Film’s tortured protagonist feels uncomfortably familiar to me

By David McElroy · December 15, 2018

Arlen Faber is supposed to be the guy who knows everything. Years ago, he wrote a best-selling spiritual book called “Me and God.” He never wrote anything else, but everybody wants to meet the man who’s so wise and so close to God.

The only problem is that Faber avoids the world. He feels like a fraud. He hates people and has nothing new to say. He’s an unhappy recluse who lives in anonymity — until circumstances conspire to bring some new people into his life and turn everything upside down.

“The Answer Man” didn’t get great reviews when it was released in 2009, but it quickly became one of my favorite movies — all because I felt an awful, uncomfortable sense of identification with Faber’s character. His story isn’t mine. The terrible way he treats people isn’t the way I treat people. His overt anger and language aren’t like me.

But something in the story of a tortured character who is forced to come to terms with who he really is — in ways that require him to admit that he doesn’t have all the answers — resonated with me in an emotional way. I watched it again last night and I had the same irrational and emotional reaction to it.

What movie tells the story of your life? I realize that no movie tells your actual story — unless someone’s made a bio-pic of your life — but there are sometimes movies that we can strangely identify with, even if the plot line is nothing like what’s actually happened to us.

Maybe we strongly identify with a character (for good or bad). Maybe it shows a lesson we’ve learned or a lesson we know we need to learn. There can be a lot of reasons.

Do you have any movie like that for your own life?

Although there are movies (and characters) I would prefer to identify with, I still have this inexplicable feeling of identifying with Faber’s character — and I’ve known since I first saw the movie that I need to learn something from him.

It’s considered a romantic comedy, but the Faber character is far too relatable for me to laugh at it too much, even though the over-the-top portrayal of someone who hates the world is an exaggeration of anything I’ve ever felt. When I watch the film, I go back and forth between shame at the portrayal of some things I see as my own inner faults when I hide from the world and emotional delight and hope as Faber takes a chance on becoming vulnerable and growing in order to win the love of a woman and her young son.

Toward the end of the film, Faber faces a crowd in a book store for the first time in years. They’re pressing him for wise answers to their problems. He finally tells the truth.

“I’m not a guy with answers,” he suddenly cries out with both frustration and relief.

“So you’re just like the rest of us,” asks the book store owner.

“Uh, not yet, but I’m trying,” Faber responds as he slips away from the crowd.

I can’t tell you exactly why I identify with this movie so much. Part of it is his longstanding disdain for others and his fear of being seen as a fraud. Another part is his intense loneliness and his struggle to become acceptable to a woman when he finally meets someone who’s everything he’s wanted.

But in all of that, nothing sums up what I identify with like that line from Faber about being as good as everybody else: “Not yet, but I’m trying.”

I’ve been struggling for years to find the right way to accept who I am, for both good and bad. The things which made me exceptional in some ways were also the things which made me feel so separate from the world.

I still haven’t worked out exactly how to be who I am but still connect with more people in emotionally healthy ways. I’m not there yet, but I’m trying.

Note: You can see the trailer for “The Answer Man” here. Reviews were mediocre, but I think it’s best seen as a life lesson for me rather than as a romantic comedy. Jeff Daniels and Lauren Graham are the romantic leads. I don’t know where you could see the film these days, but I have a copy, so if you’re ever with me, I’ll share.

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts