Bring It On is one of the most occult films I’ve ever seen. It documents an initiation ritual (spirit stick passed on from a high level witch to an initiate). The whole thing is a test of Kirsten Dunst’s character. She loses the trophy in order to win and become initiated into the cult. Then, she can date the brother of the black-haired girl (Eliza Dushku’s character). Sister is guardian of brother’s sexuality in whatever cult they are documenting here (which is why there is such a weird vibe between the brother and sister throughout the movie). Much more weirdness here (“hold the door, Tor”) — a fake doorway to power. That’s what witchcraft is. Witches aren’t these uber-powerful black magicians — they are weak cowards who can only be powerful through finding naive and vulnerable people to manipulate. They get their power from controlling others. They used to wear the cloak of progressivism — and many still do. But now lots of them have taken on a new cloak — the cloak of conservatism (the “new hippies”).
Moving on from the movie: I was thinking about the question of whether being raised in abusive circumstances is ever in some way a “good” thing for a child. Obviously, the answer is no. But anytime I feel like an answer is obvious, I just know there is more to the story. One perspective is that people who are born in dysfunctional environments by abusive parents are more resilient because of what they endured as children. Others think this type of upbringing makes a child more vulnerable/weakens the person and hinders his or her natural development.
Could there be a bit of truth to both sides? One way: it depends on the individual child. Some are strengthened, and others are harmed irreparably. I’d say all (100%) are harmed because abuse (by definition) is harm. But the end result (whether the child is able to survive psychological intact and capable of becoming a functional adult) is probably a mixture of luck, genetics of the individual child, and many other factors. Then there is the question: what do you mean by strengthened or weakened? And wouldn’t this mostly (whether one’s ability to survive is increased or decreased) be a matter of when the child was born, and where, and all those other details?
To the question of whether there can be any possible good that comes out of evil — well, yeah, because we can always find ways to create opportunities for ourselves, to pull good from evil circumstances.
But it’s always bad for the natural development of a child. A tree that was meant to grow up to the skies, straight and tall, has now been skewed in a crooked direction. But whether that “crooked” direction of growth can be corrected and/or used for some greater good is a matter of the child’s individual genetics, will, and luck. Can the child grow and learn from the experience, develop perspective, independence of spirit, and love others, even though the child was intentionally molded/shaped in an environment in which these things were punished? Yes, the child can — but it’s more difficult, of course, because a great unlearning has to occur first.
There have been some very unexpected and unique — not advantages — but opportunities that have come out of a dysfunctional situation for me as a child. When I mentioned the genetic component in this question — how the individual child’s soul responds to the environment — I did not mean it in the sense that my soul was stronger than that of others. I think I was just lucky to be born in a time when a great many people were doing good work in revealing the nature of abuse at many different levels, and I had the curiosity and drive to learn about those things. I was also very lucky to have outside interactions with people besides my parents who were more functional, loving, and giving individuals, so I had opportunities to experience brief windows of normalcy.
I’m sure this is all related to witches and initiations rituals in some way. Yes — cults. My environment as a child was cult-like. There were rites, rituals, taboos, prescribed roles, there was an ideology, an “us vs. them” mentality, total inauthenticity, total fraudulence and deception, betrayal, and my parents worked together to try to kill their children’s souls. But I think that, since I am alive, my soul exists. I read a quote yesterday on William Wildblood’s blog: “You don’t have a soul. You are a soul.”
My mother made me destroy my journal when I was an adolescent. She claimed it was because she was afraid of what my dad would do if he found it and read what was inside. But I know now that was a lie. He didn’t care enough to read my journal. She just wanted to destroy anything that cast doubt on the cult’s goodness (and the contents of my journal certainly did that). This is an example of how “nice” people become the servants of evil. My mother is a “nice” person. That’s who I was given as a model of how to live and to exist. Someone who’d completely handed over her judgment, her mind, and her life to a psychopathic narcissist was my primary caretaker. She couldn’t take care of herself, much less anyone else. I know those terms are used wilynily now for any run-of-the-mill asshole, but I do not use those terms lightly. The things my father (and, by proxy, my mother) has done would make any healthy person’s skin crawl.
I used to think all of it was okay, or at least, I tolerated it because I thought I had to in order to love them. I have only recently realized I don’t owe them anything. They owe me something (an apology), but I am not going to wait around for that any longer. I’ve decided, instead, to live.
So, with my background semi-established, the real question I want to answer is this: why has narcissism become so popular? Is it the natural result of such a large world population? Was the rise of narcissism intentional, a project carried out by some nefarious group to destroy social cohesion, or was it accidental, the confluence of many forces that no one would have possibly been able to foresee? Is it the natural result of a civilization that trades in fantasy and whose highest aspiration is to have as little contact with reality as possible? Was it a way of preparing society for a grand-scale war? Was it a way of weakening the population so that the people would be less likely to rebel against the powerful?
I don’t know, but I’m writing to try to figure it out. Sorry this has almost nothing to do with the film Bring It On, but I don’t really feel like writing about a movie. All movies are fantasy, anyway. Though these representations of fantasy (all art) are useful because they illuminate reality.
Schizo Movie Reviews 