Fredric Jameson's "The Geopolitical Aesthetic: Cinema and Space in the World" (Book Note)

 

Fredric Jameson's The Geopolitical Aesthetic: Cinema and Space in the World System is an influential work of cultural theory that examines the intersection of film, politics, and global capitalism. It forms part of Jameson’s broader intellectual project of understanding how culture reflects and mediates the complexities of postmodernity and global capitalism. In this book, Jameson draws on both Marxist theory and poststructuralist thought to analyze films as cultural artifacts that reveal, however obliquely, the structures and contradictions of the global system.

At the core of The Geopolitical Aesthetic is Jameson’s concept of “cognitive mapping,” which he initially introduced in earlier works, most notably in Postmodernism, or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Cognitive mapping, for Jameson, refers to the way individuals attempt to orient themselves within the vast and abstract global space of late capitalism. This process of cognitive orientation is particularly important in an era where traditional forms of understanding, like class relations or national boundaries, have become increasingly complex and deterritorialized by the forces of globalization and multinational capital.

Jameson applies this idea of cognitive mapping to cinema, arguing that film, as a cultural form, provides a unique means for representing the spatial and systemic complexity of global capitalism. Films, in his view, do not just tell stories or present characters; they offer visual and narrative structures that allow viewers to grapple with the “unrepresentable” dimensions of the world system. Importantly, this does not mean that films offer a transparent or coherent picture of the world system. Instead, they mediate our fragmented and incomplete attempts to map that system.

One of the central claims of the book is that films, particularly those produced in the late 20th century, serve as allegories for the geopolitical realities of their time. These allegories are often indirect, using narrative and visual elements to suggest larger political or economic dynamics without making them explicit. Jameson argues that this indirectness is itself symptomatic of the difficulties inherent in representing global capitalism, which is so vast and complex that it defies easy visualization or comprehension.

A key method Jameson employs in his analysis is allegorical reading, which seeks to decode films as political texts that, albeit indirectly, reflect the global economic and geopolitical system. For Jameson, this process of allegorization is critical for understanding how culture interacts with politics in an era dominated by multinational capitalism.

For example, Jameson’s analysis of John Schlesinger’s The Day of the Locust explores how the film uses its portrayal of Hollywood and the American Dream to stage a broader critique of the contradictions inherent in capitalist culture. Similarly, Jameson’s reading of Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather reveals how the film’s narrative of mafia family dynamics can be understood as an allegory for corporate capitalism, particularly in the way it dramatizes the tension between familial loyalty and the imperatives of business expansion and profit.

In both of these cases, Jameson insists that the films should not be understood as directly political in the sense of overtly commenting on specific issues or advocating for particular ideologies. Rather, they are political in their structure and form, in the way they encode and reflect the contradictions of the world system. This allegorical reading allows Jameson to bridge the gap between the seemingly apolitical realm of popular culture and the deeply political dynamics of global capitalism.

Jameson’s concept of the national allegory, first developed in his essay "Third-World Literature in the Era of Multinational Capitalism", also plays a critical role in The Geopolitical Aesthetic. In this context, national allegories refer to cultural texts, particularly films, that reflect the political and economic conditions of a specific nation, but do so in a way that implicitly comments on broader global dynamics. For Jameson, the distinction between “First World” and “Third World” cinema is crucial here, as the former tends to focus on individual experience and psychological depth, while the latter engages more directly with social and political issues.

Jameson uses the example of Red Dawn, a Cold War film directed by John Milius, to demonstrate how even seemingly straightforward Hollywood action films can be read as national allegories. In this case, Red Dawn depicts a fictional Soviet invasion of the United States, and Jameson interprets this narrative as a reflection of American anxieties about its role in the global system, particularly in relation to the Third World. The film’s portrayal of a rural American insurgency against a foreign occupier becomes, in Jameson’s reading, an allegory for the United States’ involvement in various Cold War conflicts around the globe, particularly in Latin America and Southeast Asia.

This analysis of Red Dawn highlights one of the central arguments of The Geopolitical Aesthetic: films, particularly those produced within the capitalist culture industries, often express geopolitical anxieties and contradictions through their narratives, even when these themes are not explicitly addressed. The allegorical nature of these films allows them to mediate between the local and the global, providing a way for audiences to make sense of their position within a complex and interconnected world system.

In addition to his focus on allegory, Jameson also engages with questions of genre, particularly the relationship between realism and fantasy. He is particularly interested in how different genres deal with the problem of representing the unrepresentable nature of global capitalism. For Jameson, realism—while traditionally associated with the depiction of everyday life and social relations—faces significant challenges in the context of postmodernity. The scale and abstraction of the world system are such that traditional realist forms are often inadequate for capturing the complexities of global capitalism.

As a result, Jameson argues that many contemporary films turn to fantasy or science fiction as a means of grappling with these complexities. These genres, while ostensibly removed from the “real” world, provide alternative ways of representing global capitalism. In this sense, fantasy and science fiction can be seen as forms of cognitive mapping that attempt to visualize the otherwise invisible structures of the world system.

An example of this is Jameson’s reading of Blade Runner, directed by Ridley Scott. The film’s dystopian future world, with its stark division between the wealthy elite and the impoverished masses, becomes an allegory for the inequalities and contradictions of late capitalism. The film’s use of science fiction tropes allows it to represent the unrepresentable: the vast, networked nature of global capital, the exploitation of labor, and the alienation of the individual in a system that seems to operate beyond human control.

For Jameson, this turn to fantasy and science fiction also reflects a broader utopian impulse within postmodern culture. While dystopian narratives like Blade Runner may seem pessimistic, Jameson insists that they nonetheless contain a form of utopian desire, an attempt to imagine alternatives to the existing world system, even if those alternatives are framed in negative terms. This utopian impulse is central to Jameson’s understanding of culture under late capitalism: even as films reflect the contradictions and limitations of the current system, they also point, however obliquely, to the possibility of a different, more just world.