Identity of Past: The Truman Show

John Locke defines Identity as that which is comparable to what has been previously experienced or known, with the assumption that we make as humans that no two things could exist the same, in the same place and time, and therefore define identity by comparison to the definite past (192). If our identity is defined by past, for Truman, this existential question is never raised until the pin drops so to speak. His identity was totally reliant on experience, and his experience was a falsehood. His experience was manufactured by producers, actors, and a director who believed himself God. His identity then could be called also a falsehood.  

However, his identity was founded upon his past experience. His experience itself was not false. He still grew up, had emotions and human conversation. To say that he would desire an outside world that he had no experience of seems contrary to his definition of identity, especially given Locke’s definition. Yet there is something that drives him out of the bubble he was caged within once he discovered his experience was walled in, driving him mad with the desire.  

This film is not only about Truman’s identity however, despite his identity being the focus. Rather, it is about the director’s identity. His past experience has informed him of a world that is cruel and unforgiving, so he becomes a Godlike figure by creating a world for Truman, almost as if to create a paradise for himself, wherein his identity is unquestioned. He is God to Truman, guiding his experience. Truman then questions his identity--therefore he questions God, so he becomes hunted, yet never harmed. Identity is based on past experience for both director and Truman, both choosing to escape their past experience despite this reliance on it for their identity.  

The director chooses to redefine himself as God, creating a new identity based on escapism from his past experiences. Truman chooses a new identity that is firmly human, to escape the cage and go to the unknown. One man attempts to remake himself for a purpose, one simply needs rebirth to have a purpose at all. The parallel between the two says much of the ways we use our past to define ourselves. One can attempt to reject the past yet still let it guide them, thereby eventually suffering – ie the director. Or perhaps one can reject the past in total, despite fearing what may come of it – ie Truman. To watch both not only as an audience, but to watch the audience within the movie allows an imperfect realization of ourselves and an uncomfortable one as we too look to our pasts and our own Identity that is informed by those experiences that Locke defined.  

Are these only two ways that we can use our past to inform our identities? Or are there far more paths to identify oneself?