Sunday, November 7, 2010

Clash of Cultures

On page 11 of the Rousseau reading, the second to last paragraph compares the civilized mans and savaged mans way of life “The Savage and the civilized man differ so much in the bottom of their hearts and in their inclinations that what constitutes the supreme happiness of one would reduce the other to despair” This passage can be tied into a number of scenes in Avatar, this is the idea behind the entire movie. In the very beginning of the movie when the humans arrived on Pandora they immediately did not understand the Na’vi’s way of life. When the Colonel gave his briefing telling the crew about how he got his scar he said something about how everything on this planet wants to kill you. From the beginning of the movie the two cultures clashed so greatly that the lives of the civilized man and the inhabitants of Pandora’s ways of life differed to such great extent that from the start neither of the two cultures even tired to understand the others ways of life. The Na’vi tribe would have never taught Jake their ways of living if they would have known where he came from from the start. The human’s didn’t see the Na’vi as being anything but animalist savages and as a culture that needed our help in becoming civilized such as learning our ways and our language. This is one of the ways in which the Na’vi differs from our culture. We depend on material objects and technology for our way of life; the Na’vi have been able to adapt to their world and live in a culture that was able to coexist with the nature of their world without these things; unlike us where there are so many buildings there is not much natural beauty left. On the second paragraph part one of Rousseau’s article this passage also supports this idea “if the savage man had had an axe would he have been able with his naked arm to break so large a branch from a tree? If he had had a sling, would he have been able to throw a stone with so great velocity? If he had had a ladder, would he have been so nimble in climbing a tree?”

2 comments:

  1. Wow that is an incredible analysis! I never would've made that connection. It's almost like Harry Potter's "neither shall live while the other survives". To expand on your thought, it's true that neither side understood or made an effort to understand eachother. Would you agree than that they both were following Rousseau's belief that "an animal will not make war with man unless in selfdefense"? In the defense of both side's self interest, they reacted violently. The humans were defending their business, the Na'vi defending their planet.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Elizabeth,

    I like how you found an idea of Rousseau that ties into the entire movie Avatar and not just one scene. This was a great idea!

    There are many different sides in the movie Avatar, such as: science and military, avatars and humans, Earth and Pandora. And the happiness of each side would bring sadness upon the opposite side. This proves Rousseau's idea to be true.

    I agree, along with Dan, that the two sides didn't try to understand the other side's way of life. And that the avatars of Pandora probably would not have taught Jake their way of life if they knew and understood where he came from.

    I enjoyed reading what I have read so far of Rousseau's "Second Discourse". It makes sense to me! Do you feel this way? And I can relate it to Wordsworth's poems and the scenes from Avatar to better understand it. It was interesting to see Rousseau's ideas at work, which happens to be the point of the assignment. :-)

    Thanks!
    Ashley Carmichael

    ReplyDelete