Here's an idea. "Jurassic Park" is
about the inherent moral dangers of capitalism.
[THEME NOISES]
OK.
So a little while ago, while we were traveling,
we posted some Idea Channel spots that
were aired on PBS broadcast.
I know.
It's crazy, right?
So along with those posts, we gave you
guys some interim ideas to discuss
while we were out of town.
By far, the most popular was this one about "Jurassic Park"
and capitalism.
So here we are.
You asked, we deliver.
But we're going to do it a little bit differently.
Instead of just showing you how Jurassic Park is
a comment on global market capitalism--
because really it just is even if it's not meant to be,
which we'll talk about in a little bit--
we're going to do a few capital-based readings
of Steven Spielberg's 1993 blockbuster movie
based on Michael Crichton's 1990 novel.
OK, so first things first-- tons and tons of spoilers.
A rich old man named Hammond develops a park
on an island where dinosaurs are brought back
to life through the miracles of science.
It's science.
The dinos managed to escape.
They terrorized the island, each other, and its inhabitants.
Luckily, everybody who is likeable-- and Jeff Goldblum--
escaped on a helicopter at the end.
What is made painfully clear from moment number
one is that capital both drives the story
and is its central complication.
They're gonna make a fortune with this place.
And just to be clear, we're talking
about capital as a resource which can be gained
and then used to create more resource-- so maybe
money, but also things which can act like or create money.
The park is ostensibly capital for Hammond in that
he hopes to profit from it.
OK, so moment one.
The movie opens on an expensive-looking, well-staffed
dino containment unit.
Within minutes, the dino devours one of the workers.
From the very beginning, both product of and subject
to capital are enemies.
Knowing the danger, the park's investors
ask Hammond to host Gennaro and three experts
to sign off on its safety before it actually
opens because it is a risky investment--
(WHISPERS) capitalism.
Doctors Grant and Sattler are reluctant to attend
but agree when Hammond agrees to fund their research for three
whole years.
As they and Dr. Malcolm-- an expert in complex systems--
tour the facility, Hammond brags over and over again
that they spared no expense.
Spared no expense.
Except, as we learn, in paying Nedry, the computer
programmer who seems to want a little bit more
than his fair share.
An outside corporation threatened by Jurassic Park
pays Nedry a sizable amount to steal dinosaur embryos,
setting off a chain reaction that just ruins everyone's day.
Though the writing was on the wall from the very beginning,
Gennaro shrugs it off because of all
of the dollar signs in his eyes and then
gets eaten in what is arguably the movie's most famous shot.
When you gotta go, you gotta go.
At every turn, capital-- or lack
thereof-- provides complication or motivation.
But up till now, we've only done a surface reading.
Thematically, the movie is also about messing
with nature and the possibility of complex systems going
completely haywire.
In JP, nature is a man-made system
that gets outside of man's own control.
Doctor Malcolm even warns, "nature will find a way."
Nature!
But Hammond is confident that the park is stable,
as if channeling the welcome sign to "Westworld,"
another one of the Crichton's novels, which reads "where
nothing can possibly go worng."
We witnessed the collapse of a complex system built for profit
but managed irresponsibly, even negligently-- sort
of like the subprime mortgage crisis.
Dangerous, risky debt was repackaged
as totally-safe, under-control investment opportunities.
And when that risky debt reared its ugly head,
well-- no one got eaten by a dino.
But some people's lives definitely
got torn apart, which brings us, actually, to our last point.
Seeing that t-Rex rip through everything in sight
is pretty cool.
And this is what both Jurassic Parks-- the fictional park run
by John Hammond and the real movie made
by Steven Spielberg-- seek to construct,
an exciting simulation.
Neither the real dinosaurs in the fictional world
or the fictional dinosaurs in the real world-- our world--
are actually dinosaurs.
They are a thing constructed in the image of dinosaurs.
And this is made all the more apparent by all
the genetic funny business that the scientists admit
to and all of the behind-the-scenes footage
of people running around in raptor suits.
Both park and movie are helmed by an egotistical madman
and provide only a false, reality-deficient experience.
They have only one aim-- profit, capital, a needless expense,
a reinforcing of a consumer culture
through the spectacle of consumer culture itself.
Now, this is all well and good.
And we can do this for days, basically with any movie.
"World War Z" is about wage slavery.
"Iron Man" is a bittersweet glorification
of the world-saving entrepreneur.
And "Pacific Rim" is about how the global market will unite us
all against our oppressors.
Even this show, Idea Channel, makes
you feel smart-- hopefully-- in your consumptive complacency
by providing analysis of things which are really just products.
But why?
Why do we-- and maybe, why should we--
look at media this way?
Slovenian philosopher and toilet theorist Slavoj Zizek
says we all silently accept global capitalism is here
to stay and that it is the self-propelling metaphysical
dance of capital that runs the show, that
provides the key to real-life developments and catastrophe.
Our modes of thinking, acting, creating,
being are completely and totally tied up in a market system.
It is, in a word, our ideology.
We think and want and do not for ourselves
but what the market dictates.
We are not in charge.
The market is.
Left unexamined, we are not living our lives
but one which has been handed to us through habit, tradition,
social structure, and media.
So even if "Jurassic Park" is not
a purposeful commentary on capitalism,
it is anyway, maybe even more so.
The characters-- and maybe even we-- behave in the ways
that the market requires in order to succeed.
And we all pay the price-- a price which, incidentally,
the market has set very high.
Clever girl.
Oh, no.
I mean like literally high.
Like movie tickets and rent and the bare necessities
are very expensive.
Just, never mind.
[DR. MALCOLM LAUGHING]
What do you guys think?
How is "Jurassic Park" a commentary on capitalism?
And what other books and movies can be read this way?
Let us know in the comments.
And when you gotta subscribe, you gotta subscribe.
Is not the truly broken egg the egg which is unbreakable?
Let's see what you guys had to say about digital materiality
invading the real world.
RyanTaylorrz brings up that another reason
to like things which are glitchy or broken
is that they can be funny and then mentions the example par
excellence of YouTube Poop, which we totally
forgot to talk about.
Yes.
I agree.
Xplosive59 talks about vaporwave and plunderphonics
as a kind of-- as a style of music
that glitches or corrupts genres instead of media, which I think
is really interesting.
It also makes me think of the musician Oval who
used to scratch CDs and then turn that
into music, which is awesome.
Aw, ID Mon, we hope you get well soon.
Ratttzable and a bunch of other people
mentioned wabi-sabi, which is the Japanese aesthetic
acceptance of imperfection, which is really interesting.
If you've never heard of it, you should go check it out.
Do some Googling.
G102Y5568 talks about how good-bad movies could actually
be an example of something that is broken on purpose.
Questionable whether or not it's on purpose,
but I like your attitude.
Luke Snyder and a couple other people
made a really good point that calling these artworks broken
has a kind of implicit value judgement,
that "broken" is a word that you use to describe something
that is negative.
That's a good point.
Also, I didn't want to say glitchy
like 100,000 times throughout the whole episode.
So broken was kind of a stand in.
But, yes, I agree.
Justin Bruno makes the point that the Liberty Bell is famous
because it is broken and that record scratches are something
that was originally undesirable and now
are something that you can spend your entire life perfecting.
Yes.
Emil Danielsen makes a really interesting point
that glitchy music and artworks are expressions
of musique concrete and abstract expressionism, respectively,
and that they are those art forms reaching
their full potential in the sort of natural sounds
and images made by computers when
they're malfunctioning which, yeah, is a great point.
I really like the idea that the sounds a computer makes
are the new sound a train makes-- musique concrete.
Finally, we're going to wrap up with some bits of news.
For those of you who are going to be at VidCon this week,
I'm going to be talking about the internet
and law on Thursday at 2:30 and then
about how we make Idea Channel, along with some other people,
at 11 o'clock on Friday.
Also, if you just see me walking around, please come and say hi.
I would love to meet you.
Hope to see you there.
Also, we are gearing up for Geek Week along with YouTube.
So next week's video might come out a little early.
Keep your eyes open for it.
I'm really excited about it.
If you're not already, you should come and join us
on the IRC.
And some subscribers set up a sub reddit.
So we'll put some links in the description
so you can find those things.
This week's episode was brought to you
by the video genius possessed by these people.
And the tweet of the week comes from @chelswhyte, who points us
towards the artist KwangHo Sin.
Also, runner up tweet the week-- Rob Sheridan tweeted at us.
[THEME SOUNDS]