And the Prophet said, "And lo, the beast looked upon the face of beauty. And it stayed its hand from killing. And from that day, it was as one dead."

Watching the movie was an odd experience for me, to be perfectly honest. It was almost surreal; out of all of the characters, I identified most with Kong himself. Perhaps it is self-indulgent of me to anthromorphosise a giant ape and apply my own mores and desires upon him, but the feeling of existential déjà vu was unmistakable.

Kong represents the ideal male archetype: powerful, aggressive, massive, uncomplicated, loyal, soft-headed. It is for this reason that the original and Peter Jackson's 2005 remake was so successful as compared to the other million and one remakes; people identified, even subconsciously, with the primal themes of socio-sexual love and emasculation that Kong represented.  

Those who are even somewhat familiar with Charles Bukowski may notice a common theme between his works and King Kong, writing a "detailed depiction of a certain taboo male fantasy: the uninhibited bachelor, slobby, anti-social, and utterly free" (Michael Greenberg). I doubt that he was aware of it, but Bukowski wrote of the human Kong. Chaotic, virile, inspired, repressed, lonely, angry, inarticulate, emotionally stunted, irresponsible and passionate. To once again quote Greenberg: "an unending chronicle of farts, drunks, shits, fucks, brawls, and visits to the racetrack, punctuated by bouts of creativity for which he indifferently receives the world's adulation or reproach."

It is only when Kong meets the woman that all this changes. The woman herself is also an archetype: she operates as a civilising and pacifying yin to the active male yang, but at what cost? Kong is no longer a powerful and commanding figure; there develops a sense of utter tragedy to his aspect, a vague itching that there can be no happy ending. He is offered two choices, each equally unenviable: to conform, and castrate himself in the process, or to die.

Both outcomes are deaths of a kind. Either way, he must relinquish that which makes him powerful, and in doing so, he must relinquish his masculinity.

Of course, we all know the outcome: Kong is shot to the ground by the biplanes, and it is a heart-wrenching scene, but it is the only scene we want to see. We don't want to see Kong civilised and held accountable for his actions; we don't want to see him prancing about like some epicene sideshow freak, domesticated, dickless and mute. Kong is only Kong when he is an active and powerful force, and we want that to be our last impression of him. For Kong, death is the only option.

This is all very easy for Kong, but what options do we have as men? I can't speak for the rest of you, but it is this dilemma of sex and society which dogs my own attempts to forge my own gender identity in what seems to be an increasingly emasculated world.

I mean, what the hell kind of choice do we have?

(Edited by chalkboard sonata at 12:00 am on April 23, 2006)

-------
Fucking for fear of not wanting to fear again.

It means his life is sort of incomplete...therefore, he's not capable of being complete on his own, he needs civilisation and "femininity" to feel truly happy.

And if you're dependent on something, you have to give up other things, such as masculinity.

Power, complete "masculinity" and independence cannot satisfy you...you need women to bring you back down to earth.  Its like the unbearable lightness of being...you cannot be happy if you're too light and elated.

or have i completely missed your point?

(Edited by Flow Morphia Slow at 4:25 pm on April 22, 2006)

-------
I'm a minger, you're a minger too.
So come on minger, I want to mingle with you

I guess I can understand what you mean, because in side, many men are like Kong. Unlike Kong, many men would rather take the other way out, be emasculated. We don't really have anyway to really let loose and just be. The hunt is just about dead, many of the things that traditionally made a man a man is dead.

You need a woman, or something to contain that, or at least that what we're told.

Lose your life, or lose that what has made your life worth living.

Or did I too, miss the point completely?

-------
Cruisin' down the street in my six-four;
Jockin' the bitches, slappin the hoes.

How would one go about redefining masculinity without compromising the core of self-determination?

-------
Fucking for fear of not wanting to fear again.

Women do get attracted, physically speaking, to the more cavemanly type of guy...women are usually brought up to be delicate, 'feminine'... so opposites attract.

But realistically speaking...although Kong men are good for keeping the human race going...ie they're good for the mating process... they are not good for a constructive, civilised human race... I mean, society really looks down on 'bastards' who impregnate lots of women, leaving them to look after the kids on their own.  Similarly, society looks down on people like Saddam and other tyrants.


-------
I'm a minger, you're a minger too.
So come on minger, I want to mingle with you

In order to preserve one's masculinity you have to be a bastard, give in to id completely.

You have to be a bachelor.

The problem is that you can't keep the Kong mentality and operate effectively in society. Not this society anyway.

I thought about how we could redefine masculinity and it seems impossible to do it without appear to be chauvinistic. We can't really re-define masculinity much at all. I suppose that it is what it is for a reason.

As of now, we can keep that old tradition of being protectors(family and otherwise). Like Kong, we can still manage to be territorial and primal in a sense("my family, my house, mine"). Perhaps we can define our masculinity in our ability to protect ourselves and others.

-------
Cruisin' down the street in my six-four;
Jockin' the bitches, slappin the hoes.

If you have romantic visions of pre-civilised man as a sort of noble savage...the reality is that such a noble savage would live a brutal, short life.

I don't despair over the fact that women are no longer 'feminine'...whats so good about being dependent, subservient and docile?

The thing is...when taken to the extremes, ideas of masculinity and femininity are not constructive at all.  But when you have a balance of masculine and feminine...a sort of ying and yang...there is harmony, there is growth, there is civilisation.

And all these gendered qualities: aggression, compassion, dominance, docility... are too arbitrary.

Is it not natural for men to feel compassion? for women to be dominant?  Its all bollocks.

(Edited by Flow Morphia Slow at 7:40 pm on April 22, 2006)

-------
I'm a minger, you're a minger too.
So come on minger, I want to mingle with you

Where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the kids are above average."

--Garrison Keillor

I like the archetypal ideas that you've identified herein, Ryan. It's interesting to think that people can connect with the Kong movies that portray Kong in the light that Peter Jackson and the initial director achieved. Perhaps audiences' captivation with the demise of such a prominent symbol of masculinity bespeaks of perverse gratification. Some Freudian instinct that is sated by witnessing the great fall? Je ne sais pas.

(Edited by ShAmAn at 8:34 pm on April 22, 2006)

-------
She took a sad song, made it better

---

The thing is...when taken to the extremes, ideas of masculinity and femininity are not constructive at all.  But when you have a balance of masculine and feminine...a sort of ying and yang...there is harmony, there is growth, there is civilisation.

---

---

Is it not natural for men to feel compassion? for women to be dominant?  Its all bollocks.

---

Quote: from ShAmAn at 12:33 pm on April 23, 2006

---

I like the archetypal ideas that you've identified herein, Ryan. It's interesting to think that people can connect with the Kong movies that portray Kong in the light that Peter Jackson and the initial director achieved. Perhaps audiences' captivation with the demise of such a prominent symbol of masculinity bespeaks of perverse gratification. Some Freudian instinct that is sated by witnessing the great fall? Je ne sais pas.

---

"The horror. The horror."

-------
Fucking for fear of not wanting to fear again.

(Edited by quidam at 11:57 pm on April 22, 2006)

-------
Are you there, Margaret? It's me, God.

---

Gender archetypes, and ideals in general, are just asymptotes. Rather like zero degrees kelvin, King Kong serves as a reference point, not a stand-in for a real man.

---

---

Quote: from quidam at 12:55 pm on April 23, 2006

---

Gender archetypes, and ideals in general, are just asymptotes. Rather like zero degrees kelvin, King Kong serves as a reference point, not a stand-in for a real man.

---

You just wanted to say "asymptote."

---

NO I WAS JUST BEING APT AS USUAL.

You're just skeeeeerred of mathematical terminology.

-------
Are you there, Margaret? It's me, God.