The Problem with "Anti-War" Theming...

I recently watched a YouTube video deconstructing Howl’s Moving Castle. Specifically, it drew on The Iraq War parallels and how they held the movie together. It got me thinking. Although I wrote a piece not long ago reiterating my stance on the film, I sometimes wonder how people can see that movie, and others like it, and love it without internalizing it. How do you watch an anti-war movie, one with anti-imperialist undertones, praise it, and yet miss its intent? 

Allow me to share a story: there are plenty of theories in psychology that become controversial as more information arises. Some, like the infamous marshmallow test, later have information disprove or complicate them. But others, like myside bias, not only hold up to scrutiny, but become strengthened each time.

What’s myside bias? It suggests that opinions, no matter how farfetched or absurd, show little evolution if those challenging them don’t share the same views. X might be empirically false, but any attempts at changing someone’s mind won’t help. It’s an example of “the human mind can rationalize anything”.

When I first heard this a few years ago, I was dumbfounded. I’d seen myside bias in action on numerous occasions in politics, both on the right and the left, but couldn’t put it into words. Why do people close their minds off to non-partisan facts that challenge them? Why can’t you argue that a Muslim ban is wrong with a Trump supporter? And why does an anti-Zionist struggle to understand that Israel-Palestine is a two-sided conflict? The answer is myside bias. 

Myside bias plays a big part in the initial question I posited above. Why don’t some people “get” anti-war movies? It’s not because they’re “idiots”, but because of myside bias. Some of them might actually understand the theming, but they might not think its real-world parallels are applicable. Some might even think it’s brilliant, yet completely disregard it anyway.

I’m not saying this to demean the efforts of artists. Go ahead, make politically-charged art! Comment on relevant issues, be brazen in your parallels! If even one person’s positively influenced to make change, even if it’s only one person, then it’s never in vain. But it’s unrealistic to assume that everyone will change. Especially not when they’ve been conditioned through myside bias.

I can speak from personal experience. There was a time, when I was a teenager, where I was an edgy libertarian. I was racist, sexist, homophobic and incredibly-condescending. My graduation yearbook blurb is proof of that, as is that time I mansplained marriage to a divorcée. I was chastised constantly, sure, but the lessons I learned would only stay in my mind for a day or two. Why? Myside bias. 

To be honest, while I’ve matured since high school, I probably still have a bit of myside bias. It’s simply swung in the opposite direction, as evidenced by the conversations I’ve had with libertarians and Trump supporters in recent years. I’d like to think I’m more empathetic than when I was 18, and I’d hope others would agree, but I’m probably still biased in certain areas. It’s inevitable.

If there’s one element to take away here, it’s a warning to not get cocky when criticizing others for misconstruing the art they consume. True, people as a collective may not be that sharp. But individuals can be, and some can be equally as dangerous or dismissive as those groups that they identify with. It’s how James Woods can behave the way he does on a regular basis despite his education, how Dick Cheney was so dangerous and how many well-read individuals are Trump supporters. It’s also why well-intended progressives spout bigoted views that are accepted in their circles. Myside bias doesn’t discriminate, after all!

But, ultimately, it explains why an anti-war movie can be understood, internalized, and then subsequently rejected. Does it make the rejection right? No. Is it fair that some of these individuals have more power than we do? Again, no. But it’s a reality we should accept, like it or not. 

As a final note, I want to point out that while my perceptions of Howl’s Moving Castle have changed slightly in the decade since I first saw it, my overall opinion of the movie hasn’t. I still think it’s too long, too messy, too ambitious for its own framework and, at times, too frustrating for its own good. I’ve come to respect and appreciate it, and there are moments of brilliance hidden in its layers of confusion, but a masterpiece it isn’t. And I consider the films that came directly before and after it in Hayao Miyazaki’s repertoire to be better.

And yes, that’s also a bit of myside bias in full-effect. I’m well-aware of that, and I’m willing to fight anyone who states otherwise!