second look at the village
I have been a fan of M. Night Shyamalan ever since I first experienced The Sixth Sense. I have looked forward to, and I have enjoyed each one of his subsequent films; although, none of them have been as striking to me as his first production. My second favorite Shyamalan film has to be Unbreakable, and without question my least favorite is Signs (sorry Mel). That leaves The Village standing somewhere in the middle of my approval meter, however his latest production has a certain quality - at least in my eyes - that sets it apart from all the rest.
On both occasions when I watched The Village, once in theater and once this afternoon, I was struck with the impression that the film could be viewed as an extended allegory. None of the special features on the DVD indicate that this was Shyamalan's intension, so I must confess this interpretation is much more representative of what I bring to the film as opposed to its original design. However, I believe viewing this film in an allegorical sense provides a whole new way of enjoying and perceiving its content.
The village is a kind of nineteenth century utopian society that has been set up as an oasis of purity and innocence in response to the pervasive evil found in the contemporary world. The village remains isolated and insulated from the world because it is surrounded by a forest filled with malevolent beasts that threaten to destroy any who venture beyond its set boundaries. A complex network of rituals and rules is present within the utopian community, they are guidelines for the people in the relationship they share with "those they do not mention".
The allegory I perceive within this film hinges within the twist of its plot. This isolated Victorian community abides not in the 1900s, but rather in the 21st century. Its isolation is nothing more than a creation of a group of elders who have become disenchanted with the corruption of the world. The elders themselves dress up as the beasts that instill fear within the hearts of the villagers, compelling them not to go beyond the borders of their safe community. Ultimately, the innocence of this utopian society is the product of an intentional fabrication of the elders, a fabrication that cannot be perpetuated without the ongoing ignorance of its members.
When I watched The Village I was struck with the feeling that Shyamalan was making a critique of organized religion, which is represented by "the village". The borders of the village are the rules of religious orthodoxy, which are protected by the manufactured threats of the religious leaders (ie hell). Ironically, the medicine that is required to "save" an injured member of the village can only be found beyond its borders. The physical blindness of the central character, Ivy Walker, represents the ongoing state of the village as she brings medicine back from the outside world. The life of her love is saved, but in the end the blindness of the village toward a greater reality only serves to be strengthened.
Admittedly, I may be reading way too much into this. But, I would like to pose this question: to what extent is innocence possible without ignorance?
posted by Jason at 4:40 p.m.
6 Comments:
I would contend that innocence is ignorance. The more we know, the less innocence we have. Innocence, however, is a somewhat shallow virtue, if it can be considered a virtue at all. Anyone who is ever called 'wordly' is certainly not innocent. Although loss of innocence generally seems to be the profaning of something pure, it also opens their eyes to a larger world, which is a fundamentally important experience in coming to understand other people's perspectives and the world around them. Being locked up in 'the village', while apparently self-fulfilling, denies the truth that they exist in a larger world, and experiencing the world as a whole, I believe, is necessary to (I admit I'm really teleological) the moving forward of all people and society throughout the world.
Awesome movie. I actually showed about 15 minutes of the movie one sunday when I was preaching as allegory/illustration of the failure of some of the attitudes Christian communities can have and what it leads too. I think at least some people got it.
Good question too.
M. Night is one of my all time favorites in the movies - oh and I loved signs - must be my obsession with aliens.
Anyway - I though The Village was brilliant and have seen it several times.
At first glance I have to agree with Dan in that innocence is ignorance. But looking further - it's not so cut and dry. I wonder if we were meant to be truly innocent as humans.
Meaning it's our very nature to be curious, to gain knowledge and ultimately not be ignorant.
However, in relation to your question, "to what extent is innocence possible without ignorance?"
There's only one way to be innocent without ignorance and that's through faith and the grace of God.
It's the only way we can become truly innocent before God. His grace allows us that innocence even though we are often ignorant of his truths.
We don't know everything about God therefore we're ignorant. But through our faith and his grace we're undeservingly welcome into his Kingdom.
Often when I saw "The Village" I wondered about how ethical it would be to hide something from someone that I though could harm them.
But in reality that's what parents do with their children. Maybe not to the extent of what's portrayed in the Village. But as parents we try to keep our children innocent by keeping them ignorant of the bad things in life (pornography, drugs, violence, language, etc.)
Does this act of ignorance keep them innocent? I'd have to say yes (for a period of time). As I've mentioned earlier - we all have that burning desire in us to know. Knowledge is power and everyone wants power.
But I think the truest power comes from self control where a person chooses ignorance even though they have the ability to know. Therefore becoming ignorant and innocent.
beauty for a soulmate said: "To choose te keep your eyes closed cause you don't wish to see what's around you would not make you more innocent. Just plain stupid I guess."
I strongly disagree with you. There are times I wished I've closed my eyes. There are things out there that no one should have to see.
There are sights that I've seen that serve no purpose but to distract you from what you should be focusing on.
I don't think it's stupid to close your eyes to the world sometimes. To me I think it's wise. I think you can choose to be ignorant. And that can be a good thing.
A few highlights from:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org
innocent
adjective
(of a person) not guilty of a particular crime, or having no knowledge of the unpleasant and evil things in life, or (of a thing) harmlessly intended
innocence
noun
when someone is not guilty of a crime, or does not have much experience of life and does not know about the bad things that happen in life
innocent
noun
a person who has very little experience and does not know about the bad things that happen in life
In my opinion, it is important to distinguish between two different "kinds" of innocence. There is innocence that is derived from being without knowledge, and innocence resulting from a lack of guilt. It is my belief that the second state of innocence is much more profound than the first.
From a Christian perspective you could argue that "Adam and Eve" and/or young children are examples of the first kind of innocence. This kind of innocence is beautiful and admirable, but in a fallen world it seems to me that this kind of innocence can only be maintained with suppression, oppression or even outright deception (as in the case with The Village).
In the same vein, the second "kind" of innocence is a consequence of grace. I love how Paul describes this concept in 2 Corinthians 5:17, "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!" This passage is clearly not referring to a state of ignorance as verse 19 goes on to clarify, "that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them..."
It is one thing to protect the "lack of knowledge" innocence in children, but we must also equip them with strength of character and discerning minds so they can challenge the often harsh realities of this world. As "Beauty for a Soulmate" said, we certainly do need to be "cunning as snakes and harmless as doves".
Ignorance untouched by brokenness is a kind of innocence; but, to ignore the pain of a wounded soul - as if it doesn't exist - is a notion that is devoid of love and is powerless to restore innocence lost.
Post a Comment
<< Home