ON F/X - THE SERIES

There cannot be true seeking of knowledge and realization and enlightenment without questioning oneself, without questioning one's own self, without questioning the questions asked, without questions the mechanisms one follows and is made to follow. It is necessary to take a step aback and to focus anew what has for long been familiar, what has for long dominated thinking, dominated the mind. The target and aim will be the construction of a better view of reality; the method will at first be the deconstruction of the old and traditional way of thinking (see The Fabric of Reality, Parts 2+8; Telos and Essence, Part 9), the first step has to be self-recognition.

Questions towards self-recognition will lead to a reflection on one's own capabilities and agendas, to emotional as well as to logical sets of mind, to intentions and motives as well as to personal preferences and aversions. Self-reflection will show one's own weaknesses and strengths as well as it will tell how reliable our very own perception and ability to describe is.

What holds true for persons will in this case also hold true for science and literature and any kind of art: As those are made and produced and maintained by human beings, they will show similar weaknesses and strengths as their creators. There are for sure traditional elements, borders, limitations and agendas within those and any other fields of work - constructions, artificial meta-structures both hindering and defining each specific field.

F/X is a show which uses those ideas; reality is dependent on perception and on our anticipation of perception. But F/X does more: It is a show about special and visual effects used for cinematic purposes; it 'deconstructs' in a way our perception of movie industry, it is kind of a 'behind the scenes', giving some insight into the making of movies. But then, the show is no 'making of' special of a specific film, it is still fiction created to be fiction - extending the very principles of the show into a larger scope, into a larger scheme.

The self-reflective level of F/X allows the show to create sort of an innate self-irony, an image of its own. It is always interesting to watch actors act as actors or film crews act as film crews; it also extends the needs of production into creating both the 'real' and the 'fake', fictionalized, setting - a mirror image within a mirror image. The show might not be a scientific series, but the approach it uses could very well support the ideas of post-structuralism I tried to explain on my General Discussion Pages.

September 10th, 1998

The main theme of F/X - the Series is perhaps originating from the technological perspective shown in the show: Technology - in addition to human intelligence and wit - is a key to solving the cases Rollie Tyler and his fellows are confronted with. There apparently is a very positive approach shown towards technology and technological progress - it is used as an instrument, as a definite means to solve problems; the 'authority', so to say, of technology is never questioned, never denied.

Rollie Tyler - to stay within the frame of the show for a while - is a master of technology, a techno-magician so to say. As his life and work are dedicated to special and visual effects for filmmaking, he has created lots of gimmicks and props and sets already, this is his normal job, his daily routine. But what he does for the NYPD is much more - he is using his crafts for police work, for helping his friends in the police solve extraordinary cases.

Technology - to step out of the frame of the show - is a tool for us to create a world of our own, of changing the world around us to provide us a better home, a better future. Without technology, there would be no science, no art, no culture. Technology is not just computers and television and space exploration; technology starts with using a spoon or a fork or just a stick to eat. The rapid development of science and technology throughout the twentieth century was precedented by a steady increase of technological advancement during the nineteenth centure; originating from the Middle Ages. While the Roman Empire focused its interests on politics, warfare, agriculture, architecture and arts, the further development of natural sciences was put to some kind of rest, only to be revived in the Middle Ages.

Technological advances occur when there is the necessity for them to do so. The Mediterranean countries had quite a lifestyle compared to the Northern European regions; the dark conditions concerning mere physical living were quite harsh: lower temperatures, large woods, less infrastructure and a much less controled political environment yearned for improvement. The word of 'darkness' usually assigned to the Middle Ages could be primarily understood as a word of propaganda of later times against a system not understood by less religious regimes. The only real basis for that darkness would be the lack of technological standars at the beginning of the Middle Ages. But with time proceeding, that changed. Necessity is an engine of change; the Middle Ages saw the rise of scientific knowledge, scientific advances and technologies and of a culture which founded the basis of ours. What we perceive as our rapid technological development can be rooted to this period of time.

Having now traveled to the past, what would be the outlook on the future? How to anticipate further progress adequately? We can't - 'reality' always will exceed anticipations. There is a general tendency of both underestimating and overstating the positive aspects of technology. Underestimating, because a 'back to nature' policy would not solve our problems. What we have created as a system of progressive economy, science and globalization, can only work when the pace of progress is either maintained or increased. Our environmental and energy-related problems will be solved by technology time and again. Overstated, because each solution to problems will make us face us new confrontations. But to step aback would not be an option - without technology we would never be able to maintain liberal and democratic structures, would not have this kind of global exchange of ideas, would not be able to feed the people. We have to be aware of the influences technology has on our lives - both negative and positive. But the very fact of me writing for an internet website of mine should demonstrate my personal attitude towards technology very well.

November 2nd, 1998

As already outlined on my General Discussion Pages, there are some problems with the conventional view of reality; those problems being related to discussions amongst other things about conclusion, tradition, fiction and perception. What now does this respective television show have to do with it?

F/X tells stories about alternate realities, altered reality - altered by Rollie Tyler with the means of special and visual effects. His efforts can change, manipulate, the surroundings of various people, in various aspects. The change often occurs as a result of being needed for a specific case. In some respect, this is similar to the approach of something I've occasionally seen on Mission: Impossible; but as I do not watch that show regularly, I will not comment on that similarity further.

Reality as a fixed entity is somehow problematic for it has changed over some time already; as well as our perception of it. Changed, for some 'truths', mostly of the scientific field, have been disproved or had to be modified over time. The technological revolution has changed the face of Earth very drastically, and humanity has changed with it to a certain extent which has to do with the perspective of reality. Politics have changed a bit, too - there is still the desire to gain power among some people; but normally a much more liberal and democratic perspective has developed with the centuries.

What about the perception of reality? It has changed with the outlook on reality science has given us, basically, it has changed with the missing outlook. The key to post-structuralist theories is that lack of completion, that apparent illusion of complete understanding; an illusion which has also been undermined by the problems and hardships caused from wronguse of scientific advances. The religious outlook has changed, too - once bound to build a political system based upon religious ideas, this attempt had to be abandoned (at least in the Western world) because of the obvious incompability of religion with state. The separation between church and state is not a step aback from religious fullfillment; it is indeed a step back to the very identity of religion. But what can be said about religion, can be said about philosophy, about any attempt to categorize the world - each of those perspectives can be deconstructed to a personal level.

The validity of perception is foremost depending on ourselves - on our ability to realize what is going on, on our desire to explore reality, on our acceptance of the fact that - whatever we might perceive - this is primarily a perspective of our own, an individual outlook, not necessarily being shared by others. The age of dictating ideas or ideology is over. What remains, is a deconstructed, reconstructed view of reality - a reality of diversity and combinations, a reality where our hope to survive is also depending on our ability to exchange our views with others without blindly accepting outside ideas not ignorantly demanding our own perception overrule that of others. Acceptance and dignity should be the consequence of such an altered perspective.

November 2nd, 1998