Expanding on onelittlebug’s interesting hypothesis:
Would Marla’s full name then be Marla Durden, or Marla <unknown last name> ?
(you can thank me later manhattan)
hey pldennsion, i researched your point, and i am sorry to say it doesn’t hold water.
what norton’s boss gives him are airline flight coupons. those are not plane tickets. they are like gift certificates. if i came across norton’s coupons, i could redeem them for a tickets, in my name.
at least you had something stronger than a wild assumption.
I’ll be nice. Superficially speaking (and yes, we all realize, I think, that in OUR real world, the whole debate is superficial, but I’m just trying to apply some rational deduction to our window into the “Fight Club” world where people probably would have names unless they didn’t need them)
When you say that Tyler Durden doesn’t exist, you assume that the name Tyler begins and ends with Brad Pitt’s appearance. The whole point I’ve been trying to make is that this assumption, when removed from the artifice of the narrative and into the hypothetical world depicted through the film, is needlessly irrational. The very fact that the narrater is unnamed in the movie SUPPORTS my proposition that, prior to the events in the film, Tyler Durden was the name used by the one personality that is portrayed in two parts during the film. If there WERE another name to use, there would be NO REASON AT ALL not to have Norton’s character use it.
The ticket bit might support my interpretation… .it certainly doesn’t prove it. But even with just the basic elements of the film in mind, I still believe my version makes more sense as an interpretation of the character in his world (although outside the narrative of the film)
I can’t argue that this debate isn’t pointless, but I can maintain that it is more reasonable to believe that Tyler Durden is the only name required by these two characters than to think that another name is left mysteriously unsaid.
Oh, and I don’t see why Norton would think it odd to meet someone with the same name as him if he didn’t think it was odd to meet someone who looked exactly like him and lived inside the same body… he’s crazy, remember?
I think everyone is assuming that the “pre-Fight Club” version of the character(s) IS Norton’s character. That’s what we are led to presume from the beginning, but everything has to be reconsidered at the conclusion. As it turns out, another interpretation is possible, fits the evidence just as well or better, and makes more sense if you think of the Fight Club world as a bigger one than the movie shows.
This thread has grown into a metaphysical discussion the likes of which I don’t enjoy. Tyler isn’t his name. The name on the tickets is added for dramatic purposes. The character Norton plays is nuts. The End
That said, I’m officially retiring from this thread.
Good night, all.
OK…I guess I just came into this discussion too late, but isn’t Ed Norton’s name Jack in the movie? Internet Movie Data Base lists his name as “Narrator (Jack)”. I don’t actually own the video, so I can’t go back and scan it over and over again, but I remember him telling Tyler about the book where the body parts speak for their owners and all through about the first half of the movie he say’s things like “I am Jack’s bruised ego” etc.
It’s my understanding that the majority of people out there who suffer from split or multiple personality disorders have experienced some sort of trauma and/or some sort of serious emotional upheaval, that they actually create (unbeknownst to them) a whole new personality to deal with that which disturbs them.
If I were at a point in my life where things got so bad that I needed to shield myself from some traumatic experience(s)or thoughts – do ya think that I’d make some character up with my same name?? I think not. I’d probably create a wonder woman super hero type of person (much like the narrator did in making “Tyler Durden”) and I’d at least make her name “Pink” or “Red” – some other name – someone who I am not.
Trust me…I know a thing or two about this stuff…I’m an avid watcher of crappy late night Lifetime TV for women. Need I say more??
Sheesh…
I agree, Dystopos, that this thread is very long and quite pointless, but the only reason for constant response is because you are definitely wrong. I’m surprised that you are still sticking to your original assumption, or interpretation, or whatever, with so much evidence contrary to it. I don’t believe that you have watched the movie again since this debate over the character’s name has started. But whether you have or not, all the proof stated here has definitely disproved your interpretation, but you’ve been ignoring the proof and sticking to your creative assumption.
Please read this post entirely if you have time, Dystopos. I won’t post in this thread after this, because if you read this and see the movie again and still stick to what you think, there is nothing I can say to convince you otherwise. I do want to hear what you think after you see it again, though.
I’m not sure where you plucked this from, but someone earlier asked when Tyler Durden came into existance. I was explaining that one could deduce many things based on what was revealed, but my point was that it is a movie and you can’t fill in gaps that it makes on purpose. I have since watched it again, and the Tyler Durden persona has existed for at least as long as the character has been insomniac (6 months prior). Norton’s character never met him until the plane. I don’t think anyone said that they believe Tyler or his name begins and ends with the appearance of Pitt.
…?
Who looks exactly like Norton? Tyler is meant to be a complete contrast to Norton, because Norton is trying to escape his life. The person he meets looks like Brad Pitt to him…Tyler isn’t mental copy, He’s an imaginary friend. To Norton, he’s a regular living person. Everyone else sees Norton as Tyler, because Tyler doesn’t exist. But the person they see looks like Norton. Norton hallucinates about himself looking like someone else.
At first I thought this was silly, but I realize that you would reach this conclusion if you thought Norton and Tyler were both simply two personalities in one body, when in fact the body belongs to Norton, and Tyler has “invaded” it. This is a story about Norton’s character (real) that has a friend (imaginary), not two personalities sharing a body equally.
Here are the facts as I see them.
[ul]
[li]The story is about a character that we are not told the name of. This does not mean that we all think he has no name; it simply means that we aren’t told it. This isn’t an assumption - but it is an assumption on your part to assign him one just cuz you weren’t told it, or because his alter ego has one. Like earlier stated, Edward Norton himself tells us that the name is not revealed in a commentary, during the liposuction clinic scene. If that isn’t enough, here’s more…[/li]
[li]Crazy people do not think they are crazy. Because they are crazy in one way doesn’t mean that they are capable of all types of craziness. He didn’t create a friend with his own name, and then forget his own for the rest of the movie. He really thinks that Tyler Durden is a different person. I mean, he found the fact that they had the same suitcase strange. I think he’d inquire about someone having the same name as himself.[/li]
[li]The character is living his life (the one he was born with) as a person that looks like Edward Norton and has an unrevealed name. He goes to sleep, and wakes up with a different personality, which he has named Tyler Durden. So while he is in this state, he introduces himself as Tyler Durden, works multiple jobs as Tyler Durden, and otherwise thinks he is for a time. But then he goes back to sleep, his personality goes back to normal, and he has no idea what happened. This is why people that have met him think his name is Tyler, including Marla. After they exchanged numbers, she notices that he has not given her his name. Before she can answer, she is gone - obviously this is the director letting us know that we don’t know it either, and this is a hint that we aren’t going to find out. Obviously he gave her his name when he went to pick her up when she took all the drugs - but he went as Tyler, so he told her his name is Tyler.[/li]
[li]Someone in a another city calls him Mr. Durden, the first time he’s heard this in the entire movie. See the funny look on his face? That is surprise. He is shocked. He hasn’t forgotten his own name cuz he’s crazy. But he knows that Tyler is not his name, it’s the name of his friend. Obviously, “last Thursday”, he was in the bar while in his other personality, and has met them in that personality.[/li]
[li]Marla calls him Tyler on the phone. See above for clues to deciphering the surprised look.[/li]
[li]He asks Tyler, “Why do people think I’m you?” and “Why do people think I’m Tyler Durden?” because he isn’t. He knows this. Tyler knows this. Tyler doesn’t say, “You are, you nutcase! That’s your name!” Norton answers himself by saying, “Because we are the same person.” He is then told that the person he’s talking to is an imaginary friend named Tyler Durden. Tyler tells him, “Sometimes, you’re still you. Sometimes, you envision yourself watching me. Slowly, you’re just letting yourself become more and more…Tyler Durden.” The key word here is become. Norton tries to rationalize that Tyler must exist by saying that he has a house, to which Tyler rebuts, “Rented in your name.” Think about this. If Tyler’s name is Tyler, and Norton’s name is Tyler, saying “in your name” would be redundant. Don’t ignore the evidence. “in your name” means “in a name other than mine. My name is Tyler Durden, but I don’t exist. Your name is not Tyler Durden, but you do exist.”[/li]
[li]When he sees that phone calls have been made between 2 and 3, while he was sleeping, he wonders if he’s been sleeping longer. He says, “Am I becoming Tyler for longer?” Again, the key word is becoming.[/li]
[li]When he’s talking to the police officers that are about to castrate him, he yells, “I’m not Tyler Durden!”[/li]
[li]Ahh, the plane tickets. You’ve had a bunch of posts, and yet this is the only actual evidence brought up (not by you, I might add) and it has been found out that this evidence doesn’t hold up because his boss never gave him tickets. He gave him flight coupons, which he could have easily redeemed while in his alternate personality, and that’s why the name Tyler Durden is on them.[/li][/ul]
All in all, there are many points that verify what I am saying. Our argument is basically this:
Me: “I know his name is not Tyler Durden. My proof is here.”
You: “I don’t see why it couldn’t be Tyler Durden, because the character isn’t named. I have no proof whatsoever, and I missed the parts containing your proof, so I guess his name must be Tyler Durden.”
Norton isn’t just a personality. He’s a human. Tyler Durden is a figment of his imagination, not the other way around, and they aren’t simply two personalities sharing the same body. The body belongs to one of them - Norton. Norton exists, Tyler doesn’t, but sometimes Norton exists as Tyler. He was not born with the name Tyler. He created Tyler. Tyler says near the end, "You created me! Take some responsibility."
How do you know Norton is the character? Simple: the surveillance camera. This is obviously not from the character’s POV. He sees Tyler Durden. The camera does not. The camera is reality. The camera sees a human that looks like Edward Norton. This is a story about Edward Norton’s character. Tyler is inside him. When Tyler comes to the surface and introduces himself to someone new, he would introduce himself as Tyler.
But don’t take my word for it. Watch the movie again. If you did, watch it again. I’ve seen it 3 1/2 times. Look for the ponts I made. If you still disagree, I won’t rebut. I’m through with this. But tell me what you think after you’ve seen it again. Argyle thought the same thing you did. Argyle’s mind has changed. Why do you think that is?
I agree with Dystopos.
Just an opinion, don’t get too hot under the collar. Don’t expect me to post to the discussion again, it’s gone on for wayyyyyyyy too long already.
-Sam
Thank GOD! This was exhausting.
Ya know what’s funny?? I didn’t even like the movie that much.
kemijo, you said it all…now I’m done.
i have one questoin about the movie that i can’t explain. norton meets meetloaf on the street (about 1/2 way through the movie) he act’s like he only reconizes norton from the help groups, yet he’s already a member of fight club. how can this be? if norton is pitt during the days that meatloaf goes, then meatloaf would have reconized him from fight club and not the help groups. Even if “your not susposed to talk about fight club” to explain why at that time meatloaf acted like he only reconized norton from the help groups, meatloaf still bring fight club up in the conversation. is this a whole in the plot or is there something i’m just not getting?
norton and pitt go to fight club on saturdays.
bob (meatloaf) goes on tuesdays and thursdays, if i recall correctly.
if norton and pitt go on saterday and meatloaf go during the week, who’s the boss during the week.who recites the rules to everybody. i don’t think that norton/pitt would entrusts this to someone else at this point in the movie, if ever
…ok…I’m back. I lied.
Towards the end of the movie when Norton is trying to convince the police that he’s done a bad, bad thing he says that Fight Club/Project Mayham runs without any central control…thus…once it’s set up…it goes on its own. That’s why there’s all this urban ledgendry going on about Tyler Durden…many members have never even seen him.
OK then one question - in the spliced in footage at the end of the movie - who’s penis is it? Tyler’s or Jack’s?
(Just kidding, I know it is actually Marla’s)
i agree that project mayham ran without any central control, but only once it was set up. when norton/pit met meatloaf on the street, fight club is just barly formed. i don’t think this explains the paridox in the movie. Why doesn’t meatloaf reconize norton/pit from fightclub?
this is not true. it is quite established. and they all know the rules. nobody wants to break them. there’s always the guy who runs lou’s to watch over things.
this was answered a few posts ago. meatloaf attends on tuesdays and thursdays, norton and pitt attend on saturdays.
read blue’s post.
i did read blue’s post. what i’m saying is that i don’t think that at that point in the movie that norton/pit would let there be fight club meatings without his presents. if that is true, then meatloaf would have reconized him, but he didn’t. i guess it’s up to opinion. if there were fight club meating at this point in the movie without norton/pit, then i think that it detractes from the plot of the movie.