Fight Club (1999) – A DECEPTIVELY BAD MASTERPIECE
In my freshman year at the Greenwich, our somewhat eccentric but erudite lecturer for Introductory Economics, an Englishman who rode his bicycle to work, in one of the morning lectures (starts around 9.00 am) went through a list of some of his favorite movies. The list included The Godfather (1972), and a few other films whose titles I cannot recall, and Fight Club (1999). In mentioning Fight Club he was drawing attention to the financial industry, which at the time (post 2007-08 financial crisis era) was all the news. The lecturer and for the many academic souls at the University of Greenwich London, a place I have fond memories of, the financial crisis and the subsequent economic downturn that ravaged Western, and much of the world’s economy was primarily a creation of the loose, irresponsible and immoral decisions made by the corporate overlords that led to the subprime mortgage crisis running the world’s biggest financial institutions.
The blame game aside, his endorsement of the movie led me to watch the movie for the first time. This was around a decade ago. A lot has happened since then, but the negativity towards big businesses, particularly those who work in finance has remained. Understandable, since the world, particularly the developed economies of the West which were hit by the credit crunch have yet to have fully revolved. With predicable scapegoat being big businesses: entities that everyone like to hate on. But what is interesting is the sheer number of contradictions that underlie the notion of attacking big businesses, particularly the financial industry, and the underlying anti-capitalist worldview that underpins it. A worldview that interestingly underlies the message of Fight Club. For despite its supposedly empowering message of self-discovery and personal liberation, the kernel of the movie is anti-capitalist.
Fight Club is a great movie when it comes the art of visual story telling, character development, but the film (i.e. its plot and the message it is trying to communicate) gets a number of crucial things wrong. And these errors are especially problematic given its supposedly subversive message to men and society.
What Fight Club Gets Right
Economic disempowerment is one of the key themes in Fight Club. Whilst of the movie’s point of criticism is supposed to be aimed at ‘consumerism’: a vaguely defined term with poor applicative meaning. The key factor driving men in the movie to join these fight clubs and beat the c**p out of each other as a way of dealing with their plight, comes down to their weak socio-economic status. A point which I shall explain later, but first we need to understand how we got here: a situation where large number of men, in developed societies (America in the film is presented as a microcosm for the capitalist West) with a lot of energy, but underlying a sense of loss, or disappointment. Who are now seeking an outlet to let out their untapped energies, but underlying it unfulfilled aspirations.
The Plight of Disempowered Men
Fight Club gets a number of things right about the plight of modern men. The reality of life for many in the West today is not a great one. If one beyond the problems of the pandemic, the state of economies across the world, including for many Western nations, have not been a great one. From the slow post financial crisis recovery, which is still bedeviling many European countries (notable the PIGS: Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain) to the enduring problem of underemployment of millions: Where persons are employed in professions that are below their skill or qualifications, and in turn leading to lower wages. In addition to the long enduring problem of the lack of growth in real wages in many Western countries. A problem that has gone hand in hand with de-industrialization of the West, due to offshoring, and lack of investment in modern infrastructure and cutting edge technologies, along with changing dynamics in labor markets, owing to the advance in technology, and the rise in service sector jobs. Realities which have been engaged by economists and other social scientists. The message Fight Club is trying to communicate needs to be seen in light of the socio-economic realities that men have, and are facing in the West.
Notable in this regard has been the increase in the mechanization of jobs in manufacturing and export oriented industries. With the main outcome being the loss in real industrial capacity, with job cuts in these sectors acutely affecting men, who tend to predominate there. I remember once asking my line manager, a wise, middle aged Englishwoman from London on the, what I believed was the decline of masculinity in men. Her immediate response-she caught on, as she usually does-to what I was implying-on the relationship between work and identity. Her explanation was the loss of major coal and energy related industries in the U.K, and its impacts on the mass psychology of men in Britain. A reality she blamed on Margret Thatcher.
Whilst Lady Thatcher’s policies may have hastened the decline of the Britain’s industrial might, at least in terms of older industries in coal and mining; but these were bound to come to an end in the face of cheaper competition abroad. Which can be attributed to the rise in multi-national corporations and growing integration of the world economy through trade, and the reduction of tariffs. Neo-liberalism in other words. The argument here is that the weakening economic status of men on average, leaving aside the high earners, went hand in hand with social disempowerment of men who worked in these ‘traditional’ industries. (Work = money and money = power). But it is also question of the kind of work. Work that is physically demanding, that complemented the physical strengths of men, but also one that provide a sense of identity, in a way that reinforced their masculinity.
This ‘masculine decline’ in the workplace was exacerbated by the financial crisis and subsequent economic downturn, where the effects of the great recession were understood to have affected men greater than the opposite sex. This ‘man-cession’ as some have called it, where unemployment levels increased in jobs that were traditionally male-dominated. But speaking of the post crisis recovery, when viewed from a, to use the word ‘gendered’ lens, policy makers in the United States (during the Obama Administration) were more keen on helping the fairer sex than the group which was more greatly affected by it.
Problems only continued with relentless rise of mobile technology: with hand helds, and new device form factors, emergence social media, ubiquitous computing, giving rise to a whole new industrial landscape. One that is, it could be said, are not necessarily man-centred. The online centered character of the modern workplace (a problem that has been taken to another level thanks to the pandemic) has helped women more than men. Whilst the U.S economy in a state of recovery, though inflation is real threat, the status of men, speaking of the masses is not a great one. Maybe not necessarily economic a the level of being able to meet basic needs and wants, but certainly at a higher aspirational level.
A problem that continues when one looks outside the developed world. As I have written elsewhere, economics aside, men as sex invariably do worse than women, no matter the country of origin. And the dangers of male frustration with life boiling into other (more serious) areas of remain real (e.g. economically disenfranchised young men who join terrorist organizations). So when viewed from this vantage point, Fight Club’s message remains pertinent as ever. However the film goes a step further in trying to diagnose the causes of unrealized human potential and low economic status, and this is where the movie gets it wrong.
The Evil of Unmet Potential
Fight Club, for its many problems does engage a profound point that corresponds to the human, but particularly the male psyche. At one point in the movie the alter-ego of the Narrator, Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt) provides soliloquy on the meaning of Fight Club. Which I shall quote in full:
“I see in Fight Club the strongest and smartest men who’ve ever lived. I see all this potential. And I see it squandered. Goddamn it, an entire generation pumping gas. Waiting tables. Slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes. Working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need. We’re the middle children of history. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our great war is a spiritual war. Our great depression is our lives. We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d be millionaires and movie gods and rock stars. But we won’t. We’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off”.
Alright there are a number of things going on here. The problematic ones I will leave out for the next section. The valid point that Durden raises here, in relation to what the movie gets right is, on the subject of unmet potential. When Durden speaks of a generation of men with great potential that is being squandered doing 9.00 – 5.00 jobs with presumably little to no chance for career progression is valid. His reference to low paying work whilst somewhat contradictory to the notion of ‘slaves with white collars’ does hold true in relation to their potentially dead end character. Which these days also applies to so called white collar jobs; as lay offs and corporate restructuring, much of it driven by new business trends and other unforeseen factors (like you know what) nullifies the certainty of the traditional ‘work your way up the hierarchy’ model.
The Wisdom Of Maslow
The subject of human aspiration is an immense one. With its metaphysical foundations being too vast for an essay of this scope. The problem with human, and specifically male aspiration is one that is closely tied to the economic status of men. It is one which builds on the foundations set by the satiation of man’s basic needs and wants. In other words, what we are dealing with here is Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Starting from the fulfillment of basic needs: which correspond to the organism’s survival (food, shelter, clothing). Once these requirements are met the character of our needs (now wants) moves upward and onward. With the nature of our wants becoming more varied and complex, whilst less essential in their survivalist value, they become more closely connected with man’s higher thought processes. Notably the spiritual, the political, the idealistic. In a word aspirational.
Durden is right in referencing the unmet dreams of being an actor, sportsman or celebrity. As these are types of goals that correspond to such higher aspirations that relate to highest or self-actualization level of wants in the Maslowian hierarchy. To be stuck in a dead end job, with bills to pay, with little money for leisure and enjoyment would wear down the spirit of men. Undermining his ability to pursue higher goals like acquiring the ability to lead a lavish lifestyle, to do great work for the wider community, or to change the world! Such aspirations are not going to see the light of day if men are unable to service their basic needs and wants in a timely and fulfilling manner. So the problem of unmet male aspiration in an economic sense lays the foundations for ‘spiritual’ bottlenecks. By spirit I am not talking about Churches and synagogues, but about the inner longing of the human heart to seek out and do great things. To accomplish the potentially impossible. Think Elon Musk. The guy does great things in business and technology, has all the money in the world, a number of ex-wives, a hot girlfriend; kids, and an insatiable want to do more for humanity.
Fight Club hits the bullseye when it comes to the, what I would describe as the problem mass unmet Male aspiration. A function of bad policy making by governments over the course of decades: resulting in bad education systems, bloated bureaucracies (which eat up the tax payer), poor infrastructure, the inability to face up to foreign economic challengers, and the failure to adapt new business dynamics like acceleration in technology etc. The result being unemployment, underemployment, and the host of other social problems that these have unleashed, including the growing social isolation of men living in cosmopolitan environments.
Money affects everything. Particularly men’s relationships with women, which can be negative to non-existent depending on how much you earn. As women tend to date up, men on the lower level of the socio-economic ladder tend to lose out. A side effect of all of this is a surplus of energy (a lot of testosterone) is that is not being channeled in the right way towards the constructive outcomes, and instead finds its manifestation in male aggression, crime, gang culture, and in the worst cases terrorism and adoption of militant worldviews. Fight Club’s answer to the problem of surplus male energy is ultimately the worst. The idea of that men form these underground fighting communities and expend their excess energies simmering beneath the surface, in beating each other up, one that eventually mutates into an organization with revolutionary presentations (albeit aimed against corporations rather than governments).
This is a bad. For it solves nothing. And if anything only exacerbates the problems men are facing in the world today. One that is primarily a creation of the massive, inefficient, inevitably corrupt and ever growing leviathan that dominates Western societies, rather the private and public corporations, that are governed by the swim or sink reality of the marketplace. Private organizations that are driven by profit, owe their existence to the democratic vote (i.e. the purchase of a product or service) by consumers who they exist to serve, not the other way around. If Tyler Durden or his alter ego don’t like the idea of a consumerist culture, and are fearful of its disempowering effects on the masculine spirit, then they can always choose to piss off to some ashram and spend the rest of their days mediating, embracing veganism and jerking their celibate assess off to sleep every night. But we’re not done with the positives of the film.
The Importance of (Man Centered) Community
One of Fight Club’s somewhat radical points, given the politically correct time we’re in, is the emphasis it places on male fellowship. Men, especially young men, in their formative and early adult years need a source of guidance. To be in an environ that can bestow moral and spiritual leadership, providing mentorship and guidelines in navigating the arenas of work, women, relationships etc. In helping men find their true purpose in life. Whilst the kind of male community that fight club creates is in no way conducive to the healthy development of men-given its focus is on men who have or are failing at life. But in its own right the movie, at least early on, makes the case for, what could be characterized as male-only spaces: A place where men can be, think and act like men, without the inhibitions and distractions that is brought on by the company of women; or by the presence of superiors whose role is to deal with, and as its often the case, prioritize the well being of women.
Durden’s observation that: ‘We’re a generation of men raised by women’ is pertinent in this regard. The lack of male role models and leaders in the formative years of a young man’s life can have lasting impacts for his future, especially when it comes to the opposite sex. Which is I why would disagree with the second part of that statement, where Durden states: ‘I’m wondering if another woman is really the answer we need’. For having the ability to relate to and attract women, not to mention having the capacity (and resources) to maintain a meaningful relationship are crucial to a man’s life in an emotional and social sense. Nonetheless the point about the need for men to work together, to share ideas, to have the guidance and wisdom of older/experienced men is something that Fight Club gets right as an idea, but not in application.
What’s Wrong with Fight Club?
Starting with the idea of fight club. Fight club, or a place where men could go to express their frustrations about life, by beating the hell out of each other, whilst potentiality helpful in a therapeutic sense, does not address the underlying nature of their problems. Which as noted is two fold: having to live in a perpetually economically disempowered state, and having to live with the bane of unmet potential. With one building on top of the other. If the problem is that men have too much energy that is not channeled in the right way, the answer to that is not direct it in something that is physically and potentially psychological harmful. So here are the main problems with Fight Club: the story and its social message.
Bad Club
Think about it, in what way is the idea of letting your frustrations out in hand to hand to combat, which in terms of how it plays out, devolves into a blood sport, empowering to the soul. If men have excess energy which they feel is not being used in a creative or constructive manner, it could be wise to find the right outlets in which one’s skills and strengths can be better utilized. The word that comes to mind here is sublimation. The term’s sexual connotations aside, what it means in this context is that if there is something inside of you that is aching to come out (not necessarily the obvious), it is best to find the right channel, or outlet. One that uses its potential to produce something creative, valuable, generative. In a word, good. But that is not what Fight Club enables.
Further the idea of fighting without the rules and controls of a certified combat style like karate, judo, or jiu jitsu could mean that someone could could seriously get hurt, and worse it opens the door to the practice of people viewing fight club as a way of dealing with their personal feelings by channeling that excess energy (i.e. frustrations) on an unsuspecting other. This reality is brought to light in the part where the Narrator beats up ‘Angel face’, the good looking, blonde guy to a pulp. Disfiguring the young man, possibly permanently. And his explanation for doing so: ‘I Felt Like Destroying Something Beautiful’.
If there was one qualifying statement that totally discredited the moral basis for fight club this would be it. Not only does its ‘founder’ do something reprehensible, but provides his ‘moral’ justification for it. Fight Club: the movie and its message, is not about helping men deal with the problems in their lives, by looking at the root causes of their failure to rise in society (i.e. the question of status). Instead it makes men vent out their frustrations out on each other, however momentarily, but then leaves them feeling even worse than before, as no solution has been found to their most pressing concerns. Which are invariably economic and relational. Instead it makes men turn around and point the finger at… You guessed it: Money! Or Capitalism specifically.
Consumerism is Actually Good
A key moment in the movie is where the Narrator or his alter ego blows up his home. The idea is that the man has become captivated by a consumerist lifestyle that is defined by material acquisition, and the superficial indulgence in temporal goods and comforts. Whilst this critic is broadly true, it fails to consider the underlying factors that drives people, men and women to do so. Wanting material things is not inherently wrong. Heck it is one of the ‘things’ that makes us human. Unlike creatures with lower intelligence and sophistication, human wants are diverse and ever expanding. We are not like the apes and our other so called primate “cousins”, who are just content with eating, sleeping and f**king.
Whilst much has been made of the higher, nobler goals of the human spirit in relation to the pursuit of intangible goods: like service to the community, fighting for justice, contributing to the social good etc. The acquisition of property and wealth is generally demonized, and along with the tendency to ignore the importance of hard work, creativity, ingenuity, disciple and determination. Which are requisites for the acquisition of wealth and status. The quote “Success is where preparation and opportunity meet” by Bobby Unser is pertinent in this regard.
When it comes a consumerist lifestyle, and here it is worth explaining what is meant by the term: the preoccupation with the acquisition of consumer goods. Consumer goods, a term from business school, breaks down into sub categories: convenience, shopping, specialty, and unsought goods. When one speaks of consumerism the focus tends to converge on shopping and specialty goods. Which are technically not essential, but incur a relatively higher cost, and investment in time. A good example of shopping goods would be IKEA furniture. Whilst these are not essential people do spend time picking out their favorite furniture set. Specialty goods include things like luxury cars, yachts, or these days flagship mobile phones. The point is we don’t need them, but we buy them anyway. Because we want them.
Whilst the message of Fight Club is partly right in suggesting that such material indulgences can distract men from finding their true calling in life, and in the younger years can work as a distraction or lame replacement for a rite of passage that in men primitive cultures undergo. Where things are not just available for purchase. However the movie gets it wrong in suggesting that the desire for material comfort and even luxury are problematic, and that they are socially constructed. The quote ‘We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d be millionaires and movie gods and rock stars’ is wrong. For the desire for material well being and social success is inherent. In stems from the human psyche, and finds its social manifestation in the world of markets, economies, industries, businesses. With showbiz and sports being the more popular arenas.
The personal problems that Durden has in terms of a dissatisfying job, insomnia cannot be connected to the phenomenon (or myth as I would like to consider it) of consumerism. If Durden is unhappy with his job, then he needs to find a new one. Or continue working, whilst developing a new viable skill that could open up opportunities in the future. The fact that Durden was stuck in an unsatisfying job and was suffering from insomnia and was unable to do something about it, requires special help. This nut job was in need of some counseling, and possibly psychiatric help. Not be the pathfinder of a new social order. Also what is not clear is how all these men started following some whack job who spends much of his time talking to and fighting with himself!
The Financial Industry is Not to Blame for your Problems
It’s funny how Fight Club came on the scene around a decade before the financial crisis, and the ‘Great Recession’ that it would unleash. The financial crisis of the 2007-08 period, was the first major global economic downturn since the Great Recession of the 1930s. And as noted its effects lingered on for far longer, particularly in continental Europe. The blame for the origins and unfolding of crisis has usually been reserved for the banks, and other financial institutions. Those who are involved in the business of debt and borrowing, and speaking of the origins of the crisis, housing. Going back to my time at Business School, it was a period when the practice of bashing major financial institutions who were deemed solely responsible for the unfolding of the crisis, was all the rage. And if you speak to the average (financially illiterate) citizen on the matter, the opinion is likely to be the same.
It is not my intention to defend investment banks, and other ‘masters of the universe’ who were involved with the unfolding of this mess. For they are not without blame. However what is overlooked is the role played by governments and government backed institutions in the origins and later unfolding of the crisis. The notion that States and policy makers were somehow faultless in how this credit crunch and the Great Recession is foolish, and to think so is self-deceptive. The school of thought, that to my mind best engages the origins, and causes of the financial crisis of 2007-08 is the Austrian one. The piece by Robert Stewart: The Crisis in 10 Points is a good starting point. And for those who harbor views that the government was guiltless, consider that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, loan companies that were deeply involved during the financial crisis, that started in America’s housing market, were created by acts of Congress.
So returning to the anti-finance, let’s erase the world’s debt by blowing up financial organization, and by extension, presumably bring down capitalism itself, message of Fight Club. This ‘reveal’ so to speak, whilst seemingly brave and radical again fails to address the underlying problem: If your life sucks, it is not the fault of banks, corporations, religion and heck even the government-the one institution I do like to blame. As tough as it is to admit, the main cause your life’s problems circles back to you. The idea of joining a fight club and beating the crap out of men, and then enlisting to join a group (Mayhem) that wishes to destroy the foundations of a modern economy is not the answer. And even if it succeeds, then what? Who is going to build back society once you tear it down. The ‘I want to destroy something beautiful’ mantra sure doesn’t fill me with promise. No. Rather it should fill us with the very opposite: Dread. Given what these men attempted to do, the members of Fight Club ought to be classed as anarchists or worse, terrorists.
The idea of that ‘without pain, without sacrifice… we would have nothing’, is persuasive. The need for Men to get in touch with their wild, primitive, survivor-side; one that stresses the value of pain and sacrifice as a way to discover or rediscover something that has been lost amidst the materialistic pursuits, hedonistic indulgences, and comforts of the present age is powerful. And is arguably the main reason why the movie resonated with male audiences. However the problem here is that the intention of the speaker is maligned. What Durden actually values is not the importance of a rite of passage, thereby helping men to become tougher and stronger, in order to be fit to confront the trials of life. But rather it is to ultimately hate life itself.
It is no coincidence that none of these men have, or are able to develop meaningful relationships with women. None of them settle down, or plan to settle down. Getting married, having a family and leaving behind a legacy are not part of their metal or moral calculus. Or maybe it will be, once they tear everything down.
In Conclusion: Fight Club is Poison
In closing, I would like to return to the point made at the end of alter-ego Durden’s speech: “We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d be millionaires and movie gods and rock stars. But we won’t. We’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off.” This conclusion reached by the unhinged protagonist is one of the central errors of the film. The source of disenchantment, angst and anger felt towards society and themselves by modern men whilst rightly stemming from the absence of fame and fortune, the feeling itself was not manufactured by popular culture. The desire for a wealthy and successful life does not stem from media, television and Hollywood. The want is not a creation of the external world, but rather it is a product of the human mind, that finds its outward social, commercial, and cultural manifestation.
Men should not be faulted for having such “unrealistic” expectations, bur rather it is the character of social systems in which men are raised that work to undermine and/or dissuade us from acquiring the know-how in developing the right capabilities for doing so, with right incentives at the physiological, intellectual, political and yes even spiritual level, that ought to be blamed. Men should not be blamed for wanting great things. The spirit which drives men to aspire for greatness is a good. And fame and fortune, which are often dismissed by cynical, joyless masses who live without purpose or ambition, as shallow and superficial, or worse as temptations of evil, is a tangible barometer for success. For the ensnares of materialism, whether its IKEA furniture or a new Maserati, correspond to the aspirational character of the human psyche. The problem, as Fight Club posit, does lie with society. However the specific source of blame for the negative social reality that men operate in does not fall on Capital One, or Synchrony Financial or any other financial institution. At least not directly.
For the market system clearly works for some: given the number of millionaires, billionaires and rock stars in the world. The fact that some do in fact succeed, means that all, with the right leadership can also do well, to some meaningful degree. But this cannot work outside the market system. For as history as shown the creative works of human ingenuity and talent thrive best within capitalism, one which empowers the growth and expression of the aspiring spirit of man. As opposed to socialism, communism or some back-to-nature primitivism that the movie seems to advocate. Whilst the movie rightly hits on the idea that the world has become a less conducive a place for Men to work, grow, and attain a level independence, in their quest to become their (our) ideal versions. But it fails in providing a meaningful solution.
Fight Club is a reactionary tale, with a misguided message. A movie that seeks to confronts the problems men in the West are facing in adult life. But its remedy is a poison. Despite its thoughtful messages on the need for self-discovery, and the importance of detachment, and having a rite of passage; what it ultimately offers is a mode of moral and social escapism. One where the excess energies of Man (creative and constructive) get wasted on misdirected exploits that ultimately provide no meaningful solution, but only produce physical harm and the entrenchment of their sense of resentment towards everyone around them.
Men would be better served signing up for a course or program that can provide them with specific plans and recommendations to help them extricate themselves out of their person specific challenges: financial, relational, moral and spiritual. Whilst helping them stay true to who they are as individuals. For by end of the movie the members of Fight Club, or now Mayhem as its known: a quasi terrorist origination, have lost their identity. Blindly following the mad designs of a suicidal whack job. So much for its message about empowering men.