Easy Rider (1969) Movie Review

I had seen Easy Rider about 20 years ago for the first time. I remember being impressed with the film and recently for some reason I wanted to watch the film again.

What I mostly remembered from last time was the tragic ending and the shots of the landscapes and the motorcycles. The story is about 2 men, Wyatt and Billy, riding their motorcycle and living a lifestyle of cruising around the Southern part of the United States. What struck me this time was that the story begins with the men successfully closing a big drugs deal. I had completely forgotten that part. They purchase a large quantity of cocaine in Latin America and then resell that at a much higher price to a buyer in the States. Within successfully striking this deal they have apparently won their freedom because now they have enough money to live their cruising lifestyle for many years to come.

I thought this was an interesting twist at the beginning of the film, because in a way the movie is all about having the courage to be free and live a lifestyle that is substantially different from the norms of society, but in reality there is no actual solution offered in regards to ‘how’ to be free, because indeed the main problem is that one need income in order to live. Hence, one way to look at the beginning of the film is that they successfully bought their freedom, but another way to look at it is that they actually sold their integrity and did not actually create a real point of freedom that one can learn from. 

I did enjoy the spirit of the film I must say and the sense of adventure of just cruising and Wyatt and Billy just going where they feel like and enjoying their bikes. There is an actual point of openness and peacefulness within the film. It is basically approaching life as an experiment, which is what it should be and not something that is set in stone through laws, traditions and customs.

So, the question then remains – how to be an Easy Rider? Do you have to close a drugs deal or win the lottery? Because, despite all the creativity underpinning this film, the answer to that question was not very creative. I would say, based on my personal experience, that being an Easy Rider is based not on having won some kind of lottery, but on who you are as a person. And here an ‘Easy Rider’ is not to be taken literally as is depicted in the film, but in a metaphorical sense. Because one ingredient that made the film very compelling is Wyatt’s attitude towards life. Had he not been as ‘calm’, ‘relaxed’, ‘grounded’, ‘open’ and ‘caring’ throughout the story, then the film would not have been such a success.  In a way he was like a Siddhartha on a motorcycle.

So back to the question how to practically be an Easy Rider in this world? I would say that one Key is to walk with a certain ‘detachment’ in this world. It does not matter then whether you have a motorcycle or not, or whether you have a lot of money or not, or even on what kind of job you have. To walk with a certain ‘detachment’ would mean that you have a rather ‘practical’ relationship with the things in your world without being ‘consumed’ by the things that you require to be able to operate and function. Most people will require a job or have to be self-employed in order to have any form of stability in their lives, hence being ‘detached’ within that would mean that you express yourself within your job in a manner that honours your best potential, but nonetheless you would not allow your job to define ‘who you are’. You have a practical relationship with it. You can then also have a practical relationship with money. You know that you need it, but you don’t have to be consumed by it.

But wasn’t Easy Rider also about being adventurous and bold in life? Yes, I would say so. I personally have started experiencing adventurousness and boldness when I started traveling in recent years. In the past I thought traveling to be an unnecessary ‘luxury’. And with ‘traveling’ here I mean really going somewhere for the sake of exploring a new place and experiencing things that I have not seen or experienced before. What I like about this kind of traveling is that my relationship with people changes – they are not ‘there’ as part of the wallpaper, but actual people I can interact with, hang out with and learn from. I would say that my relationship with people in general has changed. I used to be very rigid and keeping people at bay, whereas now I more easily let someone into my world and my reality. For me that is being adventurous, because in moments I have to trust myself that it is ok to place my trust in this or that person for a moment. I am sure there are many other ways of living the word ‘adventurousness’ – if you feel like sharing your own examples why not leave a comment?

Thank you for reading. 

Day 398 - My Journey into Spain - First Chapter

Normally when I travel abroad, I prefer to stay more or less in one location and not move around too much. But this time, the suggestion came up that I should 'travel around' and explore the country. I have never done this before on my own. With my partner we did travel to countries and we traveled around, but the initiation and the movement would come from my partner and I would just 'ride along'. 

Within my personality I have quite a bit of 'fears' as regards 'unpredictable things' that can happen whilst traveling, consequently for me to do this ony my own was an important step. When I leanred that I would not be able to travel to Panama less than 24 hours before the departure flight, I looked at the situation and talking with my partner, I decided that I wanted to travel to Spain instead. I had 2 weeks of holiday ahead of me and it was the middle of the summer. In a way it was perfect. 

So within the span of one day, I booked a one way ticket to Barcelona plus a hotel for 4 nights in the city. I did not know what I would do after those 4 nights nor did I know when I would fly home. But most likely I would after those 4 days, hire a car and travel to other places and then see when I would be ready to return home. I just had to make sure I'd be back after two weeks. 

The benefit was that my suitcase was already packed for a 2-week holiday. I simply had to replace some stuff and do some different paperwork as regards traveling to Spain. I enjoyed being able to simply book a flight and not know exactly when I'd return home. Many people do this type of traveling already in their twenties, but as I said, for me it was all new. 

What was interesting within this trip is that I knew where my fears and insecurities were. I knew that I would have to deliberately move myself to challenge myself and not fall back into comfort zones and fears of the unknown. In that sense my trip was quite expansive, because I did succeed in identifying those moments where I usually 'back off' in fear and instead guided myself to take small leaps of faith. 

The rest of my amazing journey will be posted on this blog in days to come. 

-----------------------------------------------------------

For more information about writing, self-forgiveness and applying self-change, visit: http://desteni.org

For the Free online self-forgiveness course, visit: http://lite.desteniiprocess.com

---------------------------------------------------------- 

Day 393 - The Unspoken Law of the Jungle

If you look at the 'family-construct' as a social system, one would expect that it solves the problem of 'responsibility' and 'everyone being taken care of'. Because: ideally, every child is born within a family (of at least one parent) - and that is not even taking into account the amount of orphan children in this world. 

Then, because every child is ideally born within a family of at least one parent - there is an unspoken 'law of the jungle'  that every child is taken care of in this world, as the child stands under the protection and care of (at least) one adult. The 'family-construct' as a social system is then really presented as the basic foundation of society, without which children would be lost. Looking at the world superficially then, one would expect that most children in the world are taken care of as they are lodged within one or more 'family-constructs'. And, as was said, the unspoken law of the jungle dictates that since the child is in the care of a family, it is consequently 'taken care of'.

The unspoken law of the jungle does however not take into account the money-system and how it functions on a global scale. The underlying assumtion of the law of the jungle is that every family in the world will have the means to take care of a child appropriately. The only way to do that in today's world, is by having access to money. Without money, one cannot actually survive. Yet, more than half of all the human beings in todays world officially live under the poverty line. They do not have sufficient access to money and consequently they cannot actually give the care to the children that the children require. Hence roughly half the children in this world are in effect not adequately taken care of. 

Some years ago it was reported in South Africa that a pregnant woman had thrown herself off the stairs with the deliberate intent to permanently damage her unborn child, so as to later qualify for specific government support. This is the law of the jungle in full action, because it did not consider the global economic system. 

If we assume (law of the jungle) that children are to be taken care of within a family, then why would we restrict access to money for families? Why would we not want families to have guaranteed access to money so that they can adequately raise, support and take care of their children? When we resolve this contradiction, we will resolve the problem of poverty and then we will finally be able to say that families are the foundation of society, which currently they are not.