Source: Fox Searchlight |
The movie “The
Way, Way Back,” tells the coming of age story of a 14-year old boy, Duncan, who
takes a summer road trip with his mother, her boyfriend Trent (played by the
awesomely talented Steve Carell), and Trent’s daughter to his beach house in a
small seaside town in Massachusetts. On the drive to the house, Trent strikes
up a conversation with Duncan and proceeds to ask him what he thought he was on
a scale of 1-10. After some thought, Duncan responds that he is a 6. Trent
finds Duncan’s response pretty amusing, amusing because he is tickled by
Duncan’s audacity to think so highly of himself, and proceeds to tell Duncan
that he is not a 6 but rather a 3. Young Duncan does not refute Trent’s
pronouncement that he is a 3 and instead seethes with anger and resentment towards Trent. Trent of course is the stereotypical overbearing and pushy
boyfriend who is clearly irritated by Duncan but puts up with him to be with
his Mom whom he ends up cheating on and whose name you will find as the definition of the word douche bag in any clever urban dictionary.
Over the course
of the movie, Duncan develops healthy friendships with other adult males who
reaffirm him and build up his self-esteem that Trent was so bent on destroying.
The movie was very witty and well written, however, I could not stop thinking
about the opening scene in the car where Trent tries to define Duncan. That
scene resonated with me because placing tags on people seems to be the
highlight of our culture. It’s not uncommon for some men to label women as
dimes and give less worthy attributions to other women they believe do not meet
some standard of beauty. Likewise, it is commonplace for women to define other
women, a practice that is even more vitriolic than that engaged in by men. But
putting people in so called boxes because of their physical appearance was not
what caught my attention, but rather doing so because of what society feels
they can or cannot achieve. Trent did not think Duncan was a 3 because of his
appearance but on the grand scale in the world of cool, cooler and coolest,
Duncan wasn’t so hot in his opinion. Funny to think that Facebook started in
just the same way, with a young kid sizing up students in a database based on
their appearance.
Truth is, as a
group humans can be so vindictive. While we like the warm and fuzzy clichés
that celebrate acceptance and decry intolerance, at some point most of us have
participated in sizing up and putting people in a box based on our perceptions.
They weren’t cool enough, didn’t go to the right school, didn’t wear the right
clothes, were not as bright as we would like and the list goes on. What’s ugly about
our labels is along that trajectory we turn inward and start to tear ourselves
down based not only on what society tells us we are but what our perceived
inadequacies inform us about ourselves. Having healthy self-esteem though can
sometimes be tricky because it could straddle the fence between a healthy
opinion of oneself and pure hubris. So how do we tell the difference? If a
person walks into a room and thinks that they are “it,” are they being prideful
or do they just think highly of themselves? I’ve often surmised that as long as
a person does not think comparatively in terms of “I am the most intelligent in
the room and everyone else is ignorant,” there might be room for redemption. It
might be healthy to think that one is the most intelligent in the room, but to be aware that there are others more
intelligent and to be open to learning from said more intelligent people in the
room. If said person thinks they have attained and cannot be students and see
others as inferior then that might be considered prideful or no? So how do we
define ourselves in a way that is healthy, without bordering on being prideful
and refuting labels that others might attempt to put on us?
No comments:
Post a Comment