This blog post examines how human diversity is shaken by societal scrutiny and technological intervention through the lens of the film La piel que habito.
Cell Membrane
Characteristics of living organisms include cellular structure, metabolism, response to stimuli, homeostasis, development and growth, reproduction and heredity, adaptation, and evolution. However, viruses are not classified as living organisms because they are not composed of cells. Furthermore, the reason life is not considered to exist elsewhere beyond Earth is the lack of discovery of entities capable of metabolism. This possibility cannot be ruled out because the concept of metabolism itself was defined by humanity. So, how far does our definition of ‘life’ hold validity?
If life exists beyond Earth, it could be in a completely different form, unrecognizable by human standards. This makes us reconsider how anthropocentric and limited our accepted definition of life is. The identity of an entity is often defined from the outside. Viruses couldn’t care less whether humans define them as living organisms or not. Whether it is defined as a living organism has no bearing on the virus’s existence.
Viruses utilize a protein shell instead of a cell membrane. This is essentially the virus’s ‘skin’ and its physical form. Conversely, for humans, how they are perceived by others profoundly impacts their lives. In our society, identity is not merely a personal matter; it is constantly formed and transformed within social relationships.
The identity one feels about oneself often differs from the identity others perceive. For instance, when he returned home and said, “It’s Vicente,” he was actually ‘Bella,’ not ‘Vicente.’ If a person named ‘Bella’ existed and had undergone plastic surgery to look like ‘Vicente,’ his mother might have accepted him as ‘Vicente, whose personality changed during his disappearance.’ Even when examining identity perceived through the body from a psychological perspective, it is difficult to separate it from physical and substantive elements. For example, ‘Robert’s’ identity was based on being his wife’s husband, his daughter ‘Norma’s’ father, and a ‘plastic surgeon’. His wife and Norma no longer exist, but the fact that he was a husband and father remains unchanged. However, crucial elements of his tangible, physical identity are absent.
Thus, identity is defined within physical reality and social context. This suggests that identity is not solely formed by an individual’s perception or feelings, but is continuously reconstructed through interaction with the external world. At least for humans, identity seems to be more heavily weighted by how one is perceived by others than by how one feels about oneself. If how one is distinguished by others is a crucial axis of identity, then preserving diversity becomes an essential consideration.
Cultivation
Regarding the preservation of diversity, humans must maintain vigilance, particularly in the research and application of life-related science and technology. This is because while technological advancement can increase diversity, it can also lead to its reduction. This caution stems from the fear that technological progress could threaten humanity’s survival.
For example, gene-editing technology could potentially lead to a preference for specific traits, ultimately harming human diversity. Yet simultaneously, such technology offers the possibility of preventing or treating fatal genetic diseases.
Therefore, the approach to science and technology must be accompanied by ethical considerations. If genetic editing technology is used to favor specific traits, it will result in a reduction of diversity. Consider the skin graft surgery performed on ‘Robert’. Like the ethical issues raised by other scientists, research based on human subjects must be approached with caution from the initial stages.
When considering what determines identity, we must ponder how far research that could influence identity and its applications should be permitted. Can we say ethical issues don’t arise if the subject’s consent is firm?
Of course, even if a private incident motivated the experiment, it would be difficult to argue that Robert, who forcibly conducted the experiment, did not violate bioethics.
Immune Response
In film, a ‘twist’ is a key device to deliver ‘shock’ to the audience. The biggest twist in this film is that ‘Vera’ was actually ‘Vicente’, the person responsible for driving Robert’s daughter ‘Norma’ to her death. However, this could be seen as not particularly surprising, as it was an expression of Robert’s desire for revenge.
Nevertheless, this twist presents the audience with a moral dilemma, prompting reflection on the complex emotions between revenge and justice, forgiveness and retribution. In the film, Zeca and Vicente are like pathogens in Robert’s life. Zeca, after having an affair with Robert’s wife, drove her to death and then went on to rape Bella, who resembled Robert’s wife. Vicente, too, rapes Norma yet offers only excuses, showing no genuine remorse.
Pathogens within the body offer no benefit; vaccines are even injected to block additional antigens. Our bodies mount an immune response against pathogens, and its core is ‘memory.’ Through a system that remembers previously invading pathogens, the body protects itself.
The events in the film pose the question: what is forgiveness for humans? It makes us realize that forgiveness is not a simple choice, but a complex psychological and moral process. While it might seem better to choose forgiveness for happiness, like an immune response, forgiveness also consumes energy and resources.
The film makes us question where the limits of human forgiveness lie and what true forgiveness really is. Amidst the collapse of the characters’ identities, the story of the desires and revenge left behind demands deep reflection from the audience.
