SEAN PENN, LOST IN THE WOODS.

In the interests of fair-mindedness I have to preface this post by saying up front that I am not, and never have been, a fan of Sean Penn and it'll also come as no shock to most of you that he and I are not exactly ideological kindred, but having said that I must confess that I have always been kind of fascinated by him, and it would also be fair to say that in the past I have extended him more respect than the rest of the left-fringe-Hollywood-type community. This is primarily because he seems to have guts, and his convictions often translate into sacrifical action. His convictions find expression in sweat and personal expense, and that is challenging to me. I respect that when I see it, although as I have stated previously on this blog- giftedness and sincere effort isn't admirable in and of itself, giftedness is only as good as the cause it is employed in.

In short, I Used to feel that he wasn't just noise. He always struck me more as a serious opponent, a sincere opponent, but an opponent nonetheless, and wrong on just about everything (in my estimation). I feel it can be said with confidence that the man possesses above average courage, but what drives him? I suspected that there most be some overarching ethos or philosophy that governs him and lends such decisiveness, passion, and backbone to all of his endeavors. It turns out I was wrong on that though.

I recently watched a show called Iconcoclasts featuring Sean Penn and John Krakauer who collaborated on a film based on Krakauer's best-selling book, "Into the Wild." The premise of the show is described thusly; "In this original series, leading innovators and creative visionaries meet to discuss their passions and creative processes, providing an inside glimpse into the inspiration and motivation that made these iconoclasts who they are today." I watched the show because, as I said, I have always been fascinated by Penn and I wanted to understand what made him tick.

I had read the book "Into the Wild" also, and, like millions of others "Alexander Supertramp" hit a nerve with me. Although, after watching the show, I am certain that I ultimately arrive at different conclusions than Penn and Krakauer regarding his life and ethos. I will leave my opinions on Christopher McCandless for another post however.

The biggest surprise I got from watching the show was that Penn is really kind of adrift. I am aware that I open myself up to a charge of having an exagerated opinion of myself by tearing another man down like that, but there was no cohesive belief system, and no central ethos. Frankly there was no rhyme or reason to what he does. He just shoots from the hip on every issue, following his gut, his instincts, and then justifies himself with the vaguest of language or simply refuses to justify himself at all. Perhaps he hopes that simply by saying things with authority and passion nobody will notice how confused he is, how contradictory his beliefs, how simple and vapid his reasoning. He was so facile, and I realized with some shame, that I had been duped all these years into thinking that he was profound perhaps in a way that I didn't understand or appreciate fully. It turns out that he isn't profound at all, but merely cryptic, and I now believe that he is a mystery even to himself- adrift, yes, passionately adrift.

So why does he do the things he does? Did I answer for myself the question of what makes him tick? I think so. I had mistakenly believed that he was motivated and governed by philosophy and world-view because that is what motivates me, but I now believe that he is looking and flailing about for something worthy of his passion, worthy of investment. The closest he could come in the show was, "Experiencing life to the fullest." In my opinion he is looking for truth, but he look and sounds lost. He is lost, and every boy scout knows that when you get lost in the woods, just sit down and wait for the search party. Mr. Penn, just sit down.