Interpretations of the “Monolith” (2001: A Space Odyssey)

The marbled monolith represented exactly what it was — a massive slab of obviousness.  It was something that could not be ignored if one was consciously present within the room.  However, it represented something more.  It hypothetically put forward how we evolved from apes to humans, as despite it being so obvious, one does have to be consciously aware to detect a change in one’s environment — to detect a spontaneous black slab that appears out of nowhere.  What I think Kubrick may have been illustrating was how we transitioned from a lesser state of awareness and into something more.  The apes saw the world from a primal and survival-based intelligence level.  Then, one day, they saw something in a way which they could not describe.  It captivated them in a manner which superseded all that in the background.  The apes had their first intelligently conscious moment.  The black slab was so sudden and so out-of-nowhere, that there was no way to not perceive it with intense reactional response, elevating one’s self from a lower conscious level to ultimately realize human potential.  The apes realize that one can use objects as weapons and begin to interact with the world in an evolutionary manner.  Kubrick was describing the birth of conscious intelligent life.

Just as the apes, the bones-as-a-weapon realization and the rocky, wild and unconquered landscape acted as an allegory for where conscious awareness found itself, the ending “room” is the same.  We see a fully civilized, cultured man surrounded by a pleasant bright white light in an ordered and structured room.   Whereas before the sun was the only source of light, now the source is fluorescent and man-made.  The world in which the apes found themselves was completely out of their control and foreign, whereas the room the ‘futureman’ finds himself within is completely of his (in the species sense) own creation and understanding.

Just as before, this man sees a black slab appear out of nowhere.  He chases it around the room and finds himself getting older and older in the very process.  As with the apes (‘dawn of man’), the black slab represents something in which to call attention to and inspire evolutionary reaction.  However, as a being already evolved, it is perplexing to understand its context in this room.  The man is chasing the meaning to his own human life, representing the human species as a whole.  His drive and inspiration is personified as a cold, impersonal metallic slab.  The futureman is chasing this until he dies, but with every realization, he finds himself ending up at a goal, with no memory of how he got there.  His only memory is standing at his previous position, looking out at the end-goal.  He then finds himself at the end-goal, only to not have actually ended anything.  Ironically, he finds himself once again on the chase, immediately focusing on the end-goal, until his physical body runs out of life — the entire process fueled by the monolith.  Yet even on his deathbed, at the very last moment, with his very last ounce of strength, the futureman sees this black slab once more and MUST reach out to it.  He is determined despite knowing that there’s no way he can possibly do such a thing, as he is confined to his bed and limited by his old age.  However, he must reach the end-goal and is always searching for an answer that simply cannot be reached.

This man represents what we are as a human species at the present moment — 1% away from complete control but somehow we still find ourselves unable to reach this remaining percentage.  Kubrick’s only explanation is indirect, as he eventually zooms into the black slab and transitions into space.  We live on earth and we look at space, a massive beautiful black slab, and it drives us.  Space isn’t the actual root drive of humanity; it just represents something that makes us realize our own subjectivity and scale.  It represents something so massive and so incomprehensible — its existence is a symbol for human ambition.  Like the black slab, space is unexplainable, yet we must understand and decode its mystery.  As illustrated in the final room, though, we see how the pursuit will kill us.  It is only in our last moment in which we will ever feel complete, as death is the only end-goal that can be reached with complete satisfaction.  Upon death, we go once again back into the chaotic world which we so often, in life, pretended did not exist.  We are so afraid of the unknown, that just to live we have to build white rooms of cutting edge architecture to hide us from the scary black space.  This space, like the monolith, represents the majority of existence which we do not have wrapped around our finger.  We hide from chaos and disorder, but it always exists.  Death exists, space exists and everything beyond our perspective exists and it is out of our control.  As the apes did in the beginning of the film, we go insane at these realizations — just as the futureman drove himself to death in pursuit of an explanation for what is inherently unexplainable and chaotic.  All perceived order is nothing but one flower in a field of trillions of weeds which are slowly creeping in on our shell of artificial order.

An Alternative Interpretation

The final scene could also be viewed as Kubrick’s interpretation of death, post-existence and post-humanity.  The starchild symbolizes the final peaceful understanding felt just before passing after a lifetime of seemingly futile pursuit.  The last scene shows this starchild looking over the earth and it is here where the individual starchild transitions into a metaphor for the human species.  We see the starchild looking over the earth in a contemplative and honorable manner.  If you could replace the earth with “a lifetime of personal memories” and the starchild with “someone passing away”, the intention would be exactly the same.  Instead, the final scene depicts the personification of the perfect human looking back upon the earth and thinking upon how far man has come.  In this state, one can only observe in reserved tranquility rather than act.  For a perfect, fully-realized species, this is the ultimate heaven — to look back on the source of our life, the earth, and marvel at how far we have come.  In this light, the ending is a love letter for the human species of the future.  We see a peaceful, beautiful, golden and intelligent fetus rather than something wrought with flaws.  Despite the journey, despite the chaos that once so defined humanity and the desire to understand everything, we float in peace at the finish line with nothing to do but bask in the odyssey of our achievement.

5 thoughts on “Interpretations of the “Monolith” (2001: A Space Odyssey)

  1. I read Leonard Wheat’s 2000 book,Kubrick’s Triple Allegory-you can read his online essay,Misconceptions about 2001,he argues all events are from homer’s Odyssey(HAL=Cyclops)and Nietzsche’s thus spoke Zarathustra,which also starts at dawn,ending with an interrupted last supper! here HAL=God,made in man’s image,very intriguing read!

  2. Pingback: WTF happens at the end of 2001[a space odyssey]’s… | House of Xen

  3. June 30, 2018

    Kubrick’s film is not an exact retelling of Clark’s book.
    An artist like Kubrick would have more reason to create a film than just to bring an exact copy of a novel to the screen.
    In the film version [ “2001” ] I believe Kubrick wants the monolith to represent God.
    In our dominant religious philosophies [ here in the west ] , our fundamental idea of a “relationship with God” is based upon the idea that God created us and gave us all we need to develop, thrive and continue – – – and in return we have spent all of our days
    [ forever after ] trying to understand God and in trying to seek out God.
    Kubrick establishes this idea very well in his film with the monolith’s visit to “early man” and in “modern man’s” later visit with the “purposely buried” monolith on the moon [ representing God’s understanding of our reciprocation in this relationship ].

    Kubrick’s oeuvre usually pertains to taking apart certain maxims or truths concerning human beings ( which are self serving; full of pride ) and presenting a new idea about humans which may be more to-the-point and less flattering. For example, we might believe we have full control over ourselves as human beings, but Kubrick suggests we cannot really control our anger or violent tendencies ( “Clockwork Orange” ). We might think that we can control our sexual behaviors, but in “Eyes Wide Shut” Kubrick shows how we continually get in trouble with this part of ourselves across many venues of society.
    In the film adaptation ( “2001” ) Kubrick takes issue with the idea that man has made “progress.” We may have made “technological” progress, but in the areas of our lives that have more importance, we have not made progress at all. In fact, Kubrick shows that man has actually taken a step back: when “early man” comes before the monolith – there is no sense of pretense; when “modern man” approaches the monolith [ on the moon ] there seems to be a claim of “accomplishment” or “discovery” which Kubrick finds distasteful and pretentious. In Kubrick’s reworking of Clark’s novel, this becomes the real reason for the deafening “alarm” sound: that God is not approving of such “progress.”

    The “Creation of Adam,” one of the final scenes and one of the more obvious references to
    God in the film is Kubrick’s way of saying that the only hope of improving man’s problems is to “evolve” into a “higher” form of being – or to be born again as an advanced
    “star child” ( or something ).

    – end

    • I’ve been thinking about this film and my post as well, in the last few weeks, so it’s interesting to receive this comment during this time period. Kubrick has been quoted as saying the monolith as being the movie screen itself. In the same way Kubrick took liberties to interpret the original series, I take liberties to interpret Kubrick’s film. I agree in that progression is a key motif throughout the entire film — and in many ways the scenes at the end are metaphoric of the entire choice TO progress. Should mankind evolve, if you could condense it down to one person evolving in one space, it might look like the end of the film, with the heart of man now infused with the ‘starchild’ i.e. progression.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s