Trainspotting is a 1996 film which tells the story of a young man from Edinburgh called Renton, a disadvantaged man who struggles between drug intoxication and rehabilitation. Although the brutal and terrifying side of drug addiction is largely depicted in specific ways, overall the film does not set an intense tone, rather it also involves some casual, conversational and even hilarious elements in telling the story. In this case the representation of addiction becomes questionable in terms of "authenticity"; i.e.: Does reality in real life agree with representations in the imaginary world? Are there any details or facts that are intentionally removed by the film producer and why? How can viewers distinguish theatrical clichés from realistic descriptions of symptoms, as well as the line between considering drug addicts as a negative example or as a role model? To answer these questions, in my essay I will try to examine the 'accuracy' and 'authenticity' of these visual representations of addiction that appeared in the film Trainspotting in cultural, scientific and ideological (social) terms. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayFirst of all the idea of ​​the “femme fatale” which could be traced back to 19th century France has been carried forward to this late 20th century film. In the film Trainspotting (1996) there are two main female characters who have intersections with male protagonists: Allison and Diane. Diane as a teenager, her drug use marks the decadence of future generations. The emergence of this character and his sexual relationship with Breton are indicators of the "passing down" of this tradition of drug addicts. Just as Breton does not know her true age at first, no one, especially the viewers, will know what will happen to this girl in the future, which reminds viewers of the "drunk children" in William Hogarth's engraving Gin Lane. So she's not the one who makes the audience feel sympathetic or hilarious about Breton's experiences, she's also the one who passes down these crack traditions. From the character of Diane, the whole film begins to 'joke' the viewers and leave them wondering what is true and what is not, while her appearance can be seen as an exaggeration of reality, just like the clichés that Gin Lane It has already been used a few centuries ago. Speaking more about the character Diane, in Trainspotting when Renton tries to stop using heroin and "get back to normal", he gets "set up" to have a crush on this 15 year old girl and has sex. with her. But after that he starts doing drugs again----the movie probably tries to suggest that sex doesn't give him as much comfort as drugs, along with his quote: Take your best orgasm, multiply the sensation by twenty, and you're still fucking miles away away from the beat." However this is only one possible reading of this sex scene, rather the intersection between sex and drug addiction is the issue worth mentioning. While Rantala in his article "Cinematic Images of Being Addicted" concludes the sex addiction scene in the film Diary of a Sex Addict as "associated with uncontrolled desire" (Rantala 110), this notion of "uncontrolled desire" is actually a universal feature of any type of addiction, including drug addiction Sex as alternative to drugs, Renton's "illegal" sexual relationship with this teenager effectively criminalizes him in the same way as drugs Sex and drugs are not simply issues of desire in this context, so clearly there is adramatic modulation that leads in a certain direction. The reason for the mysterious death of Allison's daughter, another female character, is not revealed until the end of the film, while the father of this child is also a mystery that remains unknown. It evokes the earlier discussion of William Hogarth's eighteenth-century engravings Gin Lane and Beer Street in contemporary British society, according to Mark Hallett, these works actually displayed concern about "increasing mortality rates in the capital, particularly those of newborns" ( Hallett 207). Although an eighteenth-century visual tradition, this notion of the “bad mother” was reproduced and continued in this twentieth-century production, especially when considering this film in the context of the development of drug law (Boyd 207). So the exact reason for this child's death is not what a film wants to emphasize, the main point is the fact that his death signifies the immorality of female drug users, and more importantly, the immorality of the mother of a newborn baby who caused several disturbances and symbolized the collapse of the entire society. The root cause and reality of the death are not essential to the narrative, so they were intentionally omitted by the director, while the film tends to let viewers focus on the mysterious outcome itself in relation to drug addicts. the relationship between drug addiction and the visual representations of human bodies in the film, the bodies that appear in the film are not simply indicators of physical, medical, or, more specifically, psychological symptoms. Thus, by contrasting bodies in film production with bodies in the scientific realm, the gap between reality and virtual reality in public media can be thoroughly understood with the help of basic knowledge of contemporary social ideologies. A character called Begbie in the film is depicted as a psychopath who also engages in heavy drug use. Portraying drug addicts as psychopaths is not a new cliché used in the late 20th century, as this tradition could be traced back to the beginning of the century. However, Lindesmith's 1940 article, “The Drug Addict as Psychopath,” thoroughly criticized the close link between drug addiction and abnormal psychology. He pointed out that this traditional view about drug addicts “is not specific and is therefore unverifiable” (Lindesmith, 914). He analyzed several scientific data to demonstrate that it is difficult to tell whether one's abnormality is the “cause of addiction” or the “result of addiction” (916). Thus, according to the relevant paragraph by Richard Huggins summarizing Lindesmith's study, Lindesmith has finally "hinted at the close relationship between professional, clinical and political discourses and how they fit into public accounts of the addict as weak." (Huggins 168) That is, the film spontaneously creates a fusion of psychological facts and ideological norms. Throughout the film, the depiction of abject bodies is almost everywhere. The film does not stop at the stage where the instant emotions of drug addicts are shown as well as their abject bodies on the surface, rather the comings and goings of the drug addict's body in the eyes of most viewers has further meanings than the viewers thought, if we combine the actions of the protagonist with some theoretical discourses. In Harold's article on this particular film, Harold also discusses this notion of the "abject body" which comes from another term called "bodies in flow." In support of this idea, Harold cites Judith Butler's article “Bodies that Matter,” particularly her conception of subjectivity in relation to the “repudiation of abjection.” According to JudithButler the abjection of the human body is not simply a symbol imprinted on the surface, but involves people's internal struggles. A person's denial of themselves, for example, in the film Renton of their heroin addiction state, effectively becomes the source of their body's "abjection" since their personal identity is not stable. Although the physical bodies in this film may be influenced by ideological norms, the physical bodies themselves may also reflect the characters' inner world that is not visible to the audience, so the body is intentionally granted multiple meanings by the film, which goes far beyond the realm . When it comes to the censorship issues of this film, the discussion will be closely related to the social promotions this film may engage in. Ultimately Renton is taking away his friend's dirty money for His moral redemption can be seen as a game of boundaries: the boundaries between moral and immoral. Therefore many people remain doubtful about this film, some consider it a glorification of drug addicts and an advertisement of their "immoral" happiness. In biological terms, in fact, drugs are able to bring people the so-called 'happiness': "Arousal (the initial period of ingestion of alcoholic beverages, cocaine, ecstasy, or the act of gambling, of sexual seduction) makes the addict happy, feeling full of power. (Lacerda 97) So this representation of happiness is exactly what reality is. Looking at the director's quote, "It does not try to limp with moral consensus", however, as my personal statement, the film does not stop at the stage of depicting their "happiness", rather it combines everything as a whole. For example, one of the friends of Renton, Tommy, eventually died from HIV. As Renton and his other friends are all on the NHS and don't share needles, this reduces their risk of becoming infected with HIV. However, Tommy's exclusion from this space and his appearance in a dirty house are closely linked to his HIV infection fortune. Therefore death is somehow a 'punishment' for his 'exclusion' rather than the outcome of a medical illness. According to Boyd's discussion of Tommy's death in her book Hooked, she notes that “the scene is problematic because it links HIV and addiction with physical and moral degradation. ” (Boyd 97) Considering the National Health Service as a social institution, Tommy's death is perhaps public hygiene propaganda. That is, Tommy sacrifices himself with the intention of proclaiming moral goods by physically degrading him in the film. Furthermore, Renton finally becomes almost the only person who survives by escaping from this "subculture". Renton's commitment to the rehabilitation program can in some ways be seen as the moral message of this film, as I mentioned above. Finally, as a side note, the film consists mostly of montage scenes. In Rantala's contribution, the affective elements of the editing technique are analyzed in depth. For example, the close-up of the protagonist's face in the film actually breaks the gap between characters and viewers. Therefore the affective elements and values ​​intentionally inserted are vividly displayed by the film producers to the audience, “engaging the viewer through an intimate emotional connection that blends the subjective and the objective”. (Rantala 107) In Nancy Campbell's book Using Women: Gender, Drug Policy, and Social Justice, she proposes the idea that drug discourse is actually isolated from “simple discussions of 'facts'” (Campbell 38). Even the facts that the film vividly shows the audience cannot overwhelm the values ​​that the entire film aims to convey. While the discussions I have set out above.