As cliché as it sounds, when tragedy strikes, the only thing one can do is to move forward. But whether this direction is for the better or worse remains in question. In the article, “The Relationship Between the Meaning in Life, Emotions, and Psychological Illness: The Moderating Role of the Effects of the Economic Crisis,” the authors explain, “A lack of meaning in people’s lives should stimulate them to search for it. Thus, searching for meaning in life is a cardinal human motivation (Steger & Kashdan, 2007). Searching for meaning means that people try to establish and/or increase their understanding of the meaning, significance and purpose of their lives (Steger, Kawabata, et al., 2008) […] When levels of searching for meaning in life are high, levels of life satisfaction are low (Steger, Kashdan, Sullivan, & Lorentz, 2008)” (RBMLEPI 2016: 81). This is quite the depressing outlook, for as one struggles to regain their footing in life and find a new purpose or meaning , one must suffer. That being said, due to inevitability of this course of action--one must move forward or not, one must become something else if not themselves—discovery of the self and others is expected, excellent tools in the reinvention of not just the individual but the country of Greece, specifically.
As mentioned previously, Yannis Sakaridis’ feature, Amerika Square (Run Time: 87 Minutes), portrays the search for meaning in opposing ways in regards to both the Refugee and Economic Crisis in Greece. Set in Athens, the film focuses on three characters: Nakos, an unemployed man living with his parents, Billy, a tattoo artist, and Tarek, a Syrian refugee. These three characters represent the three pillars of this political discussion. On one end, there is Nakos a Greek national, who is anti-immigrant, then Billy, an immigrant sympathizer, and then of course, Tarek, the refugee. Interestingly at the start of the film, on the path of trying to find a new meaning, only Tarek has set a course to find one and identity by attempting to escape Greece and start a new life with his daughter in Germany. Billy comments on this strength of the refugees’ will in general, stating, “I’m jealous of those who really want to leave. All of the others, the immigrants, the unwanted who gather here in the square, and bother those who have never left Athens. They know where they want to go […] There are borders and controls and a ton of constraints. Those who want to leave, can’t. And those who can, don’t want to” (Amerika Square 2016). When it comes to finding oneself after a crisis, there appears to be two types of being powerless. One, is external: outside forces will not allow the pursuer to easily attain a meaning, and no doubt this is in part because of the crisis that ruptured the pursuer’s meaning to begin with. The other, is internal— that one cannot imagine how to move forward, not without the social constructs and securities one is used to; moving forward is too unfamiliar and frightening, forcing the individual to simply stand still. In the case of Nakos, he chooses to blame the people who are able to move past this internal inhibitor. Just as Billy mentions in the above excerpt, blaming a people, as in the case with the refugees, is a form of jealousy that Nakos is unwilling to outright admit. For instance, Nakos witnesses an immigrant with a job, something Nakos desperately needs; another with a delicious treat, something Nakos cannot afford. In an angry, internal monologue, Nakos states, “They’ve[the immigrants] almost doubled our [Greek nationals] score. We’ve become a minority. It’s my neighborhood, man. My square” (Amerika Square 2016). Unfortunately, this hostility towards the “Other”— “You should be on my side” (Amerika Square 2016)— leads to Nakos' new purpose: eliminating what he perceives as the problem, the reason for his suffering. Nakos decides to murder homeless refugees by baking poisoned bread and leaving them near trash cans and dumpsters, treating the refugees no better than rats. Though it is in a twisted and terrible way, Nakos begins to find a new meaning and a new identity as Greece’s avenger. With this agenda, there is a new fire within him. He gets a tattoo of Amerika Square unoccupied by refugees, as a reminder for what he is a fighting for, and even learns how to bake, a helpful ability to have in one’s livelihood but he was only motivated to learn it in order to kill. His pursuit of purpose ends horrendously, accidentally almost killing his mother, if not for the ironic help of Tarek who performs life-saving first aid.
As mentioned earlier, Billy finds meaning in the exact opposite of Nakos’ way, by helping refugees. As previously mentioned, at the start of the film, Billy lacks a purpose, an identity— he’s an off-books tattoo artist working above a bar. Ironically, as a tattoo artist, he helps physicalize the purpose of others, by permanently etching a significant design on their skin. For instance, Billy gives Nakos his tattoo of Amerika Square. He also helps reinvent a refugee by tattooing over a past tattoo that had demeaning qualities, and replacing it with one of perseverance—her reinvention in her life is symbolized in reinvention of her tattoo. Billy forms a relationship with this woman, and helps both her and Tarek escape Greece. In fact, he sacrifices his life in doing so. Before he is shot in the head, he is content, feeling as if he has finally achieved meaning for his life, “I’m not an artist, but I figured out I can live” (Amerika Square 2016). Billy finds his meaning not through ink, but by living and taking action. Yannis Sakaridis’ Amerika Square portrays two Greek nationals attempting to find meaning due to a lack of one, but they choose to seek it out in opposite directions. One’s search ends in death but also in his success as Billy’s benevolent impact on the refugees lives is eternal; the other, though he continues living, search ends in failure, and he receives a jarring awakening.
Elias Dimitriou’s feature, SMAC (Run Time: 110 Min.), is quite a literal reinvention of a self after one is hit with a crisis: a second chance at life. The film tells the story of a wealthy woman, Eleni, whose cancer has returned. It is clear that she is losing the will to live, illustrated by her sudden break-up with her girlfriend, providing no explanation. However, in getting to know a homeless man named Andreas, she has found a new purpose in life, a new reason to live. With her own devastating fate and the softness she feels towards Andreas, she takes him into her home. This softness is quite possibly due to the fact that Eleni’s late brother was also named Andreas (and oddly enough, Andreas’ sister or sister-in-law is named Eleni). Eleni becomes very close to Andreas and cares deeply for him; he is the only person she has confided in about her cancer, but she soon fears the worse, that her brother’s fate may resurface when Andreas, after a terrible visit with his estranged son, turns to drugs. After Eleni kicks Andreas out of her house, she eventually regrets the decision, no longer finding any reason to live.When she finds Andreas on the street, she says to him, “I stopped the chemo. I’m leaving everything to you[…] I lost my brother to drugs. I don’t want to lose you too” (SMAC 2016). With these words, it is clear that not only has she given up the will to live (something that is also expressed with suicidal thoughts) as she chooses to refuse the medication that will help potentially beat her cancer, but it is also a desperate and intimate plea to make sure the fate that befell her brother does not happen to Andreas, someone who she cares dearly enough to compare to her brother. Andreas refuses to come back with her. Later, he ends up overdosing, and Eleni drives him to the hospital. However, like a second chance, Andreas lives giving not just Andreas new life, but also Eleni. At the end of the film, it is interpreted that Eleni and Andreas have healed their relationship. The last scene shows Eleni walking through her office with a smile and bald from chemo. This means that not only did she decide her life has value again to fight off the disease, but to also announce her weakness to the world, something she has always been reluctant to share. The story of SMAC is a reinvention for both Eleni and Andreas, both have suffered immensely from crisis— Eleni, cancer and the tragic loss of brother; Andreas, the loss of his livelihood and acceptance into his family—but have found newfound purpose in being brother and sister, filling a void in each other that their crisis ripped from them.
An individual’s identity becomes muddled in the turmoil of a crisis. Social constructs and securities the individual relied upon have no doubt shifted, causing an identity to become unfixed in the murky and churning pool of trauma. After impact, the remnants of identity are spread far and wide, losing what was once familiar, what was once safe. Moving forward, an individual can either keep its identity disjointed and stranded amongst the chaos, or can rebuild, pulling together the pieces that would lead to a new hope, a new reason.