Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Barbie Is a Movie for Our Time. This Is a Bad Thing.
Barbie Is a Movie for Our Time. This Is a Bad Thing.
Jan 10, 2025 10:14 AM

The War of the Sexes is over. Guess who won? Nobody.

Read More…

When I was a college boy, one of my history professors argued persuasively, if self-interestedly, that pink was the medieval European color of manliness—it was the color of living flesh, of manly health. And I certainly admire the pinks one sees in Renaissance paintings. But I’ve never been able to see the good of it in our lives. When a man puts on a suit, it had better be dark blue. Maybe a light pink shirt would go well with summer linens, to remind ladies that we are at leisure. But men in pink is decadence, and today we call that decadence Barbie.

For my part, I prefer to go the way of men and see Oppenheimer, the historical drama (including the mies), and nuclear explosions. It’s great—go see it as often as you can, especially in IMAX. I think if you do it once a week throughout its run, it’ll change your life. Best thing you can do this summer. It’s a big hit, too. But pared to Barbie, which debuted to around $400 million globally. I didn’t see such ing, because I avoid the vast gossipy majority of social media—Instagram, especially. It’s too late to stop it now; it’s an astonishing cultural phenomenon because it’s mothers and daughters at the movies, in pink. It’s the consequence of a decade of Taylor Swift success. Men should be ashamed of themselves. Nothing less than America—the great modern republic of the ordinary life in which it is possible for us to have self-respect—is on the line.

I did not want to see Barbie, and I want you not to see it. If you have seen it, do penance (again, see Oppenheimer). I had to do it because I have to write about it, but only an exaggerated concern for the dignity of American men could finally persuade me. I am ashamed. Women in pink used to be something delightful and frivolous, like Fred Astaire dancing with the young Audrey Hepburn in Stanley Donen’s musical Funny Face. e to think of it, maybe that’s where the problem started, with “Think Pink!”—too much advertising, too much temptation.

Barbie’s writer-director is Greta Gerwig, who once had something to do with good movies, and was lovely in Whit Stillman’s hilarious college edy Damsels in Distress. Gerwig recently remade Little Women, perhaps because she hates Louisa May Alcott. Instead, watch George Cukor’s 1933 adaptation starring Katharine Hepburn and Joan Bennett, a fine Christmas movie. Next, Gerwig has written the screenplay for a new Snow White for Disney, which already looks like a hilarious catastrophe. She wrote Barbie with her partner (not husband) Noah Baumbach, who was previously known as an indie artist, not an Instagram influencer. But things have changed.

Oppenheimer and Barbie resurrected the double feature event through sheer social media amusement at the self-importance of men and infatuation with the self-importance of women. These are our summer blockbusters, alongside Tom Cruise’s Mission Impossible 7. Hopefully, theaters will survive. But it’s a horrible price to pay. Indeed, Barbie’s big box office success has forced people to fight online over whether it’s feminist/woke or secretly moderate, open to men’s dreams of manliness. Elon Musk’s Twitter (or, excuse me, X) is the last refuge of men in modern American public life. Now, Barbie’s trending. This is like one of the particularly gloomy scenes of impending onslaught in Tolkien’s Lord of The Rings. We know that even if we prevail over the infantilization and feminization of the culture, we won’t all survive. Love and pity mingle in our souls.

Now the plot of Barbie is a thinly disguised version of the anti-erotic utopia we inhabit. Women run all the institutions, the men can do nothing but hit the gym or the beach. Barbie herself is played by Margot Robbie, who reminds me of how lovely the young Anne Hathaway was, really America’s sweetheart, the last one. Barbie lives in Barbieland, that is, Instagram. She is a lovely but loveless hen in a loveless henhouse. Suddenly, in the midst of her paradise, es to fear death and loses her superpower. She gets cellulite. This is known as “hitting the wall” on Twitter. Women age and then realize, shocked, that they’re mortal.

So Barbie goes off on a quest to find herself in the real world, with the lovelorn Ken in tow. It turns out that her mission is to bring a mother and daughter together in the hard world of 2023, where women are remarkably unhappy. Men run corporations and ogle women here; remnants of the patriarchy invariably cause problems that could be solved if people got in touch with themselves instead of being possessive, aggressive, and insecure. Barbie has an inner life; Ken doesn’t. It’s like the garden of Eden again, where the foolish Adam is tricked by the rather shrewder Eve. The Barbie theology is indeed serpent-like: it makes new gods in the world of advertising and social media.

Ken, by the way, is played by Ryan Gosling, whose career is defined by failing women in every possible way. In Blue Valentine (2010), his wife divorces him because he loves her and her daughter too much. It’s a fine picture, but depressive. In Nicolas Refn’s Drive (2011), he plays a heroic figure who saves a woman and her child but fails to save her husband and dies himself. In Damien Chazelle’s La La Land (2016), he loses the love of his life because she prefers her career, with which he helps her. In Shane Black’s edy The Nice Guys (2016), he feels guilty for failing to save his wife from an accidental death and is a drunkard bad father to a teenage daughter rather wiser and more of a grownup than him. In Denis Villeneuve’s Blade Runner 2049 (2017), he thinks he might be the protagonist, but he’s actually supposed to serve a woman. I think he dies in that one, too. Only in Terrence Malick’s Song to Song (2017) does he achieve, I think, lasting love, after of course being humiliated by his beloved’s infidelity. I guess directors take one look at this “knight of the mournful countenance” and just know he’s perfect for our times.

Ken lives up to this reputation. He’s a nonentity who thinks he could amount to something if Barbie only loved him. It goes without saying: Barbie doesn’t, can’t, and won’t love him. Loneliness is destiny. In a moment of revolt, Ken restores the patriarchy, presumably a reference to Twitter and the despised parts of the internet where men congregate only to be called incels. Ken’s reign is short-lived because he’s stupid. Barbie undoes him by playing up the petitive side of manliness, undoing the cooperating side. Then Barbie liberates him so he can find himself, too; the women give men equality, and the men submit to it!

So we get something like divine providence. First, girls are shown smashing baby dolls, since they’ll no longer define themselves as mothers. Then a girl is shown rejecting Barbie, instigating the plot, a new rebellion that leads women to reject defining themselves as wives or lovers. Again, this is just the society we live in, in which most of the young are unmarried, unloved, alone. It’s just a little more depressive in pink. The astonishing thing about Barbie is that in abstracting from erotic demands, it does embrace death and mortality. Barbie wants to be a real woman and go to the gynecologist. I guess in the sequel you can look forward to Abortion Barbie.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The Euro-Punishment of Microsoft
In what is shaping up to appear like court imposed taxation, Microsoft lost its appeal in a major anti-trust case at Europe’s second highest court yesterday. The European Union’s Court of First Instance backed the European Commission’s 2004 decision to fine Microsoft and order the software giant to change its Windows operating system to make it patible with rival systems. The 2004 verdict imposed a record fine on Microsoft in the amount of $497 million. The long feud appears, by...
Minds that Matter
In his recent and fascinating book Five Minds for the Future, Harvard professor Howard Gardner outlines the 5 basic types of intelligence people have: 1. The Disciplinary Mind: the mastery of major schools of thought, including science, mathematics, and history, and of at least one professional craft; 2. The Synthesizing Mind: the ability to integrate ideas from different disciplines or spheres into a coherent whole and municate that integration to others; 3. The Creating Mind: the capacity to uncover and...
Colleges and Universities Fail at Teaching American Civics
“Is American higher education doing its duty to prepare the next generation to keep America free?” Apparently not, according to researchers at the University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy (UConnDPP), in a missioned by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute’s (ISI) National Civic Literacy Program. In a survey of 14,000 freshman and seniors at 50 colleges and universities across the country, every school scored poorly. Also, college seniors, sadly, scored little better than freshman. The average senior score was a failing...
On Democratic and Economic Pragmatism
Related to last mentary and blog post, check out this WSJ piece, “Gates Crafts Long-Term Iraq Plan, With Limited Role for U.S. Forces,” in which Defense Secretary Robert Gates says, “My view is that whatever works economically ought to be tried.” ...
Moral Claims and ‘Green’ IT
Here’s a PCWorld piece wondering whether the “green” trend in information technology is a fad or a fixture, “Green IT: Popularity Due to Savings or Morals?” One beef I have with the piece is that it presupposes a conflict between “morality” and “efficiency” concerns. Isn’t it a part of morality to be concerned with waste and economic stewardship? These need not be contrasted in such a way, as is evident by the words of Brian Cobb, senior vice president for...
Giving and the Rise of Volunteerism
Whenever an ex-president releases a new book there is considerable buzz in the media. When Bill Clinton released a new book in Chicago this week the buzz was more than considerable. President Clinton’s new book, Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World (Knopf 2007), is sure to provoke good and important discussion. My hope is that those who love him, as well as those who despise him for whatever reason, will take a long look at his central...
Circus Bailouts vs. Market Correction
In college I wrote a paper for a Latin American Politics class titled, Barnum & Bailey Circus bailouts. The paper took the position that another financial bailout of Mexico would be a huge mistake and would not be money well spent. The paper was probably a little flippant because I interwove within the framework of the paper some characters with top hats, traveling bands of political circuses, and other outlandish theatrical symbolism. I was trying to make light of what...
‘Values’ and Voter Debates
It’s perhaps serendipitous that I’m beginning to read Gertrude Himmelfarb’s The De-Moralization of Society: From Victorian Virtues to Modern Values on the same day that the first Values Voter Debate is going to be held in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. You might think of the so-called V2 debate as an answer to Jim Wallis’ Presidential Forum on Faith, Values, and Poverty, which featured leading Democratic presidential candidates (although Wallis’ promotional materials promised a similar event including Republican candidates, such a forum...
Lewis on moral tyranny
Here’s a justly famous quote from C. S. Lewis on why the danger posed by a nanny government can be much more oppressive than that posed by the consolidation of economic power: Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but...
This Guy Has No Standing
In an attempt to oppose legislative action on tort reform, Nebraska Democratic State Senator Ernie Chambers “filed a lawsuit against God in Douglas County Court.” “The Constitution requires that the courthouse doors be open, so you cannot prohibit the filing of suits,” Chambers says. “Anyone can sue anyone they choose, even God.” I don’t think it quite works that way. In order to have standing to bring a suit, you not only have to be affected, there has to be...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved