What is science’s place in mankind? Science offers us solutions, and the ultimate salvation in
Interstellar comes from something “scientifically
sound.” But, Interstellar also demonstrates that science alone cannot bring salvation; humanity requires a
level of spirituality to survive.
Earth is ravaged by blight and dust, partially because of
man’s excessive use of resources. As a result, science has regressed to
agriculture, losing its daring to discover the unknown. Cooper holds that science
has lost something, its drive, its spirit. Without the balance of a daring
spirit, science falls back onto strict logic, which is to feed the
species. But, as we discover, humanity will die regardless of its farming
efforts. Only by reviving the spirit by daringly venturing into the unknown (Space)
might humanity be saved.
The concept of faith in the unknown permeates much of the
film. Although science has a grasp of higher dimensions, humanity still doesn’t
completely understand those dimensions. Only by entering those dimensions can
Cooper give Murphy the information she needs to save humanity. Salvation lies
beyond (or between) the stars, outside what we comprehend.
A myriad of religious references appear in the film.
Overtly, the 12 astronauts (12 apostles) were sent on the Lazarus Missions to
essentially revive something that has died. “Plan A” is essentially a Noah’s Ark leaving a dust-covered Earth. Dr.
Mann, who was the “best of us,” may be seen as a Fallen Angel or the Fall of
Man, corrupted by his reversion to strict logic (to save himself) and loss of
faith in his sacrifice. Cooper and CASE commit to their sacrifice in hope of saving
humanity. Hans Zimmer utilizes an organ in the score. The organ, while a complicated piece of musical technology, is also associated with the awe of churches. Altogether, religious references emphasize a degree of
belief, faith, and unknown mystery in the film.
Ultimately, humanity saves itself. Yet, it does so through
something scientifically theoretical, but not understood. Only two things can transcend
Time and Space: love and gravity. Love is something “unscientific;” gravity is
very scientific. Interstellar
combines scientific daring with spiritual faith to assert a balance of the two
in humanity. To find salvation, we must dare to believe (and bring along a few
awesome robots).
Note the difference between Spirituality and Religion. A sense of wonder, dreaming, daring, and faith doesn’t require a set of Religious beliefs. However, Religion is a more concrete form of spirituality, so religious references are used to convey the theme of spirituality.
ReplyDeleteThe film at first struck me as strongly humanist. Humanity ends up saving itself from destruction by means of some very improbable happenings (Cooper falling into a black hole and surviving; the whole gravity-wave communication thing). Contrast this with the doctrine of the Catholic Church: man doesn't (and cannot) save himself, he is saved through Christ. But then I thought that the very improbability of the events that allow humanity to save itself signals the possibility of divine intervention. That is, the presence of a self-consistent closed timelike curve that leads to salvation is nearly impossible without help from outside humanity. Interpret it the way you like.
ReplyDeleteUpdate on my earlier comment. In the film, it's implied that *humanity saves itself* through love transcending time and whatnot. I contend that (1) viewed from the Christian perspective, the notion of humanity saving itself is arrogant. I also contend that (2) since the film's main point is that love transcends time and space, it is shallow. Sure, love transcending time and space is a nice idea that makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside. But if that's all the film really has to say in the end (at the expense of developing its characters fully) then it fails, for the following reason among others: Cooper only experiences a few weeks/months of conscious time. Surely one cannot claim that his fatherly love has been tested by time?
DeleteIn conclusion, the film doesn't challenge the way we think about love or ethics or space travel. It tries to reach far, but ultimately falls flat out of vagueness.
Definitely, Chris I agree with that. But, like I mentioned, my take on the religious themes was more in a spiritual sense, not in a religious one. From a strictly Christian perspective, yes it would be arrogant to say mankind can save itself. But, in a spiritual sense, it's more reassuring in our own ability.
ReplyDeleteI partially disagree that the idea of love transcending time and space is shallow. As I mentioned, I'm working with the idea of a mixture of what we understand and what we don't. Gravity transcending time and space is something we "know" and understand. We don't entirely understand love, but we do see its ability to move people across time (ex: doing something because you love someone that has passed away).
I think what the film may be saying about love is that it is essential in humanity, that we shouldn’t sacrifice love for one another (as the characters that choose the logic of Plan B do). Love is something powerful and ingrained into the culture we've created. There’s something spiritual about it. It can be a reminder of the importance of love in our culture (think of living in a loveless world). I believe the film argues that we need to preserve this sort of love while simultaneously progressing with science and technology in order to keep humanity.
"I believe the film argues that we need to preserve this sort of love while simultaneously progressing with science and technology in order to keep humanity."
DeleteI agree with this. Love is good, and science is good. If science (as we practice it) didn't have a human element, then humans wouldn't do science. But do we really need a three-hour epic film to say this when it already seems self-evident? I don't mean that the idea of love transcending time and space is shallow. I mean that the film's way of dealing with this idea is shallow. Consider the plot device that results in humanity's salvation. A coincidence occurred that allowed Cooper to communicate crucial data to Murphy. But even if they hated each other, Cooper still would have transmitted the data out of necessity. Given the arbitrariness of the plot, love becomes irrelevant. Moreover, Anne Hathaway's blurting outright that "love transcends time and space" severely limits the strength of that same point, especially given that she uses those words while asking to visit her crush on another planet.
As for Plan B, it was supposed to be the last resort. The professor chose it because it was the only viable plan he could imagine. He lied only so that people would carry it out. In fact he chose the best possible course of action given what he knew. Say he reveals his intention to choose Plan B and scrap Plan A early on. Then the mission is abandoned because people lose hope. Disorder might break out among the people. Say he scraps Plan B and devotes his energies to Plan A alone. Then there is (as far as he knows) no chance that humanity can survive, and he has made an immoral choice. There isn't a clean way out of this moral dilemma, particularly one involving love.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAh I see. I agree; the film could've been a bit shorter, and the tesseract scene can be problematic depending on how its seen. Do you think the coincidence that allows for salvation would've occured if the characters hadn't kept that love? Would Cooper have chosen to go into the black hole, and would Murphy have decided to stay longer in her old room to get the message? Theoretically, for the argument, it should have happened because of some force of love they felt. I'm not sure how well the movie brings it into that though; I need to see it again. At the very least, it still emphasizes the idea of faith in the unknown/unlikely/not understood.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, with love as a factor, morals become unclear in this sort of situation. Love for one another vs. love for the species is the choice between A and B. Which is better isn't exactly clear, and viewers could go both ways with that.
The coincidence that allowed for salvation would have been less likely had they not preserved love (if we think linearly). But remember that the band-sorting gravitational anomaly was, indirectly, the only thing that could have destroyed the love between father and daughter. Had this not occurred, Cooper would not have been called away, and father and daughter would have lived together. Had the gravitational anomaly (dust band-sorting) occurred and the love between them been destroyed, then Cooper would have entered the black hole at some point anyway, since paradoxes are impossible. But you're right: would Murphy have lingered in her old room and seen the watch if she had resented her father? It isn't clear. Perhaps yes, due to nostalgia; perhaps not. If not, then humanity would have perished. You've got me there. I can't deny that the film emphasizes faith in the "unknown/unlikely/not understood." However, I still think that the film uses too many arbitrary elements to make this point, and for this reason does not succeed.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete