Last Friday night, I attended Rose’s screening of the sci-fi drama Arrival. This intriguing film focused upon Louise Banks, a linguistics professor tasked with deciphering the language of extraterrestrials who have peacefully landed on Earth. In the process of learning this extraterrestrial language, Louise gains the ability to see the future. She foresees that she will conceive and birth a daughter who will die as a young adult from illness. Despite envisioning such a future, Louise decides to conceive the baby anyway. Once the daughter is born, Louise’s husband separates from her upon discovering that Louise knew the child’s fate prior to conception.
I initially had a hard time understanding Louise’s decision to conceive despite knowing the baby’s eventual tragic fate. It is difficult to imagine putting a child through such a sad, stressful, and fatal ordeal knowing it could have been prevented. Additionally, I struggled with the fact that Louise kept such a secret from her husband, who also had to go through the unfathomable tragedy of losing a child.
However, I had an interesting discussion about Louise’s dilemma with a friend who had a different perspective on the situation. Despite dying early, the child likely brought joy to Louise and her husband’s lives, and, it was also highly possible that the daughter lived a fulfilling life she wouldn’t regret, despite it being cut short. Therefore, is it so bad that Louise conceived the child knowing it would die? The issue is further complicated by Louise’s foresight, as, in visualizing her future experiences and interactions with the child, Louise may have already felt she had developed a real relationship with the child. Thus, it would make it hard to decide not to conceive a child whom she already “knew.”
Louise’s decision is more complicated than it initially appears to be. Although I can’t find it in myself to say what she did was right, I will admit that I do understand her reasoning.
I had a different interpretation of Arrival – specifically, I thought that the “flash-forward” visions of the future that Louise had were of events that were inevitable. Essentially, I came away believing that even though Louise could see the future, she was not able to change it. This gave me a very different interpretation of the ending of the film – rather than choosing to have a child who would eventually die, I saw Louise as embracing a future she knew she couldn’t change – though she would doubtless want to. I’m not sure which interpretation is “correct” but I think both are very interesting.