Disclaimer: If you haven't seen Fight Club then DO NOT READ THIS PAPER.  In this paper I discuss concepts that aren't revealed until the end of the film.

A Fighting Chance: Virtue Ethics and David Fincher's Fight Club

Emerging from within the dark, heavy and psychotic music of the opening, the camera travels in reverse through a disorienting maze like structure that slowly becomes apparent as the internal structures of a brain. The combination of the intense music and the furious firing of neurons, enhanced as each of the opening credits appears as if a thought, originating as a neural firing, in a flash of light, and disappearing in much the same manner, illustrates to the viewer the state of mental anxiety that the person who's brain it is must be in. As the camera continues through its reverse progression through the brain it emerges through a pore in the skin, following a bead of sweat down an oily face, further enhancing the state of anxiety, onto a gun barrel where the viewer first sees the main character, the Narrator¹, with the gun barrel in his mouth. At this point the furious music stops, freeing up the sound-scape to open, ambient sounds of a vacant office space. Tyler Durden, holding the gun in the Narrator's mouth, is heard asking if the Narrator has any final words, bringing the state of anxiety to a climax. This instant switch from extreme mental anguish, illustrated by the Narrator, to a calm and arrogant demeanor, Illustrated by Tyler, sets the pace for the remainder of the film.

The next scene is even more disturbing, and illustrates an important aspect of the film that doesn't become apparent until the final stages where these very scenes are repeated in a necessarily cyclical fashion. The Narrator, who we have just witnessed in a state of mental anguish, narrates not only a plot, but a plot carried out through to its final stages, in the most calm, monotonous demeanor possible, of a plan to destroy the world's largest financial institutions by detonating vans containing high explosives in their underground parking spaces. The Narrator is articulating this plot through a calm and controlled demeanor, with a confidence just displayed by Tyler's use of the gun in the previous scene, because, as the Narrator says in this scene himself, 'I know this because Tyler knows this'; the Narrator and Tyler are both one and the same person.

Knowing that the Narrator and Tyler are both the same person, a fact discovered only at the end of the film, is what dictates that this film be cyclical, and invites us to apply all that we have learned of the relationships, especially the relationship between the Narrator and Tyler, to our entire experience of the film; even to the extent where it may become necessary to view the film another time. Everything that we think we know about the film is destroyed.

It is at this point, the reflection upon the film with a 'true' understanding of what just took place, that fundamental questions are asked, and where my analysis will get its support. Questions such as 'is the Narrator Tyler or is Tyler the Narrator?', or 'why did the Narrator construct Tyler?²' only have meaning when the film is perceived in this cyclical fashion. The analysis that is to follow attempts to answer the latter of the two questions, exploring why Tyler's creation was necessary. I do this from the perspective of Aristotle's Virtue Ethics, particularly as it is applied to situations of oppression.

The dominant theme of the film Fight Club is oppression and its resistance. The oppression dictated in the film is that experienced by 'consumers',  oppressed by systemic capitalism that controls their wants, needs, and desires. The Narrator states at the beginning of the film that he, 'like so many others...had become a slave to the Ikea^tm nesting instinct'. When a stroke of bad luck strikes and his apartment and all of its contents, his 'life', are destroyed in an explosion, it becomes apparent that blindly following those ideals espoused by capitalist enterprises such as Ikea^tm do not guarantee one's wellbeing. Importantly, this is where the relationship between the Narrator and Tyler truly starts to develop. In a bar, Joe's Tavern, the Narrator explains his despair to Tyler and comes to realise that everything he's been striving for is 'all just stuff'; he comes to understand that he is, in a sense, oppressed by capitalist enterprise.

Oppression has numerous implications for living a virtuous life. It may seem non-virtuous to simply ignore the numerous forces of oppression and simply watch your life, and the lives of others, oppressed in such a way that denies flourishing. It may also seem non-virtuous for someone who is oppressed to react in ways that seem non-virtuous in resisting the oppression, even if oppression has dictated that these non-virtuous actions are all that the oppressed individual, or group for that matter, has available to them. Extreme violence, such as that portrayed in Fight Club, would seem to fit the latter condition. Virtue for Aristotle, however, is a teleology; that is it's value is defined by its end, its telos. Virtue is also a mean between two extremes of behavior. For example, Aristotle (NE, 1106a - 1106b) uses the analogy of quantities of food, arguing that '[i]f ten pounds are too much for a particular person to eat and two too little, it does not follow that the trainer will order six pounds...'. For the oppressed person it may very well be virtuous and praiseworthy to react in ways that seem extreme, for the extreme measure may actually be a mean relative to the situation.

Cultivating virtue under oppression has other implications, however; implications that Fight Club deals with in a very unique way. In Burdened Virtues: Virtue Ethics for Liberatory Struggles, Lisa Tessman (2005, p. 124) outlines the phenomena of Burdened Virtues, 'a morally praiseworthy trait that is at the same time bad for its bearer, disconnected from its bearers wellbeing'. One problem with resisting oppression is that the actions necessary for the resister to cultivate lead to moral damage of their character. It may be a virtuous act to cultivate severe anger towards an oppressor in the fight against oppression, but this anger will affect the character of the oppressor, denying the ability for personal flourishing. Fight Club illustrates this fact through the character of Tyler, showing how his anger eventually consumes him and the negative consequences that follow. Interestingly the Narrator is free from the effects of Tyler's anger as Tyler is, ultimately, a disposable alter ego³. Perhaps Tyler was 'created' to assist the Narrator in his fight against oppression in a way that would allow him to transcend oppression without moral damage.

The cultivation of a virtuous mean requires practice. The direction of each passion, through appropriate and accessible actions, towards the correct target is something that is learned (NE, 1103a 16 - 17). Training is therefore required and this is what the 'Fight Club' of Fight Club is geared for. The Narrator states that ''Fight Club' wasn't about winning of losing, it wasn't about words...when the fight was over nothing was solved, but nothing mattered...afterwards we all felt saved'. By allowing anger its place in the fight against oppression, and keeping its overt manifestation in check where it is not appropriate, via a tight knit community of like-minded people, the development of virtuous, angry, morally valuable, resistors of oppression becomes possible.

The 'Fight Club' is a place where the comrades of the resistance to oppression can enhance their relationships, strengthening their bond in uniting for a common cause. It is expected of comrades that there be a deep loyalty to one another (Tessman 2005, p. 128). This is another location of Burdened Virtues for each individual is under enormous pressure to change, to accept that the anger embraced in Fight Club is a positive and noble trait. A conflict of values, potentially an unresolvable conflict, may arise, and, even though the goal may indeed be of liberation from oppression, an individual may be perceived as too weak to continue as a comrade, as a member of the 'Fight Club', and be excluded from further participation⁴.

This line of reasoning is furthered when Tyler establishes what comes to be known as 'Project Mayhem', when the 'Fight Club' escapes from the basement and onto the streets. 'Project Mayhem' is not open to all those who are oppressed, just those willing to embrace anger and its physical manifestations in the fight against oppression. Tyler establishes a set of rules for becoming a member, to ensure that the bonds of the comrades of 'Project Mayhem' are tensile, unlike those of the 'Fight Club' where the rules were often broken. Tyler's rules dictate that the 'applicant' for comradeship suffer grueling and torturous conditions for three days before they are admitted. In this way the comrade's relationships are based on a recognition that all of them have not only suffered oppression but that all of them have undergone the same pressures to get to where they currently are.

'Project Mayhem', however, is what causes the Narrator to realise that while the cultivation of anger may certainly be a morally praiseworthy trait, it's wanton application via forms of seemingly indiscriminate violence is not. The direction of anger has shifted from a 'release' amongst friends, amongst like-minded people, to those perceived to be the instigators, the agents, of oppression. One of the first acts of 'Project Mayhem' is the threating of a Police or Government official. The scene is set in a formal conference hall where a senior official is lecturing about how to reduce crime. The camera slowly pans across the crowd and it becomes apparent that the waiters are all members, comrades, of 'Project Mayhem'. An elderly man, perhaps a Police or Government official, leaves the stage to go to the bathroom at which time the speech on crime prevention - ironically about establishing a 'Project Hope' - ends and the comrades of 'Project Mayhem' all leave the conference hall in pursuit. When this official enters the bathroom he is viciously assaulted by Tyler, who violently throws him to the floor and punches him in the face while his comrades filter through the bathroom door behind. The music throughout this scene is of erratic, jazzy percussion, further illustrating the disjointed mayhem that is about to follow. This event leaves a deep impression upon the Narrator who is obviously distraught at what has just taken place. The difference becomes obvious between the Burdened Virtues developed under oppression and those traits that the resisters of oppression are fighting to achieve.

The problem of the direction of a passion such as anger is a perennial problem within virtue ethics. It is not possible to physically direct anger towards an abstract oppressor. This was dealt with in what could be argued as a morally praiseworthy manner in the 'Fight Club', however, in 'Project Mayhem' the direction of this physical anger, the attempt to physically resolve oppression, becomes targeted at those perceived to be agents of oppression. The problem here is that anger is an appropriate action for those who are oppressed but as oppression often occurs from abstract sources – systemic capitalism in Fight Club – the direction of one's anger is difficult. This is confirmed in Aristotle (NE, 1126a 3-6) where he remarks that '[t]hose who are not angry at the things they should be are thought to be fools, and so are those who are not angry in the right way, at the right time, or with the right persons...'. The anger expressed in the 'Fight Club' was communicating the degree and the nature of oppression whereas the anger expressed in 'Project Mayhem', while certainly of a communicating nature, is physically communicating an intent to destroy oppression.

The Narrator appears to realise the misdirection of this anger, confronting both Tyler and the other comrades of 'Project Mayhem'. Through the process of seeking out Tyler for this confrontation the Narrator comes to realise that he and Tyler are the same person. Tyler has been oppressing the Narrator and controlling his life, something that the process of the 'Fight Club' and 'Project Mayhem' has trained the Narrator to be angry towards. Whereas the Narrator was upset at the apparent misdirection of anger in 'Project Mayhem', anger directed towards an abstract entity, like a War on Terror that has no tactile object, he is entirely comfortable physically directing his anger towards Tyler, a definite, albeit trans-physical, agent of oppression.

One must develop a particular type of 'self' to oppose an oppressor, particularly if the model of Virtue Ethics is to be followed (Tessman 2005, p. 114). Tyler Durden is this self, developed by, or for, the Narrator, encompassing all of the necessary traits required in the pursuit to overcome an oppressor. Tyler also exhibits the concerns of following a Virtue Ethics model into a battle with oppression, ultimately misdirecting his physical anger and, in a sense, becoming his anger. Because of Tyler's internalisation of those traits necessary for this fight his self is no longer conducive to personal flourishing, he is morally damaged. The Narrator recognises this fact and we return, cyclically as I mentioned at the beginning, to the first scene of the film. The Narrator then chooses to 'kill' Tyler to liberate himself.

The purpose of Virtue Ethics is to develop traits, virtues, that will develop the agent's character in such a way that all of his or her actions are virtues. In Aristotle's sense these virtues will be actions or reactions that exist in a mean based relationship with their objects. Ultimately, these virtues become ingrained as character traits leading the agent to eudamonia, or flourishing (NE, 1103a 14 – 1103b 26). However, when this mean based relationship exists in a disproportionate fashion such that actions that would lead to flourishing are not the mean but are too weak, demanding that more extreme measures be taken, Burdened Virtues result. These Burdened Virtues may very well lead to the destruction of oppression, for example, but they also often leave the agent in a state of moral damage, where the agent has internalised those traits necessary in the fight against oppression, but not those traits appropriate of individual flourishing. David Fincher's Fight Club illustrates the extent of these relationships of Virtue Ethics and their phenomenology under oppression. The cinematic narrative of Fight Club challenges the viewer to accept that anger, and in some cases violence, are ethical, praiseworthy, and virtuous acts. It is in this sense that the cinematic narrative of Fight Club is performing philosophy.

Notes.

1. The main character is never actually referred to by name throughout the entire film and, as he is also the narrator of the film, it is easy to simply refer to him as 'the narrator'.
2. I phrase the question in this manner simply because it is the Narrator's body that remains 'alive' at the end of the film.
3. Whether such an alter ego is actually disposable, or even possible, is not really important for this discussion.
4. For a detailed exploration of what sorts of issues arise with Burdened Virtues within groups of political resisters, comrades, see Tessman L 2005, pp. 128 -129.

References

'Nichomachean Ethics', in The Complete Works of Aristotle 1984, Barnes, J (e.d.). Bollingen Foundation, Princeton, Books II – IV.

Tessman, L 2005, Burdened Virtues: Virtue Ethics for Liberatory Struggles, Oxford University Press, Oxford.