Guest Film Review: In Time

In Time directed by Andrew Niccol (Regency Enterprises, New Regency Pictures, Strike Entertainment, PG-13, 109 minutes)

Starring Justin Timberlake, Amanda Seyfried, and Cillian Murphy

Science without Morals

In Time, the newest work from writer-director Andrew Niccol, is a thoughtful addition to the genre of dystopian futuristic films. Niccol wrote and directed Gattaca, which is easily one of the best science fiction films ever created, and he returns to the theme with a film about a society that has embraced science and technology to the point where it loses its moral compass.

In Time shows us a society where genetic engineering has effectively solved the problem of aging and death — everyone is immortal and stops aging beyond their 25th birthday. Thus, we are presented with the situation where sons and daughters appear to be the exact same age as their biological parents.  

Population Control

A society that has achieved immortality must deal with the problem of finite resources for an infinitely growing population. This "near-futuristic" society has chosen, at birth, to give each person a glowing digital clock on his or her forearm. Everyone is given exactly one year to live and that year starts counting down at exactly 25 years. When the clock reaches zero, the person receives a jolt and instantly dies.

A result of this innovation is that "time" has supplanted money as the effective currency — workers are paid literally by the hour, a coffee is 4 minutes, service by a prostitute equals one hour, and a bus ride costs the time it takes to walk to your destination. Time can be transferred to others through a special handshake or collected by various portable and non-portable scanners.

Minutes before Clocking Out

Justin Timberlake plays Will Salas, a 28-year-old factory worker living day to day with rarely more than 24 hours on his clock. At a bar he encounters a rarity, a man with more than a century of time stored up, whom he saves from a gang of time-stealers. This rich man in return gifts all but a few minutes of his time to Will before "clocking out", content with the life that he has lived, and depressed at the inequality within his society where many involuntarily clock out each day so people like him can live forever.

Will uses his newfound time to cross "time-zones" to utopian New Greenwich where nearly all its inhabitants have centuries or even millennia of time, acquired through skimming time off the multitudes of lower classes.

In New Greenwich, Will is introduced to Sylvia Weis (Amanda Seyfried), daughter of one of the richest men in the world, but also is confronted by a Timekeeper (Cillian Murphy) who wants to pin the theft of the rich man's century on Will. Rather than go into custody, Will kidnaps Sylvia, evading the Timekeepers, and going on a journey where the couple explore the morality of a society where the deaths of millions prop up the immortality of a few.  Along the way, the characters learn the value of time, since in New Greenwich, the “time-rich” leisurely enjoy every activity, unlike in the slums where eating, drinking, and walking are done as quickly as possible. This dichotomy clearly illustrates the truth that the greatest resource one possesses is time — if it is used well.

The Morality of Redistributionism

It's easy to see this film as an allegory where time is equivalent to money and feel either vindicated or disappointed when the film explores the morality of redistributionism, similar to the folktale of Robin Hood, robbing from the rich and giving to the poor. I think this film goes deeper than that. Much like how Gattaca displayed a society whose genetic discrimination seems horrific to the audience while the characters largely did not notice the injustice right before them, we see in Will and Sylvia an awakening of senses to the injustices of the status quo.  

The deeper meaning is to remove the blinders from all our eyes, to look for the injustice that may be right before us, and to respond to the call to make society a better place. Who knows what modern practices will seem horrific to our future descendants?

In Time is a well-executed and thought-provoking sci-fi/action film that appeals to a wide audience, even those who generally don’t appreciate sci-fi. Nearly all aspects of the film’s production are good, the acting is acceptable, and it is noteworthy that Justin Timberlake has made a successful career transition from music and comedy to dramatic acting to the point that he feels quite natural in this type of role. If you are looking for a good sci-fi/action film, I recommend checking out In Time.

---

Robb Stankey is a graduate student in Genetics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. In addition to his interests in genetics and science fiction, he enjoys homebrewing and cooking with his wife, Jessie. More content from Robb can be found at http://r.robbplusjessie.com/.

Book Review: God and the Evil of Scarcity

God and the Evil of Scarcity: Moral Foundations of Economic Agency by Albino Barrera, O.P. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005. 272 pp)

Albino Barrera teaches economics and theology at Providence College in Providence, Rhode Island. In addition to God and the Evil of Scarcity, he wrote Modern Catholic Social Documents and Political Economy (Georgetown University Press) in 2001.

It Begins with Malthus

For Albino Barrera, God and the Evil of Scarcity is essentially a response to the Malthusian understanding of theodicy.  While most consider resource scarcity and population control when Thomas Malthus comes to mind, Barrera explores Malthus’ foundational views of God that lead him to his conclusions on resource scarcity.

Simply put, Barrera understands Malthusian theodicy as a source for human mastery when he writes,

“Using natural theology, Malthus argues that God created a world of scarcity to provide people with reason and incentive to apply themselves in work and striving” (2).

In other words, the condition of scarcity – an evil for all intents and purposes – inspires the pursuit of good. Despite the insistence through Christian tradition that evil is an absence of the good and an occurrence resulting from our fallen nature, Malthus sees evil as a root cause that generates the desire for good.

Theodicy and Economic Scarcity

Rejecting this notion of theodicy, Barrera explores Thomistic and New Testament traditions seeking to better understand the reason for existing economic scarcity. For Barrera, God contains the power to provide humanity with everything it needs to flourish on earth.

Since humankind struggles with its allocation of resources, Barrera reasons that God must provide a good reason for the existence of such scarcity. Barrera notes,

“The economic statutes and ordinances that flow from such historicity become the means for God to proffer and elicit human participation in divine holiness, righteousness, and providence. Scarcity makes conformity to the Law that much more sacrificial, but that much more consequential as well” (199).

In other words, scarcity offers humanity the opportunity to sacrificially work with God in the world. As people encounter need, scarcity makes help sacrificial and more meaningful. Thus, the evil of scarcity exists not to require harder work from people in order to gain assets but to supply a cost for the apostolate work of giving to those in need.

Scarcity and My Pre-Conceived Notions

In all honesty, I found Barrera’s position on scarcity to be extremely refreshing. Before reading this book, my understanding of scarcity was exceptionally negative. At best, scarcity explained why some people owned much and others possessed little; at worst, scarcity is a deeply engrained selfishness that limits the ability for the poor to survive in a harsh world. By reframing the discussion, I found it encouraging to consider scarcity as a way for sacrificial giving to truly have meaning.

What About Excessive Population and Sustainability?

Nevertheless, Barrera’s thesis is lacking in one critical category. Whether or not Malthus carried erroneous assumptions about theodicy, the damning portion of his thought in modern life is the effect of population on the environment. With fewer people, the allocation of resources is out of mind and out of sight. However, exponential human growth requires a similar growth in resource usage. Since the earth is finite, no matter the theological value of scarcity in sacrificial giving, an unsustainably large population incurs an enormous burden on scarce resources.

While most of God and the Evil of Scarcity ignores the role of population in the discussion of scarcity and sufficiency, Barrera attempts to answer the critique in an appendix to the book. He writes,

“The universe cannot reach its external end in God if its parts (humans, in this case) are unable to operate according to the nature of their being for want of material nourishment and the other means necessary for their full actualization” (234).

In simple terms, God will not allow a population to balloon in such a way that it debilitates humanity and creation.

Sadly, such a position ignores the fact that sacrificial giving to the world’s poor will greatly burden our access to scarce resources. Moreover, this position ignores the crucial work of sustainability experts who are reconsidering humanity’s relationship with resources arguing that consumption is possible without deteriorating resources (See William McDonough and Michael Braungart, Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things (New York: North Point Press, 2002).

Scarce Words

Despite my gratitude for the new perspective Barrera offers on scarcity, namely, its existence for the sacrificial giving of resources to others, I find both the population problem and current sustainable considerations for resources help to render Barrera’s thesis problematic.

Likewise, this book feels like the reworking of a dissertation. Each page contains excessive citations and footnotes which provide clear evidence that Barrera completed his homework, yet, it creates difficult reading throughout the work.

If you are interested in the intersection between theology and economics, God and the Evil of Scarcity offers a unique perspective. However, for most people, I would not recommend this book.