Family As An Institution In Lukas Moodisson's "Together"

Name: Professor’s Name: Course: Date: Explore the depiction of the “Family” as an institution in Lukas Moodisson’s film together. How is “togetherness” (or the collective good) offset by “loneliness” (or the individual good) in the film? In what ways does the collective family paradigm challenge the patriarchal nuclear family? Do you think the film ultimately endorses one over the other? Why? Please be specific and provide examples? After watching the film, I came to the interpretation that Lukas Moodisson is not your typical director and in all his works, one should not expect the normal or the seemingly obvious. I gathered that Moodisson is not a man who sees the world like other people and often, he presents this world to his audience. Together or Tillsammans is not your typical film and for people who cannot stomach the truth, it is best that you avoid it. Released in 2000, the film takes a different approach in how it reveals the themes within. Moodisson offers his audience a version of society that seems to resonate with many. Looking at the film, one can easily identify with what is being shown. The concerns in the characters as well as some of the conversations the people have seem to happen or to have happened at some point in one’s life. From the parental issues to the concerns over the children’s lives, the film takes one for a ride. The strength of the film lies in how it approaches the situation and instead of making it simple, makes it a little more difficult but relatable. In her article, Sarah Crown considers that the film’s “glorious strength lies in the way in which it takes a potentially cartoonish situation, complicates it, and then complicates it further, stripping away our preconceptions both of these sorts of people and this sort of film to reveal the messy, mixed-up reality beneath.” While watching the film, it is quite bizarre that at some point one finds themselves sympathizing with a man who not only hits his wife but also acts out angrily even in the presence of his children. Additionally, one also finds themselves furious at the well-intentioned parents who believe that the emotional lives of their children come second to their dedication at work and careers. Moodisson approaches family from a different standpoint and offers different versions of what people regard as family. From the film, the traditional understanding of family is toppled by the divorce, careers, and other issues (a good example is Anna’s realization that she is lesbian). However, despite the above, I am quite certain that Togetherness presents the family institution in a new light merging it together with the theme of togetherness and loneliness while also trying to showcase that the collective family paradigm is somehow better and complete than the patriarchal nuclear family. Moodisson depicts family as an institution that has broken the barriers of the traditionally comprehended concept of family. In the film, one notes family is not simply made up of father, mother, and children. The term institution is synonymous to organization and for there to be peace and unity in an organization, people have to be held by bonds. Families are maintained by the bonds they have. However, in the film, people who call themselves families are maintained and kept together by different things. For example, Anna who is a self-declared lesbian still lives with her family which includes her ex-husband Lasse and their son Tet (from the Tet Offensive in the Vietnam War). Lasse is still bitter with her and seems to have never moved on from their divorce. Family is indeed a complicated concept and this is depicted throughout the film. Another family that shows that the institution of family has changed from the traditionally accepted concept is Eva’s new friend’s family. As stated earlier, an institution is held together by bonds, but this new family appears to have none. Apparently, according to them, parents should be deeply engrossed in their careers and seek to develop as individuals while providing the best care to their children. These parents never felt the need to emotionally connect with their children. The issue described above is a common misconception in families today where parents believe that it does more good to spend less time with their children mainly because they are working to provide a “better future” for their children. As per the initial understanding of family, parents should protect their children from anything and everything that appears to want to cause harm including emotional factors. However, this film shows how parents have neglected their role in protecting their children by taking them through the murky waters of divorce, separation, and domestic violence. The...