"Syndrome" Syndrome: or the Fallacy of "Special"

[Raven Crowking]

I'm not sure this is a tenable position. Surely the writers don't place the movie's message in the mouth of the movie's villain, or of a character who is merely a petulant child at the time the line is delivered.

However, the context of the line is almost universal in the movie, from the little old lady in the insurance office who isn't supposed to be treated as a unique individual to the woman who makes capeless costumes for superheroes and has nothing to do until Bob shows up to the trike kid just waiting for something amazing to happen.

Because the words are stated by only certain characters doesn't mean that they are not contextually demonstrated by almost every character in the film.

How so? The idea (that if everyone is special, then no one is) is left untested by the end of the movie.

Not so. The idea (that if everyone is special, then no one is) within the context of the film is the idea of artificially levelling the playing field (whether by supressing super powers or by artificially reproducing them). That idea is tested when the supers are not allowed to be super any more, and it is shown to be a critical fail by the end of the film.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Honestly, I don't think the idea of "political correctness" is even a significant factor in this movie.

the incredibles political correctness - Google Search

Or maybe he just watched the "making of" interviews on the DVD. I seem to recall it being discussed, although I may be wrong.


RC

 

[Umbran]

In short, if I'm remembering correctly and using the OP's metaphor right, everyone's focused on the CoDzillas of the film because all of the characters are CoDzillas.

I don't think that's a good analogy at all. CoDzillas are noted for their individual ability to handle virtually any situation. A CoDzilla doesn't really need the rest of the party - but a major part of the film is that the Parrs need each other, both in super-action and emotionally.

There's no Mary Jane, no crowd of ordinaries pitching in to help Spiderman in his final fight in the first film...

This is true, but I am not sure it is meaningful.

For our purposes, the only thing that makes someone worthy of our attention in The Incredibles is if they're powerful. Whatever the dialogue says, the underlying structure of the film could be seen to undermine its stated messages.

One must be careful in analysis, not to make a failure to state a given point equivalent to an active statement of the opposite. The show is of finite length, and they must choose a finite number of things to actively say. That does not mean they are making an infinite number of negative statements by omission.

First and foremost, the film is about Bob Parr's family, and their internal relationships. What makes someone relevant to the story at hand is interaction with and impact upon that family - this should not be construed as a statement of "worth", merely of focus.

 

[roguerouge]

One must be careful in analysis, not to make a failure to state a given point equivalent to an active statement of the opposite. The show is of finite length, and they must choose a finite number of things to actively say. That does not mean they are making an infinite number of negative statements by omission.

First and foremost, the film is about Bob Parr's family, and their internal relationships. What makes someone relevant to the story at hand is interaction with and impact upon that family - this should not be construed as a statement of "worth", merely of focus.

Ordinarily, I'd agree with you, but not in this case. Clearly the concepts of "special" and "normal" are central to the film, which makes the omission of any role for normals a deliberate choice or a revealing error. And there are a lot of normals in the film for The Incredibles to test the characters at work and school. They're not really an omission at all. The creators didn't see them as being relevant or important, which says something about their values.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Exceptions: The babysitter, Bob's tyrannical boss, the Government Agent, Frozone's wife, the guy trying to commit suicide that sues Bob, the normal boy Violet likes, the normal woman who makes costumes that save their skins, the normal woman who saves Bob (& family) from Syndrome on the island.

 

[Umbran]

The creators didn't see them as being relevant or important, which says something about their values.

We may have to agree to disagree, then. I am extremely hesitant to make a claim on someone else's values based on what they failed to say, as opposed to what they did say.

In fiction, there is a very big difference between "focus" and "value". There's any number of important things in the world, but we can only talk about so many of them at a time.

And, by RC's note - there are a number of "normals" in the movie who all do their bit to help the Parrs - specifically Edna Mode (the fashion designer), the Government Agent, and Mirage (Syndrome's assistant). They don't take the same types of actions as the Parrs in physical combat, but there's a good argument the Parrs would have been hosed without them.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Indeed, it is Mirage who not only releases the Parrs, but gives them the means to reach the mainland in time to save the city. The teacher that Dash torments in the beginning of the film is necessary for his education. The cute boy Violet likes contributes to her happiness. The babysitter allows the rest of the family to follow Bob, without which Syndrome would have won. Edna Mode's costumes also contribute to the Incredible's success. Heck, even the kid on the tricycle urges Bob to do something incredible, which pushes him toward eventually confronting and defeating Syndrome.

The Incredibles are as dependent upon the normals as the normals are upon them.

It is also noteworthy that, when the Incredibles and Frozone are taking down Syndrome, the normal people are happy to see them. They, too, have learned that conformity has turned what was once a colourful existence into something that is instead drab and grey. They are happy to have the colours back again!

Note also the parallels between Bob's insurance boss and Syndrome.

Finally, note that at least one normal is given a "superhero" name in the movie: Mirage. Edna Mode (Mode = Fashion) is also a superheroish alternate identity name. Certainly, Violet is surprised to find the "normal" boy she thinks is special also regards her in the same way. In The Incredibles, specialness does not come from superpowers, but from (1) using your potential for the good of others, and (2) recognizing the potential of others. It is the attempt to squash the potential of others that drives every conflict in the film, and is ultimately shown to be wrong.



RC

 

[Marius Delphus]

However, the context of the line is almost universal in the movie, from the little old lady in the insurance office who isn't supposed to be treated as a unique individual to the woman who makes capeless costumes for superheroes and has nothing to do until Bob shows up to the trike kid just waiting for something amazing to happen.

Because the words are stated by only certain characters doesn't mean that they are not contextually demonstrated by almost every character in the film.

One more time: Syndrome's threat and Dash's lament aren't the message the film is trying to get across. Those statements, coming as they do from untrustworthy sources, should be read as the antithesis of the film's actual message: that when you're true to yourself, you become special. Never settle for mediocrity: aspire higher, serve the collective good (not yourself), and find self-fulfillment (paraphrased from a review).

In the film's first act, we're treated to a world where no one is special, and consequently no one is happy (read: self-fulfilled). Bob's act of kindness at the office, and his clandestine super-heroics, show his craving for a world where this isn't the case. The boy on the tricycle craves the same thing (and incidentally provides a "voice of the viewer" character -- when will the movie live up to its promise, he asks with a wink).

Not so. The idea (that if everyone is special, then no one is) within the context of the film is the idea of artificially levelling the playing field (whether by supressing super powers or by artificially reproducing them). That idea is tested when the supers are not allowed to be super any more, and it is shown to be a critical fail by the end of the film.

As I said, I take the film to be demonstrating instead that when no one is special, no one is. We're shown a world where the supers can't be super, where workers are just cogs in a corporate machine, and where (we're told) mediocrity is celebrated. This is not a world where everyone really is special. Even the superheroes have become coggy to the extent that they're easily duped by what appears to be the world's one extant supervillain. When the "special" people do their thing and are allowed to shine, that's when the situation presented in the movie improves.

 

[Raven Crowking]

One more time: Syndrome's threat and Dash's lament aren't the message the film is trying to get across.

I believe that the makers of the film have disagreed with you. I won't have time to rewatch the commentary tonight, but I am almost certain that they stated that the message of the film is exactly what Hobo said it was. If I have a chance to get to it this week, I'll be happy to quote them word for word as to the underlying message of the film.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

It could also be that we are talking past each other, because I fail to see where "that when you're true to yourself, you become special. Never settle for mediocrity: aspire higher, serve the collective good (not yourself), and find self-fulfillment (paraphrased from a review)" is the antithesis of the message Hobo claims.

In the opening act, it is Elastigirl who says that everyone is special. Is she an untrustworthy source? It is Dash who (correctly) understands this to mean no one is (a statement you seem to agree with). Is Dash therefore untrustworthy in his observation, or trustworthy? His actions -- his outlet for his frustrations -- are a result of having his abilities artificially levelled by society.

Syndrome, while the villian of the piece, is certainly demonstrably the most clever character in the film. We know from the film that most people who have power use it poorly (normal suing Bob for saving him, the bomb guy, Syndrome, Bob's insurance boss, the mugger, the criminals Bob and Frozone sneak out to stop, Dash in the beginning of the film), because having power =/= being deserving of power.

We are repeatedly shown people who want to drag the world down to their level. Syndrome offers them the power to do just that.



RC