2001 A Space Odyssey Theory

Perhaps the most important and symbolic scene in the film 2001 A Space Odyssey is the following:

"one of the man-apes realizes how to use a bone as both a tool and a weapon, which they start using to kill prey for their food. Growing increasingly capable and assertive, they reclaim control of the water hole from the other tribe by killing its leader. Triumphant, the tribe's leader throws his weapon-tool into the air" ..(wiki)



The use of a tool as a weapon against others in order to gain something you desire ...

As I try to grasp the bigger picture regarding politics, war, power, control, society, human interaction, etc., I can't help but wonder if it all boils down to this simple act; using a weapon, (or even threatening to use a weapon), against your fellow man in order to gain something you desire. Our history is filled with example after example of humans collectively using this approach and we see the outward manifestation in things like governments and armies.

Today in 2013, instead of a small tribe of ape-men using a weapon to gain control over a watering hole, we have massive tribes of governments and armies using weapons to gain control of resources, money, people, and even the consent of other humans to allow them to continue using weapons in the first place.

Some would say that this sort of violent behavior against other humans is simply part of our basic nature but recent psychology shows that we are not born this way. These are learned behaviors.

My basic point is that we should do our best to try to move forward as a society and leave this way of living behind. We can make a choice. It is an antiquated way to live amongst one another as we currently do. It is not a 'necessary evil' and we can make a choice to create a better world.

Most of the major problems we see in our world all stem from the masses collectively giving their consent, (either explicity or implicitly), to a relatively small group of people to use violence and weaponry against other human beings.

[color=cyan]

basically
PEACE for ALL*
Yes lots of energy needed and concentration but a mature group(s) can do it. Considering how much it takes not doing it @ times.

LOVE LIGHT ETERNIA*******

reply to post by Jedimind


Too bad it isn't "knowledge and love" being thrown into the air...........

If only thoughts were as tangible, and had meaning.......

Originally posted by Jedimind

The use of a tool as a weapon against others in order to gain something you desire ...

As I try to grasp the bigger picture regarding politics, war, power, control, society, human interaction, etc., I can't help but wonder if it all boils down to this simple act; using a weapon, (or even threatening to use a weapon), against your fellow man in order to gain something you desire. Our history is filled with example after example of humans collectively using this approach and we see the outward manifestation in things like governments and armies.

You missed the other part of the symbol there.

Had the man-apes NOT been instructed on how to use the bone as a weapon, they would have died out. The savanna was drying into a desert. The food supply was gone, and the water was insufficient for the two man-ape tribes. In addition, the leopard was chowing down on random man-apes every night.

Without the bone to use in both hunting, defense, and in culling the competition, man wouldn't have gotten started.

reply to post by Jedimind

My basic point is that we should do our best to try to move forward as a society and leave this way of living behind. We can make a choice. It is an antiquated way to live amongst one another as we currently do. It is not a 'necessary evil' and we can make a choice to create a better world.

This is true of so many things humans do, no one seems to like the idea of improving ourselves, they just want to say how we have always been so we might as well keep on doing it. This is a lot easier then trying to become a better thing then we are!

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by Jedimind

The use of a tool as a weapon against others in order to gain something you desire ...

As I try to grasp the bigger picture regarding politics, war, power, control, society, human interaction, etc., I can't help but wonder if it all boils down to this simple act; using a weapon, (or even threatening to use a weapon), against your fellow man in order to gain something you desire. Our history is filled with example after example of humans collectively using this approach and we see the outward manifestation in things like governments and armies.

You missed the other part of the symbol there.

Had the man-apes NOT been instructed on how to use the bone as a weapon, they would have died out. The savanna was drying into a desert. The food supply was gone, and the water was insufficient for the two man-ape tribes. In addition, the leopard was chowing down on random man-apes every night.

Without the bone to use in both hunting, defense, and in culling the competition, man wouldn't have gotten started.

True..But that sort of just reaffirms what I was saying about this being an an obsolete way of living.

We no longer need to cull competition just to make sure there's enough resources to go around or worry about being stalked by wild animals. Granted, we have a new set of problems involving resources and overpopulation but we're way past the ape-man stage of struggling to survive in the wild. We can now intellectually map out sensible, logical solutions instead of resorting to the 'Might equals Right' 'Dog eat dog world' way of doing things.

reply to post by Jedimind
the end of the movie also holds the key, the bone became the computer and information. Dave at the finaly lets go of all of that and unplugs the enemy. Or maybe all he does is rise above it. One way or another he decided that it was faulty and poisonous....and from there he was reborn as a .....?

Originally posted by Bedlam

You missed the other part of the symbol there.

Had the man-apes NOT been instructed on how to use the bone as a weapon, they would have died out.

They were not instructed in anything.

The Monolith didn't actually do anything but appear, shock and dissappear.

It was a moment in time where (certain) apes had the opportunity to think beyond their world of normal because of it's presence and did. The Monolith was merely the catalyst, not the teacher imo. Realisation of the power of that bone/weapon came from the workings of the ape's mind.

Pandora's box of opportunities was opened.

Originally posted by nerbot

They were not instructed in anything.

The monolith programmed them to make the next step in their evolution, much as it did later to David Bowman. If it's not explicit enough in the movie, the book is quite clear on that.

For man-apes, the next step was tool use and eating meat.

reply to post by Bedlam

Originally posted by Bedlam
You missed the other part of the symbol there. Had the man-apes NOT been instructed on how to use the bone as a weapon, they would have died out...

Originally posted by Jedimind
That sort of just reaffirms what I was saying about this being an an obsolete way of living...

Stanley Kubrick would not have agreed with Jedimind.

This thread completely misses his intended symbolism. That bone, thrown into the air and spinning end over end, becomes a rotating spacecraft in orbit. Kubrick was saying that that the combination of our aggression and inventiveness is what make us what we are. His point was that we are what we are and what we will be will always hark back to what we once were. He was right, of course.

reply to post by nerbot

They were not instructed in anything. The Monolith didn't actually do anything but appear, shock and dissappear.

Incorrect. There is a brief scene in the film where the man-apes are gathered around the monolith at sunset, clearly paying attention to something it is doing while crazy choral music (Ligeti's Requiem) plays on the soundtrack. Arthur C. Clarke, in his novel, went into considerable – perhaps unnecessary – detail about the examination and education of the man-apes.

IMVHO a bone should be used for luv.

Darryl Forests
Bonehead

Originally posted by Jedimind

My basic point is that we should do our best to try to move forward as a society and leave this way of living behind. We can make a choice. It is an antiquated way to live amongst one another as we currently do. It is not a 'necessary evil' and we can make a choice to create a better world.

Agreed.

A catalyst "from above" moved the ape-men forward.

When the time is right, another catalyst "from above" will move us forward again.

We are as incapable of doing entirely it on our own as the ape-men were.

reply to post by Astyanax


Kubrick was never afraid to veer off course from certain details of the books that his films were often based upon. A Clockwork Orange, The Shining, and Eyes Wide Shut all intentionally differed from the original books in very significant ways that Kubrick intentionally chose in order to convey his own artistic vision and message. Yes, in the book 2001 it's clearly explained that the ape-man has a matrix-like moment of recieving knowledge from the monolith, but in the film it is not readily apparent that the same is happening. Yes the creepy music kicks in, etc. but it's still left open to interpretation whether or not there's some communication of knowledge from the monolith to the ape-man if you ask me. That's part of the beauty of Kubrick's work in that whichever way one chooses to interpret certain aspects, it's always very profound and ripe for analysis.

As far as me missing the proper symbolism of the bone as a tool, it wasn't my intention to go into the symbolism of the scene or the movie as a whole. I was just intending to look at how that particular scene taken at face value - the ape-man using the tool as a weapon to gain an advantage over other ape-men and thus get something of value - is very significant and very much applies to much of the problems we see in our world today.

I maybe should've worded the title better but I didn't mean a theory about 2001, but instead a theory about society and human behavior which the particularly important scene in the movie 2001 helps to explain.

Originally posted by Jedimind
Perhaps the most important and symbolic scene in the film 2001 A Space Odyssey is the following:

"one of the man-apes realizes how to use a bone as both a tool and a weapon, which they start using to kill prey for their food. Growing increasingly capable and assertive, they reclaim control of the water hole from the other tribe by killing its leader. Triumphant, the tribe's leader throws his weapon-tool into the air" ..(wiki)

The use of a tool as a weapon against others in order to gain something you desire ...

As I try to grasp the bigger picture regarding politics, war, power, control, society, human interaction, etc., I can't help but wonder if it all boils down to this simple act; using a weapon, (or even threatening to use a weapon), against your fellow man in order to gain something you desire. Our history is filled with example after example of humans collectively using this approach and we see the outward manifestation in things like governments and armies.

Today in 2013, instead of a small tribe of ape-men using a weapon to gain control over a watering hole, we have massive tribes of governments and armies using weapons to gain control of resources, money, people, and even the consent of other humans to allow them to continue using weapons in the first place.

Some would say that this sort of violent behavior against other humans is simply part of our basic nature but recent psychology shows that we are not born this way. These are learned behaviors.

My basic point is that we should do our best to try to move forward as a society and leave this way of living behind. We can make a choice. It is an antiquated way to live amongst one another as we currently do. It is not a 'necessary evil' and we can make a choice to create a better world.

Most of the major problems we see in our world all stem from the masses collectively giving their consent, (either explicity or implicitly), to a relatively small group of people to use violence and weaponry against other human beings.

edit on 28-6-2013 by Jedimind because: (no reason given)

All creatures have a sense of territory - birds will chase off other members of the same species, and even other creatures. Mammals fight over females and territory. Swans, beavers, and fish fight over water space. Flocking birds will chase off any member of the flock that looks ill.

Humans are bit more complex. Sometimes we'll see the need to form alliances, even with strangers we don't know, like in emergencies. Unfortunately, sometimes one group will realize that the use of violence works in the short-term at least to intimidate rivals.

Originally posted by Jedimind
reply to post by Astyanax

 

Kubrick was never afraid to veer off course from certain details of the books that his films were often based upon. A Clockwork Orange, The Shining, and Eyes Wide Shut all intentionally differed from the original books in very significant ways that Kubrick intentionally chose in order to convey his own artistic vision and message. Yes, in the book 2001 it's clearly explained that the ape-man has a matrix-like moment of recieving knowledge from the monolith, but in the film it is not readily apparent that the same is happening. Yes the creepy music kicks in, etc. but it's still left open to interpretation whether or not there's some communication of knowledge from the monolith to the ape-man if you ask me. That's part of the beauty of Kubrick's work in that whichever way one chooses to interpret certain aspects, it's always very profound and ripe for analysis.

As far as me missing the proper symbolism of the bone as a tool, it wasn't my intention to go into the symbolism of the scene or the movie as a whole. I was just intending to look at how that particular scene taken at face value - the ape-man using the tool as a weapon to gain an advantage over other ape-men and thus get something of value - is very significant and very much applies to much of the problems we see in our world today.

I maybe should've worded the title better but I didn't mean a theory about 2001, but instead a theory about society and human behavior which the particularly important scene in the movie 2001 helps to explain.

edit on 29-6-2013 by Jedimind because: (no reason given)

Kubrick and Arthur C Clarke worked on the film together.. The film was based on Clarke's novel " The Sentinel" .The actual novel that carried the title "2001 A Space Odyssey" was not published untill after the film was released. All you need to know is here:-

en.wikipedia.org...:_A_Space_Odyssey_%28film%29

Originally posted by Jedimind

I maybe should've worded the title better but I didn't mean a theory about 2001, but instead a theory about society and human behavior which the particularly important scene in the movie 2001 helps to explain.

In the famous scene the proto-humans are introduced to the monolith. At this point the bones are just bones.
The monolith transmits a message to all around but there was only one proto-human who could grasp the message.
The bone becomes a weapon in his hands. Then there is a murder which cannot take place without the monolith or the bones being there first. Is the scene depicting the first premeditated murder? We don't know.

The relationship between man and technology is represented. Although the other proto-humans heard noises they did not understand any of it until they finally witnessed the murdering that took place at the water hole.

When the bone is tossed into the sky, rotating and finally becomes the space ship the connection is made clear.

The monolith itself represents a level of technology which is pre-existing in the universe, the proto-humans merely observed the monolith and one of them developed a murderous idea from it. Later, as we all know, the technology of HAL which was created by man, murders the crew. But the origins of the monolith (the pre-existence of technology) remains indecipherable. The monolith existed before man and after the star child is born.

reply to post by Jedimind

Kubrick was never afraid to veer off course from certain details of the books that his films were often based upon.

But in this case, the novel was written after the film was made. Clarke also wrote the screenplay for the film. There are many differences between the film and the book, but this isn't one of them

It wasn't my intention to go into the symbolism of the scene or the movie as a whole. I was just intending to look at how that particular scene taken at face value - the ape-man using the tool as a weapon to gain an advantage over other ape-men and thus get something of value - is very significant and very much applies to much of the problems we see in our world today.

Fair enough. The thing is, you haven't taken the scene at face value; you've created an interpretation of your own. There is nothing in the film (or in palaeontology, as far as I know) to suggest that tools preceded weapons in human evolution. Kubrick would have it that tools evolved from weapons, not the other way round; the man-apes clearly had no technology until the monlith arrived. The bone was originally a weapon.

Clarke and Kubrick were realists, who understood that human nature is the one thing we cannot change but must always take into account. This theme is one of the clearest in the book; Clarke underlines it by showing us the similarity of disposition between the man-ape Moon-Watcher and the newborn Starchild.

Moon-Watcher: For a few seconds Moon-Watcher stood uncertainly above his new victim, trying to grasp the strange and wonderful fact that the dead leopard could kill again. Now he was master of the world, and he was not quite sure what to do next. But he would think of something.

Starchild: Then he waited, marshaling his thoughts and brooding over his still untested powers. For though he was master of the world, he was not quite sure what to do next. But he would think of something.

Good thread topic, by the way. Worth a flag.

Thanks for the thread. I think it's interesting.

In my opinion, there is no difference between a tool and a weapon. A weapon is just a category of tool. A tool is an implement to accomplish a task. "Weapon" is just a value judgement on the intent of that tool and any related victimization it might wrought.

The thing for me, though, is that the advent of tools and weaponry have nothing to do with exerting power over others - except as it relates to efficiency and success rate. Fundamentally, the exerting of power, I believe, is a factor that is independent of tools.

After all, it's fairly easy for one to dominate another with only their physicality, and without anything else (note that it's commonplace for people to wage power over others with, if not the power - volume and intonation - of their words, sometimes, only the specific words they choose to use). So, this leads me to believe that additional implements aren't the area of scrutiny, but the underlying psychology of exerting will.

The OP refers to "recent psychology" that indicates "we are not born this way," that this is learned behavior. I'm unaware of this research and would be interested in it.

I think the truth is the opposite: gauging each other and who would emerge victorious in a skirmish is probably one of the most fundamental, core attributes of who we (human beings) are. In this sense, the topic of the OP boils down to ego.

Ego is an intrinsic quality of humanity and something we are only (relatively) recently aware of. Though I wholeheartedly agree with the lamentable nature of this, I feel like we have thousands, if not millions, of years of evolving to do before we come close to being able to choose wisdom over the incredibly powerful instinct of the ego.

If we determine through physicality or through the use of language or the use of tools that we can successfully "convince" another to see our way towards the end of getting what we want, our instinct typically drives us to do exactly that. And because it's instinct, it's way more powerful beyond our wisdom or the moral consideration of whether we actually should or should not do so. Of course, this individual contemplation magnifies respectively when considering groups or nations.

reply to post by Jedimind


I saw it more of as an evolutionary view of mankind. You did realize towards the end, when he entered the monolith, he went through a gateway. Constant psychedelic colours played for 5 mins, it seemed as if he was astral traveling to other worlds cause for sure that wasn't Jupiter. Almost like a Dee M Tee trip, science and spirituality completely merged as one. He became a star child, saw himself before he died(an old version of him) and he saw his starchild embryo self of the new life. The science, spirit, machine and man are all one. After all we DO live in this awesome holographic matrix. We have Logic, and we have feel.