A thought on Zabriskie Point.

I’d like to point out the fact that, although ultimately I do not agree with the idea in its entirety,
the anti-civilization trend of the film does appeal to me quite a bit. The thing I admire the most
about it is its “completeness”. It always stroke me as curious that some people should rally against
civilization while at the same time being incapable of letting go of some of its main products:
technology and the comfort that comes from it, complex art, etc. I do believe that thoughts do not
need to be backed up by actions; they can be entirely opposite, in fact. Congruity is not something
that I hold as really valuable. However, awareness is, and I think that the people who usually rally
against civilization are not aware of the contradiction they’re incurring into. What’s so wonderful
about this film is that it takes that criticism to its ultimate point: in the explosion sequence we see
clearly that all products of civilization are being blown away, as if stating that none of them, no
matter how positive they may seem, can be considered good when coming from a source that the
director sees as rotten. And so, we see technology being blown away, but also clothes, frozen food
and, most importantly, books. With these last items, the criticism is complete: the director states
that art as we know it is also a product of civilization, therefore art, the whole of it, even the film
we are watching, must be destroyed as well. Although I do not share the feeling, I certainly find it
most appealing, and the courage shown in taking the notion this far is certainly admirable.

Another aspect of it I find interesting is its critical stance both against 60’s and 70’s revolutionary
feeling as against “the Man”. The final sequence, the culmination of the film’s ideas, shows that if
revolution is ever to be attained, things like protests, strikes or bureaucratic meetings are certainly
not the way to achieve it. So a more “anarchist” (in the nineteenth century sense of the word)
approach is taken. If we are going to change the world, we need to blow all of civilization and,
more importantly, all of its products.

Now, on the orgy sequence. I see it as a symbol for the two main character's communion, not with
nature, since nature itself is rather absent from such a barren setting, a setting described as
"dead", but with their own humanity, with the animal, atavistic, primal essence which ultimately
makes us who we are and drives us, a connection that most people is shown in the film as to have
lost. In this sense, it could be said that they're the last two human beings left, both in the desert
setting, devoid of any other life, as in the world itself. But they are also the two only individuals
left; the two only people capable of thinking for themselves, of rejecting all social conventions of
any kind and being themselves. And considering the primalness of the orgy and of the desert, they
would seem to represent a sort of new Adam and Eve: the heralds of a new beginning, the
founders of a new world where no social conventions will limit our individuality and humanity.

And yet. Immediately after the orgy scene is over, a few intruders trample on our new Eden (a
stereotypically middle-class, mediocre family and a police officer), as if implying that all that
happened among the hills is nothing but wishful thinking, that ultimately reality catches up and
swallows all such intentions of renewal. Perhaps this, again, points into the direction of the
meaning I read into the ending. It is ultimately not a "make love not war" approach which will
reset civilization, but a clearly violent, destructive one.
It is interesting how the bespectacled “revolutionary” at the beginning of the film claims that
individuality is a “burgeoise” idea, and that it is only organizations that can bring about change.
The movie goes on to prove him wrong with its two main characters, who are extremely
individualistic and are fed up from the conventions and stiffness that appear both in left- and right-
winged movements. For a moment, even if it is fleetingly, this two people make the world a much
more beautiful place, bring about much more change than these “revolutionaries” will ever attain
with their endless jabbering sessions.