It’s been the traditional perspective that the younger you are the less you know about love. It is age where comes the capability of understanding love and ability to love. Frankly, this outlook seems very unfair and flawed. Why is it that when you think of love, you are more likely to think of a young couple madly in love with each other than an old couple in a feverish love? Why is it that in the movies, you always see these vibrant, young people falling head over heels for each other? If love comes with age, why are there not more displays of older people in “love”? What is it about younger people that render them so drained of such a feeling? I believe it is time to change this perspective and how it underestimates and undermines the younger ones of us.
Though said in many different forms, the idea is that love is proportional to age. The understanding of love and ability to love increases as one gets older. This idea stems from youth equals immaturity. The young mind is inexperienced and naïve, thus supposedly is far too primitive to conceive such complicated matters. Love is seen as an adult subject. To make love is adult. It is only adults who get married. Adults are “matured” and older. But what classifies as an adult? Merely someone who is not of the child or teenage years anymore? However, history and differing cultures seem to weave a different boundary. In the past and in certain cultures, it is in the teenage years where the line of adulthood is drawn. Particularly the past, people lived far less, and who was considered an “adult” would be much younger than a modern “adult”. It has been the extension of the human lifespan that has pushed the maturity mark. But then this question arises: If humans live even longer, would the cut-off for adulthood also be pushed back? When people lived to about 40 or 50, adulthood would mark at the beginning of the teenage years or so. Now that people can live up to 80, near 100, adult begins early 20s. So what if people lived to 130? 140? 150? Would adulthood be pushed to the 30s or 40s? Would the understanding of love and ability to love be pushed back as well, if the age of supposed adulthood be pushed back? After all, love is proportional to age, and being that the human would be living long, therefore being older, they would then know more of the workings of love. What would seem older now would be younger then; and because of this, they would be in the position of youth today. They too would have to be seen as lacking in the field of love, as do us in the younger ages.
Now let’s put the older person in the spotlight. The older person, mid twenties and older, is seen as more able because they are more experienced and matured in both body and mind. But is this so? Being so adapted in the matters of love, surely there should be no older person without a significant other. As love savvy as they are, there would not be any bickering, arguing, or divorce. There would not be a need to continuously date or a need to remarry. For if love is proportional with age, would it not mean these things, or remotely close to them? However, there are single people, some dying alone; there are couples who fight and argue; and there are people who divorce and remarry. Undoubtedly, it is possibly for there to exist an older person that is just as unknowing about love just a younger person. This contradicts the idea that love is proportional to age, in that even when aged, a person can still not understand love or be able to love; adults that exist in the undeveloped section of lovers.
Are those of the lesser ages really lesser when it comes to love? Do they really lack the understanding and ability to love? When it comes to love, are younger people that incapable compared to older people? If they are that would mean younger people would not be able to form meaningful relationships, or relationships that lasted very long. They would not display any love-like mannerisms, or be able to exactly feel love. They would not want to seek another for anything more than friendship or more than a sexual bond. Being that love is proportional to age, would it not mean all of this is true? However, there are young people who indeed form meaningful relationship that can last into adulthood; there exist young love absent of sexual content; and do feel and express what appears to be love. There exist young people who seem to display maturity towards love just as an older person. The idea that love is proportional to age seems to not being holding too well; both sides of this debate exhibit behaviors as their opposite.
The adult is overestimated and the non-adult is underestimated. If you remove all the other factors that come with age, love is all the same whether you are young or old. There is no inability to love and understanding of love. Love exists at all levels and different degrees, and none of them undermines one another. Love is a complex and abstract concept, and age does not entitle such mastery in this area. Yes, those younger may be still changing and developing, but those who are older do not escape change and develop. As humans, we are in constant motion, and though there are indeed areas in which age plays a major role, love should not be a slave to it.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Friday, February 9, 2007
The Lion King: A Question of Incest
I wonder sometimes if people take the time to sit and ponder the depths of a movie in a realistic sense. It can be quite surprising what one may discover. Some things may not be as obvious under first impression, despite there being a full knowledge of what is happening. Unfortunately, it is that type of thinking that can destroy a movie, or just annoy everyone else.
What comes to my interest is Disney’s The Lion King. The Lion King is, well, about lions (pretty obvious, eh?). Nearly everyone knows the story of The Lion King, about Simba and his growth and rise to become the king of the pride lands in Africa. More specifically what I find interesting focuses on Simba and his relations. Since the focus of this movie is about lions, particularly Simba, I have compared and applied real lion mannerisms on these fictitious lions.
Lions are members of the cat family, and are the only cats that live in social groups. Members of the cat family tend to live in solitude, but this can be changed under the right circumstances. These groups of lions, called a pride, basically are made up of one male lion while the rest are female lions, also called lionesses. You can say that these prides are family groups, since females tend to be related to each other, though newly matured females may set off and join other prides. Usually there is only one male, but there might be two dominate males or so, like brothers, that look over the pride. Male cubs that mature are kicked out of the pride, or sometimes fight for the position of dominate male. When there is fighting for dominance, the loser has the leave, and the winning continues or assumes the role of the dominant male. In a pride, the male will mate with all the lionesses within the pride. When a new male takes over, he kills all the cubs fathered by the previous male. This not only exterminates cubs that are not his, but also brings the females into estrus (heat) sooner. Kind of morbid isn’t it? Well this is typically what lions do.
Now, knowing this, let’s look at Simba and his situation. Simba inherits his pride from his father, the previous dominant male, and becomes the dominant male himself, and the “Lion King”. His “queen” is Nala, a childhood friend, and also a member of the same pride. We know that the male lion mates with all the lionesses in their pride. Simba’s pride was actually indeed Mufasa’s pride. Mufasa probably had, or would have, mated with all the females of his pride. Nala and Simba do not have the same mother, but knowing that they lived in the same pride, they would have had the same father, this being Mufasa. Therefore, Nala and Simba actually are half brother and half sister, if not closer. This means Simba mated with his half sister Nala, and produced their daughter Kiara; who makes an appearance at the end of The Lion King, and seen again in The Lion King 2: Simba’s Pride. And it doesn’t stop there, go back to the idea that the male lion mates with ALL of the females. In a pride, females tend to be related to each other: sisters, aunts, nieces, etc. Simba had become the dominant male lion in this particular pride. Thus, Simba will mate with all the females within his pride, including his mother. And since his mother would be related to other females in the pride Simba will basically be mating with his relatives. It seems to me that the workings of this movie, internally and externally, involve quite a bit of incest. Simba did mate with his half sister and produced a cub, and in the future will mate with his mother and his relatives when they go into heat.
My revelation seems somewhat disturbing, but this would be true according to how lions actually are. The Lion King does have some underlying incest structure to it, and it looks comparable to royalty of the past. Members of royalty would marry within their families to maintain the genealogy. This movie being cartoon and animals, it is much more subtle then if it were played out by human characters. However, this is just a kid’s movie after all, and the creators may say otherwise to my findings. Nevertheless, one can choose what they wish to believe.
What comes to my interest is Disney’s The Lion King. The Lion King is, well, about lions (pretty obvious, eh?). Nearly everyone knows the story of The Lion King, about Simba and his growth and rise to become the king of the pride lands in Africa. More specifically what I find interesting focuses on Simba and his relations. Since the focus of this movie is about lions, particularly Simba, I have compared and applied real lion mannerisms on these fictitious lions.
Lions are members of the cat family, and are the only cats that live in social groups. Members of the cat family tend to live in solitude, but this can be changed under the right circumstances. These groups of lions, called a pride, basically are made up of one male lion while the rest are female lions, also called lionesses. You can say that these prides are family groups, since females tend to be related to each other, though newly matured females may set off and join other prides. Usually there is only one male, but there might be two dominate males or so, like brothers, that look over the pride. Male cubs that mature are kicked out of the pride, or sometimes fight for the position of dominate male. When there is fighting for dominance, the loser has the leave, and the winning continues or assumes the role of the dominant male. In a pride, the male will mate with all the lionesses within the pride. When a new male takes over, he kills all the cubs fathered by the previous male. This not only exterminates cubs that are not his, but also brings the females into estrus (heat) sooner. Kind of morbid isn’t it? Well this is typically what lions do.
Now, knowing this, let’s look at Simba and his situation. Simba inherits his pride from his father, the previous dominant male, and becomes the dominant male himself, and the “Lion King”. His “queen” is Nala, a childhood friend, and also a member of the same pride. We know that the male lion mates with all the lionesses in their pride. Simba’s pride was actually indeed Mufasa’s pride. Mufasa probably had, or would have, mated with all the females of his pride. Nala and Simba do not have the same mother, but knowing that they lived in the same pride, they would have had the same father, this being Mufasa. Therefore, Nala and Simba actually are half brother and half sister, if not closer. This means Simba mated with his half sister Nala, and produced their daughter Kiara; who makes an appearance at the end of The Lion King, and seen again in The Lion King 2: Simba’s Pride. And it doesn’t stop there, go back to the idea that the male lion mates with ALL of the females. In a pride, females tend to be related to each other: sisters, aunts, nieces, etc. Simba had become the dominant male lion in this particular pride. Thus, Simba will mate with all the females within his pride, including his mother. And since his mother would be related to other females in the pride Simba will basically be mating with his relatives. It seems to me that the workings of this movie, internally and externally, involve quite a bit of incest. Simba did mate with his half sister and produced a cub, and in the future will mate with his mother and his relatives when they go into heat.
My revelation seems somewhat disturbing, but this would be true according to how lions actually are. The Lion King does have some underlying incest structure to it, and it looks comparable to royalty of the past. Members of royalty would marry within their families to maintain the genealogy. This movie being cartoon and animals, it is much more subtle then if it were played out by human characters. However, this is just a kid’s movie after all, and the creators may say otherwise to my findings. Nevertheless, one can choose what they wish to believe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
