Dark Matters: The Meaning of Life
by Mia Burke
Jonas at the Filming Location for Dark. Photo courtesy of David Klein.de.
Jonas: Why am I here?
Adam: A person lives three lives.
The first ends with the loss of naïveté,
the second, with the loss of innocence
and the third... with the loss of life itself.
It's inevitable that we go through all three stages.[1]
I’ve watched Netflix’s Sci-Fi Noir/Thriller, Dark (2017-19) three times in a row and could go for a fourth-really. If you’re not familiar with the show and need a go-to with unpredictable twists, characters whose choices surprise even themselves, fantastic cinematography, and introduces you to innovative music- this is your next binge-worthy series.
A word of caution to those not familiar with German (or European for that matter) cinematic experiences, it’s gritty. Graphic, sex, and an emotional real that makes us Americans squirm. Ok, now that that’s out of the way- ready, set watch. I’ll wait right here for you.
Overview Season 2 (2019). Photo courtesy David Klein.de.
Amazing, wasn’t it? Are you confused? Did you have to draw out a detailed family tree to understand the intricacies and the nuisances of the relationships like I did? As a screenwriter, I want to write with that kind of authenticity. Dark is everything J.J. Abram’s Lost (2004-2010) could have been. I’ll reserve my definitive judgment until after the third and final season wraps up next year. However, the geek in me prophesies that I won’t be disappointed. Stop here if you have not finished season two- spoilers abound.
Back to earth and this post. I’ve opened with one of the most intriguing lines from the series. Adam, the series antagonist (at this point), calls our young protagonist Jonas Kahnwald into the Sic Mundus lair to talk with his (allegedly) younger self about his fate. The above-quoted dialogue occurs during a pivotal point in Jonas’ history, a crucial crossroads: Does he time travel to stop events from happening? Does he have free will or fated to live an unfortunate series of events to a final endpoint- doomed like Odysseus to an inevitable eventuality? Aside from the plot line, the quote intrigued me theologically. And Jonas’ question, that’s the crux isn’t it Jonas?
Why are we here?
I theorize, like Adam, that there are indeed thresholds, which occur at specific points in life. Turning points where an event, a word, a thought definitively changed me, I was never the same again. Maybe that is why Adam’s theory piques my curiosity. In light of my threshold theory, I carefully consider Adam’s assertion that there are three lives in which we live and then lose: the death of our naïveté, our innocence and ultimately of our physical being. It feels familiar. I’m Googling desperately, looking for a spot of Nietzsche, a bit of Hegel, come on- any German or other philosopher in which this idea can be attributed. No luck. So it's up to me, well kinda- come Holy Spirit, guide me through this tangled, esoteric labyrinth reminiscent of Minos’ Knossos, Dante’s Inferno. So hand in hand with Jonas, I descend into Hell- into the Sic Mundus lair underground.
Death of Naïveté
The word naïveté derives from the French naïf with the same modern meaning we use. Time has packed nuance and additional meanings into the word for our modern connotation- a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgment. I search further back to Latin’s nativus meaning inborn or elemental [2], let’s camp on the Latin definition.
An element is the basest form of something. The Oxford Dictionary states that elements (speaking chemically) cannot be interconverted or broken down into simpler substances-they are the primary constituents of matter[3]. Let’s apply that to the more modern definition of naïveté- in a naïve state, you are your most base element- your real you. So according to Adam's theory, losing your elemental self, whether due to an event that catches you off guard, lack of experience/wisdom, or not having sound judgment leads to a sort of death. I can buy that. I vividly remember when I was no longer naïve to the world around me, and I’m still grieving it. Ignorance is sometimes bliss.
“Element’ Photo courtesy Camilo Jimenez on Unsplash.
Death of Innocence
Innocence and naïveté have only the slightest of nuisances separating them. Innocence is not guilty of a crime or offense, not directly responsible in an event, yet suffering its consequences, free from moral wrongs or corruption. The death of innocence would be guilt in the involvement with a crime, responsible for an event, moral wrongdoing, or corruption[4]. An act of the will- willfully doing something wrong and we are without question, guilty. Again, I buy that. And just as clearly as I remember the slow, eventual death of my naïveté, I also remember very early in life losing my innocence by willfully lying to get a reaction from a listener. Thankfully, my propensity for storytelling has been redeemed as a writer.
Innocence is fragile. Once that that veil is torn, it is not reparable. You cannot un-see it, un-hear it, un-feel it, no putting your “it” back together. A wise mother once told me to guard my children's innocence for as long as I can. Once it is gone, it’s gone. And boy was that true.
Physical Death
Adam says the finality is physical death, which he is going to war with until his and the other character’s bitter ends. But what is death? Scientifically speaking it’s the condition that distinguishes plants and animals from inorganic matter, including the incapacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death[5]. Here’s where Adam and I diverge on that road of understanding in the woods.
Interestingly the Bible concurs with Adam that there are indeed three states of man that we journey through. However, it differs in identifying them and their ends. The Bible notes that the three states or modes of humanity are: created, fallen, and eternal. Having a biblical worldview, physical death is not the end of our story. This might be a good time to break apart worldview and get past the quick and easy answers so many Christian institutions run to when the idea is far more complex.
Photo by Saketh Garuda on Unsplash.
Worldview is term on loan to us from the German word Weltanschauung (Welt' world' and Anschauung' view' or 'outlook') attributed to my philosopher buddy Immanuel Kant. In simple terms, it is how we view the world- the pair of glasses we choose to put on and see reality through. The worldview of a people (culture) originates from their unique experiences in time, location, and other factors over several millennia.
For instance, my culture’s use of language fixes my worldview. I am a Southerner who will forever refer to more than one person as “ya’ll.” And I have many variations: ya’ll (more than one person) and all ya’ll (a group of people collectively increasing in size). No amount of exposure to other cultures, education, nor sophistication (yeah right) will ever remove this reference to a collective of people from me. And that collective reference is based on my Papa and Uncle Pat’s use of the term. Ya’ll will always remind me to be inclusive of all people. Their humble Cajun origins in the lower working class on Back Bay in Mississippi recognized that EVERYONE contributes and is to be welcomed and served. And I live into this.
Worldview Iceberg. Graphic courtesy of Alexcarabi.com.
Many factors go into shaping how we see the world personally as well as what we inherit culturally. According to philosopher and worldview specialist Leo Apostel (1925-1995), a worldview is a descriptive model of the world[6]. It should comprise these six elements:
An Ontology- explanation of reality, which questions, “What is it?”
An Explanation- deals with the past, which questions, “Where does it come from?”
A Prediction- deals with the future, which questions, “Where are we heading?"
An Axiology- values, answers to ethical questions, "What is good and what is evil?"
A Praxeology- methodology of action, which questions, "How should we act?"
An Epistemology- theory of knowledge, that questions "What is true and what is false?"
Back to the 'so what’ question of Dark and the worldview Adam asserts. Why does this matter? Sociological research seems to indicate that feelings of insecurity and distrust are stronger among people who do not profess a belief in a religious or philosophical worldview[7]. Psychologists researching life satisfaction have found that having such beliefs increases well-being, by providing a sense of life meaning, feelings of hope and trust, a long-term perspective on life's woes, and a sense of belonging to a larger whole[8]. And we as a culture are missing these collective pieces today. So let’s look at Adam’s theory from the biblical worldview instead of from his Nihilist perspective (the belief that life is meaningless, rejecting all religious and moral principles).
Three Biblical States
Naïve Eternal Beings
Our initial elemental state rests in being created in the image of God, or Imago Dei. Genesis 1:27 tells us that,
“…God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him.”
Humans lived in a state of innocence- entirely in the likeness of our Creator. The first man Adam (and Mama Eve) hung out in the Garden and lived in a state that we could only dream of: provided for, in daily physical communion with our Father, entirely accepted as His child and as an individual, and secure. They were totally naïve- blissfully unaware that this ugly, twisted thing called evil existed.
Adam’s assertion in the series is true. Biblical Adam and Eve were their elemental selves, then something happened to shift them out of this state: enter the Serpent.
Jonas Characters from Overview Season 2. Photo courtesy of David Klein.de.
This plays out in Dark through the three-in-one character: Jonas Kahnwald. Adam (future Jonas), Jonas the Yellow Coat, and the man I’ll refer to as Jonas the Elder. We experience the plot through young Jonas the Yellow Coat. He is naïve- blissfully unaware that something wicked this way comes. He crushes on Martha, he teaches his ooma a few techie moves on the tablet he bought her, he swims at the lake with his buds Magnus and Bartosz. He’s a Hobbit in the Shire, A Gelfling in Thra, all is well with the world. Then the Serpent enters- himself, well an older version of himself. Isn't that the way for some of us? We are our own worst enemy; we are the inciting incident…but are we? Jonas the Elder intervenes in time to unknowingly tear the veil of naïveté from Jonas the Yellow Coat by returning their father Mikkel/Michael’s suicide note.
In the Garden, the Serpent enters much the same way- asking a seemingly innocent series of questions/statements. It is at that point that Eve (and later Adam since us women are so relational) now knows without a doubt -something is afoot. They are no longer naïve, and there's been a change to their elemental selves, thus enlarging their view of the world- aka worldview.
Spiritual Beings in Mode TBD and Our Loss of Innocence
The entrance of the Serpent in and of itself isn’t necessarily where things went wrong. Many things enter our minds and hearts at a young age. My grandson is three, and I'm watching him struggle against the boundaries my kids put around him. That's not sin. That's part of the nature of being human- how far can I go? What else is out there past this? We are like our Creator- curious, thinking, creative beings. But the older Finn gets, the more I see him coming into an awareness that there is a right and a wrong. In his three-year-old terms, "bad guy/good guy."
In the biblical account of the Garden in Genesis 3 the issue of sin came front and center when the Serpent threw a couple of observations at Eve: Did God really say[9]? You will not surely die[10] and you will be like God[11]. And she fell for it- hook, line, and sinker. And before you think you’d do anything differently- you wouldn’t and neither would I. We are curious beings with a propensity to think there’s something better, we’re being held out on (think Pandora and her box). So Eve lost her innocence taking that bite of the fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The taste is possibly an analogy of taking something (an idea) into her being just as you would when swallowing food (think the implanting of an idea like in Inception (2010). I’m open to mystery, the bite could possibly be literal as well. It doesn't really matter- she did it, and we're stuck with the consequences.
And what’s wrong with knowing the difference between good and evil? They were innocent before then. They only knew good[12] (morally right behavior). With the entrance of evil[13] (profoundly immoral and wicked behavior often attributed to the supernatural) came death[14]. So semantically, Dark’s Adam and my Christian worldviews agree.
Physical Death, the Transition
Death diagram used by permission of simplybible.com.
Then the Bible tells us that it is at this point that sin entered the world, and our flesh (mind, emotions, will) was more than happy to make a deviation from good to our own understanding of what is right and wrong. Let’s define sin since our Post-Modern culture loves to change the meaning. A sin is an immoral act that transgresses a divine law[15].
Evil was already on earth in the fallen Lucifer, but now it entered humanity in the form of sin. When God warned Adam and Eve in Gen 2:16-17, he said there was a consequence of knowing evil, and that was death. In one way or another, there are consequences to sin but in this case- dooming all of mankind. There seems to be a timeless principle at work- evil requires blood.
Recapping Dark, Adam’s assertion is that our first life is our true, elemental self and its loss leads to a sort of death concurs with the biblical perspective of our original state: naïveté - looking the most we ever will (on this mortal coil) like our Creator. Something occurs, and we shift from this base status of no longer being naïve to recognizing/participating in evil, a loss of innocence. We're in agreement, and then the next threshold is a death of sorts: a life of war, battling against evil (or not) until a physical death occurs. However there’s a missing element to Adam’s worldview: free will and that there is a consequence to using it contrary to universal moral laws. I cannot accept Adam’s Nihilist perspective, as I have experienced the intervention of an involved, loving God whose hand has and continues to move in my life, when/if I let him.
The concept of Original Sin strikes me- we are all born with a sinful nature, inheriting the propensity to transgress the universal moral laws from Adam and Eve as a consequence of their rebellion in the Garden[16]. The fact that the antagonist in the series is named Adam suddenly clicks a few things into place. Dark’s Adam lived the first life in the time loop and the subsequent versions of himself, Jonas, may be doomed to live that same loop over and over just as we are doomed to transgress the moral laws of God to due to our Adam’s sin according to the doctrine …ah, I see what you did there writers and directors Baran bo Odar and Jantje Friese!
As eternal beings that do, in fact, pass through the portal of physical death, our fate in death is Hell. We cannot co-exist in a sinful state with a perfect Creator as he is holy (simply “set apart”) and we are not. However, in his mercy, he provided the blood that evil requires in the form of Jesus. He took our need to wage war and earn back our innocent status (the intended state or mode) by sacrificing his son. In the series, Adam also sheds innocent blood (the kidnapped boys’) and sacrifices them as he plots and directs Noah (and Jonas) from the Sic Mundus lair- fighting death and God with his scientific time travel machines- but at what cost?
Where Dark’s Adam wages war against God, which he identifies as time, the outcome is more death, destruction, and the stealing of other’s time (think Ulrich, Elizabeth, Helge, Noah and more).
Our biblical worldview however, has a different outcome to the war we are born into- whether the reality of Adam the Gardner or Adam in Dark. Our Creator has graciously taken the war from us in exchange for a gift- Jesus. We are not doomed to an eternity of earning back (fighting for) our innocence, or naïveté, we are to simply believe in the gift then be born again. Ah, God, I see what you did there. We must return to our original state of naïve and innocent by having faith. And believe it or not, that’s it. Too good to be true, but what’s the alternative? War with self, with others, and ultimately a God we can never defeat. As we see in the Adam in the series, ourselves if we’re honest, and the other Adams (humanity) surrounding us.
As we watch the final season of Dark next year, I wonder if Adam will surrender and find the peace and contentment he so longs for with alternate Martha or is it too late? Has he gone too far with the kidnapping, murder, and dalliances in the wills and futures of others? Or will he to fight to the bitterest of ends, losing his true state of humanity- only to go into the next reality, an eternity of endless war outside of his will? Only he can decide- just as only we can choose in our reality. Because ultimately, I want my Jonas saved from the fate of becoming Adam. Only a change in his worldview will provide the key to walking an alternate path.
WORKS CITED
“Lost and Found.” Dark. Season 2, Episode 5, Netflix, June 21, 2019. Netflix, URL. Translated by Nathan Fritz.
“Naiveté: Definition of Element by Lexico.” Lexico Dictionaries | English, Lexico Dictionaries, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/naivete.
“Element: Definition of Element by Lexico.” Lexico Dictionaries | English, Lexico Dictionaries, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/element.
“Innocence: Definition of Innocence by Lexico.” Lexico Dictionaries | English, Lexico Dictionaries, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/element.
“Death: Definition of Death by Lexico.” Lexico Dictionaries | English, Lexico Dictionaries, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/element.
L. Apostel and Van der Veken, Wereldbeelden. Van fragmentering naar integratie (DNB/Pelckmans, 1991); Translation: D. Aerts et al., World Views. From fragmentation to integration. VUB Press, 1994,
M. Elchardus, Wantrouwen en Onbehagen (Brussels: VUB Press, 1998).
Myers, D. G. The Pursuit of Happiness. Avon Books, 1993.
Genesis 3:1
Genesis 3:4
Genesis 3:5
“Good Definition of Element by Lexico.” Lexico Dictionaries | English, Lexico Dictionaries, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/good.
“Evil: Definition of Element by Lexico.” Lexico Dictionaries | English, Lexico Dictionaries, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/evil.
Genesis 3:19
, “Sin: Definition of Element by Lexico.” Lexico Dictionaries | English, Lexico Dictionaries, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/sin.
Rom 5:12-14
Resources
We’ve created a free downloadable PDF to explore the article deeper. It contains discussion questions about the topic in general terms that will give you a jumping-off point for beginning a conversation.
The second page contains a way to see the topic from a biblical perspective.
And finally, to go deeper into the subject, we have chosen a few curated resources to explore from other authors’ and thinkers’ research or perspectives.
Read. Engage. Enjoy!
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Depending on how a gem is held, light refracts differently. At B+PC we engage in Pop Culture topics to see ideas from a new angle, to bring us to a deeper understanding. And like Pastor Shane Willard notes, we want “…Jesus to get bigger, the cross to get clearer, the Resurrection to be central…” Instead of approaching a topic from “I don’t want to be wrong,“ we strive for the alternative “I want to expand my perspective.”
So, we invite you to engage with us here. What piqued your curiosity to dig deeper? What line inspired you to action? What idea made you ask, “Hmmm?” Let’s join with our community to wrestle with our thoughts in love in the Comment Section! See you there!