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.
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]
