All good blogs must come to a blend

Thanks for a great semester!


Good luck on finals!


Have a good break!


And... bye-bye, blog!  (Snf...)






Contra Baudrillard, I now declare this course to have taken place.

Unsurprising

I was taken aback when the helicopter pilot said that Timothy "got what he deserved. I found it horribly disrespectful for him to say that Timothy deserved to die at the hands of the animals he loved. However, I have tried to believe that this is not what the man meant to say. Instead, I believe that the helicopter pilot simply meant that he was not surprised by what happen. Moreover, he believed that Timothy should not have been out there in the first place, that by risking his life for so many years it was simply a matter of time before he was killed by the bears. In this aspect, I completely agree with the helicopter pilot. Sure, Timothy loved the bears. Perhaps it is true that bears have gotten a bad rep in the past. Still, bears are dangerous, as Timothy admitted, and his death was more or less inevitable.

As the movie progressed, I found myself finding Timothy more and more ridiculous. At the beginning I found him to be odd (I had a hard time not seeing him as an Andy Dick-esque person). Further on in the movie, I became convinced that Timothy was not well. His diatribes and antics bordered mentally ill and I found his needing to stay with the bears to be extremely unhealthy. Furthermore, his "protection" of the bears was not good for the animals. He did not belong in the wild with those animals, as he should have known from the numerous warnings posed by the government, and was only serving as a detriment to their lifestyle. It is unfortunate that those around him supported him in these actions, instead of helping him find help for, apparently, deep seeded problems that had plagued him his entire life.

Stuffed Animals

Whether or not Timothy's activities with the bears were moral is not something I can say, but I do feel that they were excessively unnatural. The museum curator made an excellent point when he said that Timothy was disrespecting the bears by remaining so close to them. He seemed to fail to understand that bears simply are not like humans. Many of the "discussions" he had with the bears involved human concepts and structures, none of which the bears would have been able to relate much to even if they somewhere were capable of comprehending English. Perhaps the most intriguing example of this took place right after the two male bears fought for the courtship of Saturn, the prized female. Timothy sets the shot up so that he is in the foreground while one of the male bears is recuperating in the background. He then proceeds to give the animal advice, often relating his own experience with women. Several obvious aspects of this little lecture make the bear's comprehension impossible as well as also offer a surprising amount of insight into Timothy's troubled personality. As already mentioned, he speaks a language the bear doesn't know, and he uses concepts foreign to non-humans. But even if these could be excused, the distance between Timothy and the bear is too great for the latter to even hear the former. Surely, Timothy must have noticed this, indicating that the chief purpose of his advice was not that it was to be understood. So why did he do it? I believe it, just like his time with the bears in general, was meant to fulfill a deficit in Timothy's own character. It was noted that he had always adored animals, especially at a young age. His favorite companions as a young boy were said to be a pet squirrel and a stuffed bear, and he may very well have a made a strong mental connection of animals with the innocence of childhood. His adult life seemed to have been marred by disappointment, alcoholism, and complicated relationships that always seemed to elude him (as evidenced heavily by his musings on why he didn't have a steady girlfriend). The most joy he appeared to derive came from interacting with children, whom he was willing to educate with no charge, and animals. The aforementioned connection he may have made with animals and childhood would also explain his behavior towards the animals of the Alaskan woods. He often speaks to the bears as if they had the cognitive and emotional capacities of young children, which, in my opinion, is a false assumption borne out his desire to return to a happier time in his life. It is this false assumption that failed to acknowledge bears for the wild animals they truly are, and unfortunately, it may have also led to Timothy's untimely end.

Grizzly Man

Did Timothy ‘get what he deserved’, as the helicopter pilot who helped retrieve his bones a few days after he died said?

I think that was a horrible thing for the helicopter pilot to say, and I was actually offended by it. I don't think it's ever okay to say someone "deserves" death, especially someone who hasn't harmed anyone else. In Timothy's case, he was just someone who was very passionate about what he did. He wanted to protect and raise awareness of the importance of protecting the bears. Though sometimes he may have seemed a little crazy, thinking he was a bear and such, he was harmless to them, and it was a really sad thing that when he overstayed the summer, a grumpy bear got angry. It was sad that his girlfriend died with him, but that too wasn't his fault. She chose to stay with him, and it was just accidental and tragic that they both died.

I'm even one who believes in karma - what goes around, comes around. In Timothy's case, though, though he may have put himself in a situation in which it was possible and even probable that he'd get hurt, it is unfair and very ignorant to say he deserved such a fate.

Did he deserve it?

I completely disagree with what the helicopter pilot said about Timothy Treadwell. I do not see how anyone could say that about a person who truly loved the bears and was not harming them in any way. Some argue that it was unfair to take the girl along. I highly doubt that Timothy forced her to go, so it was her decision. I just do not think it's right to say that anyone deserves to be killed. Especially if the person did nothing to cause harm to someone or something else. Yes, he did something that was dangerous but he did it in order to learn more about the thing he was passionate about. I am sure that some people would say that flying a helicopter is dangerous, but would they really said that the pilot "got what he deserved" if he were to get into a crash? Probably not. I guess I felt bad for Timothy. He found something that he loved. Like he said, it was his life. The bears gave him a life. I do not understand how someone could say a thing like that when these trips meant that much to him.

That is no arrow. We just imagine the arrows because we fear them. -Gavin

I was unaware that I would be watching my second Herzog film this semester. I think for some, two Herzog film's may be far too many. However, I digress. For fun, if you can call it that, I watched Aguirre the Wrath of God earlier this semester. One of the themes prevalent in Aguirre is man vs. nature (Already a link to Grizzly Man!). German explorers seeking riches in the 'New World' are consumed by a hostile and chaotic jungle. The jungle seems to bring out the worst in everyone. Where in the eerie lull between battling cannibals and starvation there is betrayal, slavery, and every sin of man conceivable. In the end, Aguirre is left mad with lust and grandiose delusion only to begrudgingly die an untimely death. This is the world of hostility, chaos, and murder that Herzog claims to be the common character of the universe. It is interesting to note that Timothy “finds himself/ his purpose” in nature where as in Aguirre the Wrath of God, man loses himself in nature. I don't claim to know the nature of the universe, but I think in a film like Grizzly Man ,where Herzog and Timothy come together, there is a bittersweet dissonance that seems so right to me. Like a zen type of thing ya know...

The Maintenance of Sanity

I don't think that Timothy is insane, by any means whatsoever. I think that people find it easy to label and judge him as crazy because his passion is unorthodox and largely unrelatable. However, Picasso was very passionate about art, and no one thought of it in a negative or condescending fashion.
I think that Timothy definitely had a drive in his life that was selfless. I don't know whether it was necessarily "moral" or "immoral" but I also think that its all irrelevant predicament. Timothy was doing what he was doing for his personal joy as well as for the betterment of the conditions of the animals. Timothy stated, "Thank you so much for these animals, for giving me a life – I had no life. Now I have a life." I think this reflects on the fact that he was living for a purpose larger than himself. Thus, I think that his decision was moral on an individual level.
This idea of a purposeful life is also supported by the fact that he never shot his girlfriend on film. By trying not to present his personal life as truly connected with his goal of helping animals, it is obvious that his intent was to try and continue to portray an individual, pure approach to his life in nature. If his intent is to keep his message powerful, then he must sincerely care about his work.
This does not sound like the work of a crazy or immoral man to me.

People are Crazier than Bears

Grizzly Man… I am not sure how to even express my thoughts on this. This was the second time I saw the movie, and not only did I not notice any deeper meaning to the film (besides what I had at first glance), I was just increasingly irritated. In my opinion the movie itself has a fantastic premise, and I love how it is a topic that not many have explored. Unfortunately, the main character/narrator of Timothy… Is nothing more than that. To me, his portrayal in the movie is just downright strange, to the point where it takes away from some of the wonder that could have been provoked in the film. His irrational actions, senseless commentary, and overall demeanor just ruin the film for me. I agree that the point of the film is not to be a nature film and not meant to express the wonders of the Grizzlies, but the story of Timothy is just a sad tale.
On that note, reading the quote of whether Timothy got what he deserved… I definitely say he did. There comes a point where a director cannot expect to provoke sympathy by focusing on the failings of the film’s character. When dealing with something as dangerous as Grizzly bears, which is pointed out in the film no less, you have to wonder how Timothy did not get killed earlier. While Timothy did end up “succeeding” in his quest to “be a bear”, he did so (hopefully) realizing that the cost would be his life.
Though, I can’t make this wholly negative. The main aspect of the movie I enjoyed, for the second time as well, was how the film is a great example of good usage of raw films. Ignoring the presence of Timothy, I was able to thoroughly enjoy the raw, seemingly uncut footage of the Grizzlies in their natural habitat. Though understandably not the focus of the film, I just was unable to connect with Timothy and his plight at all, so this served as a useful subplot for myself.

Living With Godless Killing Machines!!!

I feel that Timothy is uncomfortable with his normality--in a way that comes from a dissonance between the self and the ability of the self to either manage, tolerate, or succeed an environment. I believe Timothy possess the will to achieve greatness but for various reasons has never reached it. Timothy's angst against human society is derived from his expectations with himself versus what humanity can offer him. Such an example is when Timothy almost got an acting job for cheers. This is why Timothy ended up befriending the waitress who had also fallen short of her own expectations when attempting to create the extraordinary. I believe the key difference between humanity and nature is the inherent indifference that exists in nature. Timothy is attracted to this indifference as if he is not judged, than who is to force him into metacognition? Who is there to provide tangible evidence that he, for a given facet of talent, is not #1? To Timothy, this indifference much outweighs the positives of humanity such as a stimulating conversation or relationship with another human. Timothy is attracted to nature because it does not see his failures or successes and because of this, Timothy's will to succeed allows him to learn to live with bears. By living with Bears, Timothy's self is satisfied along with, ironically, his interaction with others as he is proving that he can, in fact, be "the best" which would explain why he is so vindictive towards those who tell him he is crazy. These animals have given him the life that makes him extraordinary, something that I believe has needed all his life.

grizzly

The question of Timothy Treadwell's sanity is something I find very interesting and I spend a lot of the time viewing the movie thinking about it. I think the movie greatly manipulated the footage to make him seems crazy. Although, there may be some truth behind it all. After all he spent more than a decade just living with Bears in Alaska with almost no real other human contact for months at a time. I think that prolonged absence from the rest of humanity must have had some effect on him. That is probably why he grew to love the bears so much and felt so strongly about becoming a bear or least close to the bears. Or maybe he wanted to be a bear his whole life, who knows. This is something I would find very interesting to have studied in the beginning, before he set out with the bears as well as when he was out with them. I think Timothy deserved a better director. I think a lot of the footage was apart of his personal diary. Since Timothy was on his own out in the wilderness he was free to express his thoughts such as when he openly spoke about relationships and insecurities he had. I think it was wrong to show all of that in a way. He had no one to talk to but that camera and the footage of his thoughts seems to me to be a bit exploited.

Herzog's film that "Bears" all

I find it funny that both Ebert and Dargis see to compare Treadwll to Kinski's character of Fitzcarraldo from another of Herzog's films appropriately titled Fitzcarraldo. It just so happens that through the duration of the film I was thinking the very same thing myself. Having not previously been exposed to Herzog's non-fiction work I found it profound that a lot of similar themes run through not only his fiction but his non-fiction features.
Herzog is notorious for doing character studies that follow characters who search for an impossible end without always rationally considering the means. Treadwill is not exception but I think presenting him as insane in the film is very biased. Time and time again we hear Treadwell remark on how dangerous his expedition is, and how he will die for his goals, but at the end it seems as if we don't get a good sense of what Treadwill sees in the bears. Treadwill was making a film about the bears but most of their footage has been cut out entirely.
Having watch the Grizzly Man diaries, a TV show on animal planet based around the same set of footage, I can tell you that Treadwell spent time running with bears, wrestling with the bears; he had reason to call them his friends. In the film he is portrayed in crazy, but I think in reality he is far from it.

Grizzly Man: Things to consider

•  Did Timothy ‘get what he deserved’, as the helicopter pilot who helped retrieve his bones a few days after he died said?

•  Was Timothy committing a moral wrong by trying to ‘be a bear’ (as seems to be suggested by the curator of the museum, Sven Haakanson)?

•  Manohla Dargis, in her NYTimes review: Grizzly Man ‘makes you want to grab its maker [i.e., Werner Herzog] and head off to the nearest bar to discuss man’s domination of nature and how Disney's cute critters reflect our profound alienation from the natural order.’

•  Dargis: Timothy ‘traveled a familiar American path shaped by boundless optimism and an almost religious belief in the self’.  Is Timothy’s story quintessentially ‘American’?

•  Dargis: ‘For some, Treadwell’s death confirmed that animal activists and environmentalists are dangerous wackos’.  Can you see how Timothy’s behavior and death might encourage this picture of ‘animal activists and environmentalists’?  If so, is there something problematic about the making of this film (which, for a documentary, has been very popular)?

•  Timothy: ‘Thank you so much for these animals, for giving me a life – I had no life.  Now I have a life.’  In what sense did the animals ‘give’ Timothy ‘a life’?

•  Herzog, the director: ‘I believe the common character of the universe is not harmony, but hostility, chaos, and murder.’  Does Herzog’s attitude surprise you, coming from the director of (what many might consider) a ‘nature’ film, or at least one about an iconic ‘nature’ figure like Timothy?  Is Herzog right about nature/ the universe?

•  Roger Ebert, in his review: ‘The documentary is an uncommon meeting between Treadwell’s loony idealism, and Herzog’s bleak worldview.’  Does Timothy ‘deserve’ Herzog as a director, as Ebert says (and what might this mean)?

•  What do you think about the fact that Amy – Timothy’s girlfriend, who died with him – rarely appeared at all in his films?