By Eric M. Blake @hardboiledfilms
“After fighting, everything else in your life got the volume turned down. You could deal with anything.”
I’ll kick this one off by addressing the obvious elephant in the room:
“The First Rule of Fight Club is: You do not talk about Fight Club.
“The Second Rule of Fight Club is: You do NOT—talk—about—Fight Club!”
In my defense, I’m technically writing about Fight Club. So surely that means I’m safe…right?
Anyway, yes, this is a Conservative film in its own way, and like many a Conservative film, it was hilariously branded “fascist” by people who have no idea what that word means.
Bear with me.
(And incidentally, MAJOR Spoiler Alert, as this film has one of the most famous “unspoiled” twists in the history of cinema. Some other plot points are revealed, too. You have been warned, dear readers.)
WHY IT’S A CONSERVATIVE FILM:
First off, none other than Chuck Palahniuk, the author of the original Fight Club novel, has essentially endorsed the movie as a direct inspiration for Trump supporters in general and the alt-Right in particular. He may be more right than he realizes. But I’m getting ahead of myself. In the meantime, let’s start with what he gleefully takes credit for:
“You Are Not A Beautiful And Unique Snowflake”:
That’s right, folks. The term “snowflake” can be attributed to Fight Club—specifically, a scene where Tyler Durden lectures his disciples on how they are not “special.”
As Palahniuk notes, the definition still stands:
“There is a kind of new Victorianism. Every generation gets offended by different things, but my friends who teach in high school tell me that their students are very easily offended.
“…The modern Left is always reacting to things. Once they get their show on the road culturally they will stop being so offended.”
Well, I wouldn’t hold my breath on that, Chuck.
Regardless—
When Men Cannot Be Men
The “snowflake” thing is part of a much broader theme. Specifically, a general recurring theme about how the men of today have just plain forgotten to be men and, further, how society has essentially emasculated them, transforming them into a bunch of conformist spoiled brats. To wit, snowflakes:
Now, just to get this out of the way: Tyler Durden is not a Conservative hero. He isn’t meant to be. As the above speech indicates, he identifies the wrong target as the culprit. To be specific, he misbrands an effect as the cause. More on that later.
But the point is, what Tyler—and “Jack,” the narrator—see is the effective emasculation of culture. For whatever reason, men have forgotten how to be men, and the entire (initial) point of the Fight Club is to remind them of that and, further, to remind them of the value of those Alpha qualities of ambition, strength, and force of will. It’s an outlet for men to exercise their inner masculine muscles amid a society that discourages such.
Consumerism As Emasculated Capitalism:
When “Jack” (so nicknamed by movie fans because of his “I am Jack’s…” mantra) takes us back to his pre-Tyler life, we see him as a self-admitted “slave to the IKEA nesting instinct.” See, “Jack” has a good-paying office job, but in this feminized culture where classical manhood is dismissed and undervalued, what does he do with that money?
Well, he shops. And shops. And SHOPS.
“I’d flip through catalogues and wonder: ‘What kind of dining set defines me as a person?’”
It’s a common stereotype, with more than a little basis in fact, that women love to shop—whether they buy something or not, basically looking to find what fashion is most “me.” Decor, knickknacks, etc., the question is what specific brand and style “fits” best.
And lo and behold, here we have “Jack” obsessed with the exact same thing.
Welcome to Third-Wave Feminism, where the very notion that men and women are inherently different is smeared as “sexist,” instead of being acknowledged as, you know, basic psychology dating back long before Freud and Jung to the very beginning of time. Regardless, you see culture en masse marketing to men as though they had the exact same shopping philosophies as women. All that’s missing is the “shoe” thing.
Alas, you do it long enough, and a lot of men end up believing it. After all, what alternative is there?
Frankly, Tyler’s classic “duvet” speech, pricelessly calling “Jack” out on Consumerism’s problems, is the stuff of legends:
(I myself often drop a version of that speech on acquaintances of mine, one involving bidets and other expensive items that serve only one purpose, amid a host of much cheaper multi-purpose items we’re told aren’t “fashionable.” But I digress.)
Capitalism doesn’t have to be like this. Actually, true-blue, free-market, “neo-liberal,” entrepreneurial-spirit Capitalism encourages precisely those “Alpha” qualities Consumerism dismisses.
More On “Chickified” Culture:
This is almost an aside, but:
Way back when, I picked up from my church library a book entitled Why Men Hate Going To Church by David Murrow. The essential argument is that Christianity has long allowed itself to be “feminized,” emphasizing “sensitivity” and “turn[ing] the other cheek” at the expense of bold, aggressive leadership and the command, “Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil,” to the point of terminology and even songs being much “mushier” than they used to be.
Why do I bring this up? Well, the testicular cancer support group where “Jack” meets Bob takes place in a church. And the behavior in that group is almost tailor-made for an object lesson in Murrow’s book. In a particularly egregious example, the group leader promotes “sensitivity” in the form of men crying about their problems while they hug.
Fortunately, in the real world, the Church is starting to snap out of this with the advent of organizations like Wingmen and, of course, Promise Keepers. Thank Heaven.
Although to be perfectly fair, the film does also take a tongue-in-cheek shot at New Age “chakra” insanity.
So What About Project Mayhem?
All right, it may seem I’ve gone back and forth about Tyler Durden’s “wisdom” and its value. Are his ideas worth considering or not?
Well, much like his current real-life counterpart, Andrew Tate (I bet you were wondering when I was gonna bring that up, right?), it really depends. Granted, they’re not quite the same—I personally don’t anticipate “The Top G” leading some revolutionary conspiracy to blow stuff up. But that aside, both gents have the same issue of identifying the problems harming men throughout society but offering solutions that can be pretty questionable when you think about it. Tyler is more-or-less spot-on about things—earlier in the film. As Fight Club progresses, however, his statements get increasingly…off. Again, he essentially puts the blame on Consumerism in itself rather than on the Left, where it belongs.
Third-Wave Feminism, gun control, welfare state dependency, and just plain political correctness—those are what destroyed society’s masculine values. But Tyler doesn’t make that connection. One really gets the idea that it all comes out of “Jack’s” complete boredom with his tedious, routine, unadventurous, and therefore unfulfilling life. “Jack” blames that life, in and of itself, because he doesn’t know any better.
And so, in the end, Project Mayhem sets out to fulfill the Occupiers’ dream: destroy the world’s credit system. Meanwhile, we, the audience, are clearly meant to condemn this destruction as “Jack” realizes just how thoroughly messed up everything has become.
But why did things get so messed up? What brought the perfectly (let’s be honest) reasonable idea of Fight Clubs spiraling down into Project Mayhem?
This is where the alt-Right comes in. Remember, the entire reason for the alt-Right’s existence as a major force in America links directly to the constant political correctness and identity politics of the Left. It comes down to a lot of the folks who have been most ostracized by a society so terribly corrupted by cultural Leftism that they have decided at last to fight fire with fire.
The problem, again, is when you pick the wrong targets, in this case, “globalist Jews” (as opposed to globalist Gentiles?), “white genocide,” “Pizzagate,” “Hollyweird,” or whatever. And then you go all out while the real culprits laugh and deride away.
Crossing The Line Into “Space Monkey”:
The switch of Tyler’s efforts from “constructive” to “destructive,” when you really get down to it, parallels the switch in his philosophy from individualism to collectivism. He starts out as a rugged “free spirit,” preaching the need to reject conformity and to find it within yourself to get off your behind and make something out of your life.
But then come the “homework assignments.” More and more, the lines get blurred—sometimes good, sometimes bad. Until…
“Sooner or later, we all became what Tyler wanted us to be.”
At some point, he starts organizing the Fight Clubbers with a bizarre groupthink, and this is where the “fascism” (if it can be called that) comes in. Suddenly, it’s no longer about finding yourself; it’s about being “a space monkey—ready to sacrifice himself for the greater good.”
What the detractors of the film failed to understand is that the film does not approve of that. We see the men who’d been helped by the Fight Clubs end up becoming exactly what they’d once fought against: conformist drones, given in to mindless routine.
Poor Bob.
Just as so many in the alt-Right have become the kind of “micro-aggression”-obsessed snowflakes they claim to fight against (see: Nick Fuentes), such is the fate of the Fight Clubbers, becoming what they hated and never even knowing it.
In The End…
What is the point of Fight Club? It’s at once opposed to both the emasculation of Western society and the insane anarchic-yet-paramilitary revolution of Project Mayhem. So what is it for?
Well, in the end, the film is a warning. It’s the ultimate cautionary tale against the “chickification” of society and what just might happen if that corruption finally becomes too much for men to bear.
We are constantly asked to “understand” the plight of victims in society, and whenever riots break out, the P.C. crowd is always so quick with an apologetic, a great big “Well, we must first realize where they’re coming from—what society did to cause such distress in these people, driving them, out of sheer desperation, to snap.”
And lo and behold, that seems to apply to every group except for men and the entire idea of masculinity, so often smeared, mocked, and derided. Men are made to feel guilty over the boogeyman of “patriarchy” and accused of “sexual harassment” for looking at a woman “wrong.” Men must live in fear, constantly apologizing. So much potential has gone to waste. And when society denies men the right to be men, despair and desperation set in. And that has consequences.
Fight Club, then, shows a vision of just what would happen if, in response to all that, the men “snapped,” too. At any rate, if society doesn’t get its act together, it will reap the consequences one way or another.
For Bonus Points:
Despite the sadly timeless nature of the film’s warning, certain things do date the film. For example, remember Tyler’s line about there being “no great war” or “great depression” for the men of today to struggle through, to get strong by? Yes, the movie came out a few years before 9/11—and nine years before the housing crisis that kicked off the Dodd-Frank-Pelosi-Reid-Obama recession. But, lo and behold, snowflakes still exist on both sides. Political correctness flourished even amid war and depression. It seems to be another indication that Tyler is targeting the wrong root causes.
One root cause being fatherlessness. Meaningfully, “Jack” notes that his father walked out when he was six. Not having a father figure, then, forms a good root cause of sorts for all he goes through. As Tyler notes a moment or two later, “We’re a generation of men raised by women.”
And in the end, for all the carnage, “Jack” does learn the ultimate lesson:
“I am responsible for all of it, and I accept that!”
Finally, on another note, is it just me, or did Milo Yiannopoulos’s hairstyle indicate he was sort of trying to invoke Tyler Durden? Make of that what you will.
WHY IT’S A GREAT FILM:
A film that has left such a deep and profound impact on our culture surely counts either as great or monstrous. A case could be made that Fight Club is both. Either way, it’s a classic.
At any rate, to this very day, you see real-life “fight clubs,” though, thankfully, they don’t fall prey to real-life Project Mayhems (that we know about, anyway).
Regardless, it’s easily one of the most quotable films in recent history, up there with Ocean’s Eleven and Pulp Fiction. Seriously, just try to get the first two rules out of your head. Tyler and “Jack” have many a clever turn of phrase you’d be easily forgiven for wanting to drop once in a while. (Just look at all the kinetic typographies about the film on YouTube).
And, of course, “snowflake” has just reentered the popular mindset, courtesy of the Trump era.
The Cast:
Brad Pitt stars in one of his most iconic roles—slick, sly, and wily as ever as Tyler Durden. Edward Norton brings full force to “Jack’s” deadpan, snarky disenchantment with everything around him. Their mutual dry wit conveys some excellent “buddy” chemistry, especially when Tyler and “Jack” share a snicker over a Gucci ad with buff male models. One wishes Brad and Ed would do a lot more films together.
Helena Bonham-Carter is at her quintessentially Goth best, even without Tim Burton’s vision. Marla is the irritating presence that for “Jack” embodies everything emasculating about his life—and Tyler, knowing just how to “handle” her, rubs it all in beautifully. As time goes on, we see she does have a sympathetic side. In the end, she’s not really that bad. She’s just suffering from the same sort of disenchantment as “Jack” and Tyler and copes with it in her own, admittedly twisted way.
The Arc Of The Audience:
Let’s face it—the quotability of the film speaks to just how appealing the scenario is, at least initially. Rather like a good gangster flick, the seduction of “the life” is completely understandable. Of course, then things go dark, and the appeal falls apart. Slowly but surely, the “cool” gives way to weirdness as the “space monkeys” come in, and the weirdness gives way to dread with Project Mayhem. Slick comedy becomes dark comedy becomes psychological thriller. And we’re in for the ride, just like “Jack” is.
Whenever I re-watch the film, I feel roughly the same way I do whenever I watch Goodfellas. The first two-thirds of the movie are wildly entertaining and enjoyable. (A good “cutoff” point is Tyler’s “You are not your job” speech to the camera.) The last third is where you “pay for it,” and almost feel like you need a shower afterward.
But that’s the point. What goes around comes around. Drag the audience in with the style and then pull the rug out to shock them into thinking hard.
Obvious, In Hindsight:
As a major fan of Quentin Tarantino (as you remember from last week), I do get a kick out of “puzzle” films. And Fight Club is one of the most famous of all—its legendary twist is right up there with The Usual Suspects, The Sixth Sense, and Memento. It makes us question nearly everything we’ve seen so far as we discover that Tyler Durden is “Jack’s” alternate personality, seen only by “Jack” himself. As far as the fight clubbers—and Marla—are concerned, “Jack” is Tyler Durden.
Now, the key quality separating a good “twist” film from a bad one is its “re-watch value.” When you watch the film again, with the knowledge of the twist in mind, does it still hold up and make sense? And better yet, are there “clues” we can spot post-“spoil”?
Yes, there are. There’s a lot of foreshadowing in Fight Club, so much so you may kick yourself for not noticing before.
Look sharp, and you’ll see something quickly flicker on the screen a few times throughout the first act before “Jack” meets Tyler. Freeze-frame, and you’ll find it is Tyler. In hindsight, you get the idea that this is Tyler starting to form in “Jack’s” mind.
For another classic, pay attention to exactly what “Jack” says the first time we get a clear sight of Tyler, passing him by in an airport. And, of course, Marla’s behavior around “Jack” makes a lot more sense once you learn what’s going on.
By The Way…
Some trivia notes: There’s a lot of ad-libbing in the “bar” scene, where Tyler gives the classic “duvet” speech. Apparently, director David Fincher had the actors do 38 takes and edited it all together. Pretty cool, huh?
Speaking of ad-libs, “Jack” was originally supposed to hit Tyler on the shoulder during their impromptu friendly brawl outside the bar. But Fincher secretly told Edward Norton to hit Brad Pitt on the ear. In other words, Tyler’s hilarious reaction was 100% Brad:
“Why the ear, man?!?”
Also, that notorious “grade school” line came about because Marla was originally supposed to make an abortion joke. Yes. See, the studio told David Fincher to change that, and he did, on condition that the line would then stay as it was. Oh, and Helena Bonham-Carter had no idea exactly what the line meant until later. British school system terminology is somewhat different.
Jared Leto—yes, the Joker of Suicide Squad and The Snyder Cut—plays the blonde guy whom “Jack” nearly fights to the death. And rock star Meat Loaf plays Bob.
Apparently, “Jack’s” real name is Neal if his office name tag early on is anything to go by. If it isn’t, you can pretty much get the idea that his name is Tyler Durden, and everyone knows it but him.
And no, gasoline and orange juice concentrate do not make napalm. So far as I know. Don’t try it. Please.
Buy the movie here. And stay Cultured, my friends.
Any recommendations for films to make the series? Read the rules here, and let us know!