Clarifying Misconceptions about Leisure and Watching Movies Part 3

A recapitulation of the conditions of leisure:

Leisure is an end and worth doing for its own sake.
The pleasure of leisure comes with the performance of the act and not after.
Leisure rewards intrinsically, i.e. it causes self-improvement in the agent.

How does watching a movie satisfy these conditions?

Watching is leisurely because it is worth doing for its own sake. I think it is easy to understand a person who watches a movie because he simply enjoys watching. There is no question here that this person is engaged in leisure when he is in the cinematheque. But is there something in a movie that makes it properly an object of leisure? If a movie is an art work, then it is a proper object of leisure. Like all artworks, a movie is not a useful thing. Its very reason for being is to be beautiful; to be contemplated and enjoyed for its own sake on account of the excellence that inheres in it. It is "useless." It does not generate an extrinsic reward. Very few individuals--professional critics-- are paid to watch a movie, and even then, the pay is not really meant to compensate the very act of watching. It is meant more to reward the work that will come after watching--the writing of a review. In fact, the general public actually spends money to stay in a darkened room to be mesmerized by moving pictures. What do they get after the movie? Nothing tangible, actually. They get the pleasure while watching. The operative word here is "while." It is absurd to say that you were entertained and enjoyed a movie only after watching it, in the same manner that it is ridiculous to claim that you enjoyed a song only after after listening to it. The pleasure we all experience comes as we watch. This is the reason why watching a movie is liberal. Nothing comes after it. It does not acquire for us a better good. It is a terminal activity.

What then do we make of the people who claim to go to a movie to relax? If relaxation is a way for us to recharge our tired bodies and minds, then watching a movie is actually counter-productive. To recharge ourselves means not to engage in any activity that requires exertion. If this is the case, then we are better off sleeping than going to a movie (although there are people who actually sleep during a movie. Right Alexis?!). Watching a movie is actually not relaxing if you think about it. To understand what you are watching, you need to think. You need to attentively observe what's happening on the screen, recall previous scenes, re-arrange the plot to grasp the story, relate elements and more when you watch. Moreover, movies can exhaust you emotionally. Consider watching horror films. Can anyone sincerely and truly claim that watching a horror movie relaxes? I don't think any person is relaxed while terrified! Action scenes also excite us to the point of exhaustion. Watch "Black Hawk Down" to see my point. A further point is that there are movies that are physically unbearably long. Movies that exceed two hours has a tendency to strain the lower back and at some point some people begin to lose the feeling in their buttocks. (I haven't seen any of them but I'm curious to know how people physically felt watching Lav Diaz's "marathonian" movies without subjecting myself to 11 straight hours of sitting.)

Perhaps what we need to do is to clarify what we mean by relaxing in a movie. And for this I am going to need the input of people.

I've already mentioned that watching a movie entails thinking. When we do begin to actively engage a movie by subjecting it to our mental process, then we are actually exercising and developing something uniquely human--our ability to think. Doing so also adds to the skills we have because we learn to apply and adapt our thinking skills to watching a movie. And the thinking skill required in watching a movie is different form the skills required in reading a novel, looking at a painting, listening to music, etc. Also, attentive and active watching allows us to understand and experience the beauty uniquely present in a movie. Watching many kinds of movies soaks us in different manifestations of beauty as can only be done in cinema. In the end, we exit the cinematheque better persons because we exercised exclusively human faculties, enhanced old skills and developed new ones and gained experiences that are now indelibly a part of our being. These benefits are permanent and lasting. They can never be taken away from us and can only be added on to and further enhanced.

Done properly, watching a movie can only make us better. This is why watching a movie is a proper exercise of leisure. So please, see a movie and don't relax!

Addendum:

To determine which of your activities is leisure and which ones are useful make two columns and label one as Things I NEED to Do and the other as Things I WANT to Do. The "needs" are useful and the "wants" are leisure. But you also ought to examine whether the activity is, indeed, a need or a want. It is an need if you're doing it for a reason other than itself and a want if the reason is you simply enjoy doing the act and that you grow from doing it.

There are other questions of course, such as "Is it possible to to enjoy a necessary act?" or "Is it possible for an inherently leisurely act to be treated as a useful act?" We can explore these questions later on if interest arises, but for now . . . adieu!

Clarifying Misconceptions about Leisure and Watching Movies Part 2

Part 1 ends with an assertion that leisure is not necessarily relaxing and therefore not useful. This part will elaborate on why this is so.

To begin, allow me to distinguish between practical necessity or usefulness and liberality. Something is useful when it allows the user to attain something apart form the object being used. For example, a pencil is useful because it allows the user to make markings on paper. A pencil is simply a means to write or draw. A useful thing is simply a means to an end. It is a way by which we get something more valuable. By contrast, a liberal or noble thing is not a means but an end. It is intrinsically valuable, meaning that it is not utilized to gain something of greater value. As such, it is enjoyed for its inherent worth.

Utility and liberality also apply to the activities that we do. We do useful things like going to work. Work is a means for us to get compensated. The money we receive we use to buy food, which we, in turn, eat in order for us to live biologically. Notice that the useful activities that we engage in all lead to something else. Each one leads to what Adler describes as an extrinsic reward. The benefit comes as a result of doing something. At the very end of this chain of usefulness are activities that do not lead to something else. These activities reward intrinsically as the benefits come with doing them and not after. These terminal activities, done for their own sakes, are noble, liberal or free because they are not tied to practical necessity. They are done simply for the enjoyment they bring. And a person is happy when engaging in them. These intrinsically enjoyable activities fall under what is called leisure.

Contrary to current assumptions, rest and relaxation is not a form of leisure. R&r, amusement to Aristotle, is useful and not liberal. It works like medicine, Aristotle says, and should be treated as such. Medicine ought not to be taken for its own sake. It is only consumed when necessary, i.e. to cure a malady. Relaxation is medication for the ailment called fatigue caused by work. People relax to re-charge in order to work again. They work so that in the end they can enjoy leisure. The problem is that many people in this pragmatic world lose sight of this end and wind up idolizing r&r or play. The "work hard, play hard" mentality is a result of this error. It is dangerous because it begins a vicious cycle of rest and work that eventually degenerates into boredom and absurdity. It also turns into an addiction for an impermanent high which escalates into a quest for more temporary, escapist pleasures that ultimately lead to burn-out. It is a downward spiral with no self-improvement occurring in the individual.

By contrast, leisure is not an elixir that cures fatigue. On the contrary, it may even cause fatigue. Think, for example, of a book lover reading War and Peace. Reading this very thick book is mentally exhausting and is strenuous to the eyes. But this does not stop the reader form reading. After resting he proceeds to read again. Why does he do this? It is certainly not relaxing and not everybody gets paid for reading a novel. He does this not for any extrinsic reward but for the sheer joy of reading.

Leisure is not compulsory like r&r. Leisure is freely engaged in. A person chooses to do a leisurely activity and makes time for it. Also, a man at leisure enjoys himself while at leisure and not after. A man listening to his favorite song enjoys while listening and not after the last note dissolves into oblivion.

Lastly and perhaps most importantly, leisure improves the person engaging in it. Reading sharpens reading skills and adds to the knowledge of the person. It develops the human faculties, enlarges the mind and is much prized for it improves the soul. Leisure's reward is intrinsic and secure in the person engaging in it.

How do these things apply to the activity of watching movies? The answer will come in part 3.

Clarifying Misconceptions about Leisure and Watching Movies

In the beginning of every semester, I ask my students why they watch movies. Many answers are thrown into the air but three things consistently emerge: entertainment, learning and relaxation. After careful prodding the students classify these three things under the general category of leisure. At first instance, it appears to make sense. Leisure, the students argue is their free time. And in this free time, they choose to watch movies to achieve the above three, things that they cannot afford to do while in school. And then I hurl Aristotle at them aided by his 20th century ally, Mortimer Adler.

After reading treatises form the two with a considerable amount of difficulty, the students are confronted with a dilemma. The two thinkers, one ancient the other contemporary, both dead, basically shattered student understanding of leisure and what it consists in. To the students, leisure is something that is supposed to relax the weary body and mind, tired from a long days toil. To Aristoltle, Adler and, allow me to now add, Vito Cruz, leisure does not necessarily attain relaxation, in fact it can even be as arduous and taxing as the occupation the students wish to escape from. Leisure is not meant to relax, say the three! Thus begins the long, difficult, but ultimately rewarding discussion of what leisure is and here I propose to elaborate on the ideas that I and my students contend with.

Leisure, the Philosopher says, is "the first principle of all action" and "the end of occupation." It is "accompanied by pleasure and happiness and enjoyment of life." The students agree with this. The reason being that they experience these things when engaging in their free time. I do not doubt that they do, but further inquiry reveals a misunderstanding of some of these ideas. First of all, most do not understand "first principle of all action" and "the end of occupation." And for this we turn to Adler who explains that leisure is the reason why people do things. It is the principle that move people to act. In relation to work, leisure is the goal a worker aims for. Leisure is the starting point and the terminus of occupation. Because it is and end, leisure is not necessary or useful. This basically rules out relaxation as a necessary condition for leisure. This conclusion proves perplexing to the students as shown in their stunned and puzzled faces. How can this be, when Aristotle himself equates leisure with amusement, which brings the relaxation?

Aristotle does bring amusement into the picture. The problem with the objection is that it is based on a erroneous understanding of a passage form the Politics. The students failed to understand that Aristotle was actually ruling out amusement as an activity done in leisure. The lines in question seek to clarify what people ought to do when at leisure. It then proceeds to explain that it should not consist in amusement. Otherwise amusement will be the end of life, which is absurd. "Why is this absurd?" asks one brave fellow. Because amusement and the relaxation it brings is necessary and leisure is not necessary, I answer.

The reply points back to the other assertion that stung the students: leisure is not necessary. The discussion naturally turns to a discussion of usefulness or practical necessity against nobleness or liberality. A discussion which will continue in a subsequent entry in the near future followed by an attempt to defend watching movies as properly belonging to leisurely activities.

Stay tuned!

Why on earth am I doing this?

My friend and colleague Alexis Tioseco of Criticine fame advised me to begin writing a blog to finally communicate my ramblings about cinema to the rest of the world. Why am I taking his advise? Well for one, writing this blog allows me to get a load of my mind. And hopefully my musing contained herein will become substantial enough to metamorphose into articles or papers that I can publish for renown and, hopefully, monetary gain. Secondly, I'm at my wits end in mining sites and hardcover databases of funding institutions in the hopes of finding a generous soul or souls who may be willing to shell out money to cover the expenses for the higher studies I wish to begin this September in England. I have a school to go to but no money to spend. Fingers crossed, I hope this blog's contents can launch me into the academic spotlight of film studies and get a myriad of full coverage scholarship offers! Lastly and more liberally, I simply want to spend some of my leisure time thinking and writing about the art form I enjoy most. Doing so improves and pleases me.

I am not a film scholar. I would like to be one, which explains the quest for the aforementioned scholarship. I just like watching and talking about movies and teaching my students how to do the same in a University whose trust in my still unpolished abilities I profoundly appreciate. I also write reviews for a website set-up by one of my former students and her friends whose noble aim is to help the general public process the movies they watch from aesthetic and moral standpoints. The site's address is www.cinesuri.com. I will place a link in this blog as soon as I figure out how.

I do sincerely hope that the contents of this blog will be enjoyable and helpful to those who will spend the time and energy reading it.