|
|
Post by haleyjensen on Nov 20, 2013 15:17:01 GMT
I've never seen The Titanic either, but one of my favorite movies is The Bridge to Terabithia, and I would definitely consider that movie a tragedy. Spoiler alert if you've never seen Bridge to Terabithia...
Despite knowing what it will do to my emotions, I watch this movie over and over again because of Jess and Leslie's relationship. Growing up, I used to draw as I watched the movie and felt like I was a part of their world and their friendship. One of the reasons I watch it is because I find Jess and Leslie's friendship is so sincere and endearing, that it's worth it to me to cry over it every once in awhile to watch the two-person dynamic that Katherine Patterson dreamed up in her brain.
As far as the literary purpose of a tragedy... A story is a lot like a sandwich. The genre of a work (tragedy, comedy, etc.) serves as the bread of a story. You get a taste of it in every bite, similar to how genre tends to be tangled throughout an entire work. And if you think about it, the bread crust is usually the last thing you have left to eat when eating a sandwich. If that final taste isn't good, you may not remember any of it very fondly. The same is true for literature. The "breaded" end of a novel definitely has the potential to change a person's overall opinion of a book, even if they enjoyed it up until the end. The characters give it a different texture and flavor as well. The characters, plotline, setting, etc are all kind of like the stuff you put in a sandwich. The bread sets the tone for a sandwich, as a genre sets the tone for a story.
|
|
|
|
Post by keelycorrigan on Nov 20, 2013 16:41:33 GMT
For the record—“Titanic” warrants every viewing it gets because of its groundbreaking aesthetics and timeless love story. I’m sorry. I had to say it. I don’t know why I feel I have to defend all of these emotionally manipulative movies. They suck me in, forcing me to want to turn away, but not allowing me to do so.
In terms of the tragic elements, I think that is it because of our desire to know ( and "know" as in capital K know) that drives us to towards tragedy, because we feel like if we see it over and over again then one day we can figure it out. We can figure out the WHY. We are driven to the WHY. Why else would there be such abundance beautiful and insightful literature? What else are we doing when we create art but exploring our interpretations of the why? Human curiosity knows no bounds (cliche and dumb to say, but true), especially when it comes to the question of why. We want to be able to rationalize and analyze these events because we are not satisfied with wondering. We never have been.
|
|
|
|
Post by danyhong55 on Nov 20, 2013 20:49:40 GMT
Humans are, in nature, drawn to emotions and feelings. Whether those emotions are caused by real events or manufactured, we crave to feel them. We commonly tend to value movies, books, TV shows and the like by how much they can "move" us emotionally or how much they stretch our minds (but this is besides the point). We so desperately want to feel emotions so much that we are willing to bottle, ship and buy them in the form of film, Digital media and print. Though comedy and other such genres that elicit human emotions can be found in the real world, with tragedy, humans prefer not to encounter it in the real world. We would rather feel the emotions and the responses that we would feel when witnessing tragedy, but in the end, after the credits start to roll, that tragedy is as if it never happened. There is no net loss. This is the primal reason as to why we humans are so drawn to tragedy in media format. It's much easier to deal with the emotions through fiction than through real life.
|
|
|
|
Post by carolinedorman on Nov 20, 2013 21:01:33 GMT
I have a confession: I've seen Titantic about 8 times but I've never seen the ending. I turn it off right after the ship starts sinking. I think I hold on to a small hope that somehow it will turn out differently. This may be naive but we are essentially somewhat naive. Humans never make it out of life alive, but this does not stop them from trying to create a fulfilling life. I think the scariest thing in life is not feeling anything which is why we have tragedies- to help make us feel. Whether it is a feeling of sadness or a feeling of euphoria, humans essentially crave emotion. I still watch Titanic even though I know what will happen because it still has the ability to play with my emotions. Arguably, tragedies have the same function as horror, romance or comedy. The ultimate goal is to evoke emotions, which are what essentially make us human.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anna M. on Nov 20, 2013 21:02:39 GMT
This may not be the same for everyone, but tragedies make me feel more connected to humanity. Awful things happen around the world all the time, but a lot of the time we are unaffected by these events. Tragedies open our eyes to the events that we think we are immune to. Thoughts like "that won't happen to me" reassure us when we read a tragic news story. When we see a tragic movie or read a tragic book, if it has done it's job correctly, we are emotionally affected because we feel that we know the characters, that they are important to us. We feel more connected to humanity when we can relate to events, good and bad, that are constantly happening to humans. The Titanic makes me feel a loss while a movie like "Marley and Me" make me feel appreciation for the companionship of dogs. Even though these emotion are constructed by the directors and actors in the movie, I don't think they should be undermined because feeling something is better then feeling nothing. Tragedies help us feel something other than the reassured numbness that we often feel when we are comfortable with our daily routines.
|
|
|
|
Post by rileyhatfield on Dec 2, 2013 6:09:30 GMT
Humans are so weird. And the human brain and its emotions are even weirder. When it comes to literary tragedy, we can't get enough of the most sad, depressing and tear-jerking movies/songs/books. To be honest I seriously don't understand why this is. I do it too, though. You're having a bad day and you choose to listen to sad breakup songs, thinking that magically, something sad plus another something sad will equal something happy. It obviously doesn't, and we end up crying and eating pints of ice cream for a few hours until you're too tired to hold the spoon.
But, I believe that I (and probably everyone else on this planet with a few exceptions), choose to watch, read, and listen to these literary tragedies because we want to know that there are other people out there that understand how we feel. If Robert Downey Jr. can cry over a girl, then gosh dang it, I can cry too because he understands how I felt 8 months ago, or 3 weeks ago, or how sad I feel today. And not only can I cry because his story reminds me of my story and therefore he understands me, but I can cry because I too understand how Robert Downey Jr. feels, and I can cry for him and his loss.
|
|
|
|
Post by billfeng on Dec 5, 2013 14:39:29 GMT
I've watched the Titanic 7 times in my life and after every viewing my eyes have always gotten into a teary and quivering state. Yes, I know the ship will sink and many people will die. Yes, I know that Jack Dawson, played by the youthful Leonardo Dicaprio, will succumb to an wet and icy fate. Yes, I know that Rose will eventually let go of her lover and let him fall into the frozen depths of the sea. All of these moments in the storyline of the Titanic film are predictably awful and crappy in feeling. Even though I know that all of these moments are going to happen, in the very back of my head my conscience begs that it should have gone another way.
I think the reason why people watch the Titanic, and other tearjerkers that predict tragedies, over-and-over again is to feel sad. I'm not trying to imply that there's some sort of schadenfreude relationship between people and fictionalized tragedies. Instead, I think people try to comprehend tragedies as a way to explore outside of the status quo. Since people naturally want to feel happy in a safe and idyllic bubble, viewers want to have an experience of sadness to be more acclimated with the real world. By training ourselves to feel this sadness, we increase our preparedness for future calamities to come.
|
|
|
|
Post by anaritter on Dec 19, 2013 3:42:59 GMT
Like Danny said, as humans, we like to experience something difficult without having the consequences and repercussions of experiencing something difficult. Whether that's a guaranteed tearjerker like the Titanic, or a terrifying horror movie, or an intense roller coaster, we like that rush of feelings that are still fun because we know that the fear or sadness or panic or anxiety that we feel are synthetic, made up in our own heads, and gone as soon as the credits roll or the ride is over. We like to explore how feeling sad and losing someone so important to you would feel without actually losing someone. We like to feel like we're on the verge of death or attack or free-fall, without actually being in danger at all. Humans are curious, and like to explore. The more intense the potential feeling, the better.
|
|
|
|
Post by adamgrace on Dec 19, 2013 4:56:31 GMT
As an aspiring film maker I tend to go over this question in my head repeatedly. Why do I want to ritualistically watch Star Wars IV - VI each year even when I know who Luke's father is? I've come to the conclusion that every time I watch the movies I see it in a different way. How else would I be able to stay sane during that 372 minute stretch of Harrison Ford badassery? Every time I witness a piece of art, whether it be music, literature, or film, I feel like a different person. My mood, comfort level, hunger, etc. are all varied during the time period of experiencing any form of art. Therefore there are many subtle changes in how I view the art. Some days I feel angry at Mr. Lucas for ruining an otherwise perfect film series. Some days I feel content with the prequels and the remakes. But there is one thing that will remain a constant until the end of my days; Han shot first.
|
|
|
|
Post by travistoal on Dec 19, 2013 20:12:26 GMT
My critical lens is existentialism, and that bestows upon me the mysterious power to make everything that should be happy depressing. However, I can also look at everything that should be depressing as.... not happy, but not entirely pointless either. We live in a monotonous society that glorifies spontaneity and adventure but normalizes routines and repetitive jobs, be it lifting boxes in a blue-collar workplace or pushing pencils in a white-collar workplace. A 'tragedy' shows us what is important. They don't help us "understand how good our lives actually are and how we took everything for granted and blah blah blah," but they show us that although our life is boring, it can be much, much worse. Existentialists believe that humans learn best about ourselves by seeing the most 'extreme conditions.' We know what happens on the Titanic, but we can't truly imagine ourselves on the Titanic because most of us can't truly imagine what it is like to face our mortality. Although through the lens there is no God and we are not here for any reason, looking at how people react in extreme circumstances helps broaden our understanding of so-called "human nature." While there is no real reason for our existence, the main goal of humanity is to create, or at the very least understand, meaning in our lifetime. So we continue to buy tickets to watch Leonardo DiCaprio let go of the door and sink, hoping that in doing so we can learn something about ourselves. Tragedies help to rouse us from our states of apathy, if only for a moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by hannahboe on Dec 19, 2013 20:59:45 GMT
Emotions make us human. We crave things that make us sad because it reassures us that we know HOW to feel. We go to a sad movie or a tragic play and we see people around us crying and we know it's okay to do the same. So often in our society we are told not to cry (guys especially - thanks gender stereotypes), but sad movies and the like are a free-pass and a complete reversal of the societal norm: you are expected to cry. If you don't, there's something wrong. So we grasp onto this opportunity and exploit it again and again. We watch the same movie, be it Titanic or The Notebook or anything else, because we know that it will make us cry and sometimes that's all we want to do. Similarly, Hollywood keeps producing sad movies (they even have a special name for these: TEAR-JERKERS <- how clever)because they know the effect they will have and they know that we want it.
|
|
