PHIL498

Sezer Türkaydın

2014202003

01.11.2020

The Truman Show, Reality & Hyperreality

The Truman Show (1998) is one of the films that leave the viewer with a lot of
questions after watching it. As the movie is about the life of the main character named
Truman Burbank being a complete set and a TV show, this movie can be analyzed with
various philosophical approaches including ethics, free will or reality. In this paper, I will
focus on reality and hyperreality –which can be defined as inability to differentiate reality and
simulation- and discuss how we can distinguish what is real from what is not real, how this
movie is connected to this topic and what the movie can provide to this discussion.

Truman Burbank’s whole life was a complete set since his birth. He was placed in a
very big studio and he was surrounded by a massive amount of actors so that the set was
looking just like “the real world”. He lived his life being unaware of the fact that he was
living in a set until he realized several strange things happening in his life. So if he had no
idea about the set or the world outside of the set, can we say “the set is the real world for
Truman”?

I believe we can discuss this better if we define what “reality” or “real world” is first
briefly and specify what is meant by these words for the rest of the paper. Reality can be
defined as the natural state of things without any interference, deception. By this definition,
we can say that the real world is the external world we sense, observe and experience without
any interference, deception.

In accordance with this definition, now, we can say that the set Truman Burbank lives
in is not the reality because it is not the natural state of things. The whole set was built by a
person, who is called Christof, and everyone in the set was actually playing a role therefore
“Truman’s world” is interfered and deceived. But Truman had no idea about this for almost
30 years. At this point, does it matter if Truman had no idea about or not? And does his
unawareness change the status of “reality” or “real world”?
 One could argue if he was living in that set since his birth, then it’s his “own reality”.
Moreover, he may never know neither the structure of his world nor the outside of his world
but his reality is to the extent what he knows and experience. Honestly, I would disagree
because no matter what “his world” does not fit the definition of “reality” or “real world”. He
may not be aware of it at all, but this does not change the fact that his world is still interfered
and deceived. He was living in a world which “he thought was real” but in fact, the world he
observed was a fictional and unreal world. Truman’s situation was just like Plato’s cave
allegory. Truman was a person chained in the cave, shadows were all the actors –and all other
materials- in the set and Christof, the creator of the show, was the person who played with all
the puppets. This distinction settles that “the reality” is not something that is defined
according to an individual; rather it is an “objective and unique status”. The next issue arises
here can we realize if something that seems very real to us is not real or how can we realize
it?

This is a relatively hard question. If something that is interfered seems identical to its
equivalent in the real world, then there should not be any way to find out that it is not real.
However, in the movie, Truman suspects his world. He suspects the nature of the world he
lives in as he realizes some inconsistencies and technical mistakes which damage the perfect
replication of the set. Therefore, we can assume that if no inconsistency or technical mistakes
happen, then we still cannot know that our world is not real.

We may go further and say that if the world you observe is not the reality then there
will be at least one indicator that will show you that it is not the reality. This statement fits the
movie. Truman lived his first 30 years without questioning the “perfectly designed” world
around him but eventually, he realized that something is wrong. Is this argument convincing?
Although it fits the movie, I would not say that it is convincing. Truman realized the
inconsistencies and strange things around him but those inconsistencies or strange things
might not happen or he might not realize them. Those mistakes could have been avoided and
Truman could live in his perfectly designed fake world without realizing it is not real. Going
back to Plato’s cave allegory, we can compare Truman’s realizations –we can take it as his
disengagement with the perfectly designed fake world- with a person becoming free in the
cave. But again, the person who becomes free in the cave becomes free because someone else
take them and bring them outside which is again the result of an external effect just like
apparent inconsistencies and technical mistakes in Truman’s world. Therefore there is not a
certain way for someone to understand that the world they live is not the reality.
 The Truman Show is a good example to make someone to think about what is real or
not as simulation in the movie is identical with the reality. Although there is an unchangeable
definition of “reality” and “real world”, it’s always possible for you to assume that your
simulation is reality because there is no way for you to realize that your world is a simulation.
Only an external change can make you realize that your perfect simulation is not actually real.