The Materialization of the Spectacle: The Role of Allegorical References in I’m Thinking of Ending Things Written by Nujhat Tabassum1,2,3,4 1 Department of Physiology, 2Human Biology, 3Psychology, University of Toronto 4 Alumnus of Victoria College, University of Toronto Through stark alterations of characters and setting, and unreliable narration, I’m Thinking of Ending Things thrives on ambiguity, effectively disorienting first-time viewers. Despite their confusion, enticed by the film’s withholding nature, many viewers feel compelled to return for multiple viewings, in attempts to decrypt its ‘true’ meaning. Ending accomplishes this, in part, through its overabundance of visual and literary allegorical references. Like tantalizing bait, the sources of these references are dangled in front of the audience, either directly stated through philosophical dialogue or noticeably placed in a scene’s setting. Understanding these references as representative of Ending’s narrative details and overarching themes, viewers attempt to use them as keys to crack the film’s coded language. However, stated but rarely elaborated upon, these references instead enhance the barrier to knowledge between the film and its audience, preventing the average viewer from achieving intelligibility of the story. As a result of not being equipped with the foundational knowledge required to gain deeper understanding of the material, these viewers cannot help but feel alienated from the film. However, in line with Ending’s overarching themes, this effect is intentional.
A Not-So-Beautiful Mind As referenced in the film, David Foster Wallace’s essay “E Unibus Pluram: Television and U.S. Fiction” states, “Pretty people tend to be more pleasing to look at than non-pretty people. But when we’re talking about television, the combination of sheer Audience size and quiet psychic intercourse between images and oglers starts a cycle that both enhances pretty images’ appeal and erodes us viewers’ own security in the face of gazes.” (1:34:21-1:34:42). The perception of intelligence and talent, conflated here as genius, creates the same cycle between Jake and the Girlfriend, and between the references he surrounds himself with. Similar to the principles stated in the essay in relation to prettiness, human beings find appeal in and tend to identify with things they consider genius. Due to Jake’s deep desire to be perceived as genius himself, he diligently absorbs knowledge from those he reveres. Like prized commodity, the quantification of this desire is shown through shots of Jake’s childhood bedroom, teeming with notable works of art and science. Fitting this frame of genius as a material possession, Jake’s fractured psyche constructs the Girlfriend to be an idealized partner to not only carry his breadth of academic knowledge, as a physicist-artist-poet-gerontologist-biologist, but to be earned by him, as validation of his own genius because he appeals to and is accepted by her. The relationship between the film and its audience follows similar logic. The Girlfriend’s genius qualities are presented directly to viewers, through conversations about her scholarly pursuits, displays of her artistic talent (her breathtaking poetry and paintings), and her original arguments (like her scathing review of the film A Woman Under the Influence (1:16:56-1:19:29)). Through this evidence, the Girlfriend becomes established as genius in the audience members’ minds, and in line with Wallace’s essay, they find themselves both attracted to her (and Ending’s) genius, and pride themselves in their ability to recognize the refined qualities associated with genius. Through this ability, they believe they have gained access into the exclusive social sphere of genius, earning identities as at least genius-adjacent. Screenwriters’ Perspectives Vol. 3 No. 1 2022
23
