for a living animal contrasts Rose’s parents? objectification of the animal as a thing. Missy and Dean’s house is full of deer decorations and parts (including a mounted head on the wall). They use the deer even though they think the deer is worthless of any subjective value. Thus, the deer represents the objectification of a living being, similar to the banish of privileges obvious behind acts of racism.

The Meaning of that Sinking Feeling and The Surgery

Peele exemplifies how traumatic racism can be in his film by using Missy and Dean as key instigators. Missy dives into Chris’s mind using involuntary hypnosis, making him paralyzed and unable to escape what seems like a dark hole in his mind (see movie to find out what it is). Dean elects to perform a different, but equally invasive act on Chris. This is poignant as these acts demonstrate the symbolic stripping of a person’s identity and personal autonomy as a human being. They treat Chris and other black people the same way they treat the deer. I never imagined how being recognized as colour-first could be so terrifying. Why? Because I do not know what it is like, since I am privileged and fit the majority of the dominant traits. Get Out discloses layers to the experience of being a racial target that cannot be put into words. They must be put into portrayals of experiences on different planes as a means of involving the viewer.

Peele’s premise as a black director is to take aim at people’s tendencies to internalize racist concepts outside of their conscious awareness (Collins & Arthur, 2010). The content in Get Out signals traumatic experiences with the goal to integrate the unsolved into the conscious awareness so that it can be rationalized and resolved (Rosen et al., 2013). This is art, this is communication on a deeper level. Overall, the film is fantastic, and provides a close-up of racism on a personal level. An essential concept gaining great exposure within our current paradigm.

Difficult experiences may be the anti-thesis to art that draw the present into the darkness (illness), while creating art extracts the darkness (illness) from the person into the present (Rosen, Matic, Mardsen, 2013).

ReferencesCollins, S., & Arthur, N. (2010). “Culturally sensitive working alliance.” In Arthur, N., & Collins, (Eds.), Culture Infused Counselling (pp. 103-138). Calgary, Alberta: Counselling Concepts.
McCarthy, Kevin. (Fox DC 5) (2017, February 17). GET OUT interviews – Jordan Peele, Allison Williams, Daniel Kaluuya. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnuSQSTHOr8&t=76sMcIntosh, Peggy. (2003). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack., In Plous, Scott (Ed). Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination, (pp. 191-196). New York, NY, US: McGraw-Hill, xiii, 609 pp.Norcross, J. & Karpiak, C. (2012). Clinical psychologists in the 2010s: 50 Years of the APA Division of clinical psychology. Clinical psychology®, 19(1).Potash J.S., Copland D., Stepney C., Stella A. (2015). Advancing multicultural and diversity competence in art therapy: American art therapy association multicultural committee 1990-2015. Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 32(3), 146-150. Retrieved from http://0-www.tandfonline.com.aupac.lib.athabascau.ca/doi/abs/10.1080/07421656.2015.1060837#.Vleds3arTIURosen R. M., Matic M., Mardsen E. (2013). Adlerian art therapy with sexual abuse and assault survivors. The journal of Individual Psychology, 69(3), 223-244. Retrieved from http://0-eds.a.ebscohost.com.aupac.lib.athabascau.ca/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=d74a4176-7f9b-6d0-8a2b-8e6a254dae8c%40sessionmgr4003&vid=3&hid=4205Tan, A. L. (2012). Art therapy with trafficked women. Therapy Today, 23(5), 26-31. Retrieved from http://www.therapytoday.net/article/show/3130/art-therapy-with-trafficked-women/

Melanie is a second-year Masters student studying Counselling Psychology at AU. She is fascinated by pop culture and uses a critical lens of examining its meaning in the context of modern psychology.

When I gave the film a chance, I found it was an effective vehicle to tell a cautious story on the value of love and relationships. The film is a dramatic irony. We know what is happening to Anastasia is not healthy, and we know that she is struggling with setting her boundaries as an autonomous person. For example, we see that Anastasia’s need for personal autonomy clashes with Mr. Grey’s sadistic tendencies that threaten her individuality and safety. This is what led her to leaving the relationship at the tail end of the first film. In 50 Shades Darker, you also see her give in to Mr. Grey’s orders and demands. She appears to be in a dream-like state or under a spell of some kind while the people around her warn her that she is entering a disaster.

An interesting similarity is noted between the 50 Shades of Grey series and the film Eyes Wide Shut. Mostly, the dreamy blurred lights for each scene with Tom Cruise as he embarks on several what if experiences prompted by his desires were scenes that, if acted out, would destroy his marriage. Those dreamy possibilities were only dreams, but with very real and very abruptly shattering life consequences. How close is Anastasia to walking off a cliff blindfolded? This is why 50 Shades is a suspenseful series stocked with dramatic irony. The story is dreamy, cautionary, and not what it seems.

The glamour within the scenes of the film are meant to draw the viewer into the moment of the movie. Sex and violence sell. Like Anastasia, we are drawn into the sensational depictions of erotica, sex, mystery, violence, and flashy things. In 50 Shades Darker, however, there are moments that abruptly snap the viewer out of the dream but not Anastasia. This is the dramatic irony within the story; you see what is happening to the main character to her own oblivion. Could our internalised oppressive ideals be challenged by this story and the dramatic irony within it? Can this example of the distorted sensuous ideal of a relationship snap us out of what we consider a real relationship? Or do we continue to swipe right?

The relationship portrayal in 50 Shades is very dreamy and surreal, similar to a nightmare. Soft, misleading, and terrifying. The main character is so infatuated within the erotic stages of love that she appears blind.

Theorist Viktor Frankl claims “just as there are three layers of the human person, so are there three possible attitudes toward it. [The] Most primitive attitude concerns itself with the outer most layer, sexual attitude. One step higher, is the erotic or erotically disposed person [who] penetrates deeper than the one who is only sexually disposed. Loving is the end stage of eroticism which surpasses time energy and space” (Frankl, 1986). The curtains of illusion behind Mr. Grey’s and Anastasia’s relationship are pulled back when you analyse the meaning of true love, as you see that the loving stage is the unattainable for the main characters who remain fixed within the temporary sexual erotic stages. This is obvious by the number of sex scenes and eroticism which Mr. Grey uses to emotionally control Anastasia. For example, any time she wakes up and realises she could be in a trap, he guilts her with his tormented past, or he’ll say things like “don’t leave me” when she speaks up to say “I need time to think,” or “this isn’t a relationship, this is ownership”. She does have her moments where she awakens to see the reality of their relationship, but gets dragged back into the emotions involved in sexuality and eroticism.

This is not love, as Mr. Grey’s behaviour forces eroticism via fear of abandonment. As Frankl writes on the meaning of love, “The person who has a fixation on overvalued eroticism tries to ’force open’ that door to happiness of which we have remarked with Kierkegard, that it ’opens outward’ and does not yield to violent assault “(Frankl, 1986). And in conjunction suggests, “pay attention when people act with anger and hostility to your boundaries. You have found the edge where their respect for you ends.” Another remark of Frankl also notes how the person who confuses love with sex wants to be taken, but not taken seriously. This is echoed in a scene where Anastasia’s boss tries to become sexual with her and asks her “do you want to be kept, or taken seriously?” This scene is clearly meant to be ironic, as no one who forces themselves on you against your will could have ever take you seriously. But it also foreshadows her struggles with conceptualising true love and seeing past illusive curtains.

Given these dynamics of the two characters; Anastasia, who confuses her boundaries (being taken with being taken seriously) and Mr. Grey, who is fixated on eroticism and uses it to try forcing the door to happiness, you see behind those illusive, dreamy curtains. Both are tragic characters who could not be further from true love, despite how physically close they are in nearly every scene of the film. Thus, this film is more complex that imagined. Human relationships are more complex than imagined, and the artists portrayal attests to this.

Thus, the relationship between Anastasia and Mr. Grey fools you into thinking the author intended to present this couple as relationship goals. This is evident by the outrage sparked on social media, reviews, and other journal articles. The romantic glamorisation of an abusive relationship? Or a tale or lesson to people to be aware of the non-lasting or temporary gratuitous things so often confused as signs of a real relationship? The fact that I hear so many comments about the relationship between the characters as glamourized may indicate incomplete awareness of internalised values of an oppressive dominant societal ideal. However, the outrage of recognition over an unhealthy relationship being present in a film is a positive sign. This is the point and message behind this tragic film. These flashy gratuitous components are not the real pleasures of a true relationship. You can have all the objective values of what people consider pinnacle to achieving happiness, but, even with those things, anyone in this relationship would be absolutely miserable. Thus, there is a message behind this story if it is given the chance to be taken seriously.

References:Collins, S., & Arthur, N. (2010). “Culturally sensitive working alliance.” In Arthur, N., & Collins, (Eds.), Culture Infused Counselling (pp. 103-138). Calgary, Alberta: Counselling Concepts.Frank, V. E. (1986). The Doctor and the Soul: From Psychotherapy to Logotherapy. New York: Vintage Books.Roney, D. (2015). “50 Shades of Ugh”. The Voice Magazine, 23 (8). Retrieved from https://www.voicemagazine.org/search/searchdisplay.php?ART=10248

Melanie is a second-year Masters student studying Counselling Psychology at AU. She is fascinated by pop culture and uses a critical lens of examining its meaning in the context of modern psychology.

Before I continue with the analysis and in-depth discussion of the film, I will mention the tone I gathered from others; “ug, poor story, poor movie, not worth watching an abusive relationship be glamorized” (Roney, 2015). This tone is consistent with readings of other articles from journalists reviewing the film. These criticisms confuse me, as the book series is so popular. Why are people complaining about the film’s story line? The film and the book have the same story line, so what is causing them to be disappointed? What were people expecting to be different?

I’m writing through the lens of a student studying high conflict divorce and healthy relationships in psychology. It may differ from the previous Voice Magazine article, “50 Shades of Ugh“. For example, that article notes how “Someone who participates in the BDSM lifestyle discusses the misrepresentation of that lifestyle, which is based around consent. This book series, and now movie, are glorifying?even romanticizing?emotional and sexual abuse. The message this ‘story'” sends is disturbing at best.”

From viewing the film and reading some of the 50 Shades series, I question whether this is truly the message this story sends. Does it really glorify and embolden abusive relationships? Or is the story being taken too literally? I argue that there is no glamour here, only tragic, dark, and shady illusions. That is, this story intentionally cautions the hazards of falling for the shiny and glossy image of the desirable, dominant man. He embodies all qualities which AU psychologists, Sandra Collins and Nancy Arthur, claim to fit as the desirable, dominant stereotype; white, heterosexual, Christian, Anglo-saxon, able-bodied, attractive, male, high socio-economic status, and so on (Collins & Arthur, 2010). Christian Grey’s male-dominant behaviour is familiar within our social conscience as men of his privilege are historically allowed several invasive dating privileges. How is this still an issue with the waves of feminism today and so much of what has been accomplished? The answer is that we are prone to internalizing oppressive, dominant aspects of the western culture. In other words, oppressive ideals and propaganda are passed down from past generations and become internalised by future generations. Thus, the idea of sexism is not absent or far from our conscience. We do not need to go far to find an article on these issues in current society.

I argue that this film challenges our latent internalizations of these past ideals and the confusing dating paradigm we face with dating and hook- up sites like Tinder, Plenty of Fish, OkCupid and so on. Let’s take a moment to consider how these dating websites work. A person has a profile on display that they leave for others to view and decide whether or not that person is enticed to make a connection. You swipe right if you are interested in that person based on their appearance, hobbies, relationship goals, or interests, but if You’re not, you just swipe left and they’re gone. The problem with this anonymous profiling method is the meeting experience is artificial and depersonalised. That is, we seek out people based on an image of what they portray themselves to be online; we already have this illusive ideal of the person before we actually meet them of who they are. This is poignant to the story behind the 50 Shades series because the relationship between Mr. Grey and Anastasia is based on ideal and plays on that false, or, artificial concept of an ideal romance. We could just say the story of 50 Shades depicts an abusive relationship and move on, or we can explore the purpose behind why artists presented such an obscene story line about this torrid relationship.

Artists are thinkers who engage in conversations with the world through portrayal of the concepts they create. The way the story is set out, portrayed, and delivered is deliberate and intentional, and, like any fairy tale, legend, or myth, has some message or call to its purpose.

Viewing the 50 Shades series (in film or book form) makes more sense when acknowledging it as a non-literal story. For example, we read stories like Alice in Wonderland to our children as fantasy, and this fulfills the purpose of delivering its intended message to our own realities. Conversely, if we magnify what we dislike, we can lose the message behind the story. It’s simple to get distracted over how Alice can change sizes, or that she ran away down a rabbit hole. But this would block us from discovering the magic and meaning behind the overall symbolic message of the story: Alice fell and got lost in the maze of her own internal world. To climb out of her rabbit hole, she had to make it through her confusing internal mazes, conquer the beast inside, and find the courage to get back into the world. Moral of the story? She overcame her challenges and found the courage to face herself. Did she change sizes and climb down a rabbit hole? Sure, but that wasn’t the focus of the message behind the story; this was just a vehicle used to convey a message or point. Abuse is an aspect of 50 Shades, however it is not the main message behind the story.

Next week, Celluloid Psychology will tie things up with the second part, where we remove the blindfold to explore the psychology behind the main message of 50 Shades Darker.

References:Collins, S., & Arthur, N. (2010). “Culturally sensitive working alliance.” In Arthur, N., & Collins, (Eds.), Culture Infused Counselling (pp. 103-138). Calgary, Alberta: Counselling Concepts.Frank, V. E. (1986). The Doctor and the Soul: From Psychotherapy to Logotherapy. New York: Vintage Books.Roney, D. (2015). “50 Shades of Ugh”. The Voice Magazine, 23 (8). Retrieved from https://www.voicemagazine.org/search/searchdisplay.php?ART=10248

Melanie is a second-year Masters student studying Counselling Psychology at AU. She is fascinated by pop culture and uses a critical lens of examining its meaning in the context of modern psychology.

Kevin, the main character in Split, suffers from a condition called dissociative identity disorder (DID) involving 24 different identities. While he sees his therapist regularly, this does not stop him from succumbing to the “beast” inside him, and he kidnaps three girls as his sacrifice.

If you think this sounds like the stereotypical, frightening psychopath depicted in Hollywood movies, then you know why mental health professionals are damning this film. There are several ethical issues with how the film looks at DID. For example, the language Kevin’s therapist uses to describe his condition to other professionals is filled with “us and them” terminology. “We look upon them as less than, but maybe they are so much more than us” states Kevin’s therapist. Renowned cultural psychologist Sandra Collins claims this language perpetuates the black and white categorical thinking responsible for overgeneralisations that perpetuate stigma and oppression. Additionally, Kevin’s psychological disorder is unrealistically portrayed and exaggerated, as he is given the typical Hollywood maniac image: dangerous, unpredictable, and monstrous with intentions to hurt others. But we know that, in reality, most people who suffer complex disorders are harmless and fit none of these descriptions.

In spite of this, watching this film created a “split” within my conscience. On one hand, I noticed the obvious negative portrayal of mental illness, while on the other, I felt the film was an exploration of the human experience. I argue that this portrayal was intended to stir discussion and exploration on the topic of mental health.

Keep in mind, this film was written and directed by M. Night Shyamala—?the same man who directed The 6th Sense, Unbreakable, Signs, and others. He is known for making films with supernatural plots that have twist endings. This supernatural spin is also evident in Split. For example, Kevin and his therapist discuss “the beast” (his 24th identity) who Kevin claims can crawl on walls and crush things with unimaginable strength using superhero-like powers.

The film clearly portrays mental illness using fantasy, and thus, DID is not meant to be portrayed realistically, and the assumption made by the therapist, that Kevin can change body chemistry with different personalities, is unproven in reality. However, Shyamalan’s use of fantasy is interesting, as this vehicle of artistic expression opens the door to explore complex issues in a creative way. For example, when Kevin becomes “the beast” he assumes powers similar to superheroes like Spiderman, Batman, or Superman. The difference between heroes and villains, however, is how they use their power. Therefore, this premise of using a super-hero fantasy enables the viewer to potentially conceptualise sickness differently. “We are what we believe we are” is the verse toted by Kevin’s character shortly after becoming “the beast”.

Like in superhero movies, the human struggle to overcome adversity is questioned. Some turn evil, some do not. So what is evil? The real issue in this film is that DID is depicted as evil, which can play on people’s fears of mental illness. Both Kevin and Casey (one of the girls he kidnaps) suffered childhood trauma, however, she becomes the hero who survives Kevin’s beast. While this is similar to the psychological debate over why only some people who experience severe trauma develop mental illness, Split incorrectly implies that a) a person who develops a mental illness is dangerous and b) the person who went through severe trauma can choose their outcome of mental health. Kevin laments “the broken are the more evolved. Rejoice”

Overall, I found the film interesting and thought-provoking. Is art meant to be politically correct? Or to be just an expression of explorative creativity? Are viewers truly passive to portrayals of mental health in films like Split? Should the artist be censored? Or is it the responsibility of those watching the film to make judgements that are not based on heuristic black and white thinking? It appears this film intentionally raises these questions in its use of the supernatural motif. As the main character states “We are what we believe we are”. Perhaps, this film was intentional in creating a divide, or, “split” within the conscience of its viewers to question deeper issues.

Melanie is a second-year Masters student studying Counselling Psychology at AU. She is fascinated by pop culture and uses a critical lens of examining its meaning in the context of modern psychology.