Fight Club notes

David Finchers Fight Club is a film produced in 1999. Its story revolves around an
anonymous male protagonist whose internal struggle for identity and consequent
schizophrenic tendencies result in widespread, organized rebellion against
postmodern society and represents a bitter and dissatisfied generation.

The primary goal of the plot is to witness the protagonists self-realization of his
sickness, and through observing this self-realization, the audience is exposed to a
culture of deprived of any source of identity. Unlike the generation before them,
men of the postmodern era have no identifying calamity, No Great War. No Great
Depression to overcome, no purpose or place. (IMDb 2011) As a result, they are
reduced to search for their individual sense of purpose within their monotonous jobs
in small corporate businesses cubicles and in their small, inconsequential lives.

The film demonstrates the postmodern cultural angst that results from its
generations countless, misguided attempts to derive meaning from their lives
through the media-endorsed, fantastical childhood aspirations and material
possessions. Unfortunately, this leads to mass materialism, where the things you
own end up owning you. (IMDb 2011) The main character exemplifies this
directionless pursuit for an alternative foundation for identity through his perfect,
catalogue-furnished apartment. (Postmodernism and Violence 2010) However, all of
these efforts prove themselves to no avail and result in a generation frustrated and
unsatisfied.

The film portrays a generational frustration that expresss an overwhelming

resentment towards postmodern culture. Discontentment with postmodern society
results in mass rebellion that rejects all prior social norms and expectations. (Bukisa
2010) Both the upper and lower classes abandon all material possessions. Cult-like
organizations form and begin plaguing cities with random acts of violence and
vandalism: buildings are defaced, private pieces of property are stolen, and small
business shops are destroyed. A major shift occurs: rather than working towards
consistent self-improvement, people resort to an entire annihilation of set
establishments and self. Nihilism and self-destruction become a means for
reconstruction, and the postmodern generation is characterized as a generation
whose freedom lies only in the complete loss of hope.

More FC Notes
Fight Club is a film most have come to know and many love passionately, whether it
is because of its psychological twists, killer soundtrack, intense action scenes or its
anti- establishment demeanor. But are the messages of strong anti-postmodernism
and anti-capitalism profoundly hypocritical in its medium or a necessary evil in
order to reach a wider audience? If not, the cult classics aura could be rendered
significantly diminished if the hypocrisy is without vindicated reason. In order to
distinguish which, the aforementioned messages, aura and over-all form will be
explored in detail.

Like any other film, Fight Club can be broken up into three main acts split by set plot
points throughout the film. The first plot being when the Narrator first meets and
talks to Tyler Durden on the plane. Though this is arguable as it is set further into
the beginning of the film than most others, it is undoubtedly a turning point; the
second plot point being the disappearance of Tyler after the near life experience.
The classic storytelling movie formula born from such films as Back to the Future
and Jaws is effective and sophisticated enough for the normal audience. But when it
comes to examining Fight Club in the light of postmodernism, it is much easier to
break it into two acts, before and after the threat of castrating the police
commissioner. The reasoning behind this is very simple; it is all centered around the
Narrators relationship with Tyler, because this directly reflects the films
implications of tackling postmodernism and capitalism. But first is first; how is Fight
Clubs hypocrisy effecting its over all messages?

Postmodernism is the time in modern society where originality has been ultimately
lost. Everything, to some degree, has been done at some previous point in time,
simulacra, and that we are in a constant state of overstimulation, hyperreality. Due
to the nature of postmodernism, it tends to be distinctly conjunctional with the
ideals of capitalism. Not to say Fight Club itself isnt an original concept, but the
things within the film that are very postmodern. Tyler Durden, for example, is a
manifestation of postmodernism in several ways. One of these ways is the
conventional masculine tough guy. As Asbjrn Grnstad states in the opening of his
critique:

One of the most memorable performances of masculine bravado in classical

Hollywood cinema occurs in John Ford's Irish epic The Quiet Man (1952), in which

the character of Sean Thornton (John Wayne) instigates a mock fistfight with his
brother-in-law Will Danaher (Victor McLaglen). As the two men pummel each other
around haystacks, streams and hillsides, even stopping for a pint at a nearby pub,
they seem to respect what I believe is the seventh rule of Fight Club: fights will go
on as long as they have to.(1)

Not only does Tyler Durden fit this classical tough guy persona, but the ironic wellknown rules of Fight Club can also be applied to that of other films.

Even the fact that it is a film makes it hypocritical to critique postmodernism. Film,
as an invention of postmodernism, is tied strongly into capitalism. The purpose of
films, for the most part, is to make money. A company makes a product, advertises
it, sells it and people consume it. The exact same stands true for the cinema and its
capitalistic style of existence and Fight Club is no exception. Fight Club had to be
thought up, budgeted, written, produced, advertised, sold and consumed like every
other product of capitalism in this postmodern era. The major problem with this fact
is that Fight Club is utterly anti-capitalism. It is relentless. There are films which
simply point out the flaws in our society, such as documentaries, and then there is
Fight Club which is not only pointing out the flaws but then literally attacking them.
This in itself is a very hypocritical thing to do considering Fight Club owes its very
existence to the capitalistic process.

When splicing this film into two parts to examine how it fights postmodernism and
capitalism, it is best to do this by looking at the Narrators relationship with Tyler.
Before the Narrator met Tyler, he was a product of postmodernism, or as he puts it
A guy who came to Fight Club for the first time, his ass was a wad of cookie dough.
After a few weeks, he was carved out of wood.(2) Most people interpret this quote
as a direct correlation of their physique, but it can equally be applied to the Narrator
and others relationship with postmodernism. Before starting Fight Club and
meeting Tyler, the Narrator indulged himself in materialism, a direct result of
capitalism telling him what he needs to be complete. Through these many examples
of post modernisms simulacra is seen and that his relationship with insomnia is an
interpretation of postmodernism ideals. With insomnia, nothings real. Everythings
far away. Everythings a copy of a copy of a copy. When deep space exploration
ramps up, itll be the corporations that name everything, the IBM Stellar Sphere, the
Microsoft Galaxy, Planet Starbucks.(2) Ironically, it is only after meeting the
anthropomorphism of postmodernism that he is finally able to let go of these
possessions. The struggle doesnt end there, it really only begins.

Tyler Durden. Tyler attempts to embody the very bottom, letting go, being free
through his actions. But it is through his wit, his intelligence and his ego that he
single-handedly brings Fight Club together to accomplish so much. With his
charisma and unbreakable spirit, he motivates his space monkeys to let that which
does not matter truly slide.

Man, I see in Fight Club the strongest and smartest men who've ever lived. I see all
this potential, and I see squandering. God damn 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, man.

No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a
spiritual war... our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television
to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods and rock stars. But
we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off.(2)

Through this quote, it is easy to see why he embodies the spirit of anti-capitalism
and anti-postmodernism. But there is a problem with Tyler Durdens existence, in
that he owes it to the concept of postmodernism. The narrator goes on to tell about
how his father was setting up a franchise. Meeting a new woman and starting a
family every five years, moving from place to place doing this across the county.
Then we later learn that Tyler is a copy of who the Narrator would like to be. This is
a superb example of simulacra; we have the Narrator, a copy of a copy of children,
then Tyler - a copy of a copy of a copy.

Regardless of this fact, he fights the concept to the death. Through the first half, we
watch the Narrator struggle with and prevail over capitalism and postmodernism
around him by learning to live without it. This is until of course, he begins his
internal struggle with Tyler. This queue is seen in several different ways through the
second half of the film. It starts with Tyler beginning to favor a new blonde haired
member of Fight Club shortly after their threat on the police commissioner. The
Narrator doesnt like this; he has already fought and won his seat in Fight Club.
Without hesitation, at the opportunity in the fight in the basement in the next
scene, he puts him back in his place and into the hospital. From there on, it is a
constant struggle with Tyler and therefore a constant struggle with postmodernism.
He chases Tyler blindly across the country, discovering new Fight Clubs, one after

another. Copies of copies of copies. Until the Narrator once again comes face to face
with Tyler, and literally fights his postmodernist self once again. As Lynn puts it:

From the coercive, absolutist order in which physical punishment is levied on the
individual, the flogged being is replaced by the psychological inducement of the
self-regulating subject who, now in the throes of liberal capitalism and humanist free
will, must flog himself.(3)

The question that comes into play then, is it really being hypocritical or just doing
what is necessary in order to have its message reach as many as possible? Fight
Club had much more humble beginnings as a book. At least humble compared to
the beginnings of a film. Books themselves come across as a much less postmodern
medium, not because books are anymore original than film can be, but because it is
imposed upon by capitalism. There is less advertising, less money put into it, less
money to be made from it. But at the same time, some of the best films such as A
Clockwork Orange, Drive and Transpotting have their roots in books. Though this
may take away from how modest they truly are, it still comes across as less
capitalistic then cinema. But Fight Club, with its powerful messages, must do what is
necessary to spread them. As a film, Fight Club did poorly in the box office, grossing
only $37 million on a $63 million budget4, but after becoming a cult classic it only
continued to grow. Though the film may come across as hypocritical in its nature, it
is easy to see what it is doing, as it must, because it can.

Fight Club treads a fine line between hypocrisy and satire. But it comes out swinging
with some incredibly powerful messages about capitalism, postmodernism,
violence, masculinity and the self. Things such as You're not your job. You're not
how much money you have in the bank. You're not the car you drive. You're not the
contents of your wallet. You're not your fucking khakis. You're the all-singing, alldancing crap of the world.(2)

Not only are these potent and unusual things to be said to anybody, but Fight Club
takes it a step further and doesnt say it to just anybody. It says it to you, directly to
your face, breaking the fourth wall. This is largely one of the reasons it is such an
effective film as it is completely self-aware. Not only does it look you in the eyes and
tell you off, it starts with a narration directed at you, with multiple moments
expounding upon situations completely separate from what is happening at the
moment before the cut. Even dialog between the Narrator and Tyler becomes self-

aware as in the beginning of the film, the Narrator has a pistol jammed in his mouth
as hes asked if he would like to say a few words to mark the occasion? in which
he responds with a mumble, after the gun is pulled out he responds with I cant
think of anything. Then in the last scene of the film, after the rollercoaster has
come full circle back to the beginning we see the same situation, but with slightly
altered dialog. Once again he sits with a gun planted between his teeth, he
mumbles a response and once it is removed he says I still cant think of anything.
To which Tyler responds: Ah flashback humor. It is this kind of new level of
addressing itself that makes the film so incredibly powerful, effective and helps
make it gain a cult-like following.

When comparing it to the book, if anything, it is even arguably less hypocritical than
its paperback counterpart. The film ends with the Narrator and Marla, standing
hand-in-hand in an empty office building as they watch capitalism literally fall apart
before them. This is a strong message to end on, though unsettling and if anything
less capitalistic then the books ending. The book instead concludes with the
Narrator being sent to a mental institution as he is unable to deal with his mental
disorder. The film instead goes all the way with conquering the postmodern copy
and the tumbling of capitalism. This goes to say a lot compared to other weak
kneed films as a lot wimp out on fulfilling their truth in favor of not upsetting
anyone. But Fight Club not only stayed more uncompromising than the book, but
uncompromising in its narrative form. Even a Fox 2000 executive acknowledges its
uncompromising nature in an article by Claudia Eller about the violence in Fight
Club. Mechanic said, It's an Us vs. Them movie. It's certainly not a middle-of-theroad movie . . . we didn't make it for everyone.'(4)

This shows that though it may be rare, it is possible to even see the capitalistic
corporations which fund things like Fight Club are even behind its narrow scope.
Though it would be safe to say they didnt expect it to be a huge hit like Avatar or
anything on that level of profit consuming. But, to go negative was a surprise, and
at the same time it helps support the overall attitude of the film, as it would be
ironic for it to do too well.

Despite being a film that performed poorly at the box office, offending people in
several ways due to what people considered to be 'out of taste' on the grounds of
recent events such as Columbine, it still managed to reach that rarely seen cult
status and even topped the charts of numerous all-time best movie lists. In further
irony, after the release of the movie, actual Fight Clubs began to sprout up, people
attempted to reenact Operation Latte Thunder which in the film the globe from
the art piece is blown up and rolled into a coffee chain. Long after the release of
Fight Club, it continues to live on strong within the minds and actions of followers
and fans alike. And like in the film, the mythology of Fight Club has come full circle
as the narrator makes the point that Fight Club operates like a living breathing

organism without Tyler. Even to this day, Fight Club lives on as a living breathing
organism, without interaction from any of its founding capitalistic influence.

As it is evident from the above, Fight Club makes the sacrifice of being further
enveloped into post modernism in order to spread its words of wisdom. For as long
as capitalism reigns, these words will continue to ring truer as time goes on and
remain a warning for those who take it to heart. Even though it is now pushing its
15-year anniversary, released on October 1999, Fight Club continues to live and
thrive in the minds of the following. And worryingly, the more and more practical
uses of its quotes in everyday life continue to do so as well.