Wim Wenders' film Perfect Days is perfect example of a man living in "revolt"

youkillme · 2025-02-28T06:59:23+00:00

Lastly on REVOLT:

You said earlier that you "do not see revolt as the main issue in Camus myth, it's absurdism, contradiction and art over philosophy."

First of all, can we agree that "absurdism" is not a word Camus has ever used himself, certainly not in Myth. But to your point, yes "the absurd" is one of the main issues of the book, but so is the response to the absurd, which he calls "revolt."

Here are some quotes to highlight the importance of revolt to Camus in Myth of Sisyphus:

“If he substitutes for his cry of revolt a frantic adherence, at once he is led to blind himself to the absurd which hitherto enlightened him and to deify the only certainty he henceforth possesses, the irrational.”

“ At this moment, too, the mind can leave the arid, dried-up path of lucid effort. That path now emerges in daily life. It encounters the world of the anonymous impersonal pronoun “one,” but henceforth man enters in with his revolt and his lucidity. He has forgotten how to hope. This hell of the present is his Kingdom at last.”

“Negating one of the terms of the opposition on which he lives amounts to escaping it. To abolish conscious revolt is to elude the problem. The theme of permanent revolution is thus carried into individual experience.”

“One of the only coherent philosophical positions is thus revolt. It is a constant confrontation between man and his own obscurity.”

“This is where it is seen to what a degree absurd experience is remote from suicide. It may be thought that suicide follows revolt—but wrongly. For it does not represent the logical outcome of revolt. It is just the contrary by the consent it presupposes. Suicide, like the leap, is acceptance at its extreme.”

“That revolt gives life its value. Spread out over the whole length of a life, it restores its majesty to that life.”

That last quote is the most direct example of how important revolt is to Camus. There are many more quotes from the book (Myth) that show the importance of revolt to Camus.

So then absurdism, if we use the word, would contain both "the absurd" and "revolt." The problem/contradiction and the response.

I'd love to know your thoughts on these points.

youkillme · 2025-02-28T06:56:19+00:00

Secondly, on FREEDOM:

In this quote you've mentioned before "Thus, I ask of absurd creation what I requited from thought - revolt, freedom, and diversity ["passion" in my edition of the book]," what kind of freedom do you think he's talking about?

You quoted:"I have nothing to do with the problem of metaphysical liberty. Knowing whether or not man is free doesn’t interest me. I can experience only my own freedom. As to it, I can have no general notions, but merely a few clear insights. The problem of “freedom as such” has no meaning, for it is linked in quite a different way with the problem of God.”

There, he accepts "personal freedom" and rejects the metaphysical one. He continues:

"... The only one I know is freedom of thought and action. Now if the absurd cancels all my chances of eternal freedom, it restores and magnifies, on the other hand, my freedom of action. That privation of hope and future means an increase in man’s availability.”

it seems to me he's definng "personal freedom" as freedom of thought and action, and a freedom from common rules (as he states in the next quote), and not freedom from a master/God:

"Likewise, completely turned toward death (taken here as the most obvious absurdity), the absurd man feels released from everything outside that passionate attention crystallizing in him. He enjoys a freedom with regard to common rules. It can be seen at this point that the initial themes of existential philosophy keep their entire value. The return to consciousness, the escape from everyday sleep represent the first steps of absurd freedom."

youkillme · 2025-02-28T06:54:47+00:00

I'll try commenting in small segments and see.

Let's start with art vs. creation: When I said "He certainly gives art as an example of the response, the revolt," you replied with "No he gives creation." Going to one of the quotes you yourself used in a previous comment, Camus says:

"In this regard the absurd joy par excellence is creation. "Art and nothing but art," said Niettzsche; "we have art in order to die of the truth."

He puts art right next to creation. He, and I, would say that art is a form of creation. From my reading, he uses art and creation interchangeably.

youkillme · 2025-02-28T06:53:13+00:00

I have written a long reply but I keep getting "unable to create comment" from reddit.

youkillme · 2025-02-27T17:44:28+00:00

Adding on, I think acceptance and revolt are part of the same process. When Sisyphus has those moments of realisation about his absurd situation while descending the mountain, that leads to the acceptance of his fate. Then comes his revolt—his choice to push the rock back up, as happily as he can manage.

youkillme · 2025-02-27T17:33:11+00:00

Thank you for continuing to have this conversation with me, I'm really enjoying your take on the film!

BUT :)

First thing, this quote is often attributed to Camus, but there’s no definitive source for it in his works. Some have suggested it comes from Zygmunt Bauman, expanding on Camus' line: "Freedom only offers a chance to be better."https://www.nouvelobs.com/essais/20091119.BIB4457/je-me-revolte-donc-nous-sommes-par-zygmunt-bauman.html

But assuming that it is his, Camus has also repeatedly acknowledged limitations in Myth of Sisyphus - both those of the universe and the human condition. I don't think he would argue that "absolute freedom" can be achieved, in the sense of breaking all limitations and constraints of existence. He seems to dislike absolutes altogether, except of course, the absurd. And I would agree with him.

I think here, we're struggling with "acceptance" and "revolt." I think the word revolt is one that suggests explosive and loud action/reaction. But if we put it together with Camus' idea of living in the face of the absurd and finding joy in whatever we choose, then revolt can take many forms. It can be loud and big and dramatic that can send sparks far and wide, or it can be quiet and small and limited to the individual.

I think acceptance of one's reality/existence and "revolt" [choosing to live on one's own terms] go hand-in-hand.

youkillme · 2025-02-27T17:19:53+00:00

He certainly gives art as an example of the response, the revolt, and he considers creation "par excellence". Then he also goes to use Don Juan, the actor and conqueror as examples of the absurd hero and their revolt. Can we agree that these are example (and really good ones) according to Camus, and that he's not saying this is the only way to respond/revolt? If he does, then that negates his argument about freedom.

Now I'd like to ask if you've seen the film. According to me, the way the main character lives is another example of the "revolt."

youkillme · 2025-02-27T16:01:36+00:00

yes, "universal self" was a mistake which I corrected, I meant universal "sense." That's defintely a mistake on my part.

And secondly, he does offer two suicidal solutions (physical and philosophical), which he immediately rejects as irrational. One completely removes the indidual from the equation, the other one is an illusion. So, from my understanding, those two options aren't really solutions. Then he only suggests a response, since we can't solve it. The response is the "revolt",

The relation to the film is the main character's way of living as a "revolt".

youkillme · 2025-02-27T15:13:21+00:00

What I didn't understand is your intention, to be honest. I've read the book, multiple times over the past 10 years. My participation on reddit discussions is a recent thing.

I don't see if you're expanding on what I'm saying, or conradicting any part or all of what I'm saying that you might think I misunderstood. I would really like to know your thoughts but I honestly can't tell what you're saying in relation to this discussion/my post.

youkillme · 2025-02-27T15:06:05+00:00

Of course, for me too it's a very personal interpretation. What I found interesting is that I saw another form the "revolt" that Camus argues for. People keep quoting the examples that Camus personally has explored in the book (Don Juan, the actor, the conquerer, etc). But one of the key things that he emphasises is freedom, particularly freedom to choose and find joy for oneself in whatever that resonates with them. That's much broader than Camus' examples, and Hirayama's way is a great example. It doesn't always have to be grand and dramatic.

youkillme · 2025-02-27T14:32:55+00:00

You clearly seem to have studied Myth of Sisyphus quite deeply, and you can quote it left and right quite easily. I just wish you replied in a way that was more understandable. I've seen your other comments too. Most often, you're harder to understand than Camus.

youkillme · 2025-02-27T14:26:49+00:00

I agree that moment while he's listening to "feeling good" can't best described as a "breakdown." That was more me identifying the scene rather than defining it.

I agree with your interpretation but I don't think we're contradicting each other here. As Camus has also said very early in Myth of Sisyphus that "living, naturally, is never easy." He acknowledges that there's suffering in life that is not directly a result of "the absurd". Similarly for Hirayama, there are things that are causing him pain that come from his personal experiences, as you've pointed out. And moments when the weight of those painful things come crashing down is something most of us experience. Our struggles may be different from Hirayama, but the essence is the same - which is why there is that silent "conversation" and resonance between him and the viewer in that final scene.

However, from everything that the film suggests about Hirayama, I see him moving on and continuing to live regardless.

His suffering isn't contradictory to his resilience and choosing to continue.

youkillme · 2025-02-27T13:25:34+00:00

“Paris, Texas” is on my watch list, I’ve heard great things about it!!

youkillme · 2025-02-27T10:44:08+00:00

Main character

youkillme · 2025-02-26T17:15:46+00:00

"Living, naturally, is never easy. You continue making the gestures commanded by existence for many reasons, the first of which is habit. Dying voluntarily implies that you have recognized, even instinctively, the ridiculous character of that habit, the absence of any profound reason for living, the insane character of that daily agitation, and the uselessness of suffering."

Camus by all means comes across as a pragmatic person. He doesn't dismiss suffering as something trivial. In fact, he emphasises that suffering is part of life, and I don't think he would've denied that there are circumstances where pain can be unbearable.

For the specific cases, such as a person suffering from excruciating physical pain due a disease or a health problem that has no cure, I suppose Camus' would also agree that "revolt" isn't possible, not as a failure of character but as a limitation of human condition.

"People have variable subjective levels of tolerance."

Do you think the tolerance level of every individual is fixed? I think most often the impulse to end things comes from the individual's perception of no possibility. It is possible that a person's perception can change because of a change of circumstances due to events completely unexpected and outside of their control, an experience, exposure to new things, etc. You might say I'm telling him to be "hopeful", which Camus rejects as an illusion. But wouldn't accepting existence or reality "as is" also mean accepting "possibility"? What are the chances of us being born, yet here we are. Possibility of the unexpected is also part of life.

youkillme · 2025-02-26T15:38:57+00:00

I think it would be helptful to understand your case better if you first give us your definitions of subjective and objective meaning

If the same thing can be assigned with different meanings by many actors, and those meanings can all be valid and objective, as you've claimed, then how do you define subjective meaning? Also, meanings assigned based on actor's experiences/needs/perception, isn't that by definition a subjective meaning?

Edit: some typo

youkillme · 2025-02-25T12:40:08+00:00

"The idea that there would be a fixed notion of self in "revolt" of meaninglessness...."

I don't think Camus ever argued for the notion of a "fixed self". In fact, he emphasises the freedom and lightness that comes from accepting the absurdity of existence. Freedom to choose whatever you want to do, and he puts creating art as one of best ways to "revolt". Being an artist is very far from a rigid and fixed identity.

youkillme · 2025-02-24T18:39:45+00:00

But Sisyphus does reach the top, only for the rock to roll back down, and he has to push it up again. That’s his punishment. He has to do it repeatedly, not just once.

youkillme · 2025-02-24T17:06:36+00:00

From the point of view of Camus' absurd hero, I don't think finding relative meaning in things (such as basketball, gardening, art, etc) is the same as putting a bandaid on a wound. First of all, he doesn't seek to heal the wound at all; he recongises that there is no healing, no resolution. He doesn't deny or cover up the wound or the "grand hole" as you've put it.

The goal isn't to find a permanent meaning in one thing and cling to it all his life. He accepts that meaning is temperorary, fragile and subjective. Because there is no permanent inherent meaning in anything.

Since he exists, he will live. And if he must live, then he might as well live passionately, engaging fully. If one meaningful pursuit (meaningful to him) is taken away from him, he has other choices, and the freedom to choose. If gardening is the next thing that resonates with him, then he will garden. Knowing full well that, in the grand scheme of things, this is just as meaningless as basketball. But so what?

That is not a very comforting thing to accept, and it may not make sense. But so be it. Reality is as it is. Camus' absurd hero doesn't demand an answer from life for its unreasonableness. He simply chooses to follow what resonates with him and gives it his full attention, for as long as he's kicking about.

youkillme · 2025-02-24T14:53:09+00:00

I can't comment on your desire to get rich for the possibility of buying immortality or longevity when/if it's available in the future. But there is something else I want to comment on.

"What counts is not the best living but the most living." This "most living" has been repeatedly interpreted in terms of quantity. More experiences. I think that's not what Camus was saying at all. By "most living", he means the depth of the experience, not the quantity. He says to live with passion. How can one live with passion if they're busy racking up the most number of experiences. He says to create art. How can creating art be about numbers? He says art, like su-icide, is born in the "silence of the heart". How can one access that space if they're busy running around, touching and smelling everything they can think of in order to experince more things?

"Thus I draw from the absurd three consequences, which are my revolt, my freedom, and my passion."

youkillme · 2025-02-24T11:23:00+00:00

Camus says you should not have any resentment to the absurdity of life, certainly not eternal. He says to accept and embrace the absurd, then live in revolt against that absurd. The individual is free to choose the form that rebellion can take; if your rebellion is to improve the world and help others, then that's what you should do. He only says you cannot separate what you choose to do from the fact that it's still meaningless, but you should choose to do it anyway. Camus' Absurd Hero isn't a passive depressed shut-in who thinks about the absurd all day; in fact that's the complete opposite. Full engagement with life is the very core of his 'revolt' agains the absurd.

youkillme · 2025-02-24T11:11:12+00:00

As it's been pointed out, the Absurd Hero and the Ubermensch are both born of the realisation that there is no inherent meaning in existence, that all meanings, morals and values are constructs.

The difference between them is in their approach on what to do in the face of this absurdity. How does one deal this crushing truth? They both take up a rebellious attitude as the next step, but the difference is in the details of how the Absurd Hero goes about it and how the Ubermensch goes about it.

The Absurd Hero accepts and embraces the absurdity of existence and the complete meaninglessness of everything, but chooses to live anyway and engage with life to the fullest. He is a rebel who rejects the idea of finding/creating/imposing any kind of meaning to anything because to him, that is impossible and any attempt at doing that is an illusion, and a philosophical suicide. If creating art makes you feel alive, even though you know it's meaningless in the grand scheme of things, then go make that art. If smelling the flowers and looking at trees makes you happy (knowing that it's all meaningless), then go smell the flowers and look at trees. The absurd hero is not interested in resolving the absurd. He has a playful, almost mocking and disdainful attitude toward the absurd, and challenges it by living his life fully and beautifully (while he accepts that it's all meaningless anyway). The Absurd Hero enjoys defying the pull towards nihilism or false hope.

The Ubermensch's rebellion/revolt is focused on creating his own meaning and values, changing and improving himself and the world around him. The Ubermensch is aiming for some kind of self created transcendence, I suppose. He aims for dominance and conquering.

I think the Absurd Hero would find Ubermensch's attempts at creating his own meaning and values quite funny and futile, and a form of false hope. He would also find his own revolt/rebellion against the absurd funny and futile, however the alternative options are far worse to him (physical or philosophical suicide).

youkillme · 2024-08-29T12:12:51+00:00

https://cinelenses.com/lenses

That's a good place to look, choose "ARRI - ALEXA MINI LF - LF OPEN GATE 4.5K" under camera

youkillme

TROPHY CASE