Ergo Proxy - 11: In the White Darkness/Anamnesis

All Episodes: Ergo Proxy Companion Viewing Guide
Previous: Episode 10:Existence/Cytotropism
Next:Episode 12:When You're Smiling/Hideout

In the White Darkness
Ahhhhh. This is the first of the episodes that breaks completely with the expected plot and sequence. It probably caught you off guard as it broke all sense of reality and development. This will not be the last time Ergo Proxy pulls this stunt, and I advise you to appreciate it for what it is. It is not a wild card thrown in the middle, but a strange sort of shift in expositions mechanics. You see, Ergo Proxy can't stay still for more than three episodes at a time. It cannot reveal plot consistently. It cannot wax philosophical all the time. It cannot be a mystery or an action anime. And it can't even stick with the same style of story narration nor even the same genre. Some parts are humorous or romantic. Some parts are exclusively philosophical and some parts exclusively action spectacle and other parts are simple visual poetry mixed with character development. Ergo Proxy was not limited, restricted, or reviewed by any sort of quality control and it shows it. Thus, it is experimental in every sense. I've decided that I admire the way it tells one story with about 14 different voices and genres and styles, but maybe it really is just a bad idea. Whatever your opinion, you can't ignore Ergo Proxy's dissociative identity disorder, and it won't be going away any time soon. As such, everyone has different favorite episodes because everyone likes(hates) a different combination of the faces Ergo Proxy shows.

This one happens to be surreal and philosophical and uninterested in sequential revelation. Take it or leave it, but I'm about to break it down into individual pieces that I appreciate or that speak out things of interest.

Vincent Law, here, is experiencing two different plot lines at once. One is the rather literal confrontation with his other proxy persona. This proxy half of his mind is probably more or less actually talking to him in a very literal sense. The other plot line that is taking place simultaneously is a very poetic or artistic interpretation of what our subconscious behaves like. This is why the episode keeps forcefully declaring to Vincent and the audience, "This is not a dream." It is not meant to be a happenstance occurrence, but an actual example of what happens inside us on a daily basis. Furthermore "This is not a dream" is told to us so that we do not just discount and ignore part of the episode as being purely fanciful. The books, the pages, the magic and the characters, while all dreamlike, are not supposed to be an interesting dream, but a real authored poem /intended to be interpreted. Probably in a variety of ways, but more or less with real purposes.

The quote "...the future is an opaque mirror. Anyone who tries to look into it sees nothing but the dim outlines of an old and worried face." is from a columnist by the name of Jim Bishop. He does not seem to have done anything particularly significant or relevant. He wrote his column, became a political enemy of Nixon, and wrote a best seller called "The Day Lincoln was Shot." I can draw no meaningful parallels for the historical purpose of this quote's inclusion. However, in a philosophical sense, I believe it communicates something along the lines of: It is meaningless to try and guess at the future. The harder you try to predict or control it, the more you trouble yourself. Rather, focus on what you can see: yourself, and learn to change yourself until you see the face-of-the-future you want to see.

So too, is Vincent trying to do too many things - figure out the Proxies, determine the path of his journey, befriend Pino, learn about himself, and worry about the practicalities of maintaining the ship. The bookstore is a symbol of self-reflection. A symbol of taking a pause to reorient and determine what really is important in life. Managing life is best done by "looking within yourself," because otherwise you'll "never find the answer you seek." "These things take time" trying to get to the answer directly, instead of working through the process and understanding the entirety of everything in it's proper perspective is a foolhardy path. "Take this tea, for example. Nothing you do will make it steep any faster."

Despite the episode being slow and dialogue heavy, this episode moves very quickly.

"We are, if you'll pardon the expression, in the theatre of his mind."

"Consider these books. For them to exist society must evolve to an appropriately advanced state. But in order for society to evolve, it would need the linguistic tools these books contain. I know, a bit of a chicken or the egg dilemma... in the face of such a paradox one could reasonably argue that language is perhaps not entirely a human invention. Is it too far-fetched to imagine god-like creatures bestowing man with the gift of language? Mmm. It's probably a bit far fetched. It was Rousseau who first put forward this argument."

I could not find evidence of Rousseau giving such an argument, but he did propose several pieces of it. He believed that mans' first speech was caused by passion and figurative exclamation. He also proposed that written language was stiff and concrete compared to the fluidity and flexibility of spoken enunciation. He declared God as the giver of language and reason, and that the primitive state was pure and good, but that reason was the way to salvation and enlightenment.

"I am nobody, even if I was somebody, I am beyond your comprehension.
And even if you could, you would not have the tools to express that knowledge. "

"From the perspective of others I am part of the world, but when I observe the world from my perspective I am nowhere to be found.
To observe is to create perspective. I can never cease to be the point of origin from my perspective. I observe that which is not myself. This is the first principle defined."

Again, I cannot find the reference of the "first principle defined." I am most reminded of Hume and his discussion of the self being interpreted as a single entity, but not necessarily so in actuality. (we may actually be -- and from scientific evidence, most likely are -- a conglomeration of multiple fractured subconscious perspectives artificially combined to be perceived by the over-conscious as a single one.*) Hume also points out that the outside world as being nothing certain except perceived stimuli; we perceive an outside world, but our only access is through these stimuli and reactions being perceived. We do not actually have any kind of direct access to an external world, merely a conduit through which information flows. The information could, in fact come from anywhere -- our own imaginations, a computer program, a deity, a shared dream, a reliving of memories -- with just as much likelihood as what we claim is true -- an actual outside world.

*There is a lot of psychological experiments and demonstrations on this front that are crazy and interesting. For example, the conscious is not aware of it's own subconscious's decisions. Psychologists can sometimes tell, based upon brainwaves, your decisions before you know them.

It is also true that you cannot observe the observer. Like a puppy chasing its tail, you can strain as much as you want, but despite twisting and turning around, you cannot see yourself either mentally or physically. Yes, you can see "yourself" in a mirror, but that is again, a false image. It is a shadow cast by light, and it is imperfect, both from the reflective nature (reversal) but also from the light traveling through distorting air, hitting the mirror with it's own blemishes and distortions, and then being received imperfectly and transformed into electric signals imperfectly and interpreted by a mind imperfectly. You are not actually seeing yourself after all. This is merely the visual physical side of things, it becomes even more complicated when you are looking deeper into what it means to "observer the observer." In any case, it cannot be done, if only for the logical impossibility of containing a complete visualization of yourself within yourself.

Ergo Proxy plays with the sentences, it is talking about the concept of "I" as well as telling Vincent he cannot know who is speaking because the voice is a part of him.

"I was there because I was told that someone reported an infected autoreiv.
Incorrect. It is not I think therefore I am.
But I'm not lying, if you take a look at the facility's records.
Correct. The answer is, I think therefore you are. "

Cogito ergo sum. I think, therefore I am. This is Descartes famous line, and the source of the term "Cogito" in "Cogito virus." Here, Ergo Proxy says it is false, and makes a statement that can be interpreted two ways:
"I think therefore you are" either means that the world is the only way we can validate our own existence. (after all, who would know they exist if they could not observe themselves, or be observed by the world, either literally, or else by interacting with something through touch, smell, sight, or sound. If we could not, we would only know... nothing. No senses, no time, no space, nothing....)
It could also mean that the world only exists in our consciousness; it is all a dream we are imagining and creating. The most common synonym to this is the Chinese saying: "But he didn't know if he was Zhuangzi who had dreamt he was a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming he was Zhuangzi."
(Incidentally, this is why there is a butterfly on the cover of the Vincent Law book toward the end of the episode.)

The statues in the tea room are Apollo and Artemis - Greek gods of the sun and moon, light and dark, logic art and truth. They both wield bows, which also fits with the discussion.

I am firmly of the stance that single worlds being reinterpreted is a lovely way to discover more meanings, as well as a good way to say more than would otherwise be possible. It makes English (or Greek or Latin) messy and troublesome and unclear, but that very lack of clear understanding permits more understanding, if you see my double meaning?

The bow gives life by ending life for another. Life itself supports life by ending life for another. (This is fundamentally true down to the laws of physics. Entropy is always increasing. In order to live, we consume and compete for energy. Carnivores eat herbivores. Herbivores eat photosynthesizers. Photosynthesizers eat energy from dying stars. Stars eat energy from disappearing atoms.) His explanation is lacking, but the elegance is there.
This is a reference to Heraclitus, a Greek philosopher who is known for his belief that the nature of the universe is composed of the shifting balance between opposites. "Logos."

Anamnesis, "Memory" and "Recollection." Memory and to remember. A noun and a verb. To remember means both to store the now for later as well as to take it out of storage for now. Memory is both a link to the past and a link to the future. Without a memory you cannot function for more than a moment.
Anamnesis is a reference to Plato, another Greek philosopher. He claimed that humans already know everything, but must work to remember what they already knew from previous lives.

"And yet, even at this late hour, traces of the Great Circle remain. The circle of life only continues because you exist. We wait to see the fate of you last survivors of this world. For if you perish, perception is removed and existence comes to an end. A universe without perception is much like an enormous stack of rotting books. Forever unopened and unread."

If a tree falls alone in a forest, does it make a sound?
Physically, yes. But if no one hears it, does it have an relevance? Does it hold any meaning? If it is not perceived, who is to say it actually happened? Does it actually exist, except for its effects which are observed?
Everything that you can think of, has some effect you can observe. If you try to imagine something that does not have any effect, all you can think of, is something that does not exist.
Maybe you can create closed universes that do not effect our own timeline, but do exist... "elsewhere."
(This may just be escaping the question, however, as the things would have an effect in that universe.)
Schopenhauer was one who claimed that without perception, the universe without oneself ceases to be.
Even more so, this applies especially to books. If the language cannot be read, the meaning contained within the scribbled letters simply ceases to be. Letters have no meaning except that we have agreed that they symbolize something other than what they truly are.

Pulse. Shrew and elephant. Kleiber's Law - this is an actual law. There is a ratio to the speed of the heartbeat and the average lifespan of a creature. It can, vaguely, predict the lifespan of a species based on circulatory system rigor.

Gatekeeper of memory/core self - I am unable to draw direct parallels to and Freudian archetypes, but it is clear that the characters in this episode are fragments of Vincent's conscious and subconscious. Vincent would be the ego, mediating the contention between the other two, but superego and id are not so clear. Id may be the gatekeeper trying to just please himself with interesting facts while avoiding reality, and Ergo Proxy may be the superego demanding that Vincent improve himself and progress for the greater good, despite the fear and pain....? This is interesting if only be cause the beast-like Ergo Proxy is the superego and the civilized-like Gatekeeper is the id in this interpretation.

"White noise that beats within the white darkness."
This is a beautiful image of paradoxes. I can imagine it, and yet I cannot. White noise has no pattern, it is chaos. It cannot have a beat or rhythm. White darkness cannot happen by definition. Darkness is the absence of light, and white is the presence of light. You may find meaning in the alternative meanings each word has, of course.

"Keep in mind, Vincent, you have just crossed the threshold of truth. It's time to find your way to knowledge." The difference between truth and knowledge is understanding. Truth in this context is mere data. Knowledge is what to do with that data.

[VIEW SPOILERS]

Anamenesis

"I do not belong to the world. That is the limit. That is the boundary between all and self."
Ah ah ah, Ergo Proxy loves to play with meanings and words. What does this sentence mean? Wellll.....



"I" does not belong in the world. It is distinctly separate. The difference between soul and reality, or observer and observed. World and self are disconnected in profound ways. "Self" interprets, "world" is uncontrolled data input.

Vincent does not belong to the world. He believes himself cast out, he cannot accept any of the lifestyles he has come across, and he does not even understand himself or his past.

Ergo Proxy does not belong to the world. He is a god that creates and destroys the world. How can a god understand a human inside of a world it cannot create or destroy? How can someone that understands, understand someone who does not understand?

Let alone, the question of how can someone hope to understand anyone else, with such an divide between oneself and the world, as well as the impossibility of even understanding oneself?

For that matter, isn't it a little like a god to be an observer, an interpreter? A being that is separate from the outside world, yet lives within it, yet never touches it except through perception which can be completely controlled, removed, or reinterpreted? Can we not shape our world by deceiving ourselves? Could we not create and destroy our own realities, if we tried? Aren't we all gods, if we choose?

Each of these interpretations I find valid, true, revealing, and if not intended, then certainly relevant to the matters at hand.

This is the beginning of the discussions of godhood and what it means to be a god.


I find it interesting that the first time he saw Re-l Mayer, Vincent was drawn to her. He saw her passing as he waited in line for his immigration permit. The attractions between them either began there, or else was ingrained well beforehand from the fates of Ergo and Monad.

Also interesting is that the immigrants walk with blankets across the desert with no protection. This is either showing how faulty and wrong Vincent's memories are, or else they get some sort of medical treatment at some point that saves them from the deadly outside viruses.

Vincent says that there was "an accident" that "destroyed the city." Mosk sounds about as dystopian as Romdeau if it covered up the Romdeau invasion as a simple accident. This also is evidence that Romdeau was destroyed well before Rapture (Raul's missile) takes place.

For "living in Mosk" Vincent pictures Pino asking him about living in Mosk, and not actually the living part. This would indicate that Vincent was actually created in Mosk right after it was destroyed. Perhaps triggered by Ergo Proxy/Proxy 1's sorrow at this point. That, or else Vincent has some false memories he placed himself or placed by Ergo Proxy/Proxy 1. It is really too uncertain to tell, but this is clearly the earliest he could have come into being.

"I present a time of destruction. There is misfortune in the stars. The sky is lost and the sea is frozen over. The circle of life which allow both man and nature to flourish have all but stopped. The main players of our story have long since left the stage. We hang in anticipation for the inevitable final curtain. "

This is both a lovely setting for a drama, an acceptable dialogue for someone who does not know the history the anime reveals later, and also a real foreshadowing of what we learn about the history of the earth. The earth really has collapsed into what it is now. The sea, is not just figuratively frozen over, but literally. The main players, the cause of this tragedy, the humans, have fled into their safe haven in orbit and possibly beyond. They view the remnants they left behind as some kind of denouement to their own story, rather than a story all it's own.

alter our own pulse - Ergo Proxy altered his fate. They stopped being who they were before and become someone new. This being is not Proxy 1, not Ergo Proxy, but Vincent Law now too. They are not just the programmed proxy, but a being with its own destiny apart from the one given to them. Whether it is possible to "stop being oneself" is a question of possibility in and of itself, (Do we actually have free will at all?) however, it is common think of people growing and changing from their pasts. (How can this be? We are capable of actual self-modification? We really do change our own behaviors through our own behaviors?)

"Rhythm of life. It is that pulse which never truly left the stage."

Life never left earth. Life always struggles onward, against all odds, life will find a way. Both biologically speaking as well as philosophically.
This also brings up the repeating theme of what life is, morally speaking. The humans left, but the engineered proxies and the created pseudohumans are left. Whether they were left behind, or were the ones to struggle onwards while the humans gave up, is left open for debate. They are life. They are Re-L. They have their own truths.



It has come to my attention that I was mistaken. This episode does not take place with only Vincent and his own apparitions present. It is Proxy 1 who is also involved. Jbethune1 brought it to my attention, and as he points out, this episode is flashed back to when Vincent meets Ergo Proxy, implying that this is when they met before. It stays more consistent with Ergo Proxy's personality, that he is not as .... distorted to one side as Proxy 1 is. What then, is Proxy 1's goal in forcing Vincent at this time to realize he is Ergo Proxy? (What, in fact, is Proxy 1's goal and what is his role in Vincent's life?) I don't have a perfect understanding yet, so I will wait to try to write it. Presumably at some point I will return here, and explain Proxy 1's motivation for how he acts here.

[/SPOILERS]

////Reactions:
Believe it or not, I hated this episode greatly the first time I watched it. In fact, I used to place it among the Quiz show and Smile Land episodes. (Which I still abhor with a passion) It was only after the second or third time that I came to actually appreciate Anamenesis and even place it as one of my favorites.

I still find it kind of overdone and bland at the same time. And yet, it is so much better than before when I thought it was entirely a stunt to make Ergo Proxy exciting with no real relevance while subsisting entirely of complete nonsense. Now I understand the words and appreciate the drama as well as the philosophy being spouted as contextual instead of just... purposeless gibberish paired with meaningless spectacle.

*writes for a bit* Wait.... *continues writing guide* *put's down hypothetical pen*
Oh.... oh my god. I forgot how much I love this episode. Ergo Proxy, however meaningless it may be, tends to bring out the best in me. It makes me question it and myself and ideas I am familiar with and really explore what I think it is trying to say.


This episode is very much about delving into the nature of self and reality. It is empowering in a very existentialist way. It points out that we shape our own realities and our own fates. That it is a dangerous power, and we can entrap ourselves, but also that we can break free because it is the self that wields the power to shape our fates.

All Episodes: Ergo Proxy Companion Viewing Guide
Previous: Episode 10:Existence/Cytotropism
Next:Episode 12:When You're Smiling/Hideout