I saw Avatar a couple of nights ago with the words of many earlier critics in mind. The template was in place. This would be a left-wing, pantheistic film.
Coming out of it, I think Avatar is more complex than that. Whether or not Cameron intended that complexity, I don’t know, but I saw more than I expected to see.
Yes, the humans from their “dead planet” are on a paradise planet attempting to rape it for its natural resources. I suppose many people will see this, and have seen it, as westerners technologizing the world and expending so much fuel that they have to steal it from poorer humans around the globe. Cameron may have been thinking NO BLOOD FOR OIL.
For the most part, the humans are completely uninterested in the religious beliefs of the people they are exploiting and appear to have none of their own. That was something that stuck out to me. The humans of the future, the ones exploiting another planet for corporate wealth, appear to be resolutely secular. The military contractors are even worse. They are secular and tribal. You are with them or against them. Right and wrong don’t enter the picture. What is right is what the chain of command says is right.
Cameron may be the kind of western liberal who doesn’t recognize the influence of Christianity on his own thought. The human being who inhabits an avatar and becomes one of the alien Na’vi caused me to think about the incarnation of God in Jesus Christ. The avatar in the film is sent to deliver one message, one of power and oppression, but ends up being a mythic, savior figure who somehow connects with the “real” god of the planet and turns the tide in battle.
Another point that I found compelling is the insistence of Sigourney Weaver’s scientist character that the religion of the Na’vi is a real religion. What she means is that elements of the physical existence of the planet bear out the religious attitudes of the alien people who live there. In other words, they are connecting with (apologies to Francis Schaeffer) a “god who is there.” Again, I thought of Christianity because the church has always insisted that the things that make the faith matter are real things that happened in time and space. For instance, the resurrection is a physical resurrection. Christ is not an attitude or a collective spirit of his followers who remember him well. He is real and because of his unique ability to triumph over death, his authority can be trusted.
These things I’ve picked up are far from the dominant notes in the film. What I noticed more than anything is that Cameron seemed to set out to make the ultimate film in the genre of primitive peoples who are better than those who exploit them. Billy Jack is a well-known example. Dancing with Wolves has been the reigning champion. Avatar contends for that throne.
December 28th, 2009 | 5:16 pm
I compliment Hunter Baker on his independent-minded take on Avatar. There is indeed, more to the film than Cameron may have (consciously) intended. For one thing, It is true that the humans are portrayed as resolute secularists.
However, my contention is that the biggest influence on Avatar is, in fact, Frank Herbert’sSci-Fi classic, Dune. that points up the biggest problem with Avatar. It is, in fact, apastiche of themes and plot-lines that have been done before, and better,in texts ranging from “John Carter, Warlord of Mars” to Terrence Malick’s The New World.
December 28th, 2009 | 6:02 pm
Now I have to see Avatar; if it’s a Billy Jack for our time, then it HAS to be good. ;-)
Nothing like good martial arts skills to help us understand the necessity of non-violence! The ultimate in what would become postmodern thought!
December 28th, 2009 | 6:11 pm
Hunter, I had some of the same thoughts. I went because my teens wanted to go, their Dad offerred to take them, and I didn’t want to be left out. I had heard about the leftward leanings and had low expectations.
I came away pleasantly surprised. One of my teens picked up on the theme of “evil America taking over other peoples,” but her sister pointed out that it was one of those “evil Americans” who rallied the natives and led them to defend their home, and that some things ARE worth fighting for.
December 28th, 2009 | 6:31 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Keith Jones, musatzou. musatzou said: A Different Take on Avatar – First Things (blog) – BBC NewsA Different Take on AvatarFirst Things (blog)Another poi… http://ow.ly/16efMN [...]
December 28th, 2009 | 6:53 pm
sorry guys, but I got Disney’s Pocahontas as the biggest influence ;0)
Though I have to admit that though panentheistic in overtone, it is quite clear that there are the similarities that can be accorded to the Christian Tradition. If we move deeper into the judeo-christianic mythos base there is a similitude to the fall stories – both the genesis base, but also the angelic fall (avatar hybrid – great line, they grow them big… nephilim construct?) and the revelation elements of apocalyptic battle that leads to the wrong doers being cast out of paradise.
So yes there are judeo-christianic similarities there as well, but I think that it’s more likely a grand eco-apotheosis based on the idea of native subjegation with a more than passing nod to the native cultures internment experienced in the States, with their tribal religions also as a basis for the mythos.
Still it’s a great film to watch – especially in 3d :0)
December 28th, 2009 | 11:19 pm
Anyone notice a comparison with C.S. Lewis’ sci fi novel Out of the Silent Planet?
As I recall, he wrote it imagining a planet which had not fallen. Bad earthlings came and almost ruined it, although there was a good human named Ransom. I haven’t seen the movie yet but the plot lines seem simliar.
December 29th, 2009 | 1:41 am
The spiritual/religious themes also stood out to us, far more than the eco-oil-anti-gov issues.
We watched the movie here in India in room packed with Hindus, for whom the Hindi/Sanskrit word “avatar” means “incarnation”.
Interestingly, Cameron’s Avatar is a blend of the 2 species physically , but mentally, culturally, and ethically, he is 100% human. And not just human, but American-human. The Christ figure of Avatar ‘saves’ the people and the planet out of an individualistic, American ethic rather than the panentheistic resolve of the native god-worshippers. His sense of “justice” and right/wrong bend his allegiance to a new “cause.” He is not acting as the Na’vi act, or thinking as think (believing, feeling… etc). His consciousness is pricked within the cultural worldview of his home, rather than his recent biological synthesis.
What a great way to think about Jesus, who acted, thought, believed and felt just like we do. In every way, he was like us (excepting sin). He was not merely a “skyperson-in-a-cool-body” but truly human, truly god. This, too, our Hindu friends cannot comprehend.
On a side note, Cameron’s avatar “becomes native” through trial-and-error in less then 3 months? Yikes. What took Jesus so long?
Great movie, but only for those ready to think critically!
December 29th, 2009 | 9:28 am
[...] Avatar discussed. [...]
December 29th, 2009 | 9:29 am
[...] Avatar discussed. [...]
December 29th, 2009 | 11:51 am
We’re seeing “Avatar” later this week (the whole Imax3D nine yards, in fact).
James Cameron is both more and less complex than many critics make him out to be. He’s clearly not a “Thinker” and so not a cinematic “auteur.” So I don’t think he is, at any level, working from some set of well-thought-out theological/cultural/philosophical ideas that he sets out to express in a movie.
I like Baker’s insight into character-istics of “Avatar” — the nature and genuiness of the Navi religion, of Jake’s “conversion,” of the secular tribalism of the humans — that have gone unnoticed because of the too-ready grasp of critical cliches (it’s pantheistic, it’s a rehash of white liberal guilt, it’s anti-capitalist). I think those character-istics come from Cameron’s ambition as a story-teller, even if sometimes his reach exceeds his grasp.
(It’s analogous to Peter Jackson’s affinity for Tolkien in the “Lord of the Rings” — Jackson seems to be a reflexive secular liberal when he’s pushed to articulate his beliefs, so he has no spiritual congruence with Tolkien or his novel. But as a story-teller, Jackson recognizes a good story, and a good story teller, when he sees one.)
Douthat’s well-regarded recent NYT essay on pantheism, for example, is just that: an essay about a topic, not about the movie itself.
I think Baker undercuts his observations with his closing paragraph. These may not be the “dominant” elements in the sense of being the most visible or obvious. But they may work as the keel of a ship does: invisibly under the surface providing stability and balance to the superstructure.
And I would suggest a possible modification of his conclusion that Cameron set out to make the ultimate movie in the “primitive peoples who are better than those who exploit them” genre. TJ comments above — the “Avatar ’saves’ the people and the planet out of an individualistic, American ethic rather than the panentheistic resolve of the native god-worshippers. His sense of “justice” and right/wrong bend his allegiance to a new “cause.” He is not acting as the Na’vi act, or thinking as think (believing, feeling… etc). His consciousness is pricked within the cultural worldview of his home, rather than his recent biological synthesis.”
To me, this observation sort of turns the criticism that “Avatar” is about white liberal guilt inside out — Cameron does in fact see the world through Jake’s eyes, who sees the “new” world through the eyes of the Na’vi but with the heart of an American. Perhaps the Na’vi are not a “better people” but our better selves. The genre conventions are just Cameron’s scaffolding for a Bigger Idea.
December 29th, 2009 | 1:45 pm
I was “googling” “Avatar Out of the Silent Planet” to see if anyone else made the connection I did last night, when I saw the film. I was directed to Mr. Baker’s essay and Amie’s comment.
I think anyone who has read “Out of the Silent Planet” cannot escape the parallels. In a way, “Avatar” is a much expanded version of Lewis’ 1938 novel. (The second expedition to Mars consists of an explorer determined to bring back all the gold he can fit on the ship, a scientist scouting out the planet as a potential outpost for humans, and an authority on ancient languages, who has been abducted to be presented to the “Planetary God” as a “Sacrifice”. [The first expedition ended when the two earthlings refused to be presented to the "Oyarsa", and returned to earth to find someone to be presented instead...]. The intended victim escapes his human captors and finds himself in the company of the three sentient species of Mars, each displaying more humanity than the men who brought him there. He does meet their “God”, a meeting whose implications are carried far in the remaining two books of Lewis’ Ransom trilogy.)
When Amie sees the movie, I think she will see she was absolutely right.
December 29th, 2009 | 4:22 pm
[...] to Hunter, who was surprised to find that Avatar was more than a “left-wing, pantheistic film,” [...]
December 30th, 2009 | 11:42 pm
Hi Hunter,
I find it interesting that you project your Christian beliefs onto the movie. I’m currently reading Don Cupitt’s book, Jesus & Philosophy, and he contends that it was the introduction of the novel, historically, that brought secular, humanist ethics into common currency, and that it’s actually hard to find counter-examples, back then or today (where God determines our morality as part of the novel’s narrative or even subtext).
Institutionalised religions are all based on mythology (including the Jesus myth of resurrection that you refer to) so, whilst one can also find Jesus references in movies like The Matrix, or even, Superman Returns, it’s merely an indication of how myth influences modern cinema, especially myths that we are all familiar with and grew up with.
Whether Cameron was making a deliberate reference or not, I can’t comment, as I’m yet to see the movie. I only visited this site, because I was interested in other people’s views before I went and saw it.
Regards, Paul.
December 31st, 2009 | 3:10 am
Why even bother trying to analyse or waste time watching such artistic nullities? The trailer was enough to inform me that this latest Camreon spending-spree was not worth the effort or trouble to watch or analyse. This is standard Hollywood tripe tricked-out with 3-D. That doesn’t make it intellectually, or aesthetically interesting.
Why do otherwise intelligent publications like First Things and National Review waste time analysing artistically null blockbusters? You’d be better off spending some time intelligently discussing and asessing the oeuvre of brilliant directors such as Tarkovsky, Kieslowski, Bergman, Herzog, Wenders, Fellini, Visconti, Resnais, and Kurosawa, to name but a few…
January 1st, 2010 | 12:31 pm
[...] symbolism. I was shocked to find no mention of this in several excellent Christian reviews (though see this review, and this discussion of resurrection and transhumanism in Avatar). To my [...]
January 8th, 2010 | 11:03 pm
I agree with Amie and Josef. C.S. Lewis’ “Out of the Silent Planet” came to my mind as I watched the film as well. The parallels are striking. This is what opened my mind to the possibility that there’s more to this film than some Christian commentators have given it credit for (and, as Mr. Baker implied, perhaps even more than James Cameron intended). Glad to know I’m not the only one who saw this in the film.
January 9th, 2010 | 11:02 am
I view this as a sequel to “Out of the silent planet”. The most awesome thing about it is that
it was supposedly something that happened to J.R.R. Tolkien, it has also been said that it was just a dream J.R.R. Tolkien had, but in the book it is clearly seems to be something that really happened. Put my tinfoil hat on and I say that tech is far more advanced than we are aware of, perhaps AVATAR is a documentary?
January 9th, 2010 | 7:33 pm
Indeed, a sequel to out of the silent planet it is.
~Yoda
January 16th, 2010 | 2:49 pm
[...] He was not merely a “skyperson-in-a-cool-body” but truly human, truly god.” Comment on A Different Take on Avatar, First Things by Hunter [...]
January 20th, 2010 | 6:12 pm
Like Joseph I googled” “Avatar Out of the Silent Planet” to see if anyone else made the connection, and arrived here!
After reading a report of Vallini’s opinion of the film for L’Osservatore Romano, I got to thinking that the plot reminded me of Lewis’s work, but since I hadn’t seen the film (and still haven’t) I didn’t know how fanciful this was. I’m interested that some of you who have seen the film have mde the same connection.
(Vallini’s comments were reported in our local paper as “the Vatican said”, but after reading the article, I reassured myself that the Supreme Pontiff had not made a solemn pronouncement on “Avatar” binding on all us Catholics.)
Avatar is Sanskrit for Incarnation, Navi is Hebrew for Prophet…
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact