The Bittersweet Tragedy of a Transcendentalist

Being a transcendentalist writer and filmmaker is a tragedy. The individual is compelled to explore some ultimate truth and express it to the point where it consumes most of his life. In a lot of ways, it’s like a drug addiction. His every thoughts are consumed by a desire that will make him do whatever it takes to re-live that deep and intimate sense of enthrallment he can only feel when he’s discovered an amazing way to make sense of a generation that has a cold and unknown future.

And of course, the transcendentalist can’t just walk away from it, because he know it’s his responsibility. And, if he’s good enough, he’ll be rich as hell, but what does money mean when it’s not backed by some higher purpose? Sure, he might be good enough to develop a cult following and enough popularity to get the nice media coverage, but will the vast majority ever change because of what he showed and told them?

The average feature length is about an hour and a half, which means that his movie will get about that much attention to millions and probably only change a few hundred thousand lives. That’s 300 thousand out of 7 billion people in the World. So, in the end you’re spending all of your time and effort to create a “master piece” that will only put a small check mark on the endless list of, “to dos” that culminate into the utopia we’ve dreamed about since the dawn of man.

A writer and filmmaker’s life seems to be the most useless job to have ever existed. It destroys the individual pursuing this endevour because the individual fools himself into believing that some how he’s going to change everything. And in spite of all the hellish things this individual puts himself through just so he can do next to nothing, when you take him and the millions of others doing the same exact thing into consideration…Well, then something magical happens.

Suddenly, a wave of old beliefs and ideas expand into new ones, flooding the social fabric into a new World order. They converge and feed off one another in a symphony of chaos. Eventually, no one can really pinpoint a beginning or an end. We simply transcend to a new plateau, culminating into a Neo-Renaissance. The act of the transcendentalist is deliberate. But the consequence is so foreign and unknown to him, he can never be too sure if he’s a blessing or a burden.

Nevertheless he moves along, because he knows is necessary. The transcendentalist is the silent agent moving the story of our lives; hiding in a dream within the social chaos; wandering onward with his tragic life.
 
Word
smiley_bong.gif
 
Absolutely.

But nothing would change if one did not try, not to mention that is more than one of those out there trying to affect change. Sometimes we are not as alone as we think.
 
Absolutely.

But nothing would change if one did not try, not to mention that is more than one of those out there trying to affect change. Sometimes we are not as alone as we think.

I just don't know where to find them. Just about everyone I know in film simply does it because they love it. There's certainly nothing wrong with that, but it would just be nice to meet revolutionaries who are actively trying to change and progress the art itself.
 
Being a transcendentalist writer and filmmaker is a tragedy.

Um, no. Take away all the fluff and what it boils down to is you want to do something that you think you can't. That only seems like a tragedy if you have an inflated impression of your own importance - which may be the case if you feel it's your responsibility to 'save' the world. I know it sounds harsh, but wanting something and not getting it is just not a real tragedy.
 
But why pursue that without loving it?

It's not about loving film and pursuing it versus not loving film, but pursuing it. It's about loving the craft, but understanding that it needs to be better. It has to evolve and grow closer to our collective and individual consciousness. Otherwise...Well, shit. What else is there to do, but move forward.

I mean, this is obviously all subjective. It's not as though movies should or shouldn't progress. I just want to see something new.
 
Um, no. Take away all the fluff and what it boils down to is you want to do something that you think you can't. That only seems like a tragedy if you have an inflated impression of your own importance - which may be the case if you feel it's your responsibility to 'save' the world. I know it sounds harsh, but wanting something and not getting it is just not a real tragedy.

It is my responsibility as it is all of our responsibilities. If you're not doing something that helps us progress whether you consciously think about it everyday, then you're simply wasting time and energy. Not that this is a bad thing. It just is what it is.

I'm not inflating myself to the extent where I believe that I'm some sort of savior. I'm merely placing myself within the context of the whole movement. It doesn't matter if I fail because someone else will get it right and even if they do, that really doesn't matter either.

That's why we tend to believe that a single film means nothing. It definitely means something. It just doesn't mean that much when it's simply stands alone because it can only do so much. But, when you agglomerate hundreds and thousands of movies that are seen throughout long periods of time, you suddenly understand the enormous implications that art and media have and that's when you understand your role within it.

It's a tragedy because the transcendentalist always yearns to change a generation, but will always perceive his actions as being one big heap of failure (minus a few notable icons). Most of them however, will linger on thinking that his film has satisfied an audience, but did nothing more or less.

It's like F. Scott Fitzgerald. He's a legend in our time, but back in the day he was just a good writer who entertained people. That's tragic.
 
Terrence Malick is one director that has made some films that can be construed as transcendentalist in approach.
I'm just wondering about the nature of the audience for this kind of approach.
I've got great response to my Facebook page, The New Transcendentalist in the two days it's been up.

I think the American mind may be slowing down to take in nature and slowly see things beneath the cheap tinsel.
I've written a transcendentalist California Gold Rush tale. I wrote it with too many words, wrote a screenplay for it and then overlaid it on the 132,000 words and got it to go forward better.

The transcendentalism in "Yosemite and the Opium Journal" is the point of view character and where he is; he's in the Sierra Nevada near Yosemite. Also, being a surrogate for the English Romantics, he with an opium addiction, this character is also surrogating Ralph Waldo Emerson. The gold rush tale is a western but mine's not. It is California history I'm covering and the English Romantics pretty much individuated the way we do, taught us how to be in many ways.

Good luck!
 
Back
Top