 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ramonmercado Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Total posts: 17933 Location: Dublin Gender: Male |
 Posted: 19-05-2006 15:34 Post subject: The Simpsons as philosophy |
 |
|
|
| Quote: | The Simpsons as philosophy
The Simpsons is more than a funny cartoon, it reveals truths about human nature that rival the observations of great philosophers from Plato to Kant... while Homer sets his house on fire, says philosopher Julian Baggini. With the likes of Douglas Coupland, George Walden and Stephen Hawking as fans, taking the Simpsons seriously is no longer outre but de rigeur.
It is, quite simply, one of the greatest cultural artefacts of our age. So great, in fact, that it not only reflects and plays with philosophical ideas, it actually does real philosophy, and does it well.
How can a comic cartoon do this? Precisely because it is a comic cartoon, the form best suited to illuminate our age.
To speak truthfully and insightfully today you must have a sense of the absurdity of human life and endeavour. Past attempts to construct grand and noble theories about human history and destiny have collapsed.
We now know we're just a bunch of naked apes trying to get on as best we can, usually messing things up, but somehow finding life can be sweet all the same. All delusions of a significance that we do not really have need to be stripped away, and nothing can do this better that the great deflater: comedy.
The satirical cartoon world is essentially a philosophical one because it reflects reality by abstracting it, distilling it and presenting it back to us, illuminating it more brightly than realist fiction can
The Simpsons does this brilliantly, especially when it comes to religion. It's not that the Simpsons is atheist propaganda; its main target is not belief in God or the supernatural, but the arrogance of particular organised religions that they, amazingly, know the will of the creator.
For example, in the episode Homer the Heretic, Homer gives up church and decides to follow God in his own way: by watching the TV, slobbing about and dancing in his underpants.
Throughout the episode he justifies himself in a number of ways.
"What's the big deal about going to some building every Sunday, I mean, isn't God everywhere?"
"Don't you think the almighty has better things to worry about than where one little guy spends one measly hour of his week?"
"And what if we've picked the wrong religion? Every week we're just making God madder and madder?"
Homer's protests do not merely allude to much subtler arguments that proper philosophers make. The basic points really are that simple, which is why they can be stated simply.
Philosophy's First Family
Of course, there is more that can and should be said about them, but when we make decisions about whether or not to follow one particular religion, the reasons that really matter to us are closer to the simple truths of the Simpsons than the complex mental machinations of academic philosophers of religion.
And that's true even for the philosophers, whose high-level arguments are virtuosi feats of reasoning, but are not the things that win hearts and minds. They are merely the lengthy guitar solos to Homer's crushing, compelling riffs.
However, being simple is not the same as being simplistic, which is one of the greatest crimes in the Simpsons' universe.
We can see this when Homer's house catches fire, in what could be seen as divine retribution for his apostasy.
But what actually led to the fire was not God's wrath but Homer's hubris and arrogance. Sitting on his sofa thinking smugly, "Boy, everyone is stupid except me," he falls asleep, dropping his cigar.
What really caused the fire was thus a slippage from the simple into the simplistic. Homer's mistake was to think that because the key points which inform his heresy are simple, that the debate is closed and he has nothing left to learn from others. But this is being simplistic, not keeping things simple.
Small dots, big picture
Revealing simple truths about simplistic falsehoods is not just a minor philosophical task, like doing the washing up at Descartes' Diner while the real geniuses cook up the main courses.
For when it comes to the relevance of philosophy to real life, all the commitments we make on the big issues are determined by considerations which are ultimately quite straightforward.
Pointillist paintings, such as this by Seurat, use thousands of tiny dots
A rich philosophical worldview is in this sense like a pointillist picture - one of those pieces of art in which a big image is made up of thousands of tiny dots (see Seurat image, right). Its building blocks are no more than simple dots, but the overall picture which builds up from this is much more complicated.
Yet we need reminding that the dots are just dots, and that errors are made more often not by those who fail to examine the dots carefully enough, but those who become fixated by the brilliance or defects of one or two and who fail to see how they fit into the big picture.
And the Simpsons certainly plays out on a broad canvas.
Any individual or group is shown to be ridiculous when only their pathetic and partial view of the world is taken to be everything. That's why no one escapes satire in programme, which is vital for its ultimately uplifting message: we're an absurd species but together we make for a wonderful world.
The Simpsons, like Monty Python, is an Anglo-Saxon comedic take on the existentialism which in France takes on a more tragic hue. Albert Camus' absurd is defied not by will, but mocking laughter.
Abstract themes
Another reason why cartoons are the best form in which to do philosophy is that they are non-realistic in the same way that philosophy is.
True heir to Plato, Simpsons creator Matt Groening
Philosophy needs to be real in the sense that it has to make sense of the world as it is, not as we imagine or want it to be. But philosophy deals with issues on a general level. It is concerned with a whole series of grand abstract nouns: truth, justice, the good, identity, consciousness, mind, meaning and so on.
Cartoons abstract from real life in much the same way philosophers do. Homer is not realistic in the way a film or novel character is, but he is recognisable as a kind of American Everyman. His reality is the reality of an abstraction from real life that captures its essence, not as a real particular human who we see ourselves reflected in.
The satirical cartoon world is essentially a philosophical one because to work it needs to reflect reality accurately by abstracting it, distilling it and then presenting it back to us, illuminating it more brightly than realist fiction can.
That's why it is no coincidence that the most insightful and philosophical cultural product of our time is a comic cartoon, and why its creator, Matt Groening, is the true heir of Plato, Aristotle and Kant.
Julian Baggini is talking about the philosophy of The Simpsons at The Watershed, Bristol as part of The Bristol Festival of Ideas at 1500 BST on Saturday 20 May.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Add your comments on this story, using the form below.
Homer has said many great things, one that comes to mind is :"no problem is so big that it can't be ignored" at first it seems irresponsible but then again life is too short and precious to keep worrying about things which we can not influence.
Ruan Hince, Budapest, Hungary
Years ago there was a book called 'The Parables of Peanuts' that analysed the Snoopy and Charlie Brown cartoons of the same name.
Mark P, Hertford
When the show first began, I said, "No way are my kids watching this." But then I began to see beyond Bart and Homer's comic stupidity to the good lessons underneath. Now the whole family (the kids are grown now) watches and discuss the satire and adaptations of movies, literature and current events.
Rickey Dodd, Birmingham, AL
Curiously, Julian's interpretation of Homer the Heretic is opposite to that the episode itself makes. The point is made (by Marge) that Homer has created these quips as excuses to disengage from faith, and has to be rescued from the fire by those still engaged enough to be willing to take action (Apu and Flanders). Far from being "simple philosophical truths", his quips are "tempting excuses for inaction". So perhaps the Simpsons' main gift is to be vague enough to read whatever you like into it.
William, Cambridge, UK
It's a lot to put on the shoulders of our local hero, Groening, to call him an ambassador of American culture, but every episode does seem to illustrate our country's ridiculous character in a way that no well-spoken diplomat can. I'm glad it's appreciated the world over...I'm proud every time I walk down Flanders St... and Lovejoy St... and Quimby St... and when I pass the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant.
Kara, Portland, Oregon, US
Can we not keep the Simpsons as a funny, irreverent comment on modern Western culture? Reducing it to an abstract science takes all the pleasure out of watching it.
Ben R, Reading
The Simpsons has had a very positive influence on my life since I begrudgingly started watching it about 10 years ago. Bound within Greoning's imaginary world is not one world view but a whole serious of competing, and as Mr Baggini says, partial world views. Homer is an idiot savant who shows us the folly of our own rigistic thinking. He is often stupid, and sometimes irritating, but no more so that those around him who claim a more sophisticated outlook, whether it is religious, moral, legal or intellectual. And in counter pointing Homer's antics with their antithesis, such as Lisa's dogged earnestness, he allows us to compare and contrast a range of opinions and attitudes. But enough... The Simpsons rules!
Pete, Leeds
As Homer once said, while watching cable TV in his house (cable TV he was watching illegally): "It's funny because it's true." That's why The Simpsons works.
Fran, Melbourne
Bravo! It is time that we recognised the message in the satire - I would personally liken this creation to the satirical works of Voltaire more than Kant, but if philosophy performs a function, it is in Marx's words, to change the world rather than just interpret it. Maybe it is time that society took a good hard look at itself in the mirror which seemingly banal creations like The Simpsons hold up to it.
Laura, Cambridge
I thought Pseuds' Corner was in Private Eye.
Mike Brown, Whitley Bay
Surely it follows that anything created by humans will have some essence of philosophy. I remember when the Teletubbies first came out people tried the same trick. Why we can't just say, "they're funny little yellow dudes that make me laugh". It can work on another level, but then if you analyse anything closely it can.
John, Grimsby
Why do philosophers say things we can't understand: "The Simpsons, like Monty Python, is an Anglo-Saxon comedic take on the existentialism which in France takes on a more tragic hue. Albert Camus' absurd is defied not by will, but mocking laughter." What's that all about? The Simpsons is great because we can all relate to it. End of.
Phelpsteruk, Warrington
Homer is the modern day Plato, except obese & he doesn't know he's a genius.
Sujon Miah, Burnley, UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4995624.stm |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Anonymous |
| Posted: 20-05-2006 14:38 Post subject: The 'Simpson' effect |
|
|
|
There's an article on The Simpsons in the Spring 2006 Building for a future (15,4, p10), by Chris Laughton. It views the Simpsons in a less than beneficial light- I've only got the hard copy, can't be bothered to type the whole thing and am not sure that it's interesting enough to scan in to put the whole of the text in. In the unlikely event that anyone wants the whole text, PM me and I'll scan it for you, if you can't get any other access.
Some quotes;
"The Simpson effect is distinguishable not only by casual disregard to the complexities of nuclear power but to an absolute expectation that the fridge, lights, and TV shall remain on whatever the consequences. Furthermore in the Never-Never land that pervades through this thoroughly amusing satire, there comes a strange sense of calmness and security through watching the characters that never seem to age and bounce back through every hurdle along with the ever-present nuclear power station sitting in the background."
"The Simpsons don't care much for standards. They don't care for very much at all of the detail of our everyday lives, except perhaps the TV, doughnuts and the comfort of their suburbia. Perhaps we should ask, how much longer we can we be secure in our Simpson world?"
Now, even bearing in mind that this is published in a journal on the subject of sustainable architecture, this strikes me as a bit prissy. And it ignores Lisa's character, which is written as the conscience of the family, and strikes me as being a little more human than the author of this piece, since at least Lisa acknowledges that no one person can change everything overnight, and that everyone buggers up from time to time, while still seeing Mr Burns as the ancient and lurking evil that he is.
I think Laughton is writing about Homer in the same way that people used to write about Alf Garnett's racism being a reason to take 'Til death us do part off the air, since (they wrote) it encouraged and affirmed racist attitudes. He doesn't get that the buffoon is there to ridicule the attitudes presented in the character, and the rest of the family is there to call these attitudes into question.
Now, I'm as guilty as many others of spouting off before fully understanding the background of what I've decided to spout about, but at least over the years I've learned that doing this makes me look like a prat and have managed on several occasions to hold in my natural gibbering until having an opportunity to check out at least a little about the thing I've been moved to pontificate about.
Laughton's bit on the Simpsons looks like someone who has seen maybe one or two episodes and is not really media-literate in terms of being able to understand that not all traits of a character are meant to be sympathised with. The purpose of having a sympathetic character with disagreeable traits in literature or other media texts is generally to have us look at ourselves and consider what we can do about our less than perfect selves. And often to consider our own faults before pointing the finger at others. That's where I think Homer and Lisa's characters in particular do more for the area that Laughton is writing about than any amount of pious killjoy bollocks of the type he has written.
Or I could just be taking the whole thing a little too seriously. Maybe I'll get a column in an architecture rag... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gncxx King-Size Canary
Great Old One Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Total posts: 13561 Location: Eh? Gender: Male |
| Posted: 20-05-2006 16:10 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Hmm... a good reason to take the Simpsons off the air would be because it's not funny anymore rather than any social ills it may or may not be promoting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramonmercado Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Total posts: 17933 Location: Dublin Gender: Male |
| Posted: 02-06-2006 13:54 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | Under-achiever Bart 'gets PhD'
The Simpsons is a hit cult TV show from the US
A Northern Ireland student is hoping to become a PhD "achiever" through a thesis on the classic "under-achiever" of pop culture - Bart Simpson.
Alison Crawford is pursuing a doctorate on the hit animation TV show The Simpsons at the University of Ulster.
The 24-year-old insisted PhD subjects do not need to be "so serious".
"I have loved animation since I was a child and I have been watching The Simpsons for around 15 years now," said Alison.
"Personally, I have learned a lot about American society and American politics from the show.
"Any viewer watching it would have to absorb some of that, and definitely inspires debate in people about societal problems and about political figures."
Alison said she did not take the view that subjects needed to be 150-years-old to study them.
When you look at Bart, he is very intelligent, he is very witty, and he is actually failed by a school system which will not nurture his creativity and that's what causes him to act out
Alison Crawford
"You learn a lot about a culture by what is going on now. Pop culture is very important - why does a subject have to be straight-laced and serious," she told the BBC's Nolan Show.
"What tells you more about a culture than what makes them laugh, or what doesn't make them laugh - given the controversy which the Simpsons and other primetime animated shows cause?"
She said Bart's catchphrase of being "an under-achiever and proud of it" had caused controversy in the United States.
"But when you look at Bart, he is very intelligent, he is very witty, and he is actually failed by a school system which will not nurture his creativity and that's what causes him to act out.
"He definitely captured the spirit of the times of the 1990s.
She rejects the notion that the Simpsons is merely "a silly cartoon".
"Some of the issues raised in the Simpsons are very serious - they talk about political corruption and the rights of gay people, immigration and multi-culturalism in America."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/5041098.stm
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Anonymous |
| Posted: 05-06-2006 17:48 Post subject: |
|
|
|
sound of plane crashing...........ah that would be akin to the devaluation of higher education qualifications....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Doctor_Occupant Great Old One Joined: 03 Apr 2006 Total posts: 369 Location: Somewhere dusty and mostly red Age: 44 Gender: Male |
| Posted: 05-06-2006 21:53 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| GadaffiDuck wrote: | | sound of plane crashing...........ah that would be akin to the devaluation of higher education qualifications.... |
Don't take on so, friend Duck. After all, a doctorate in the Simpsons just goes to show that academia likes a joke too.
To be fair, what's the criteria for actually getting a Phd? Isn't it something about adding to the sum and total of human knowledge? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Anonymous |
| Posted: 05-06-2006 22:10 Post subject: |
|
|
|
While I agree about adding to the sum of human (or duck) knowledge, it is the value of what has been added that should be weighed as well....and I just don't think that the above would've cut the mustard even a few years ago. Imagine if you will....there is the physics graduate...sweated blood and popped a neurone or two for his/her Phd. Look, there's the modern day equalitarian nonsense qualification in something like media...ooo...according to the playpen chatterers in Whitehall etc, the two PHds are of equal merit. Gah and NO.
Grah grah grah - I'm now off to play at GadZilla...grah grah grah grah grah grah
Hmm: I wonder if my extra testyness is down to withdrawal...Hmmm...grah grah grah  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| H_James Ancient Cow (&)
Creepy thing Joined: 18 May 2002 Total posts: 5624 |
| Posted: 05-06-2006 22:26 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| The simpsons is bollocks these days, it's been a boring institution on a par with rolf harris for some years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Doctor_Occupant Great Old One Joined: 03 Apr 2006 Total posts: 369 Location: Somewhere dusty and mostly red Age: 44 Gender: Male |
| Posted: 06-06-2006 02:02 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Just imagine the conversation.
Two Phds meet in a bar. They discover they both have a doctorate. Shyly, they compare qualifications.
One has a PhD in semiconductor physics, involving years of lab work and experimentation. And the other watched cartoons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rynner Location: Still above sea level Gender: Male |
| Posted: 14-05-2007 23:31 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Stuff philosophy, let's talk money...
| Quote: | Springfields eye Simpsons movie
Two Scottish towns named Springfield have offered to host the UK premiere of The Simpsons Movie this summer.
Officials in the Fife and Borders towns said that if they were approached by film company 20th Century Fox to stage the event they would be happy to do so.
There are currently 16 US cities named Springfield which have been asked to compete to host the US premiere of the movie in July.
The popular cartoon series is based in its own fictional town of Springfield.
Officials in the two Scottish towns said they hope Fox will now consider a UK competition.
Currently in its 18th year, The Simpsons revolves around the antics of bald, beer-guzzling family man Homer and his spiky-haired son Bart.
Unlike either of its Scottish counterparts, the fictional town boasts several prisons and a monorail.
Despite not having a cinema and a population of less than 1,000, officials at Fife Council said they would jump at the chance to play host to the UK event.
Local authority event co-ordinator Linda Thomson said: "We think the most obvious location to host the UK premiere of the new Simpsons film is Springfield, Cupar, Fife.
"Of course, neither Springfield nor Cupar actually have a cinema, but this would just give us the opportunity to create an American drive-in experience, in either the beautiful Haugh Park or Duffud Park, using our new top of the range outdoor projector.
Common name
Dumfries and Galloway, which boasts a Springfield of its own near Gretna, also said it would throw its hat into the ring, given the chance.
Film commissioner Mark Geddes said: "It all sounds very interesting. I don't know how many UK locations are called Springfield but I wouldn't imagine there are many. It would be daft to miss out."
Simpsons creator Matt Groening said he chose the name Springfield for the cartoon because it was a common US city name.
It is the longest-running prime-time entertainment series on television in the US and a worldwide hit.
A spokesperson for Fox said it currently has no plans to hold a Springfield premiere contest in the UK.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/6653305.stm |
According to Multimap, there are 7 Springfields in the UK
But Streetmap.UK finds dozens of placenames including Springfield.
A childhood friend of mine lived in a house called Springfield, FWIW. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ted_bloody_maul Great Old One Joined: 23 May 2003 Total posts: 4877 Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 15-05-2007 00:10 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| There's actually a book available called 'The Simpsons And Philosophy' by Irwin, Conard and Skoble. I have it nestling on my shelf between England's Dreaming by Jon Savage and The Intellectual by Steve Fuller currently. I'm sure there's some significance in that although what it is I can't be bothered to ponder. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rjmrjmrjm Professional Surrealist
Constipated-Philosopher Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Total posts: 1465 Location: Behind your eyes... Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 15-05-2007 11:37 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Being in University myself I see no problem with doing a PhD on 'the role of the classic under-achiever in popular culture - as typified by Bart Simpson'.
It is an interesting topic that could help us understand the complexities of character assosiations in our culture.
Would you complain if he happened to writing on 'the role of the super-exemplary male in popular culture - as typified by Mr Darcy'.
After all, it's just reading books. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramonmercado Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Total posts: 17933 Location: Dublin Gender: Male |
| Posted: 09-12-2008 13:07 Post subject: |
|
|
|
There could be a Simpsons episode about this.
| Quote: | Fake Simpsons cartoon 'is porn'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/7770781.stm
By Nick Bryant
BBC News, Sydney
An appeal judge in Australia has ruled that an animation depicting well-known cartoon characters engaging in sexual-acts is child-pornography.
The internet cartoon featured characters from the Simpsons TV series.
The central issue in the case was whether a cartoon character could depict a real person.
Judge Michael Adams decided that it could, and found a man from Sydney guilty of possessing child-pornography on his computer.
The defence had argued that the fictional, animated characters were not real people, and clearly departed from the human form.
They therefore contested that the conviction for the possession of child-pornography should be overturned.
Justice Michael Adams said the purpose of anti-childpornography legislation was to stop sexual-exploitation and child abuse where images of "real" children were depicted.
But in a landmark ruling he decided that the mere fact that they were not realistic representations of human beings did not mean that they could not be considered people.
He ruled that the animated cartoon could "fuel demand for material that does involve the abuse of children," and therefore upheld the conviction for childpornography.
Rather than jail the man, however, he fined him Aus$3,000 (US$2,000).
Story from BBC NEWS: |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Xanatico Great Old One Joined: 11 Nov 2005 Total posts: 1141 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 10-12-2008 00:46 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| That should get the manga lovers rather worried. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: 10-12-2008 05:02 Post subject: |
|
|
|
pleases go out and read some manga before you coment on some think you no nothing about.
Last edited by Guest on 10-12-2008 15:10; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
