Mad Max: Fury Road

I was writing a PhD-proposal, and it turned out to be an interesting piece on Mad Max: Fury Road and aesthetics. 

A day before the 2016 Academy Awards, writer Brian Phillips took to Twitter to discuss Best Picture nominee Mad Max: Fury Road (Miller, 2015). Phillips argued that in the film there is a 'weird tension between its critique of, and its reveling in, patriarchal violence. Its moral theme is basically a sustained attack on its visceral entertainment value'. I think Phillips here gets at the heart of what makes Mad Max: Fury Road so interesting. Throughout the film director George Miller complicates his audience' enjoyment of it. His aesthetic choices, to a very large extent, reflect the ideology of the film's antagonists.

The apocalyptic society in Fury Road, with its uninhibited violence, its aggressive displays of masculinity, and its objectification of women, is clearly presented as an extension/result of the norms and values of the film's villains. Moreover it is profitable to them, while hurtful to the heroes, who are looking for peace and quiet. The film itself hardly allows for peace and quiet. There is a minimum amount of dialogue, and except for one scene in the middle, the film basically amounts to one long chase sequence through an apocalyptic wasteland.  The action is ramped up from the beginning, and Miller never lets go. He presents pumped up monster cars, flamethrower guitarists, gruesome deaths, scantily clad women, madmen crying for war, and brilliantly staged extended battle scenes full of bloodshed. The action is further intensified by the relentlessly loud, bombastic soundtrack.

In other words, the patriarchal society criticized in Fury Road manifests itself in the style of the film, forcing the audience to directly engage with it.  Instead of merely showing the audience the problematic aspects and dangers of patriarchal societies, Miller lets the audience, to some extent, experience them. While watching the film the viewers realize that their enjoyment of it is tied to the fact that the film revels in the patriarchal values of its apocalyptic society. This could contribute to personal self-reflection. Viewers could reflect on how the society they live in has shaped them to enjoy the patriarchal aesthetic of Fury Road. They could ask themselves to what extent their society is patriarchal, and whether they have to share some of its values to enjoy the film. They could also reflect on how attractive many patriarchal values are on the surface, and how easily they can be accepted.

Style is not merely about how something is communicated, but also about what is being communicated. As communication professor Barry Brummett puts it 'When we put on jeans, we are not just clothing our nakedness, we are speaking a language formed in cloth. Style is a complex system of actions, objects and behaviors that is used to form messages that announce who we are, who we want to be, and who we want to be considered akin to. It is therefore also a system of communication with rhetorical influence on others. And, as such, style is a means by which power and advantage are negotiated, distributed and struggled over in society" (Brummett 11). By wearing certain jeans we make a statement about ourselves. It may not be a conscious statement, or a relevant statement worth exploring, but it does mean that there are certain aspects of these jeans that we like. Our jeans communicate something to the world about who we are.

A similar argument can be made about our consumption of (popular) culture. In an analysis of television show The Tudors, media scholar Kevin Williams discusses the casting of Jonathan Rhys Meyers in the leading role. That casting is consistent with the slick, cool, and sexy, style of the show. Through this style The Tudors connotes to its audience that Henry VIII was something like the historic equivalent of a modern rock star. Yet this is not the only way to tell this story. The producers of The Tudors could have easily chosen a more restrained, 'serious' aesthetic in which case they could have cast 'some fat 250 pounds red-haired guy with a beard" (Williams 139). Then the show's connotation could have been that, despite his many wives, Henry VII was a serious, devoted king. That show would also have attracted a different audience. Some people certainly watch the The Tudors primarily because they are interested in learning something about the Tudor dynasty. Yet there are many other cultural objects they can consume in order to do this. They choose to watch this show specifically, because of the style it is presented in. They watch it because they like slick representations of Henry VIII and the historical period in which he lives, and because they like seeing Jonathan Rhys Meyers in the role of the notorious king. They share these 'values' with the rest of The Tudors' audience.

It is important to note that the audience of The Tudors would not exist without the show. Their shared values are created by the show. In other words, style is not merely used to communicate meaning, but also to create it. This is explained very well by the British sociologist Simon Frith who attributes the success of folk music in the 1960's the musicians' ability to create a fictitious, imagined, folk community. According to Firth, these communities were not formed because a group of people with the same values decided to make music. Rather, these values were created through the music. As he puts it: "My point is not that a social group has beliefs which it then articulates in its music, but that music, an aesthetic practice, articulates in itself an understanding of both group relations and individuality, on the basis of which ethical codes and social ideologies are understood. What I want to suggest, in other words, is not that social groups agree on values which are then expressed in their cultural activities, but that they only get to know themselves as groups through cultural activity, through aesthetic judgement"(Frith 1996). Furthermore Firth states 'it is the aesthetic rather than organizational/contextual aspects of performance that betray a continuity between the social, the group, and the individual. It is in deciding - playing and hearing what sounds right that we both express ourselves, our own sense of rightness, and suborn ourselves, lose ourselves, in an act of participation" (Firth 1996).

These ideas can be connected to Marshall McLuhan's famous notion that 'the medium is the message'. McLuhan argued that a medium affects society not through its content, but through its characteristics (McLuhan 108). For McLuhan, it does not matter much what is being broadcast on television. What matters is that the introduction of television affected people's behavior. For example, it allowed families to gather together around a television set, thereby creating a new social environment. These changes in behavior are the true message of television. McLuhan himself offers the light bulb as an explanation of his ideas. The light bulb itself has no content, yet it is a medium with a social effect. In the nighttime it enables people to lit spaces that would otherwise remain dark. In doing so 'a light bulb creates an environment by its mere presence' (McLuhan 112).

Now, let us return to Mad Max: Fury Road. Director George Miller could have addressed his concerns about patriarchal societies through a straightforward dramatic film that criticizes the patriarchy, perhaps even in a more coherent way than Fury Road does. The plot of that film could show the audience exactly why the heroes had to overcome the patriarchal values, how they did it, and what these values exactly are. In the process it could offer its audience plenty of room for thought. I would argue that approach would be less effective than Miller's approach in Fury Road. The message of Miller's hypothetical film would be that people like watching dramatic films that criticize the patriarchy, and make them think about it. The message of Fury Road is that people like watching a patriarchal aesthetic. As Firth would put it, Fury Road 'allows' the viewers to express themselves as people who like the patriarchal aesthetic. Miller's hypothetical film allows the viewers to think about how patriarchal values may be part of their lives. Fury Road allows the viewers to directly experience how patriarchal values may be part of their lives. In doing so Fury Road gives its audience more reason for (self-)reflection