Forrest Gump: A Subversive Movie
Dr. Skoble teaches philosophy at the University of Central Arkansas.
A Hollywood movie is like a box of chocolates: it tastes good, but it’s really bad for you. Of course, it isn’t bad to eat a small amount of chocolates; likewise, not all Hollywood movies are bad for you. But after seeing Forrest Gump, the charming aphorism that was central to the film ("My momma says that life is like a box of chocolates") metamorphosed in my mind in this fashion. I caught myself enjoying the film while realizing that I was enjoying something unhealthy. As time passes since the film’s release, it not only grows in popularity, but the associated merchandising increases, One can buy collections of Gump sayings, tins of "BubbaGump Shrimp," Gump t-shirts, and so on. As the film’s appeal grows, so does the need to examine its message. The movie won six Academy Awards (including Best Picture and Best Actor for Tom Hanks)—so the film is clearly an influential social and cultural item.
Before criticizing the film’s vices, I first praise its virtues. It is very well executed, The by-now-well-known special effects that make Tom Hanks appear in old newsreel footage and play championship ping-pong, and that make Gary Sinise’s legs disappear, are outstanding. Hanks adds another finely crafted performance to his resume. The film’s narrative structure is tight, and strikes the right balance between serious drama and light comedy. Indeed it is truly an excellent film, in the sense that it tells a story well and conveys a message. But the values portrayed, like a box of chocolates, are too sweet and not entirely healthy.
This film is subversive. It doesn’t subvert the Constitution of the United States, but rather it is subversive of the human spirit. This claim will come as a spoilsport voice-in-the-wildemess to the many who are trumpeting the film as a triumph of the human spirit, Forrest Gump is unambiguously antiintellectual, and subversive in its power to make one enjoy it anyway.
The naive innocent who prospers in a wicked world is an old standard, and a very seductive device. Even Wagner, after announcing the coming of the superman, found refuge in this archetype in Parsifal. Here Hanks portrays a man with an I. Q. of 75 who becomes a national hero and a millionaire through… what? The purity of his spirit and the grace of God, or something like that. The message is that intelligence, indeed ability generally, are unimportant. Providence will watch out for those without gifts, therefore everyone is gifted. Some of Gump’s achievements are due to his being a nice guy. He wins the Medal of Honor for rescuing his company because he is unwilling to abandon his friend. But he becomes a great runner by divine flat. His shrimp boat survives a hurricane. He becomes a champion ping-pong player simply by not taking his eye off the ball. It’s not quite like Being There, to which this film is frequently compared. The character Chance in Being There receives his fortunes through the misinterpretaions of his idiocy by a sick society, hence the satire. Gump is satire-free. But the film makes us ask, what’s the point of having talents if talent is unimportant?
The film not only portrays talent as unimportant, but literally as an impediment to the good life. Consider the intelligent and intellectually curious Jenny. She is an independent thinker who questions authority and social standards, and who is experimental and adventuresome. Jenny is punished with a series of abusive relationships; -she finally dies of AIDS, I’ve rarely seen a characterization so hostile to inquiry. It is revealed that the roots of her eagerness to question authority and think independently are having a dysfunctional family. So an evil force drives her to independence of thought, and the results of the consequent life are drugs, abusive boyfriends, and AIDS.
The contrast with Gump is clear enough. His mother loves him. He always does as he’s told, and prospers as a result. In response to the command, "just run," he is able to score touchdowns. This trait also makes him a natural for military service. To be sure that we do not interpret all this as anti-Christian, Jenny, despite her sins, is forgiven and rewarded in the afterlife in the form of a perfect child conceived with Forrest. When Lieutenant Dan loses his legs, he rails against God, but when he makes his peace with God, he walks again.
Gump’s mother, played well by Sally Field, keeps admonishing him that he’s no different from everyone else. The film insistently advances the idea that there is "nothing wrong with being stupid." Honestly, could there be a more dangerous message to promulgate? It should go without saying that people should not be cruel to those with less ability, and we may indeed wish to care for those incapable of taking care of themselves. But is there really nothing wrong with being less able, less smart? This is not about self-esteem for the disabled, it is actually about radical leveling, a devaluation of ability. How is Gump no different from anyone else? This claim seems innocent enough, and might follow from the idea that those of less ability are still humans deserving respect and dignity. But of course he is different-he is a great runner, a football star, a war hero, a millionaire. Most of us are none of those things. And he has a 75 I.Q., which most of don’t have either. So he is different from most people. By donplaying that, the critique of ability is made more subtle.
There’s no secret to excelling, the film tells us, just do what you’re supposed to do.
In real life, people must earn their achievements. Of course, some steal and some inherit, but in general, people have to achieve through their efforts. At any rate, that would be a better lesson to teach, I submit, than that if you just blunder about, God or fate will take care of everything. No ability is necessary to make a fortune in the shrimp business—just make sure that your shrimp boat is the only one left intact after a hurricane. No ability is necessary to be a football hero-just run until they tell you to stop running.
Of course, all these bits in the film are funny and charming. I laughed and smiled on cue with everyone else. Hanks is always likable, and Gump especially so, being the sweet innocent that he is. But I am disturbed that a film could attain such popularity and appeal by advancing the view that ability is not an important component of business success and that critical thinking is not essential to achieve prosperity. Despite Gump being a successful businessman, the film thereby conveys a tacit anti-commece message.
The anti-commerce message derives from the more general anti-ability theme. If intelligence and analytic ability are not portrayed in the most popular film of the year as important components of the good life, an intellectually lazy generation will tacitly take this as support for their disengaged condition. The majority of teens cannot locate the Pacific Ocean on a world map, or the Civil War by half-century. The fastest growing trend in criminal defense is diminished responsibility. Books are out, MTV is in. Critical reasoning is on the decline not only as a skill but as a desideratum. And now comes Forrest Gump to reinforce the idea that we are not responsible for our destinies, that intelligence is not important, that independent thought will be punished. That’s dangerous.
Forrest Gump is not a bad film, but it is subversive. The film is subversive because it is so well made and enjoyable. I enjoyed it even as I was aware of the unhealthiness of its message. If anyone tells me that it was a good film, or that he or she enjoyed it, I won’t disagree. But if anyone tells me that it was profound or that it changed his life, I shall weep.
Comment by Marissa on 4 November 2009:
I really think that Aeon Skoble needs to open his mind a little bit. I am glad I’m not one of his philosophy students, because he would do me a disservice. Forrest Gump is not a movie showing how it’s okay to be stupid. Showing that even though you may have a low IQ you can still go on to become legends, without really trying. No, what this movie says that if you really believe in yourself, its possible. Forrest goes through life, day by day, just doing what makes him happy. Maybe Forrest had a natural ability for these things? Or maybe, this was a movie made for entertainment purposes? Yes the movie showed Jenny to be an outspoken girl who ended up in bad relationships, and eventually dying of aids, guess what? That’s the way the world is sometimes! Sometimes bad things happen to good people. And Forrest, who was a kind and caring and gentle soul, he was the one who ended up with the riches and trophies and medals. This is not something to be read into. This movie could possibly give people with a learning disability hope that one day, they too can achieve greatness.
So in short Professor Skoble, open your eyes, stop being so close-minded.
Comment by Taylor on 15 June 2010:
I do have to agree it is a bit anti intellectual, but there is a point you mix up. Gump has plenty of Talent, he has wisdom, but not the intelligence to articulate it all of the time, or even to realize it when he shows it, sometime over thinking gives us the motive to rationalize our actions like it does with many of the characters in the film. Another point, Gump is a fantastic runner, that’s talent, not a skill, his corrected back and natural running ability carried him where he wanted to go, he had a determination that not many can match, he saw where he wanted to go and went by the straightest path. Just because people tell him to run or not doesn’t mean people will stop having minds of their own from watching the movie.
As for Jenny, I’m SURE no one has EVER been sexually assaulted as a child and then ended up emotionally scarred enough to hop onto the prevailing wagon downhill. You have to think about what you’re saying, the “adventuresome and curious” nature of the intellectual are very different from the experimental and self sacrificing indulgence in each generations new fads, free love, the drug revolution, musical trends, I do believe this was written 15 years ago so I hope I haven’t missed the latest world-wide phenomenon that “question authority or the status quo” like MMORPGs. We aren’t being conformist or anti intellectual in cheering on an unsung hero because of his luck or his honesty, that it was created artificially makes it no less important that these traits are exemplified, whether it was in a dyslexic savant or genius. I think only the already intellectually stunted could not take these traits to heart and retain their own intellectual curiosity, we aren’t turning people into Forrest Gumps in a non-fairytale world where they can’t survive, we are showing that purity is in fact valued still, that you can be successful without being a sleazeball, and if you’re fortunate you can even be loved. I’m not a religious man, so I wouldn’t know anything about his divine providence, but I think it’s missing the point entirely, if you try to argue otherwise it’s like preaching against the choir, the viewer’s already believed it or not when they walked in.
Comment by Corey on 3 May 2011:
I have to say, I got angrier and angrier as I read this article. First I would like to point out that for all the credibility we are supposed to give this person, there sure were a lot of spelling mistakes, and they have the nerve to get on the lack of intellect in the film. Secondly, Skoble is treating this film like it is a weapon. He doesn’t like what it portrays, says it’s too dangerous, well that’s what life is. Hitler is a bad influence and yet we still teach kids about him. I really think that Skoble is too over zealous with this analysis of the film. If every single film portrayed a good wholesome message for all to live by, movies would become boring and unwatchable. What Skoble has to realize is that movies are meant for entertainment purposes, so to knock a film’s message when all it is trying to do is entertain, is rather obnoxious. This is why critics and analyzers of film should never be taken seriously, especially when they themselves can not do the very thing they are critiquing others for doing. Apparently we should never show movies with sad endings because it is a bad influence. People need to realize that life isn’t all about good messages, or even bad messages, it is, like a box of chocolates, very diverse. Skoble needs to stop being a sensitive wuss and watch a film like Goodfellas, then maybe Skoble will learn that he, life can’t be the way they want it to be all the time. Get over it.
Comment by Andrew on 19 June 2011:
@Corey
“movies are meant for entertainment purposes”
Some see them as an art form and more than just mere entertainment. Of course you could make the argument that art criticism is similarly pointless, but I believe to reflect upon a work by entertaining a variety of viewpoints from one’s peers allows the individual to draw his or her own conclusions.
You do no have to agree with the writer of this article, but getting angry over them is unnecessary. Use what you have read to further cement your own views, don’t see it as a pointless exercise.
Personally, I am inclined to agree that Gump is a subversive movie, but not in the sense that it promotes anti-intellectualism. Rather, I think it promotes blind patriotism and the value of religion over reason (which could I suppose be seen as derivatives of anti-intellectualism).
When all’s said, it’s a fun feature to watch, and it entertains, but it is an insult to the writer of the film to say that entertainment is its main end.
Comment by sai on 2 July 2011:
no problems with that movie.just do what u r supposed to do without keeping results in mind is best message to be given for mankind which this movie has given.holy book geetha quotes similar kind.audience will take what they need.
Comment by Stan Heard on 12 July 2011:
It is interesting that an article written in 1995 can still elicit responses. I am a Vietnam veteran so perhaps my comments are tainted by an admiration for Gump’s qualities.
I believe the story makes a distinction between “stupidity” and “intellect”. Gump knows that he is not smart but he also knows that “Stupid is as stupid does.” He understands that it is stupid to be dishonest about himself and others; to lie, cheat, or steal; to ignore the individuality of himself and others. Gump seems to understand that character is more important to success in life than the cleverness of intellect. Lord knows, we Americans seem to be willing to let intellectuals without character run our government and our lives just because they can cleverly manage the political landscape.
Perhaps if I were more intellectual I could make a living as a university professor and see the subversive nature of this movie. But I would have lose my vision for the American character portrayed by Gump.
Comment by Adam on 29 December 2011:
I LIEK TEH PART WHAR THE GUY WITHOUT LEGS GETS SHOT WITH A SHRIMP HARPOON LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLOLLOLOOL
Comment by bill on 24 January 2012:
You realize Gump had talent, right? He wasn’t a great runner because he was told to run. He just hadn’t known he had the talent. He was a great ping pong player because he could stay focused on the game. Again, talent.
Jenny wasn’t in abusive relationships because she was smart. It’s because she was abused as a child. Follow this link http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/svaw/domestic/link/theories.htm. Read this part ” (A recent study reported by the Family Violence Prevention Fund does indicate, however, that women who were physically or sexually abused as children may be more likely to be abused as adults.)” . In other words, she was looking for a man just like her father. Seriously, this was lost on you?
Jenny didn’t get AIDS due to being smart. She got AIDS by having unprotected sex and sharing needles. This all goes back to her being abused as a child. She’s trying to get away from the memories of her childhood.
Lieutenant Dan walked again because he found peace. What’s wrong with that? Instead of giving into self pity he chose to live. And he owed this to Forrest not giving up on him.
Comment by Don on 28 January 2012:
The message of “Forest Gump” is pure existentialism: there is no destiny, there is no logical reason for anything, there is no purpose. Why? Because everything happens by chance. All of the sinister descriptions of the movie miss the point. It isn’t glorifying stupidity anymore than it is glorifying anything. I certainly don’t agree with its point of view, but it is a brilliant, artistic portrait of the idea that there is absolutely no meaning to existence, that nothing really matters.
Comment by Don on 28 January 2012:
The message of “Forest Gump” is pure existentialism: there is no destiny, there is no logical reason for anything, there is no purpose. Why? Because everything happens by chance. All of the sinister descriptions of the movie miss the point. It isn’t glorifying stupidity anymore than it is glorifying anything. I certainly don’t agree with its point of view, but it is a brilliant, artistic portrait of the idea that there is absolutely no meaning to existence, that nothing really matters.
Comment by Joe Schmoe on 29 January 2012:
Re: Corey
The spelling mistakes are not the fault of the author. Most of the older articles on this website were published in print first and then probably scanned via a computer into a digital form when this website went up. The mistakes are largely the fault of the conversion process from print to digital.
In any case, few movies are made solely to entertain. Sure there are a few, almost always action flicks, that are mainly just mindless violence. And the movies based off of some kind of derivative work (book, comic series, etc.) are directed mainly to garner a nostalgic appeal and so are more likely to advance the agenda of the original author, if any, rather than that of the director or script writers. But the majority of the remainder have a political message to impart, whether it be subtle or overt.
Avatar is a good, recent example: a clear case of anti-corporation, pro-environment rhetoric.
Trackback by stop spam plugin on 8 February 2012:
Gems form the internet…
[...]very few websites that happen to be detailed below, from our point of view are undoubtedly well worth checking out. Especially when they clean your website from spam better than askimet.[...]……