A People Without a Culture?

Is an identity a choice? Do individuals have a say in the cultural labels they wish to have upon themselves? And what happens if they reject that label? While some passengers aboard the Snowpiercer had some say in thier choice of seating, a large number of them wre forced onto the train and subjected to live in unbearable conditions in the last car. These passengers in the last car (called "tailers") not only reject to be identified as this low class but they lead a rebellion in order to change thier identities entirely. 

A Quick Review of Events

Snowpiercer (Joon Ho Bong) follows the journey of Curtis (Chris Evans) as he leads a rebellion on a train that circumnavigates a post apocalyptic, frozen Earth. Curtis and his fellow tailers fight through car after car as they take on the front car oppressors that put them there. As they progress further up the train, these tailers learn more about their society and how it functions. As mentioned by Mason (Tilda Swinton), one of the few authority figures of Snowpiercer, everything is a perfectly balanced equilibrium with precise calculations. In other words, people must die in order to have a balanced population.

What is Culture?

According to Geert Hofstede, culture is “the collective programming of the mind distinguishing the members of one group or category of people from others.” It is developed overtime, learned and shared through generations. In fact, this continuous passing down of habits and beliefs form a social norm that ultimately determines the ways in which a group of people behave. 

Snowpiercer's Cultural Identity

As is often the case in a post apocalyptic film, the characters of the story have been stripped of any previous cultural identity they may have had prior to the beginning of the disaster. In a last ditch effort to salvage humanity, every person in the world has come together to struggle for survival. Cultural differences or even old national cultures are no longer important given the drastic reduction of the human race. 

In Snowpiercer, a diverse cast displays all the nationalities of the world coming together in order to survive a barren Earth. Languages previously spoken by these nationalities are also referenced as seen in scenes with a translation device used between Curtis and Namgoong (Song Kang Ho) and the translators accompanying Mason in the tail car. However, these seem to be the last remaining traces of any cultural identity held by the passengers before they boarded. 

While there are glimpses of other nationalities and possible culture present, there is not much more said about the almost nonexistent community of diverse cultures. This is because these individuals on the train no longer identify with their past national culture. Rather, the passengers' cultural identities have been deconstructed and molded to fit the new social norm in which they live. 

The passengers of Snowpiercer are now identified by their class rather than a country of origin. Tailers remain in the rear while the elite remain in the front. Tailers are the shoe. Elite are the hats. Any attempts of change to this order is chaos and will be punished. 

But Do They Identify?

One key difference between cultural identities today and the cultural identities seen in Snowpiercer is the individual's choice. Often with members of a transnational community, a person has some of a choice of where they wish to live and the types of communities of which they want to be a part. While most people in the world identify with the culture in which they grew up and are accustomed, some individuals chose to identify with multiple cultures depending on where the path of life takes them. All in all, there can be some element of choice in the process. 

This is not the case the the individuals of Snowpiercer. The passengers at the end of the train were brought aboard against their will and were forced to harsh living conditions. Immediately, they were labeled as tailers by others and were never given a chance to decide whether or not this was they way in which they wished to be identified or even live. 

Ultimately, they reject their label and refuse to be kept in the back of the train. But while they chose not to be tailers, they still unconsciously identify with this group of people. They have learned the social norms (whether they be just or not) from one another and have taken it upon themselves to rebel. In a sense, rebellion is the social norm for the tailer culture. Curtis and his followers may try to shake their label, but it does not alter the fact that being a tailer is a part of his cultural identity. 

Conclusion 

If a group of individuals refuses to live according to the culture they were forced into, do they still identify with that culture? Yes. Unwillingly and unconsciously, the people of the last car of Snowpiercer identify with one another as a fellow tailer. They may want to change their status, but this will not alter their roots. A change in status will not erase their history and their associations with one another. Curtis may have moved up to the head of the train, but it does not alter the fact that he was once a shoe. 

Comparative Research Paper Draft: Avatars and Apes

War is created from two opposing forces and each person must choose a side to support. Either “us” or “them.” Throughout history, the “us” verses “them” mentality established among cultures has created conflicts that can lead to violence and war. Massacres of Native Americans were carried out by the U.S. Military during the western expansion. Hitler’s genocides killed millions of Jewish followers during the second World War.

In our Western culture, many of our films do not stray from the easily understood “us” and “them” battle. James Cameron’s Avatar pits the profit hungry humans of Earth against the nature-loving, traditional Na’vi of Pandora in a battle over resources and a homeland. Likewise, in Matt Reeve’s Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, both humans and apes strive to survive on a vastly different version of Earth and violence erupts when the two cultures collide. So the characters cling to their own, familiar culture and fights against the "other" out of fear.  

Either way, inevitable violence explodes in both films. But why is violence among these species seen as the only feasible solution? Again, this all circles back to the means in which Western History was shaped: with an imperial mindset. As a culture, it was ingrained in us to see another culture as an “other” and if they pose the slightest threat or obstacle, force is the simplest solution.

   Therefore, the films Avatar and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes feature themes of post-colonialism and the violent effects an “us versus them” relationship among cultures has on the individuals within them.

Hofstede's Dimensions

According to social psychologist Geert Hofstede, culture is “the collective programming of the mind distinguishing the members of one group or category of people from others.” As such, the culture in which one is born into greatly effects one's way of thinking. Then when more individuals from differing cultures negatively interact, this incites conflict and even violence.

As a part of his cultural analysis, Hofstede developed six dimensions that contribute to the makeup of a culture: power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation and indulgence. However, for the sake of this research, only masculinity, uncertainty avoidance and long term orientation will be discussed since they are the main contributors to conflict.

Avatar's Humans and Na'vi

Masculinity 

Masculine or feminine nature of a culture focuses on the culture’s preference to strive for personal achievement or to nurture the community as a whole (Hofstede). 

In Avatar, the humans on Pandora are more focused on achievement, making them a predominately masculine. They strive to mine unobtainium and are willing to strike down the Na’vi in order to do so (Cameron, Avatar). Meanwhile, the Na’vi focus on “The People.” Their actions come from a concern for the betterment of the tribe rather than the individual (Cameron, Avatar).

Uncertainty Avoidance

Uncertainty Avoidance looks into the degree to which members of a culture feel comfortable taking risks. Cultures with low uncertainty avoidance will be more likely to take risks. (Hofstede).

Pandora's humans are more willing to risk the destruction of the planet and commit violence in order to get what they want. Several characters express indifference when the Home Tree of the Na’vi becomes an obstacle (Cameron, Avatar).

On the other hand, the Na’vi are not as well accustomed to change or willing to take chances. They are more traditional and have a deeper connection to their ancestors as seen in their tie to the tree of souls. The only times they truly choose to take chances are when they believe the risk will save the lives of the people. This is shown during the final battle of the film (Cameron, Avatar).

Long Term Orientation

Long Term Orientation expresses quickly or slowly a culture wishes to complete its goals. Cultures with a higher long term orientation are willing to take their time (Hofstede). 

Humans want results immediately. Early on in the film, Parker Selfridge mentions the need to have profitable results for the upcoming quarter (Cameron, Avatar). Relating back to the culture’s feminine quality, the Na’vi are not as focused on immediate results. They are willing to let things flow with the way of Eywa (Cameron, Avatar).

Source of Conflict?

Much of the conflict between the humans and Na’vi is rooted in these difference in cultural dimensions which fuel their actions. The humans who strive for achievement use force to get the unobtainium because they need results as soon as possible. On the other hand, the Na’vi have no need for profit and choose to focus on their people by sticking with traditions and letting Eywa be their guiding force. Since both sides are unable and unwilling to understand the other, violence is used as the simplest solution to settle their differences.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes' Humans and Apes

Due to the ape-pocalypse and the mass devastation of the human race, the human culture seen in this film is vastly different from the one previously seen in Avatar. Instead of seeking expansion on another planet, the humans simply strive for survival. Because of this difference, the ape and human cultures have more similarities than differences.

Both are Feminine

The apes have just begun to thrive as their own separate community, developing a tribal system slightly more advanced than the typical cave man. Meanwhile, some of Earths last remaining humans have come together trying to survive with a limited amount of resources. Both cultures are centered on the whole community of each culture because their races depend on cooperation to survive.

Both have Low Uncertainty Avoidance

Humans are high risk takers because they are on at the end of their rope. Supplies are running out and if they have any chance of saving their race, they must take it. Even though he could be killed by the apes, Malcolm chooses to seek out the ape tribe to gain access to the dam in order to get electricity that will save his community in San Francisco (Reeves, Dawn).

This dimension is difficult to apply to the ape culture because it depends heavily upon the ape. Koba is a huge risk taker since he is willing to kill Caesar, the ape who saved him, in order to rid the Earth of humans. Caesar has a high uncertainty avoidance at first since he looks out for the betterment of the ape tribe. However, when faced with the conflict with Koba, Caesar is more willing to risk his life to salvage the community he has created. (Reeves, Dawn)

Both have Low Long Term Orientation

Humans are faced with a life or death situation. They need power to live and reach out to other survivors. Therefore, they require immediate results from those around them.

This is another dimension not easily applicable to the apes. Caesar far more concerned with long term orientation at the start of the film. This can be seen in his decision to allow the humans to work on the dam as well as his reluctance to fight them. Meanwhile, Koba is focused on current situation with the humans. His past is what drives him to fight without much concern for the distant future (Reeves, Dawn). As a result, he would rather see the immediate eradication of the human race.

Source of Conflict?

What is depicted in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, is a reverse in imperialism. The Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia defines imperialism as the “practice by which powerful nations or peoples seek to extend and maintain control or influence over weaker nations or peoples.”

The once conquered apes become the conquerors as Koba leads his army to take over what is left of San Francisco. Koba strikes out of fear of past events with humans. “Koba’s actions [are] neither random or unjustified. His […] violence […] responds to the violence that has already been done to the apes” (Hamilton, 318). While the cultural dimensions were not a fueling the conflict like they are in Avatar, this film shows how deep past negative experiences with another culture can influence an individual. 

What does this say about Western Culture?

Post-Colonialism

As stated before, elements of imperialism are apparent through Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. In a strange twist of events, the apes attempt to exert imperialism over the humans. They take advantage of their weakened state and exert force over them. As a response to fear for humans, apes (Koba in particular) show off their power and dominance. 

Avatar contains imperialism as well, but also Orientalism. According to Edward Said, Orientalism is closely tied to imperialist cultures. It is the patronizing and misrepresentation of another culture through the eyes of the imperial culture ("What is"). 

This is seen through the scientists on Pandora who try to look at the Na'vi "objectively." Avatar chooses to "problematize settler culture's configuration of the 'sacred,' distinguishing indigenous knowledge as objects of colonial scientific study from that of a mode of living." (Chou, 79). Also, through the human's need to mold the Na'vi to fit their standards. Grace taught many of the Na'vi English and they once tried to offer them medicine which they refused.

But Why Violence?

Battles and war have been apart of humanity almost since its beginning. It is the simplest way for one to establish dominance and to gain what is wanted. Violence may be considered primitive, it is effective and one of the most easily understood forms of conflict resolution. So much so that many audiences are not as fazed by the inclusion of violence in films like the ones discussed in this research. It's almost expected.

Audiences have a thirst for war

It is my true opinion that humans crave, even lust for bloodshed. This sadistic concept dates back to Roman times when arenas were packed full with citizens eager to watch a criminal be executed by ravenous lions.

While it is simple for filmmakers to go straight for the inevitable bloody battle to satisfy and audience, others attempt to take an alternate route, as seen in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. In his review of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, Richard Corliss explains that the film “dares ask the audience to root for the peacemakers” referencing Malcom and Caesar.

Unlike Avatar which displays destruction and/or death in every other scene, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes challenges the audience to side with a nonviolent solution. However, as later stated in Corliss's review, the viewers crave for blood.Rather than allow peace to triumph, the audience receives the more satisfying bloody finale. 

Western Colonial Guilt

Western culture has guilt about colonialism and the means by which these countries expanded. John Rieder explains how films like Avatar exploit this Western guilt. He states “Avatar mystifies race and violence, representing the heroes’ own participation in the same project as the villains in order to afford these heroes all the rewards of colonialism with none of the guilt” (47).

In no way can Western cultures atone for the crimes committed decades ago, but the construction of these films are a means for them to continue with the colonialism ideas their culture is much accustomed to without any unpleasant guilt that often comes with violently attacking another culture.

So why do these films end with violence rather than peaceful negotiations if Western cultures have post colonial guilt? Again, this goes back to what is familiar. Audiences prefer to watch what is familiar to them. Given an individual's preference for action films with a grand final battle, an individual will watch films that coincide with his taste. Westerners are familiar with colonialism and violence, but would rather watch films that do not give them an ounce of guilt associated with colonialism. Thus Avatar and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is born.

Conclusion 

 The post-colonial nature of a culture is difficult to alter. Even today, we see elements of these events in our entertainment. Through films like Avatar and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, conflicts among cultural differences is enough to strike fear into the hearts of the individuals. It is human nature to be cautious and even reject something new and foreign. Strangeness, often found in cultures, can spark fear which can lead to reckless actions.

The amount of violence in films today is enough to tell modern audiences how heavily war and fighting has influenced the Western culture. It is pivotal to Western history and has greatly shaped the entertainment industry. Perhaps there is a way to quench an audience's thirst for gore and blood that does not force cultures to view one another in a negative light. 

Works Cited

Avatar. Dir. James Cameron. Perf. Sam Worthington and Zoe Saldana. Twentieth century 
         Fox home entertainment, 2010. DVD.

Chou, Shiuhhuah Serena. "Claiming the Sacred: Indigenous Knowledge, Spiritual                          Ecology, and the Emergence of Eco-Cosmopolitanism." Cultura:                                               International Journal of Philosophy of Culture & Axiology, vol. 12, no. 1, Jan.                         2015, pp. 71-84. 

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Dir. Matt Reeves. Perf. Andy Serkis and Jason Clarke. 
          Twentieth century fox home entertainment, 2014. Online Streaming.

Hamilton, Sheryl N. "'Human No Like Smart Ape': Figuring the Ape as Legal                                   Person in Rise of the Planet of the Apes." Law & Humanities, vol. 10, no. 2,                           Nov. 2016, pp. 300-321.

"Imperialism." Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia, 2016, p. 1p. 1.

"National Culture." The Hofstede Centre, geert-hofstede.com/national-                                           culture.html. Accessed 20 Mar. 2017.

Richard, Corliss. "REVIEW: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes: Who Needs                                       Humans?." Time.com, 12 July 2014, p 1.

Rieder, John. "Race and Revenge Fantasies in Avatar, District 9 and                                                Inglourious Basterds." Science Fiction Film and Television, no. 1, 2011, p. 41. 

"What Is Orientalism?" What Is Orientalism? | Reclaiming Identity: Dismantling Arab                     Stereotypes. Arab American National Museum, 2011. Web. 20 Apr. 2017.