The Incredibles

[coalescent]

Tom requested a poll on the philosophy of The Incredibles. But, given that I'm me and not him, I'm going to preface his simple enquiry with a whole load of other quotes and questions.

Exhibit A:

The superhero was dreamt up by Nietzsche during the 1880s, and has been summoning humanity to transcend itself ever since. Does Mr Incredible's renunciation mean that the superman has finally despaired of the midget, puling race he was meant to lead onwards and upwards?

Exhibit B:

Is Dash, the supersonic third-grader forbidden from racing on the track team, a gifted child held back by the educational philosophy that "everybody is special"? Or is he an overprivileged elitist being forced to take into account the feelings of others?

Is his father, Mr. Incredible, who complains that the schools "keep inventing new ways to celebrate mediocrity," a visionary reformer committed to pushing children to excel? Or is he a reactionary in red tights who's been reading too much Nietzsche and Ayn Rand?

Is Syndrome, the geek villain trying to kill the superheroes, an angry Marxist determined to quash individuality? Or is his plan to give everyone artificial superpowers an uplifting version of "cooperative learning" in an "inclusion classroom"?

Exhibit C:

Who would have thought that an animated film would finally touch a nerve, putting egalitarians on the defensive? That is the achievement of Pixar Studio's new hit, The Incredibles, the story of a family of superheroes who struggle against the reign of mediocrity and finally break free to excel. Along the way it skewers the dumbing down of schools, the mantra that everyone is special, and the laws that give losers special status as victims.

Exhibit D:

The movie does come to some interesting philosophical conclusions, not least among them the way it advocates full-on Nietzschean ethics. The "Supers" -- literal Ubermensch -- are the strong, endowed with special gifts that place them beyond the range of normal men. The Supers also possess unimpeachably noble spirits, just as Nietzsche described. While competing amongst themselves to be the finest hero, they devote themselves and their gifts entirely to protecting the weak from themselves.

And, as mentioned in my earlier post, the Guardian has a roundup of comment here.

[Poll #399598]

Note that if you answer 'other' to question three, you should explain that in the comments, too. Myself, I'm undecided. So, convince me, one way or the other!

Comments

[communicator.livejournal.com]

I think FN wrote well, and expressed things that probably are better said than left unsaid, even if they are way extreme and dumb in many ways.

The moral consensus in the 19th C was so dull and bourgeois, there had to be some reaction against it, and people like Nietzche, Wilde, Baudelaire, all the rest, attacked the complacent system in all sorts of different ways. You don't have to agree with Nietzche, to see the value of his works.

[immortalradical.livejournal.com]

You don't have to agree with Nietzche, to see the value of his works.

I agree completely - I like nothing more than an iconoclast. :) I'm far from very well read in Freddy, but it seems to me that Nietzschean ideas as a great big ole hammer to break down constricting systems of thought were useful. They were also, however, a product of those very same systems - they believe rather explicitly in the ability of mankind to transcend its nature and reach god-like status, in progress, and in the necessity of a strictly defined ruling class. I don't really accept any of those concepts, and as useful as he was I can't therefore see any place for his ideas (rather than his legacy) in my modern philosophy. Anyone who suggests it's super that he lacks a "reliable criterion of a pang of conscience" can shut up from where I'm sitting.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

I don't really accept any of those concepts

Dammit. I quite like the idea of transcending my limitations and achieving god-like status.

[ang-grrr.livejournal.com]

Dammit. I quite like the idea of transcending my limitations and achieving god-like status

It's not all it's cracked up to be.

[(Anonymous)]

Dude, transcending your limitations isn't even going to get you to normal-guy-like status.

HTH. HAND.

-- tom

[communicator.livejournal.com]

What I like in Nietzche is where he argues against the self-pity that his worshippers are drowning in. It's that sort of fierce engagement. I like it that he spoke for Supermen although he was just a Trekkie himself. Well, he would have been if they had them in those days.

[immortalradical.livejournal.com]

Of course, his arguments against the self-pity of his followers are largely based in his frustration that they're not as Simply Terrific as he is. ;P

[greengolux.livejournal.com]

I think FN wrote well

Really? You must have been reading some other Friedrich Nietzsche to the one I've tried to read. Rambling and poorly structured.