Twelve years after it’s initial release I finally watched the film Whiplash (2014).
Having never seen it before, and not being a musician myself, I still found myself relating to many core components of the story.
That being said, I was surprised to hear many online talking about the movie as a tragedy: a sad surrender to the abuse of a narcissistic manipulator, as well as selling one’s soul to the devil.
Because although some of those elements are true, I didn’t see it that way at all.
In fact for me, Whiplash was not a tragedy, but in many ways an enlightening story about choice.
Here are a few reasons why.
Was Andrew Neiman’s Father a Good Father?
When asked about Jim Neiman, Andrew Neiman’s dad, I think most would say he’s a good father.
It surprises some then, that during the ending of the movie, Andrew still leaves his father and returns to the stage.
However if we pay attention, there are several moments of throughout the film that suggests a less than happy relationship between the two.
One we see early in the movie, when Andrew says he doesn’t like the raisins, and his father responds, “I don’t understand you sometimes.”
His father is also used several times by Fletcher, the jazz instructor, as an example of who Andrew doesn’t want to be, a “failed writer”.
The difference between the two is further demonstrated during dinner with Andrew’s extended family.
In this scene, Andrew is constantly being overshadowed, overlooked, and dismissed by his relatives, and even his father himself.
His path to music is largely regarded as silly, less impressive, and a waste of time.
Even when Andrew explicitly says that he’s become the core drummer of one of the best jazz ensembles in the entire country, they don’t seem to get it.
One of them even asks, “How do they know who wins in a music competition? Isn't it subjective?”
To which Andrew comically responds in an instant, “No.”
This not only shows how different Andrew is from other people, but also how misunderstood he is.
Being the core drummer of the Shaffer Conservatory Studio Band puts him in the top 0.01% of musicians in the entire country.
He’s literally one of the best of the best, as a freshman.
That’s f*cking insane.
And yet multiple times he’s being talked over, receiving subtle knocks about his life, how he has no friends, etc, while his cousin is receiving endless praise for just being a division three athlete.
Not division two, not division one, division three.
This isn’t to say that division three isn’t impressive.
But it’s like comparing a college basketball starter to Michael Jordan.
They’re worlds apart.
This is what pisses Andrew off.
Giving validation to someone who’s not even close to the same caliber as the other, just because they play a more accepted “sport”, feels disrespectful.
Especially for someone who cares so deeply about what he does.
Even his father, who is the closest to him, the one who should know him best, and the one who should defend him, shows how little he truly understands about Andrew.
His defense and praise of Andrew’s cousins implies that he would have rather have Andrew be more like them.
He also doesn’t brag or show any pride about Andrew’s accomplishments, which another parent would normally do when speaking about their children.
Which is again, insane, considering your son is top 0.01% in the entire country.
This is not to say he’s a terrible father.
There are plenty of moments where we see his love and support.
He clearly cares about Andrew and wants to see him win, but is more concerned about his well-being than his overall success.
And therein lies the disconnect between the two.
Because although Jim knows what Andrew wants, he doesn’t get it.
In the final scenes, when Andrew leaves the stage, Jim rushes to him and gives him a hug.
He then says for them to leave.
Which again, on the surface, seems respectable.
This is what you want a loving and kind father to do, right?
But if we truly look at it from Andrew’s point of view, we’d realize that this is the not what Andrew actually wants.
Andrew had been hurt from the repeated betrayal, trickery, manipulation, and embarrassment, but that doesn’t mean he wanted to give up.
At the end of the day, he cares more about becoming one of the greats than he does about nearly everything else - that’s why he returns.
So the hug with his father was like putting on a band-aid.
It’s like when a kid playing on a playground falls and gets hurt.
The kid cries, but it’s not like they want to leave and go home.
In fact, if you comfort them and give them first aid, they’ll quickly be up and running, back on the playground again.
This is how I see this scene.
Jim does a great job of being there for his son.
But I imagine that instead of leaving, Andrew would have wanted his father to say something like:
“You can do this. Go get em. Show them why you’re great. Prove them wrong.”
Andrew’s personality, since he’s not going to change his path, needs the support and encouragement to overcome his obstacles, rather than avoid them.
Later, we see this dark expression on Jim’s face during Andrew’s drum solo.
Many see it as the fear that his son might become another Charlie Parker, or even worse, Sean Casey (Fletcher’s former student who hung himself).
But for me, this is actually a moment of realization.
As Jim’s watching him, he finally realizes just how much this “music thing” means to Andrew.
He knew he loved it, but to the point of being abused, mistreated, and potentially lose everything?
That’s another level.
Understanding this, he realizes:
Andrew’s not crazy.
This is just how much he cares.
So ultimately, is Jim Neiman a bad father?
Definitely not - but he’s not the perfect father for Andrew either.
Instead, he represents a realistic portrayal of the struggle many parents face.
They want what’s best for their child, but that can sometimes come into conflict with what the child wants for themselves.
I’m not saying that Jim should have been supportive of Andrew remaining in this twisted relationship with Fletcher.
Just that: if he understood Andrew’s goals, desires, and motivations to a deeper level, he could have guided him to a better path to success.
Andrew wanted to be one of the greats, he was willing to trade anything for it, and he wasn’t going to stop until he got there.
If Jim, instead of trying to change him, understood that, he may have been able to guide him to a different path to success, without the narcissistic abuser.
Similarly, had Jim shown more approval, pride, and support of Andrew’s dreams in front of their relatives, Andrew may have not felt the need to seek that approval from Fletcher instead.
Ultimately, Andrew believed Fletcher could give him the things his father couldn’t, that he wanted, and that’s why he “sold his soul”.
Was Fletcher Right?
One of the central themes to Whiplash is greatness; while the second is abuse.
These are two different things, yet they often intermingle within the film, leading to many misunderstandings.
It’s why a lot of comments online will see the ending of the film as a tragedy, rather than a happy ending.
Because Andrew’s return to the stage seems like a submission to the abusive methods of his instructor, Fletcher, in the effort to become great.
But actually, I see it differently.
In fact for me, Andrew’s return to the stage symbolizes his commitment to his dreams, more than a submission to abuse.
You see, throughout the film, Andrew constantly and consistently tells us who he is.
He doesn’t simply want to be great - he wants to be one of the greats.
This is shown in everything from his hard work (drumming repeatedly to the point of bleeding), his breakup conversation with Nicole (his girlfriend), down to the type of snacks he eats (saying to his father, “I don’t want this one, I want that one.”).
It’s even to the point that he even gets into a car crash, almost dies, and still tries to play on stage, covered in blood.
Just how many of us can relate to this level of commitment?
Some might call this behavior strange, crazy, or even insane.
But Andrew is just that committed.
So his willingness to take abuse, sacrifice relationships, and almost die is more of a symbol of his dedication to becoming great, but it doesn’t prove that “abuse will lead to greatness”.
In fact, in many scenes we learn that Fletcher isn’t actually right, even if it’s validated by Andrew’s final decision.
Fletcher himself even said he’d never had a Charlie Parker.
Not to mention him raising a student that eventually commited suicide.
So there’s proof that Fletcher’s methods fail all the damn time, despite the ending.
In reality, we’d have to split test Andrew’s path to success with a different non-abusive mentor to see the difference.
But in my opinion, there’s evidence all around us of great musicians that became great without being raised by a “Fletcher”.
The only reason why it works on Andrew is because he’s another Charlie Parker, not because of the teaching methods themselves.
There’s a great line I like to think about when it comes to success:
“Winners win.”
Meaning: the people who want to win will find a way to win no matter what.
Andrew, in my opinion, demonstrated many qualities of being a winner, from his hard work to his dedication to his sacrifices.
He simply wasn’t given a different choice for a healthier path to greatness (because it’s a movie).
But I think he could have still become great without Fletcher.
The abuse was simply a better way to draw out the emotions of the viewers as well as make the stakes of Andrew’s decisions seem more real.
Similarly, just because Charlie Parker overdosed and died young doesn’t mean the same will happen to Andrew.
The director and Fletcher simply used that as an example to further accentuate to the audience the stakes of the decision Andrew was making.
Later, Chazelle did confirm he believes Andrew’s future path will be dim, but I think he left the ending open-ended for a good reason.
Because in reality, who knows?
Yes, Andrew might become mentally unstable and die young, but he could also overcome those obstacles and be mentally healthy as well.
It happens all the time with A-list actors and musicians around us.
Think about Robert Downey Jr. for example.
He had a rough patch but is in a better place now.
So I like to think there’s a strong possibility that Andrew is also one of those exceptions.
Ultimately, Fletcher is partially right, but ultimately wrong.
He’s right in the sense that praise can make artists complacent, and holding high standards can make you better.
But he’s wrong in the sense that there are many other ways to achieve the same results without having to abuse your students.
Pain can be a strong motivator, but pleasure and positive reinforcement are as well.
Of course this is a movie, not a culmulative textbook on how to become successful.
Abuse was primarily used as a tool to make the scenes more visceral, as well as highlight Andrew’s level of commitment and desire.
But it’s not the best or only way to become great, and we shouldn’t confuse the two themes.
Meaning if you’re on the path to greatness, like Andrew, you can find a way to do so without the same sacrifices.
Find a good mentor, study success, and work hard consistently.
There’s a derivative quote of Charlie Munger I like to think about.
It went something like:
“If you have nothing else, but you’re consistent, you still might win.”
That’s how important consistency is, moreso than beating yourself with a stick, trying to succeed.
Why Does Andrew Neiman Return to the Stage?
Many people struggle to understand why Andrew ultimately returns to the stage, or even continues being around Fletcher in the first place.
What this comes down to is a fundamental misunderstanding of Andrew and the first core theme, greatness.
In fact, that’s the very thing we see both Neiman and Fletcher agree upon throughout the entire film: greatness.
It’s shown several times over, from the moment Fletcher intoxicates Neiman with the stories of Charlie Parker, to the Jazz bar scene, where Fletcher says, “The next Charlie Parker would never be discouraged.”
It’s the single integral element that differentiates both characters from all of the others in the film - it’s also why Neiman ultimately chooses to play for Fletcher once more.
Both characters carry within them an insatiable desire for greatness, alongside a ruthless need for perfection.
To the rest of the world, it seems crazy.
But for them, it’s purely obvious and logical.
One could argue that Fletcher is simply a terrible person, a control freak who just wants to f*ck with his students - but I’d argue his love for jazz is also real.
It’s for this reason that many people see the ending as a tragedy.
Because most of us are more like Jim (the father) and Nicole (the girlfriend), than we are like Andrew or Fletcher.
So we have a hard time understanding why any sane person would do what Andrew does.
The Late Kobe Bryant once said, "A lot of people say they want to be great, but they're not willing to make the sacrifices necessary to achieve greatness.
Andrew is.
With that in mind, I believe the ending scene isn’t simply Andrew selling his soul to the devil - it’s about confirmation.
Confirmation that this is indeed what he wants.
Throughout the film he is constantly being tested to see just how much he’s willing to sacrifice for his dreams.
It begins with hard work, then his girlfriend, then his health, and finally his soul.
It’s like life is asking him over and over again:
“Okay, you say you want to be one of the greats, right? So prove it. How badly do you want it? Are you willing to give up everything?”
Because that’s what it costs.
Continually he is asked this question, and every time he chooses greatness.
In fact, Andrew is so remarkably consistent with his choices, it’s surprising people are still surprised by the ending.
But that’s simply because they’re projecting onto Andrew their own values.
They personally, wouldn’t make the sacrifices he’s making, so therefore they’re surprised when he does.
We know Andrew wants to be great.
But we don’t get how much he actually wants this.
Plus, when he says he wants to be great, he actually means it.
Unlike other people who say they want something, but take it back as soon as the price becomes too high.
It’s in this instance Andrew’s dedication becomes more respectable to me, rather than selfish or stupid.
Because he is not only honest with his words, he’s consistent with his actions.
Andrew realizes this as he hugs his dad in the final scenes.
Life keeps asking him the same question: “How bad do you want this?”
But now he finally fully understands the game that’s being played.
Him returning to the stage is like saying:
“I know the price for my dreams and I’m willing to pay it.”
Whether it’s verbal abuse, no friends, no girlfriends, no family, and even potentially becoming suicidal and dying an early death.
He’s willing to pay it all.
That, and to give Fletcher one final “f*ck you”.
Was Whiplash a Tragedy?
At the end of the day, I firmly believe that if we understand Andrew’s personality, as well as put ourselves in his shoes, Whiplash is actually a happy ending - in a weird way.
Some people might regard the over glorification of success and greatness as a young person’s naivety, but I’d disagree.
I think it comes down to values.
Many people value their families, relationships, and health more than they care about becoming great.
Andrew is the complete opposite - all he cares about is becoming one of the greats.
People judge others by the sacrifices they’re unwilling to make.
But what if we judge Andrew based on what he wants - where does that lead us?
I think it leads us into making the same exact decisions as Andrew did.
Because the movie is about him, not us.
So if he wants to be great at all costs, and he actually does it, then isn’t that a win?
He’s made it clear many times that he cares more about becoming great than he cares about how Fletcher treats him, even after realizing what he’s doing.
This isn’t to say that we should approve of abuse or manipulation, or any of Fletcher’s negative behaviors.
Just that our main character is willing to make that trade.
Again, we must take and separate the two themes of this film: greatness and abuse.
If you look at it through a lens of abuse, Andrew loses.
However, if you look at it through a lens of greatness, Andrew wins.
And in that case, even if it’s a little twisted, it’s a happy ending.
Because technically, he got what he wanted.
In this moment I’m reminded of a great line by Naval:
"The only real test of intelligence is if you get what you want out of life."
This means several things:
The first is knowing what to want in the first place, which many characters like Nicole struggle with.
The second is actually getting it.
And if Andrew’s life becomes this chaotic spiral, but it’s what he wanted, then in a weird way, it is a happy ending, not a tragedy.
