Play by Ruben Östlund
Description generated by https://www.perplexity.ai/
Play is a 2011 Swedish drama film directed by Ruben Östlund and written by Östlund and Erik Hemmendorff. The film follows a group of black boys who rob a smaller group of children in central Gothenburg, Sweden. Inspired by actual court cases, the film portrays the power dynamics between the two groups and examines how the victims are affected by the crime. Ruben Östlund’s depiction of the Afro-Swedish kids has been criticized for typecasting them as criminals, but he also works to make their actions as unforgivable as possible in order to emphasize the gravity of their actions.
This movie left me feeling a bit stunned. Stunned at the injustice of everything, the constantly shifting dimensions of power and powerlessness. My current life hinges on action and so seeing the complete inaction from not just the victims of robbery, but of everyone, from the adults encountered along the way, from the black boys themselves against the adverse conditions of a system set against them from the start of their lives, from the adults trying to serve justice on the boys but end up being bigger bullies. Even the brief point of relief (against the total injustice and inaction perpetuated throughout the movie) was needlessly violent and ultimately fruitless in solving problems and instilling change, which is Ostlund’s main point.
The current systems are designed to separate, isolate, give everyone their private gardens and clean glass cubicles and own tram cars which make the act of coming together to identify the context and see the entire picture extremely hard. Throughout the movie, the interventions staged by adults trying to help victims were helplessly unable to state why they were intervening, and ultimately looked like violent prepetrators themselves when they took phones away using physical force. In general, the challenges we face as a species are unable to be solved by one person, and yet where has the culture gone to be able to impartially discuss these challenges? Where are any more open spaces to talk freely without accusations of perpetrating a political talking point? Especially hard is the discussion on mitigating the adversity faced by immigrants and lower-classes without the shouting of racism or reverse racism popping up, and in the incentive driven landscape of news outlets choosing to rile up feverish support, a calm discussion resulting in lasting postive systemic change seems impossible.
How would an ideal discussion form - even just in the context of this movie and Sweden? Not knowing anything regarding the data or the situation, I asked perplexity once again:
Sweden has a long history of welcoming refugees and providing asylum, which has resulted in a diverse immigrant population. Immigrant students have been able to integrate into the Swedish school system, as evidenced by their performance on the Swedish National Test in History. However, there is evidence that migrant- or immigrant-origin workers are discriminated against when trying to find a job. The 2015 refugee crisis had a significant impact on Sweden’s political and social landscape. The Sweden Democrats party was formed in response to this crisis, arguing that the influx of immigrants had caused economic, criminal, and cultural problems. Despite this opposition to immigration, many migrants from the Middle East have been able to successfully integrate into Swedish society. They have achieved success as businesspeople and academics, demonstrating how stories of successful integration can be told even in the face of opposition.
Some important citations being:
“are discriminated against when trying to find a job”
With findings of:
Candidates of immigrant origin often had to make three to four times as many applications as candidates of “national extraction” in order to get to the next step of the hiring process.
“the influx of immigrants had caused economic, criminal, and cultural problems”
The discussion needs to begin with context, and needs to provide the entire scene to all actors. However, that takes time and sometimes too much, but who gets to decide who should know everything? In a complex system, how can a group know enough to make the best decision?
IRL
So it’s decided - I’ll join Jerry in Cartagena for the 14th, then go back to Barranquilla together. Isolation seems to shove me right back into pandemic times again, where the only interactions are single-serving, and the total days are dragging, yet almost wasted away unless the daily routines are met. But here, the routines are healthy - gym, translation of Borges, writing. I’m planning my return for CDMX and have defined two goals for myself - to sell a bowl of noodles, to take a deep look into clothing there, and to continue this ai-augmented writing journey. I’d like to define a philosophy (mostly for myself) of what my taste is, and what it’s inspired by. All I know for now is that it seeks harmony.