TSN movie meta: back to the basics, let's talk canon
DISCLAIMER: The following meta is inspired by the personal opinions of others, and I must clarify that my response is not intended to be malicious in any way, shape or form. I fully respect everyone's freedom to ship or not ship a pairing in The Social Network fandom (and I wish my right to exercise that freedom is respected too). You're 100% welcomed to agree or disagree with anything I say here.
A recent post on Tumblr about why some people do not ship Mark/Eduardo got me thinking. The reasons given are listed neatly in bullets right here, and at first glance seem irrefutable because these events are all shown in the movie. But it doesn't mean that they are facts.
Well, let's go back to the beginning before we break them down. TSN fandom 101: this movie consists of stories told by biased narrators who are involved in lawsuits set within the frame of an adversarial legal system. The beauty of the Rashomon effect is demonstrated through Sorkin's masterful integration of the three different perspectives. It's very, very easy, on the first watch, for the audience to be sucked into the compelling narrative and forget that the stories may be tweaked here and there to achieve an obvious goal. Why is only half of the ad board hearing shown in the movie? Why is the other half cut, where Mark's wisecracking in the beginning earned him a 6-month academic probation in the end? Why are we never informed about how Eduardo came to the decision of interning in New Yrok and not going to California? Had Mark even made an effort to convince Eduardo to "come out"? There isn't a single hint from the movie about that one. Of course, I understand movies work within a time limit and they don't have time for everything. It would be foolish to ask for every single detail, but the point is, this story is like a kaleidoscope; everybody's piece has a different colour, and the view is different depending on the way you spin it. Bottom line is, it isn't fair to deem Mark the manipulative taker solely based on Eduardo's accounts of the story, post laptop smash.
1. When he asks for the algorithm for FaceMash: The anarchist and the seed that grew
As anyone who has watched 3 episodes of Judge Judy will know, the plaintiff brings the case first (hence the opening sequence is based on Erica's testimony). But I doubt Gretchen had to spice up the story much when it comes to the algorithm; a 19-year-old drunk who just attacked his ex-girlfriend on the Internet and hacking Harvard's network is probably not one you'd expect common courtesy from at 2:08 AM. Besides, we are usually our rudest selves when we are in front of our best friends, especially at that age. I'm 18 years old, the way I speak to my own best friend is almost atrocious at times, and even though she complains about it occasionally, she never holds it against me.
I think before any shipper of Mark/Eduardo gets carried away by the homoerotic subtext, they mustn't forget that they are best friends, first and foremost. Intimacy in friendships is very different from intimacy in relationships, and I don't think it's all that condescending or manipulative if you're just trying to talk a friend into joining your own party, however misogynistic or violating that party is. If Mark's behaviour in the FaceMash scene can be described as "using Eduardo to serve his own ends", well, he never let Eduardo take the fall for it. Eduardo was the one who was apprehensive about making FaceMash from the beginning, but he did give in and surrendered the algorithm willingly. Should he have taken responsibility? Technically, yes, Eduardo was an accessory who doesn't have alcohol to blame. But I don't think Mark saw it that way at the ad board hearing (the scene where Mark is the narrator). Eduardo never wanted to use FaceMash to piss people off. Eduardo never had that anarchistic desire, or the anger that stemmed from it. Eduardo had neither the will nor the drive nor the executing abilities, therefore he was not responsible for FaceMash and its repercussions in Mark's eyes.
It's interesting to compare the two different opinions about Facemash: Eduardo said, How do you do this thing where you manage to get all girls to hate us? And Sean said, It may not have been good business but it pissed a lot of people off. And wasn’t that what your Facemash was about? Jesse Eisenberg made it quite clear to see which line Mark actually listened to. Eduardo was also just a college kid, of course, and girls was a staple topic of conversation. He complained about not being popular among girls, when Mark thought of FaceMash as the first Molotov cocktail he threw in the name of anarchistic anger (Fincher's quote about anarchy in the DVD documentary, absolutely glorious imho); he was the one who dated a girl for a blowjob and some sweet words, when Mark thought the girls were but a pleasant distraction and sought after the approval of Erica only; he was the one who said Thefacebook gives people a chance to get laid, when Mark said it was to meet a girl. These differences seem trivial, sure, but I think they are the cracks that mark the beginning of the divide.
/* A tangent: in the original script, it was Mark who said get laid and Eduardo who said meet a girl. I find the switch fascinating, and I think the reason behind it is worthy of discussion. It's evident that Eduardo makes more of an effort to socialize with girls (the Asian girls who can't dance, get all the girls to hate us, etc). Moreover, he's a pledge of the Phoenix club, where busfuls of beautiful co-eds get free passes into awesome parties, be it Mark's imagination or not. I think the switch has nothing to do with who sexually objectified women more than the other; it's just the logical order of things, and meeting girls comes before getting laid. I don't think Eduardo has more trouble than Mark in terms of the first step. He's more than likely to have cleared that level already, so the next logical goal is, of course, getting laid. */
Anyway, the want of someone who "gets it" is something that a lot of people can relate to. That distance between the closest of friends, when you're thinking about one thing and he/she is thinking in a completely different direction, and you're a little disappointed and change the subject because you know explanations just don't matter. That distance, that discord of ideas is where Sean Parker wedged in, planted a seed, and watched terror grow (Fincher, table reading in DVD documentary).
I'm a firm believer in "you can't talk about Mark without mentioning Sean Parker, even if you hate his guts". He's the seasoned veteran in the struggle for power against big money, and the clever mistress who had no problem helping himself to a slice of the pie using the knife tainted with Eduardo's blood. He shows Mark how to get inside the King's suite and the Pope's quarters, and he understands that the anarchist's defensiveness about his ideas is extrapolated from his long-time defensiveness about who he is. Was Sean's gesture of faith of putting Facebook on two continents any less important to Mark than the Eduardo Saverin Foundation? At the time, in the Ruby Skye VIP Room with house music booming in his ears, no. The whole point of making Facebook, the whole point of starting an exclusive final club where they are the president, the point of we don't need those old money rich snobs we can do it so much better ourselves, was what Mark tried to communicate to Eduardo all along. When Eduardo advanced in his quest to be a member of the Phoenix, when he refused to go to California, he ceased to validate that point for Mark (hence the deleted lines about maybe if you'd spent a little less time with your new friends and a little more time with the company this - ). Sean was the one who backed that point up and pushed it to the extreme with a line of angel investors and VC's. He put Mark in a bubble where Mark only needed to spray-paint, knock furnitures over, and tear walls down and build everything up again as he likes, when he and the others pushed Eduardo down the castle walls to be devoured by the new investors flooding in. Sean created the illusion that Eduardo is an expendable that Facebook must be rid of in order to get new things up and running, and he convinced Mark to look the other way (I remember rl!Mark once said something like the only way to be innovative is to destroy the old way of things). It might seem like sound logic from a fellow anarchist at the time, but Eduardo was not just another vase Mark broke. Eduardo could not be replaced.
There are two college kids that Mark would never be able to leave behind, because they made Facebook together, and Facebook made Mark Zuckerberg. He might never apologize for screwing Eduardo out, because he really wasn't a good fit for Facebook did benefit from Eduardo's downfall, but this history of assholery would follow Mark around for the rest of his life. I guess that's what it meant to be changed for better and for always.
Sean always had the best and most underappreciated lines.
2. When he asks for the startup cash at the AEPi party: The line between friends and partners
In my opinion, one must really think like Gretchen to spin this one as "using". To say Eduardo was used in this context would be demeaning his influence as CFO, as if he was a pawn instead of a partner, as if Mark came to him to ask for money for his own project and didn't even offer terms. Review the script or the movie for that scene and you'll see that Mark did not use a single my, and only used I when he was explaining the concept of Thefacebook to Eduardo. The deal was sealed in that scene, and thus began the war between we and I.
Sorkin addressed this at the table reading, as to why Mark grew more reluctant to recognize Facebook as our thing as the story developed. Admittedly Eduardo had not been putting Facebook's interests as his top priority, but for him, Facebook isn't do or die. He can make $300,000, he's a member of a Final Club at the most prestigious college in the country, he comes from a fairly wealthy family, he has numerous options. This isn't about responsibility, it's about obligation; and the difference between the two is dropping out of Harvard and staying to finish the degree.
A common saying in the fandom is, "when Mark asks Eduardo to jump, Eduardo says how high?" It mostly pertains to the $19, 000 Eduardo gave Mark, and I feel that it is appropriately quoted here since two out of the four bullet points in the Tumblr post are about giving money. To be honest, I think "financing the company's operations" is one of the basic clauses in the job description of the CFO. It wasn't as if Mark asked for unreasonable sums for ridiculous causes. Should he have been nicer when he asked? Maybe, but how much of a pretense of politeness do you expect from your best friend? In the context of language and mannerisms, Mark and Eduardo are friends. In the context of finances and vital equipment, Mark and Eduardo are business partners (thank you, zinkini , for sharing your insight). The lines are blurred when they're on cordial terms and sharpened when they fight, and it is a dangerous trap for characterization in fanworks. However, at the end of the day, the fact that Eduardo gave the money promptly upon request doesn't make him morally superior, and the fact that Mark asked bluntly isn't a precursor of his mistreatment of Eduardo. If anything, it is partially because Eduardo barely contributed anything substantial other than money that, after other investors got his shares, Facebook was still thriving.
As you know, precursors of the betrayal is a valid topic in canon; Gretchen tried to shake Mark by accusing him of being jealous of Eduardo getting punched, but Mark stood his ground. She found footing for her accusation on Mark's line: It probably was a diversity thing but so what? It is a repitition of Eduardo's previous line, who said that phrase twice in his own explanation. The difference is in the last three words: but so what? The false cheer died down when Mark raised his voice in rhetorical question. He refused to approve of Eduardo's effort at humility and somewhat of a kindness to "make him feel better". Perhaps Eduardo never intended for pity or sympathy, but Mark was determined to let him know that he needed none of it. I didn't get punched, but so what? You got punched and you said it was because you're Jewish and I'm Jewish too, but so what? You make more money than me right now, and I thought the ability to make money doesn't impress anybody around here, but so what? You got punched, I didn't, and I'm fine with it. I won't hold it against you now, because I have an idea that you will flip sides for. At the end of the conversation, Eduardo returned to the party, and Mark didn't. He walked, in cargo shorts with his torso upright and unmoving, the lone anarchist on his quest to prove to the final clubs he has all the power to fuck their stupid pretentious "tradition" at his fingertips. He would not settle for the AEPi, he would not settle for the Phoenix, he would not settle for anyone or anything until the day these people beg for an account on his social network. He walked with the sternness of such confidence. I'd say Mark truly believed in the we at that point and time. He believed in the partnership as much as he believed in the friendship.
3&4. When he asks for more cash for more servers & When he asks Wardo to forward the link to The Facebook to all the Phoenix members: you'll accept just half of all these consequences
Well, the two most infamous exchanges in the movie about how Eduardo submits to Mark. Already did and I'm just saying/You're right. I suppose if you ever need to write an essay about how Mark used Eduardo for his own ends, these are the best points you have left.
As I explained in part 2, Linux box is one of those "business partner" moments, conducted in the usual banter of best friends. I don't think the already did part is meant to be condescending at all, on the contrary, I think it's a sign of trust. Mark trusted Eduardo to have the best interest of the company at heart and would support a cause that was vital to the functionality of the site, so he bought the box before telling Eduardo about it. It's amusing to see Eduardo asking Mark do we need it right after Mark explained what he needed it for (I need a dedicated Linux box...), and Mark breaking it down for him in simple layman terms without prompting (gotta handle the traffic). It's one of those great moments where we catch a glimpse of how their friendship works, how they navigate around each other and understand one another. There's no need to tunnel vision on one line or one gesture; it is meant to be enjoyed as a whole. As for the don't worry if you don't make it any further, it's a reply directed more at the audience than Eduardo himself. It's not a nice thing to say of course, but like how Eduardo later admitted he didn't understand any of the tech talk when Mark explained the interns' hack-a-thon, Mark apologized by saying sorry, that was mean when he took another jab at the Phoenix. And I'm sure many of you will agree with me when I say that was a beautiful moment in their friendship.
On to the email scene. Now I don't really understand how Mark asking Eduardo for the mailing list is a form of using him for his own benefits. Remember that episode of Fairly Odd Parents, where Timmy feels bad about beating Francis the bully with his magically-acquired kung fu skills? Wanda tells him not to, because Francis has his muscles, and Timmy has his fairy god parents. Each uses his assets to gain leverage, and the rest is history. It's reasonable to say that the CFO's contacts is a valuable resource of the company's. Of course Eduardo could've said no; Mark was only making a proposal, it wasn't like he would take Eduardo's laptop if Eduardo was not convinced that he needed the email addresses. After all, Thefacebook was their thing, and Eduardo made the right call to be more of a team player. If there's anything controversial about this scene, it lies in Eduardo's line: I’m not sure if it’s gonna be cool with them that I spam their --, to which Mark promptly denied, this is not spam. Granted, spam could've meant "sending identical emails to a lot of people", and not in the sense of "junk". However, it is obvious that Eduardo's attitude was a 180 change from his previous this looks good, this looks really good. Is Thefacebook not good enough to be shown to his final club buddies? Eduardo answered quickly to this unasked question: no, I know it’s not spam-- and proceeded to read Mark the email addresses, which Mark attacked with his usual snark. And hence, the dynamics of the friendship were restored.
At this point, I must clarify that I'm not accusing Eduardo of being selfish here. As a pledge, he has his reasons to be concerned in his dealings with members; I'm just trying to prove that Mark isn't manipulating him for his own benefits in any way. Sometimes, I have this feeling that even though Eduardo had given in to Mark's requests and followed Mark's directions, his inability to think in Mark's shoes in some areas stretched beyond the discord of ideas. To me, that is the most tragic flaw in a friendship that could've lasted a lifetime. The best example for this is probably the chicken. From an outsider's point of view, it's plain to see that Mark really didn't care about it. The fact that he teased Eduardo about the chicken with the Crimson article was probably because he couldn't see why Eduardo was so worked up about it, and as we later learn, he defended Eduardo on the subject of the chicken in a meeting with his lawyers. It is hinted that both parties know that the chicken is going to be a problem in the litigation process, and Gretchen and Eduardo prepared their remedy (Mark cheating on his Art History final) if the subject does arise, which it did. The oops from Eduardo was a staged impression in an amateurish smear campaign, a payback that exposed his own insecurities. The oops from Mark was a true expression of feeling sorry for the way things turned out at the moment: the fact that they had reached this low (whether willingly or not), the fact that Eduardo sunk to blaming Mark without grounds and it is all justified because things are expected to get ugly in lawsuits. Gretchen and Sy were no idiots, they both knew the chicken incident was a ticking bomb for Eduardo's character evidence (a water bomb, for all the comedy it created). But after the hilarity passes, the absurdity sinks in. Here sits two ex-best-friends on the screen, in a deposition room of chrome and glass, armed with teams of litigators, attacking each other with information that only best friends could've known the details about. The only known witness of the chicken cannibalism, the only known witness of Facebook cheating, and the only one laughing is the spokeswoman of the audience.
I feel the need to mention that the story of the chicken is one of the two instances where Eduardo's father was brought up in Harvard era. I don't know how big of a part he played in traumatizing Eduardo for years with a silly incident about a chicken, while normal people would've moved on already, but Sorkin doesn't drop a reference to him lightly (in fact, he said the scene where Mark showed Eduardo the masthead was very important to him). Could it be that Eduardo was so thrown off by the repercussions of the chicken incident that he never realized how ridiculous it was to accuse Mark of caring about that story, let alone planting it? Could it be part of the reason why Eduardo chose New York over Palo Alto, even when he changed his attitude and willingly contributed $18,000 more at the hack-a-thon? How big of a part did Eduardo's father play, behind the scenes of the depositions, even though he didn't even want to look at Eduardo at the time? We will never know.
All in all, The Social Network is a complex narrative that could potentially be worth billions of analyses, essays, and meta. I've only touched on the tip of the iceberg here, having referenced mostly to quotes and lines from the script and not much of the nuances of the acting and performances. If a morsel of my words has got you thinking about something, my work here is done. Mark Zuckerberg is not a bad man, and you can well argue that he is not a very good man either, but I'm sure he is not the most manipulative and cold-hearted character in this movie. Everyone broke his own share of glass to make the shards that spun in the kaleidoscope, and the beauty of it lies in the eye of the beholder.
Thanks for reading, and especially you, my flist, for looking this over and/or generously sharing your ideas with me.
The link to my tumblr is in the downbar, the ask box is open and anon is on. Help yourself if you feel more comfortable over there.
A recent post on Tumblr about why some people do not ship Mark/Eduardo got me thinking. The reasons given are listed neatly in bullets right here, and at first glance seem irrefutable because these events are all shown in the movie. But it doesn't mean that they are facts.
Well, let's go back to the beginning before we break them down. TSN fandom 101: this movie consists of stories told by biased narrators who are involved in lawsuits set within the frame of an adversarial legal system. The beauty of the Rashomon effect is demonstrated through Sorkin's masterful integration of the three different perspectives. It's very, very easy, on the first watch, for the audience to be sucked into the compelling narrative and forget that the stories may be tweaked here and there to achieve an obvious goal. Why is only half of the ad board hearing shown in the movie? Why is the other half cut, where Mark's wisecracking in the beginning earned him a 6-month academic probation in the end? Why are we never informed about how Eduardo came to the decision of interning in New Yrok and not going to California? Had Mark even made an effort to convince Eduardo to "come out"? There isn't a single hint from the movie about that one. Of course, I understand movies work within a time limit and they don't have time for everything. It would be foolish to ask for every single detail, but the point is, this story is like a kaleidoscope; everybody's piece has a different colour, and the view is different depending on the way you spin it. Bottom line is, it isn't fair to deem Mark the manipulative taker solely based on Eduardo's accounts of the story, post laptop smash.
1. When he asks for the algorithm for FaceMash: The anarchist and the seed that grew
As anyone who has watched 3 episodes of Judge Judy will know, the plaintiff brings the case first (hence the opening sequence is based on Erica's testimony). But I doubt Gretchen had to spice up the story much when it comes to the algorithm; a 19-year-old drunk who just attacked his ex-girlfriend on the Internet and hacking Harvard's network is probably not one you'd expect common courtesy from at 2:08 AM. Besides, we are usually our rudest selves when we are in front of our best friends, especially at that age. I'm 18 years old, the way I speak to my own best friend is almost atrocious at times, and even though she complains about it occasionally, she never holds it against me.
I think before any shipper of Mark/Eduardo gets carried away by the homoerotic subtext, they mustn't forget that they are best friends, first and foremost. Intimacy in friendships is very different from intimacy in relationships, and I don't think it's all that condescending or manipulative if you're just trying to talk a friend into joining your own party, however misogynistic or violating that party is. If Mark's behaviour in the FaceMash scene can be described as "using Eduardo to serve his own ends", well, he never let Eduardo take the fall for it. Eduardo was the one who was apprehensive about making FaceMash from the beginning, but he did give in and surrendered the algorithm willingly. Should he have taken responsibility? Technically, yes, Eduardo was an accessory who doesn't have alcohol to blame. But I don't think Mark saw it that way at the ad board hearing (the scene where Mark is the narrator). Eduardo never wanted to use FaceMash to piss people off. Eduardo never had that anarchistic desire, or the anger that stemmed from it. Eduardo had neither the will nor the drive nor the executing abilities, therefore he was not responsible for FaceMash and its repercussions in Mark's eyes.
It's interesting to compare the two different opinions about Facemash: Eduardo said, How do you do this thing where you manage to get all girls to hate us? And Sean said, It may not have been good business but it pissed a lot of people off. And wasn’t that what your Facemash was about? Jesse Eisenberg made it quite clear to see which line Mark actually listened to. Eduardo was also just a college kid, of course, and girls was a staple topic of conversation. He complained about not being popular among girls, when Mark thought of FaceMash as the first Molotov cocktail he threw in the name of anarchistic anger (Fincher's quote about anarchy in the DVD documentary, absolutely glorious imho); he was the one who dated a girl for a blowjob and some sweet words, when Mark thought the girls were but a pleasant distraction and sought after the approval of Erica only; he was the one who said Thefacebook gives people a chance to get laid, when Mark said it was to meet a girl. These differences seem trivial, sure, but I think they are the cracks that mark the beginning of the divide.
/* A tangent: in the original script, it was Mark who said get laid and Eduardo who said meet a girl. I find the switch fascinating, and I think the reason behind it is worthy of discussion. It's evident that Eduardo makes more of an effort to socialize with girls (the Asian girls who can't dance, get all the girls to hate us, etc). Moreover, he's a pledge of the Phoenix club, where busfuls of beautiful co-eds get free passes into awesome parties, be it Mark's imagination or not. I think the switch has nothing to do with who sexually objectified women more than the other; it's just the logical order of things, and meeting girls comes before getting laid. I don't think Eduardo has more trouble than Mark in terms of the first step. He's more than likely to have cleared that level already, so the next logical goal is, of course, getting laid. */
Anyway, the want of someone who "gets it" is something that a lot of people can relate to. That distance between the closest of friends, when you're thinking about one thing and he/she is thinking in a completely different direction, and you're a little disappointed and change the subject because you know explanations just don't matter. That distance, that discord of ideas is where Sean Parker wedged in, planted a seed, and watched terror grow (Fincher, table reading in DVD documentary).
I'm a firm believer in "you can't talk about Mark without mentioning Sean Parker, even if you hate his guts". He's the seasoned veteran in the struggle for power against big money, and the clever mistress who had no problem helping himself to a slice of the pie using the knife tainted with Eduardo's blood. He shows Mark how to get inside the King's suite and the Pope's quarters, and he understands that the anarchist's defensiveness about his ideas is extrapolated from his long-time defensiveness about who he is. Was Sean's gesture of faith of putting Facebook on two continents any less important to Mark than the Eduardo Saverin Foundation? At the time, in the Ruby Skye VIP Room with house music booming in his ears, no. The whole point of making Facebook, the whole point of starting an exclusive final club where they are the president, the point of we don't need those old money rich snobs we can do it so much better ourselves, was what Mark tried to communicate to Eduardo all along. When Eduardo advanced in his quest to be a member of the Phoenix, when he refused to go to California, he ceased to validate that point for Mark (hence the deleted lines about maybe if you'd spent a little less time with your new friends and a little more time with the company this - ). Sean was the one who backed that point up and pushed it to the extreme with a line of angel investors and VC's. He put Mark in a bubble where Mark only needed to spray-paint, knock furnitures over, and tear walls down and build everything up again as he likes, when he and the others pushed Eduardo down the castle walls to be devoured by the new investors flooding in. Sean created the illusion that Eduardo is an expendable that Facebook must be rid of in order to get new things up and running, and he convinced Mark to look the other way (I remember rl!Mark once said something like the only way to be innovative is to destroy the old way of things). It might seem like sound logic from a fellow anarchist at the time, but Eduardo was not just another vase Mark broke. Eduardo could not be replaced.
There are two college kids that Mark would never be able to leave behind, because they made Facebook together, and Facebook made Mark Zuckerberg. He might never apologize for screwing Eduardo out, because he really wasn't a good fit for Facebook did benefit from Eduardo's downfall, but this history of assholery would follow Mark around for the rest of his life. I guess that's what it meant to be changed for better and for always.
Sean always had the best and most underappreciated lines.
2. When he asks for the startup cash at the AEPi party: The line between friends and partners
In my opinion, one must really think like Gretchen to spin this one as "using". To say Eduardo was used in this context would be demeaning his influence as CFO, as if he was a pawn instead of a partner, as if Mark came to him to ask for money for his own project and didn't even offer terms. Review the script or the movie for that scene and you'll see that Mark did not use a single my, and only used I when he was explaining the concept of Thefacebook to Eduardo. The deal was sealed in that scene, and thus began the war between we and I.
Sorkin addressed this at the table reading, as to why Mark grew more reluctant to recognize Facebook as our thing as the story developed. Admittedly Eduardo had not been putting Facebook's interests as his top priority, but for him, Facebook isn't do or die. He can make $300,000, he's a member of a Final Club at the most prestigious college in the country, he comes from a fairly wealthy family, he has numerous options. This isn't about responsibility, it's about obligation; and the difference between the two is dropping out of Harvard and staying to finish the degree.
A common saying in the fandom is, "when Mark asks Eduardo to jump, Eduardo says how high?" It mostly pertains to the $19, 000 Eduardo gave Mark, and I feel that it is appropriately quoted here since two out of the four bullet points in the Tumblr post are about giving money. To be honest, I think "financing the company's operations" is one of the basic clauses in the job description of the CFO. It wasn't as if Mark asked for unreasonable sums for ridiculous causes. Should he have been nicer when he asked? Maybe, but how much of a pretense of politeness do you expect from your best friend? In the context of language and mannerisms, Mark and Eduardo are friends. In the context of finances and vital equipment, Mark and Eduardo are business partners (thank you, zinkini , for sharing your insight). The lines are blurred when they're on cordial terms and sharpened when they fight, and it is a dangerous trap for characterization in fanworks. However, at the end of the day, the fact that Eduardo gave the money promptly upon request doesn't make him morally superior, and the fact that Mark asked bluntly isn't a precursor of his mistreatment of Eduardo. If anything, it is partially because Eduardo barely contributed anything substantial other than money that, after other investors got his shares, Facebook was still thriving.
As you know, precursors of the betrayal is a valid topic in canon; Gretchen tried to shake Mark by accusing him of being jealous of Eduardo getting punched, but Mark stood his ground. She found footing for her accusation on Mark's line: It probably was a diversity thing but so what? It is a repitition of Eduardo's previous line, who said that phrase twice in his own explanation. The difference is in the last three words: but so what? The false cheer died down when Mark raised his voice in rhetorical question. He refused to approve of Eduardo's effort at humility and somewhat of a kindness to "make him feel better". Perhaps Eduardo never intended for pity or sympathy, but Mark was determined to let him know that he needed none of it. I didn't get punched, but so what? You got punched and you said it was because you're Jewish and I'm Jewish too, but so what? You make more money than me right now, and I thought the ability to make money doesn't impress anybody around here, but so what? You got punched, I didn't, and I'm fine with it. I won't hold it against you now, because I have an idea that you will flip sides for. At the end of the conversation, Eduardo returned to the party, and Mark didn't. He walked, in cargo shorts with his torso upright and unmoving, the lone anarchist on his quest to prove to the final clubs he has all the power to fuck their stupid pretentious "tradition" at his fingertips. He would not settle for the AEPi, he would not settle for the Phoenix, he would not settle for anyone or anything until the day these people beg for an account on his social network. He walked with the sternness of such confidence. I'd say Mark truly believed in the we at that point and time. He believed in the partnership as much as he believed in the friendship.
3&4. When he asks for more cash for more servers & When he asks Wardo to forward the link to The Facebook to all the Phoenix members: you'll accept just half of all these consequences
Well, the two most infamous exchanges in the movie about how Eduardo submits to Mark. Already did and I'm just saying/You're right. I suppose if you ever need to write an essay about how Mark used Eduardo for his own ends, these are the best points you have left.
As I explained in part 2, Linux box is one of those "business partner" moments, conducted in the usual banter of best friends. I don't think the already did part is meant to be condescending at all, on the contrary, I think it's a sign of trust. Mark trusted Eduardo to have the best interest of the company at heart and would support a cause that was vital to the functionality of the site, so he bought the box before telling Eduardo about it. It's amusing to see Eduardo asking Mark do we need it right after Mark explained what he needed it for (I need a dedicated Linux box...), and Mark breaking it down for him in simple layman terms without prompting (gotta handle the traffic). It's one of those great moments where we catch a glimpse of how their friendship works, how they navigate around each other and understand one another. There's no need to tunnel vision on one line or one gesture; it is meant to be enjoyed as a whole. As for the don't worry if you don't make it any further, it's a reply directed more at the audience than Eduardo himself. It's not a nice thing to say of course, but like how Eduardo later admitted he didn't understand any of the tech talk when Mark explained the interns' hack-a-thon, Mark apologized by saying sorry, that was mean when he took another jab at the Phoenix. And I'm sure many of you will agree with me when I say that was a beautiful moment in their friendship.
On to the email scene. Now I don't really understand how Mark asking Eduardo for the mailing list is a form of using him for his own benefits. Remember that episode of Fairly Odd Parents, where Timmy feels bad about beating Francis the bully with his magically-acquired kung fu skills? Wanda tells him not to, because Francis has his muscles, and Timmy has his fairy god parents. Each uses his assets to gain leverage, and the rest is history. It's reasonable to say that the CFO's contacts is a valuable resource of the company's. Of course Eduardo could've said no; Mark was only making a proposal, it wasn't like he would take Eduardo's laptop if Eduardo was not convinced that he needed the email addresses. After all, Thefacebook was their thing, and Eduardo made the right call to be more of a team player. If there's anything controversial about this scene, it lies in Eduardo's line: I’m not sure if it’s gonna be cool with them that I spam their --, to which Mark promptly denied, this is not spam. Granted, spam could've meant "sending identical emails to a lot of people", and not in the sense of "junk". However, it is obvious that Eduardo's attitude was a 180 change from his previous this looks good, this looks really good. Is Thefacebook not good enough to be shown to his final club buddies? Eduardo answered quickly to this unasked question: no, I know it’s not spam-- and proceeded to read Mark the email addresses, which Mark attacked with his usual snark. And hence, the dynamics of the friendship were restored.
At this point, I must clarify that I'm not accusing Eduardo of being selfish here. As a pledge, he has his reasons to be concerned in his dealings with members; I'm just trying to prove that Mark isn't manipulating him for his own benefits in any way. Sometimes, I have this feeling that even though Eduardo had given in to Mark's requests and followed Mark's directions, his inability to think in Mark's shoes in some areas stretched beyond the discord of ideas. To me, that is the most tragic flaw in a friendship that could've lasted a lifetime. The best example for this is probably the chicken. From an outsider's point of view, it's plain to see that Mark really didn't care about it. The fact that he teased Eduardo about the chicken with the Crimson article was probably because he couldn't see why Eduardo was so worked up about it, and as we later learn, he defended Eduardo on the subject of the chicken in a meeting with his lawyers. It is hinted that both parties know that the chicken is going to be a problem in the litigation process, and Gretchen and Eduardo prepared their remedy (Mark cheating on his Art History final) if the subject does arise, which it did. The oops from Eduardo was a staged impression in an amateurish smear campaign, a payback that exposed his own insecurities. The oops from Mark was a true expression of feeling sorry for the way things turned out at the moment: the fact that they had reached this low (whether willingly or not), the fact that Eduardo sunk to blaming Mark without grounds and it is all justified because things are expected to get ugly in lawsuits. Gretchen and Sy were no idiots, they both knew the chicken incident was a ticking bomb for Eduardo's character evidence (a water bomb, for all the comedy it created). But after the hilarity passes, the absurdity sinks in. Here sits two ex-best-friends on the screen, in a deposition room of chrome and glass, armed with teams of litigators, attacking each other with information that only best friends could've known the details about. The only known witness of the chicken cannibalism, the only known witness of Facebook cheating, and the only one laughing is the spokeswoman of the audience.
I feel the need to mention that the story of the chicken is one of the two instances where Eduardo's father was brought up in Harvard era. I don't know how big of a part he played in traumatizing Eduardo for years with a silly incident about a chicken, while normal people would've moved on already, but Sorkin doesn't drop a reference to him lightly (in fact, he said the scene where Mark showed Eduardo the masthead was very important to him). Could it be that Eduardo was so thrown off by the repercussions of the chicken incident that he never realized how ridiculous it was to accuse Mark of caring about that story, let alone planting it? Could it be part of the reason why Eduardo chose New York over Palo Alto, even when he changed his attitude and willingly contributed $18,000 more at the hack-a-thon? How big of a part did Eduardo's father play, behind the scenes of the depositions, even though he didn't even want to look at Eduardo at the time? We will never know.
All in all, The Social Network is a complex narrative that could potentially be worth billions of analyses, essays, and meta. I've only touched on the tip of the iceberg here, having referenced mostly to quotes and lines from the script and not much of the nuances of the acting and performances. If a morsel of my words has got you thinking about something, my work here is done. Mark Zuckerberg is not a bad man, and you can well argue that he is not a very good man either, but I'm sure he is not the most manipulative and cold-hearted character in this movie. Everyone broke his own share of glass to make the shards that spun in the kaleidoscope, and the beauty of it lies in the eye of the beholder.
Thanks for reading, and especially you, my flist, for looking this over and/or generously sharing your ideas with me.
The link to my tumblr is in the downbar, the ask box is open and anon is on. Help yourself if you feel more comfortable over there.