Great read, I'm always delighted when I see people from different disciplines offer their perspectives on a medium I care for. There's a comment by Nolan that's been going around saying that he's been telling the story of the Odyssey in all of his films, and while I suppose that's true in the abstract. I am curious to know what Nolan actually thinks the Odyssey is about or represents because even with the christian gesturing he ultimately pulls away and retreats into something else.
Great writing, I’m not well read enough on Adorno to speak too much about your reading. I’d only really offer some pushback against a reading that states Nolan’s work as incoherent. Not to say he’s a genius or even coherent just more of a thought exercise. To me the removal of the “no man” interaction with the cyclops and general dumbing down of gods etc. Is a suppression and dumbing of his “primitive” enemies (non capitalists, luddites, etc.) that points to a liberal “technocratic” notion. Likewise the men Nolan’s Odysseus commands are only a bit better than beasts too stupid to rule once given the reigns, (you hit some of this in the enlightenment section but again not well read enough to fully grok it) I feel like this could be a stand in for any “populist” movement. But idk.
I didn't watch the movie, but I dearly love Ancient Greek mythology. I deliberately chose not to watch it because I was afraid of seeing something so culturally rich and historically significant being dragged through the mud of late-stage capitalist, American Hollywood thought. What a great example of the Kulturindustrie at work (Sorry, not sorry for offending film bros)
I don't really agree with this take, but then it seems to me that Adorno is doing precisely what everyone is accusing of Nolan of doing: impressing his own critical values on a piece of text that can support a multitude of them. Can Adorno use the Odyssey to illustrate his dialectic of enlightenment? Sure. But if the ‘point’ of the Odyssey was the triumph of enlightenment values over the animists then I don't see why it's precisely Odysseus’ trickery of premodern Polyphemus that sets off his misadventures in the first place, or why Scylla and Charybdis illustrate the victory of cruel rationalism rather than the tragedy of foresight. Ultimately the parts of the movie that are the *strongest* are precisely those which lean most into the Christian narrative, because that is what lends itself best to film—the sharp intercutting between Odysseus’ tragic recollection of his ‘failures’ at Troy as he announced them to a weeping Penelope (pretty much directly stolen from Paris, Texas, but effective nonetheless) is clearly the part of the movie which is best, because it’s the only part which has any gravity compared to the weightlessness of most of Odysseus’ travels.
The real failure of this film is in that Nolan can’t even do Milton’s Odyssey correctly. I don't see any reason why presenting Odysseus as a Christlike figure is something that wouldn’t inherently work: presumably many people might find it reprehensible, but it would ultimately have made for a far better film with more vital imagery. The film is best when it is indulging in great-man-Odysseus politics. This movie just exemplifies the weaknesses of contemporary politics which attempt to pacify instead of invigorate—it has no convictions at all.
I agree with you! I agree that the Odyssey, possibly the most critically-assessed piece of literature of all time, can hold a multitude of interpretations (the Aeneid holds one, Dante and Joyce hold others, etc.). That being said I'm directly responding to Nolan's stated goal of directing an Odyssey that can "speak to today's viewers" (I forget the exact phrasing he used in an interview) which he's using to justify many of his choices.
I don't think he succeeds in doing this. I would have been fine with a more Christian narrative too but he doesn't really fully commit to this either, it's some unholy mix between it and "mourn the loss of our traditions because those traditions were, in fact, traditions of liberality" (to quote Crane). Odysseus instigates the sack of Troy which is bad (it makes Zendaya sad :((), but also massacres the suitors which is just and good (?); Nolan can't cast him as a Great Man (in all senses of the term) because he's so committed to portraying him as a 'good guy'.
Updated the conclusion to reflect that. (You're so right about the Paris, Texas thing.)
Lol did he really say he was trying to make it palatable to modern audiences? I love how making things suitable for modern audiences just means that the politics has to be infantile neoliberalism: for Penelope to work the movie needs to endorse monogamy, and so he's fine with Penelope simply not working. Wilful slop creation
Also I think saying that Sam Kriss is doing a standard Adornian cultural critique is missing the point (even though that is what he is doing). Sam Kriss should be taken literally, like we should just literally kill people who use AI. I have many opps in Boston. When I say I'm ‘on sight’ with them I am quite literally on sight. They will get their ass kicked
Great read, I'm always delighted when I see people from different disciplines offer their perspectives on a medium I care for. There's a comment by Nolan that's been going around saying that he's been telling the story of the Odyssey in all of his films, and while I suppose that's true in the abstract. I am curious to know what Nolan actually thinks the Odyssey is about or represents because even with the christian gesturing he ultimately pulls away and retreats into something else.
Great writing, I’m not well read enough on Adorno to speak too much about your reading. I’d only really offer some pushback against a reading that states Nolan’s work as incoherent. Not to say he’s a genius or even coherent just more of a thought exercise. To me the removal of the “no man” interaction with the cyclops and general dumbing down of gods etc. Is a suppression and dumbing of his “primitive” enemies (non capitalists, luddites, etc.) that points to a liberal “technocratic” notion. Likewise the men Nolan’s Odysseus commands are only a bit better than beasts too stupid to rule once given the reigns, (you hit some of this in the enlightenment section but again not well read enough to fully grok it) I feel like this could be a stand in for any “populist” movement. But idk.
Great writeup! And thanks for the link to my piece. Need to reread DoE ...it's gonna be an Adorno Summer
I didn't watch the movie, but I dearly love Ancient Greek mythology. I deliberately chose not to watch it because I was afraid of seeing something so culturally rich and historically significant being dragged through the mud of late-stage capitalist, American Hollywood thought. What a great example of the Kulturindustrie at work (Sorry, not sorry for offending film bros)
I don't really agree with this take, but then it seems to me that Adorno is doing precisely what everyone is accusing of Nolan of doing: impressing his own critical values on a piece of text that can support a multitude of them. Can Adorno use the Odyssey to illustrate his dialectic of enlightenment? Sure. But if the ‘point’ of the Odyssey was the triumph of enlightenment values over the animists then I don't see why it's precisely Odysseus’ trickery of premodern Polyphemus that sets off his misadventures in the first place, or why Scylla and Charybdis illustrate the victory of cruel rationalism rather than the tragedy of foresight. Ultimately the parts of the movie that are the *strongest* are precisely those which lean most into the Christian narrative, because that is what lends itself best to film—the sharp intercutting between Odysseus’ tragic recollection of his ‘failures’ at Troy as he announced them to a weeping Penelope (pretty much directly stolen from Paris, Texas, but effective nonetheless) is clearly the part of the movie which is best, because it’s the only part which has any gravity compared to the weightlessness of most of Odysseus’ travels.
The real failure of this film is in that Nolan can’t even do Milton’s Odyssey correctly. I don't see any reason why presenting Odysseus as a Christlike figure is something that wouldn’t inherently work: presumably many people might find it reprehensible, but it would ultimately have made for a far better film with more vital imagery. The film is best when it is indulging in great-man-Odysseus politics. This movie just exemplifies the weaknesses of contemporary politics which attempt to pacify instead of invigorate—it has no convictions at all.
I agree with you! I agree that the Odyssey, possibly the most critically-assessed piece of literature of all time, can hold a multitude of interpretations (the Aeneid holds one, Dante and Joyce hold others, etc.). That being said I'm directly responding to Nolan's stated goal of directing an Odyssey that can "speak to today's viewers" (I forget the exact phrasing he used in an interview) which he's using to justify many of his choices.
I don't think he succeeds in doing this. I would have been fine with a more Christian narrative too but he doesn't really fully commit to this either, it's some unholy mix between it and "mourn the loss of our traditions because those traditions were, in fact, traditions of liberality" (to quote Crane). Odysseus instigates the sack of Troy which is bad (it makes Zendaya sad :((), but also massacres the suitors which is just and good (?); Nolan can't cast him as a Great Man (in all senses of the term) because he's so committed to portraying him as a 'good guy'.
Updated the conclusion to reflect that. (You're so right about the Paris, Texas thing.)
Lol did he really say he was trying to make it palatable to modern audiences? I love how making things suitable for modern audiences just means that the politics has to be infantile neoliberalism: for Penelope to work the movie needs to endorse monogamy, and so he's fine with Penelope simply not working. Wilful slop creation
Also I think saying that Sam Kriss is doing a standard Adornian cultural critique is missing the point (even though that is what he is doing). Sam Kriss should be taken literally, like we should just literally kill people who use AI. I have many opps in Boston. When I say I'm ‘on sight’ with them I am quite literally on sight. They will get their ass kicked
From your lips to God’s ears brother🙏