No-one? It’s exactly what I thought of while I was reading. If you hadn’t posted them, I would have. @PrestonSturges, too, probably.
Maybe all my cultural references are stuck 10-15 (15-20?) years ago?
I guess I run in the wrong circles, because no one I know talks about spirit animals, but Fight Club is the second most profound movie in my life.
Anyway, if I did have a spirit animal, it would definitely be this guy:
http://www.boingboing.net/2011/06/28/Screen-shot-2011-06-28-at-9.14.jpg
“Soak!”
These spirit animals are very real… They are like allies that come in for a person, esp. when they see this person is devoted to their path - in being more aware, awake, and mindful of their connection with nature. This is the reason most indigenous cultures see and work with the many power animals they encounter in trance states (aya etc). These animals have certain lessons - guidance - for the seeker…
Western man lost that connection w nature long ago - but it was very much alive w/ the ancient Celts and Aztecs pre-christian era. So when the Europeans came to America - they scoffed at the Native Americans ways, and their reverence for animal totems and omens.
It’s too bad Hollywood (in general) reflects this ignorance of esoteric knowledge. It’s a sad bit of programming, but the programming is everywhere. The key is to step away from the program and walk in another direction - these animal allies notice and come in to help and support the shift.
KK has a good article on The Gaia Tribes - http://www.thehoodedsage.com/2014/07/the-gaia-tribes/
Fight club was cool - good lessons in that movie.
On the subject of Fight Club…
It’s not that no one remembers Fight Club. It’s that no one talks about Fight Club.
My favorite rendition of spirit animals was from Pullman’s Hit Dark Materials trilogy, with their daemons.
On the off chance that anyone here hasn’t read them, consider this an extremely-strong plug.
To be honest, I think Hulk is giving that idiotic film FAR too much credit. For example, he writes “… IF THE POINT IS TO ULTIMATELY REJECT THE INNER-TYLER, WHY THE FUCK DOES IT SPEND TWO HOURS MAKING YOUTHFUL NIHILISM AND NOT-GROWING-UP AS SEDUCTIVE AND PROFOUND AS FUCKING POSSIBLE?” Seriously, people find Tyler Durgen/Project Mayhem “seductive and profound”? One of the serious flaws of FIGHT CLUB is that its alternative to consumer ennui (trailing after a half-baked, used-car salesman philosopher, meeting up in alleyways to fight with dispossessed and slightly pathetic males) is NEVER for one moment seductive, convincing, or appealing; its obviously a heavy-handed satirical joke from the get-go. Rather than rejecting nihilism, the film fundamentally espouses a vacuous nihilism, by presenting two extreme, fish and a barrel alternatives ( Ikea-consumerist drudgery, the sheer dumb-assery of Fight Club/Project Mayhem), and thumbing its nose glibly at both.
You’re right, I have no recollection of those clips at all. Weird.
I don’t understand the point of this article at all.
I’ve only skimmed over the FCH article, but I get what he’s getting at; it’s a lot easier to get that you’re not supposed to admire Tyler Durden and Project Mayhem from the book, which Chuck Palahniuk constructs as a sort of world in which all urban legends are true. (Although not everybody even gets that much; Laura Miller, whose work I otherwise admire, wrote a scathing critique of Palahniuk’s work in general that seemed to miss that point quite badly.) Aside from whatever specific criticisms of Fincher’s work that FCH is making, there’s also the bare fact that Durden is played by Brad Pitt, and the narrator by Edward Norton, which kind of front-loads the question of who you should be rooting for.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
