From Saint to Villain: The Humanization of Steve Jobs
Last night I watched director Alex Gibney’s film Steve Jobs: The Man In The Machine. The film has courted controversy for its less than flattering portrayal of Steve Jobs. Several Apple employees even walked out of the films screening at SXSW.
However Gibney’s film succeeded where others fell short. The 2013 film Jobs staring Ashton Kutcher barely scratched the surface of the contradiction and nuances that comprised the totally of the existence of Steve Jobs. In The Man In The Machine rather than the vilification of a saint what I witnessed was the humanization of a demigod. And it was precisely that humanization that made the film and Jobs himself more engrossing.
Jobs, like almost all of humanity was an imperfect human being. He could be selfish, manipulative, dishonest, vindictive and downright callous even with those closest to him. In fact, most often with those closest to him. I suppose the controversy surrounding the film comes from two camps. The saint camp, those who believe Jobs was a luminary and this posthumous criticism is unfair and overblown and the villain camp, those who believe that Steve Jobs was an exploitative egomaniac and that all the admiration poured upon him is unwarranted and misguided, an endemic symptom of a sick society that worships material progress above all else. Both camps miss the point.
Jobs was neither a villain nor a saint. What he was in essence was an artist. And like many artists the tumultuous nature of the artists relationships to their work creates a plethora of emotions that are both complex and contradictory in nature. As writers, painters and artist of any ilk can attest to, when in the process of creating they inhabit an imaginary world of ideas. This world exists solely in the mind of artist and can be all consuming. This obsession is the passion that fuels the creative drive. It’s what motivates artist to create and is the essence behind inspiration, but it has its downsides.
Existing in a world of their own creation can make them seem aloof to those of us not cohabiting it with them. They may have little patience for seemingly trivial everyday concerns. (This can account for some of Jobs’s eccentricity, like his refusal to get a license plate). They may react with hostility towards those who fail to see their vision. Viewed from this lens Jobs eccentricities, hostilities and contradictions begin to take on a new light.
My intent is neither to excuse his behavior nor vilify his actions and in so doing negate his accomplishments. My point is this, the blame rest squarely with us. We as a society hold our celebrities, athletes and politicians to a higher standard of conduct then we ought to. We also rush to demonize and sanctify. The number of recent examples of celebrities that have fallen from grace, mired in scandal are numerous. The question is why do we care?
Why must celebrities be both luminaries in their fields and saints in their personal life. Does one negate the other? Are their accomplishments somehow diminished because of their shortcomings as human beings? If we were to examine the personal lives of many of our beloved entrepreneurs, artist, scientist and politicians of times past how many of them would hold up to today's politically correct standards? Few, if any. (Imagine Ernest Hemingway espousing his “colorful” view on feminism). Yet none of us would argue the impact they’ve had on history. Similarly, few would argue Jobs historical impact.
Jobs was an extraordinary human being. And by virtue of being a human being he had shortcomings and contradictions in his nature. And it was precisely these contradictions that colored his personality and made him who he was, for better or worse. He was incredibly adept at understanding the spirit of things. A skill he refined through practicing Zen Buddhism, yet he lacked the empathy commonly associated with devout Buddhist practitioners. He built a family at work while neglecting his own. He evangelized the bettering of the world while cutting all of Apples philanthropic efforts. He espoused the hacker ethos and then persecuted journalist from Gizmodo.
He was nuanced and that’s okay. Human beings are not static entities that exist in a dimension where all actions are either black or white. (Despite our best efforts to put people in those categories). This nuance is what spices life and colors our existence. At the end of the film Gibney beautifully articulates a Japanese Zen principle called Mono No Aware. It roughly translates to “the deep awareness of things” and it defines a part of who jobs was. As Gibney puts it, it is “the sadness in life expressed in the beauty of things”. There is another Zen principle which likewise can help us better understand Jobs, Wabi-Sabi. The essence of Wabi-Sabi is that things are beautiful because of and not in spite of their imperfections.
My admiration for Jobs accomplishments remains just that, admiration for his accomplishments, not his life. He was not a Gandhian figure and never claimed to be. He was however a paradigm shifter in his own right. In the end he succumbed to his own myth, a victim of his own reality distortion. His is both a cautionary and inspiring tale of a man who dared to dream and paid the ultimate price for it. A modern Icarus.
