Reflections on the Christmas/angel film, "The Bishop's Wife" (1947) starring Cary Grant, Loretta Young and David Niven

 

Reflections on “The Bishop’s Wife” (1947)

Directed by Henry Koster

Written by Leonardo Bercovici and Robert E Sherwood

Starring Cary Grant, Loretta Young and David Niven

 

“The Bishop’s Wife” is unquestionably one of my favourite angel and Christmas films. Cary Grant is simply perfect as Dudley, the angel sent to help Bishop Henry Brougham in response to a prayer, though not, perhaps, in exactly the way Henry anticipates.

Bishop Henry Brougham is hardworking, principled, kind and resolutely determined to build a cathedral to honour God, though funds are hardly flowing into the coffers and Henry is starting to panic and obsess over his failure to raise both money and the building. In his obsessive desire to do right by God, his mind has been diverted by reverence and image and he appears to have lost sight of his broader purpose and direction. He is so focused on a monument that his attention is drawn from other more pressing and humanitarian good works, and he has become neglectful of his wife and daughter. He prays for help and guidance which, in his mind, is intended for the construction of the cathedral, and Dudley appears. However, Dudley’s mission is to offer guidance of a more general and humanitarian nature to Henry, so that Henry can refocus on helping people and appreciating his family rather than constructing a building to honour the spiritual father of such grand notions.

By the end, Dudley has helped a number of people see the bigger picture, to put their problems into proportion and consider their priorities, to appreciate the many gifts we enjoy through being alive – something we tend to lose sight of when overwhelmed by problems and anxiety – and to inspire them to achieve their potential. He seems to advocate value and fulfilment associated with understanding, tolerance and love as opposed to material gain, immediate gratification and physical comfort.

This is particularly true of Agnes Hamilton, a wealthy widow whose support for Henry’s project is dependent on incorporating her late husband’s name into virtually every aspect of the building’s design, amounting to the creation of a monument to her husband’s memory, something Henry cannot accept and which is causing conflict and delays.

Mrs Hamilton appears to be a hard-hearted woman overwhelmed by position and pride. However, Dudley sees the truth in her heart. In fact, she is driven by her lack of love for her late husband whom she married for social advantage and wealth.  In truth, when she was young, she loved a penniless artist but she abandoned him due to a fear of poverty. She sacrificed her heart for material things and she knows it. Her marriage was something of a sham and now she is trying to compensate by material and costly memorials to her late husband and a crass demonstration of non-existent affection in an attempt to make it real. However, Dudley puts her in touch with her deepest and hidden feelings and this brings about a remarkable change of heart – she abandons her façade and determines to do as much good as she can with her money by helping the poor and the needy with Henry as the chief administrator, rather than constructing an edifice in honour of her late husband.

Indeed, this is the same message Henry must receive – that offering practical help to the needy is more important than merely honouring the very one who advocates such actions….

Julia, Henry’s wife, is something of a catalyst in all this. She doesn’t contribute a great deal to the storyline yet she is central to it as she represents those qualities that are fundamental to so much we do – love and humanity, and as such she provides purpose and inspiration. Of course, Henry, like many others, is losing sight of the importance of love and consideration compared to the importance he has attached to material things…

Julia is loving, caring and sincere and she inspires affection through her tenderness and kindness, but she is largely unappreciated and neglected and the love in her heart is being slowly stifled by Henry’s inattention and devotion to his project. Of course, she remains a dutiful and good wife, but will duty replace love so she may end up in a position similar to that of Agnes Hamilton? Disappointment and hurt are toxic to relationships long-term. She needs to see she deserves more and Dudley is happy to provide her with moments of innocent happiness and joy, with the added bonus of causing Henry to be jealous and reflect on what is important to him…

Dudley is supremely calm, commanding and confident of his place in the grand scheme of things and his contribution to life. He has complete belief in himself and is ever positive and optimistic. He achieves his mission not by way of miracles (though he does indulge in some audience-pleasing miraculous antics on the way), but by showing compassion and understanding, and by offering appreciation, inspiration and help, thus leading the way for others to do likewise.

And he watches over all, whether faithful or non-believers, as he helps to inspire the sceptical Professor who provides the voice of reason and common sense to Henry and Julia. The Professor is principled, consoling and sincere but lacks the self-belief and inspiration he needs to fulfil his dream of writing the definitive history of Rome, and Dudley is able to stimulate and inspire him to do so. Indeed, Dudley also stimulates a degree of spirituality in the Professor as, at the end of the film, he attends the Christmas service in church.

Problems are put into proportion and what really matters is brought into focus, but another dramatic element is introduced, and one which is revisited in many other angel films – jealousy of emotion, love and attachment on the part of the angel. Emotions can lead to problems, but bring great joy as well. Here Dudley becomes envious of the love between Henry and his wife Julia, and this adds a whole dimension not just in terms of dramatic interest, but one which urges us to appreciate what we have in life. Dudley appears to have everything, yet he himself feels he has nothing without the kind of bond of love he has witnessed between Henry and his wife.

This is, I believe, an essential element in the success of this film – not only does it emphasise how lucky we are to experience these feelings, but it lends drama, import and even a sense of tragic sympathy to the figure of the angel whose very presence will be forgotten on completion of his mission. Without some kind of inner conflict, the angel would simply be doing a job and there would be little real interest in him.

This may be a somewhat dated and unashamedly sentimental concoction but if you’re willing to surrender to its seasonal spirit, it engages, entertains and invites gentle reflection on what is important in life as Dudley puts people who have been diverted or corrupted by experience and pain in touch with their fundamental humanity and allows them to fulfil their potential.

My thanks for taking the time to read this article. I hope you found it of some value.

Stuart Fernie (stuartfernie@yahoo.co.uk)

BLOG 

YouTube

Discussion of some themes and issues in "Moliere" (2007) and in Moliere's work in general

 

Reflections on “Molière” (2007)

Written and directed by Laurent Tirard

Starring Romain Duris, Fabrice Luchini and Laura Morante

This is not intended as a full review or analysis, but rather a brief discussion of some of the themes touched upon in the film and in Molière’s work in general.

 

“Shakespeare in love” was much admired for its clever combination of historical fact, transposition of character and imagined biographical detail, and “Molière” uses a similar conceit; taking characters, events and issues from Molière’s canon of work and reimagining them as elements of Molière’s own life which will go on to inspire him in his writing.

Initially well received by critics and public alike, the film went on to be criticised, at least in the UK and the USA, for being a little shallow – criticism I find somewhat ironic and largely unjustified as Molière accuses himself of just such a fault quite early in the film, and the film goes on to take shallowness as one of its themes and ultimately addresses this issue more than adequately, in my opinion.

Personally, I found “Molière” amusing, involving, of considerable historical interest and very entertaining. It brings the celebrated author and the content and context of his plays to life. It would be short-sighted to consider that the seventeenth century setting of Molière’s work means that it is not relevant to today. Molière’s reading of human nature and society is so acute that he sees beyond the immediate context of his play and touches on universal themes and problems, though his work and style are undoubtedly less familiar to British and American audiences than those of Shakespeare.

Human and fun to watch, the film explores themes such as an examination of social strata and class superiority, the value of sincerity and genuine emotion as opposed to adopting manners or airs and graces in order to please others or to try to advance socially, religious zealotry and how principle can be manipulated to achieve one’s own ends, and the vagaries of parental interference in children’s lives, to name but a few of the themes touched upon.

The bourgeois or middle classes aspiring to the heady heights of the aristocracy who in turn are doing their best to avoid the depths of having to work in order to maintain their lifestyle can surely be simply replaced with different players aspiring to different positions in today’s society. The fundamental truth remains that there are some who fawn to those they consider superior and will do whatever they feel is necessary to charm their way into their good graces, even to the point of sacrificing their dignity and self-respect, and there are those who treat their social “inferiors” with contempt but are perfectly willing to profit by these people’s efforts and good will. Religious zealots can be seen as any group claiming moral, spiritual or intellectual superiority, yet who manage to improve their own physical lot along the way without contributing anything of particular value to the society they criticise.

Molière clearly invites us to consider a person’s true worth, value and place in society, to value what is genuine and not to take people or position at face value.

According to the film, Molière aspired to be regarded as a great writer – someone with things to say about life – but he himself does not recognise the value of comedy in the drive toward fulfilling his aim as he regards it as light and frivolous. He appears to believe serious points can only truly be made through serious drama and tragedy, dramatic forms for which he has little or no talent.

Molière is presented as a man dogged by a sense of his own lack of worth or value. Success is not enough – he wishes to leave behind something meaningful and of merit. Yet he is given hope and inspiration by one he loves and respects as she is about to die. He is given a new perspective and insight into the possibility that through his comedy he can indeed deliver a meaningful and worthwhile “message”, and a commentary on society and life.

Pointing out various individuals’ foibles, and therefore those of society in general, in a witty and entertaining manner can perhaps be more engaging and thus can be more effective than a “serious” play on the same theme. Man’s nature is examined indirectly through a comedy of manners and social etiquette.

The plays admired by Molière undoubtedly contain many truths and insights into human nature, often exaggerated or taken to the extreme for dramatic effect, but Molière’s plays remain accessible to viewers and readers. There is a familiarity and comfort in his settings, situations and issues, and viewers and readers are more likely to identify with these events and characters, ultimately perhaps lending them greater personal appeal and value than other more “serious” works.

This film really brought Molière’s world alive for me. The historical context and pervading humanity allow the viewer to enjoy and appreciate Molière’s work with a fresh eye. Emotionally engaging as well as entertaining, I thoroughly enjoyed all the performances, though especially Fabrice Luchini and Romain Duris who managed to be amusing and touching, much like the film as a whole, as befits a work inspired by the works of Molière, and the whole is gift-wrapped in sumptuous and rousing music by Frédéric Talgorn.

My thanks for taking the time to read this article – I hope you found it of some value.

 

Stuart Fernie (stuartfernie@yahoo.co.uk)

 

 

 

Reflections on and discussion of ideas, thoughts and themes in Charles Baudelaire's "Les Fleurs du Mal"

 

Reflections on themes in Baudelaire’s

“Les fleurs du mal” 

This article is not planned as literary criticism, but rather a page allowing young or new readers of Baudelaire to become familiar with some of the ideas, thoughts and themes contained in the poems.

First published in 1857, “Les fleurs du mal” is a collection of poems divided into five sections:

Spleen et idéal

Les fleurs du mal

Révolte

Le vin

La mort

On its initial publication Baudelaire and his publisher were prosecuted for an “insult to public decency”, and six poems were banned. A second edition was published in 1861 which contained 32 new poems and a new section entitled “Tableaux Parisiens”.

The poems contained in this collection deal with a wide variety of themes and generally reflect the philosophical mood of the time, as well as Baudelaire’s own feelings and torment, and his overwhelming belief in the value of modernism in the arts of the second half of the nineteenth century.

Baudelaire’s poetry is remarkably clear, incisive and accessible. Although highly personal, he manages to make points which are equally applicable to all men. He considers themes such as good and evil, human nature, conflict between the spiritual and the physical, religion, death, time, discipline and self-control, boredom and pointlessness, destiny and artistry.

I have chosen a handful of poems (L’ennemi, La destruction, Le reniement de Saint Pierre, Le vin du solitaire and La mort des artistes) which illustrate these themes and ideas. However, the work which encapsulates beautifully the themes and feelings of the author is the introductory poem entitled “Au lecteur”, which touches on many of the themes expanded upon in the course of the collection, and gives the reader a clear indication of the tone and content of what is to follow.

Au lecteur   (1)

La sottise, l'erreur, le péché, la lésine,
Occupent nos esprits et travaillent nos corps,
Et nous alimentons nos aimables remords,
Comme les mendiants nourrissent leur vermine.
 
Nos péchés sont têtus, nos repentirs sont lâches ;
Nous nous faisons payer grassement nos aveux,
Et nous rentrons gaiement dans le chemin bourbeux,
Croyant par de vils pleurs laver toutes nos taches.
 
Sur l'oreiller du mal c'est Satan Trismégiste
Qui berce longuement notre esprit enchanté,
Et le riche métal de notre volonté
Est tout vaporisé par ce savant chimiste.
 
C'est le Diable qui tient les fils qui nous remuent !
Aux objets répugnants nous trouvons des appas ;
Chaque jour vers l'Enfer nous descendons d'un pas,
Sans horreur, à travers des ténèbres qui puent.
 
Ainsi qu'un débauché pauvre qui baise et mange
Le sein martyrisé d'une antique catin,
Nous volons au passage un plaisir clandestin
Que nous pressons bien fort comme une vieille orange.
 
Serré, fourmillant, comme un million d'helminthes,
Dans nos cerveaux ribote un peuple de Démons,
Et, quand nous respirons, la Mort dans nos poumons
Descend, fleuve invisible, avec de sourdes plaintes.
 
Si le viol, le poison, le poignard, l'incendie,
N'ont pas encor brodé de leurs plaisants dessins
Le canevas banal de nos piteux destins,
C'est que notre âme, hélas ! n'est pas assez hardie.
 
Mais parmi les chacals, les panthères, les lices,
Les singes, les scorpions, les vautours, les serpents,
Les monstres glapissants, hurlants, grognants, rampants,
Dans la ménagerie infâme de nos vices,
 
II en est un plus laid, plus méchant, plus immonde !
Quoiqu'il ne pousse ni grands gestes ni grands cris,
Il ferait volontiers de la terre un débris
Et dans un bâillement avalerait le monde ;

C'est l'Ennui ! L'œil chargé d'un pleur involontaire,
II rêve d'échafauds en fumant son houka.
Tu le connais, lecteur, ce monstre délicat,
- Hypocrite lecteur, - mon semblable, - mon frère !

Baudelaire immediately introduces several of his main themes within the first four lines. He lists four somewhat negative qualities of human nature (stupidity, fault, sin and stinginess) and suggests they overwhelm our minds or spirits and control our bodies. He goes on to suggest that while we may nourish regret over this, this regret in turn feeds off us.

Thus, Baudelaire has already introduced his somewhat jaundiced and negative (yet realistic?) view of human nature, the division between the body and soul, the concept that man has little (if any) self-discipline or self-control, and of course the idea that conscience serves largely to weaken man, causing him to doubt himself, though in the next verse he suggests that this has little or no effect in real terms.

In verse two he says our “sins” are stubborn and our repentance is faint-hearted. We pay handsomely for our confessions (in what may be a dig at the Catholic Church), but then we happily return to our murky paths, thinking we have washed away stains on our characters with a few cheap tears.

Here Baudelaire makes it clear that although we are conscious of our misdeeds, we can’t stop repeating them – we may try (or pretend) to alleviate guilt through confession or atonement, but that doesn’t stop us re-offending. Once again man’s willpower is called in to question, as is organised religion. He almost goes so far as to suggest that we are hypocritical, as we “buy” a clear conscience for a short time before once again committing the same acts.

In verse three Baudelaire personifies temptation or evil and suggests that temptation gently but steadily draws us in, and great willpower and determination of which we can be so proud on occasions is simply vaporised by this temptation.

In verse four he expands and suggests it is the devil who holds the strings which move us – man has no effective willpower or control and will always give in to his nature. In moments of clarity we may see general unpleasantness and ugliness, we recognise our wrong-doing, yet our nature causes us to see something attractive within this, and we give in to temptation. Each day we descend one step closer to Hell, without complaint, recognising the unpleasantness and wrong-doing around us, yet we continue.

In verse five he gives a specific example of a debauched man who turns to an ancient prostitute in order to gain a fleeting moment of pleasure. He compares this act to squeezing the remaining juice from an old orange. Clearly this is a desperate act of pure physical satisfaction with no hint of love, romance or affection, and no hint of spiritual worth or beauty. This is a very clever metaphor as it not only exemplifies the division of body and soul, but also introduces the idea of “carpe diem”, by which he suggests we should squeeze every drop of life from every moment and every experience.

Verse six suggests that temptation is all around us in a million shapes and forms. It is unstoppable, in much the same way as death which comes closer with every breath of life we take. Here Baudelaire introduces the inevitability of death, underlining once again the importance of making the most of every moment as life will come to an end.

In verse seven once again we have a list of misadventures which Baudelaire finds attractive and which brighten our uneventful lives and our pitiful destinies. Life is boring or pointless and Baudelaire finds such activities preferable to banal and monotonous existence. Once again there is implied recognition of “unpleasantness” involved in these activities, yet Baudelaire finds them attractive, especially given the boredom and emptiness of the alternative. However, he does seem to suggest that indulgence in such activities shows a certain strength of spirit.

The last three verses run together. In verse eight Baudelaire compares vices to a list of various creatures and animals, all displaying strength and purity of purpose (while following their nature), and also representing danger. However, in verse nine he suggests there is one more awful than any other, one vice that could destroy the world. In verse ten we are told this is boredom or a sense of pointlessness and we, the readers, are reminded that we know this vice just as well as Baudelaire. There should be no hint of superiority on our part for we are all the same, all brothers sharing the same vices.

This is an excellent introductory poem, which was almost certainly written after the others. It expresses themes and ideas with such clarity that it almost summarises rather than introduces the ideas Baudelaire will go on to discuss in the main body of his collection.

L’ennemi   (10) 

Ma jeunesse ne fut qu'un ténébreux orage,
Traversé çà et là par de brillants soleils ;
Le tonnerre et la pluie ont fait un tel ravage,
Qu'il reste en mon jardin bien peu de fruits vermeils.
 
Voilà que j'ai touché l'automne des idées,
Et qu'il faut employer la pelle et les râteaux
Pour rassembler à neuf les terres inondées,
Où l'eau creuse des trous grands comme des tombeaux.

Et qui sait si les fleurs nouvelles que je rêve
Trouveront dans ce sol lavé comme une grève
Le mystique aliment qui ferait leur vigueur ?
 
– O douleur ! ô douleur ! Le Temps mange la vie,
Et l'obscur Ennemi qui nous ronge le cœur
Du sang que nous perdons croît et se fortifie !

In “L’ennemi” Baudelaire likens life to, or describes life by way of, weather and gardening metaphors. He has had a hard life, lightened only occasionally, and he asks if hope for the future will find some way to grow in the barren land of his life. Suddenly, in the last verse, he turns his attention to time and suggests that time consumes life and its voracity grows stronger as we grow weaker.

He goes from a beautifully (and effectively) descriptive poem to one which attaches blame and reveals anger and frustration at the thought of time consuming his life.

La destruction   (78)

Sans cesse à mes côtés s'agite le Démon ;
II nage autour de moi comme un air impalpable ;
Je l'avale et le sens qui brûle mon poumon
Et l'emplit d'un désir éternel et coupable.
 
Parfois il prend, sachant mon grand amour de l'Art,
La forme de la plus séduisante des femmes,
Et, sous de spécieux prétextes de cafard,
Accoutume ma lèvre à des philtres infâmes.
 
II me conduit ainsi, loin du regard de Dieu,
Haletant et brisé de fatigue, au milieu
Des plaines de l'Ennui, profondes et désertes,
 
Et jette dans mes yeux pleins de confusion
Des vêtements souillés, des blessures ouvertes,
Et l'appareil sanglant de la Destruction !

In “La destruction” Baudelaire again emphasises lack of willpower and recognises the “guilty” nature of his thoughts. Temptation is once again personified and he suggests that if he is feeling low, demons (or temptation) will take the shape of an attractive woman, knowing Baudelaire cannot resist such a work of art, and this takes him far from God’s gaze and influence. Once again it seems man is incapable of offering any resistance and has no control over such matters.

Temptation transports him from the land of boredom (or is this in fact depression?). Are we to see interaction with women as a form of release from self-doubt and depression?

In the last verse Baudelaire recognises unpleasant side effects of indulgence, but this is not enough to stop him.

Yes, there is some expansion of themes treated in “Au lecteur”, and some of these are expressed with slightly greater clarity, but there is little that is new, thematically speaking, although it is interesting to note discussion of depression as a possible extension of boredom.

Le reniement de Saint Pierre   (90)

Qu'est-ce que Dieu fait donc de ce flot d'anathèmes
Qui monte tous les jours vers ses chers Séraphins ?
Comme un tyran gorgé de viande et de vins,
II s'endort au doux bruit de nos affreux blasphèmes.
 
Les sanglots des martyrs et des suppliciés
Sont une symphonie enivrante sans doute,
Puisque, malgré le sang que leur volupté coûte,
Les cieux ne s'en sont point encore rassasiés !
 
– Ah! Jésus, souviens-toi du Jardin des Olives !
Dans ta simplicité tu priais à genoux
Celui qui dans son ciel riait au bruit des clous
Que d'ignobles bourreaux plantaient dans tes chairs vives,
 
Lorsque tu vis cracher sur ta divinité
La crapule du corps de garde et des cuisines,
Et lorsque tu sentis s'enfoncer les épines
Dans ton crâne où vivait l'immense Humanité ;
 
Quand de ton corps brisé la pesanteur horrible
Allongeait tes deux bras distendus, que ton sang
Et ta sueur coulaient de ton front pâlissant,
Quand tu fus devant tous posé comme une cible,
 
Rêvais-tu de ces jours si brillants et si beaux
Où tu vins pour remplir l'éternelle promesse,
Où tu foulais, monté sur une douce ânesse,
Des chemins tout jonchés de fleurs et de rameaux,

 
Où, le cœur tout gonflé d'espoir et de vaillance,
Tu fouettais tous ces vils marchands à tour de bras,
Où tu fus maître enfin ? Le remords n'a-t-il pas
Pénétré dans ton flanc plus avant que la lance ?
 
– Certes, je sortirai, quant à moi, satisfait
D'un monde où l'action n'est pas la sœur du rêve ;
Puissé-je user du glaive et périr par le glaive !
Saint Pierre a renié Jésus... il a bien fait !

“Le reniement de Saint Pierre” offers an interesting discussion about God and Baudelaire’s attitude to religion.

He appears to suggest that God is “asleep on the job”, ignoring the situation of revolt against Him (a reflection, perhaps, of the effects of the Enlightenment Movement?), and even seems to suggest complacency.

He goes on to point out that martyrs die in the name of God, but that heaven does not appear to have had its fill of their pain and suffering. Baudelaire asks if God is listening, and appears to suggest a certain injustice and lack of caring as he uses empirical evidence of pain and suffering in God’s name.

He goes so far as to suggest that God may have laughed at Jesus’ suffering. Not that Baudelaire renounces Jesus – Jesus represents humanity – but he points out that God did nothing. Jesus was full of promise and hope, but Baudelaire suggests he was ultimately let down by God, and Jesus must have felt regret on his death.

This poem, perhaps more than any other, reveals the malaise felt in the late nineteenth century as the principles and challenges of the Enlightenment Movement made themselves felt. In a sense Baudelaire feels almost abandoned by God. He wants more from life – he wants direction, purpose, sense, morality. These things were in place, but they have now disappeared with the arrival of the challenge to God’s very existence and the authority of those who claim to represent Him. God is not responding to this challenge, and is allowing pain and suffering – not least the pain caused by the possibility of His non-existence!

Le vin du solitaire   (96)

Le regard singulier d'une femme galante
Qui se glisse vers nous comme le rayon blanc
Que la lune onduleuse envoie au lac tremblant,
Quand elle y veut baigner sa beauté nonchalante ;

Le dernier sac d'écus dans les doigts d'un joueur ;
Un baiser libertin de la maigre Adeline ;
Les sons d'une musique énervante et câline,
Semblable au cri lointain de l'humaine douleur,
 
Tout cela ne vaut pas, ô bouteille profonde,
Les baumes pénétrants que ta panse féconde
Garde au cœur altéré du poète pieux ;
 
Tu lui verses l'espoir, la jeunesse et la vie,
– Et l'orgueil, ce trésor de toute gueuserie,
Qui nous rend triomphants et semblables aux Dieux !

In “Vin du solitaire”, Baudelaire lists several things which can make you feel better about the pain of life, but best of all is a bottle of wine which pours hope, youth, life and pride into its consumer – it can make you feel triumphant and equal to the gods.

Clearly Baudelaire is seeking a form of escape, and this poem reveals something of how he feels about life – as a series of insurmountable problems – and wine offers a momentary release, although he recognises the fleeting and illusory nature of this solution.

La mort des artistes   (100)

Combien faut-il de fois secouer mes grelots
Et baiser ton front bas, morne caricature ?
Pour piquer dans le but, de mystique nature,
Combien, ô mon carquois, perdre de javelots ?
 
Nous userons notre âme en de subtils complots,
Et nous démolirons mainte lourde armature,
Avant de contempler la grande Créature
Dont l'infernal désir nous remplit de sanglots !
 
Il en est qui jamais n'ont connu leur Idole,
Et ces sculpteurs damnés et marqués d'un affront,
Qui vont se martelant la poitrine et le front,
 
N'ont qu'un espoir, étrange et sombre Capitole !
C'est que la Mort, planant comme un soleil nouveau,
Fera s'épanouir les fleurs de leur cerveau ! 

In “La mort des artistes”, Baudelaire considers whether death will allow artists to meet that which has captivated and inspired them. Will it release their spirit from physical limits and allow them to grow? Do artists gain a glimpse of what is beyond the physical to see the truth? Will death enable them to achieve a spiritual reality?

Much in Baudelaire’s poetry suggests he is lost – he doesn’t know what to believe, or whether he should believe in anything. At one moment he suggests God is responsible, the next it is the Devil who is pulling the strings. Then he decides it doesn't matter anyway – he will simply seek pleasure in his experiences because life is short and should be appreciated as such. He appears confused or at least unclear about who or what is responsible for life, but he is quite clear that he finds nature overwhelming – he feels he is not in control and is disappointed that he cannot find it in himself to rise above his nature. He sees his own shortcomings and weaknesses with remarkable clarity (and extends his criticisms to the whole of humanity), so that he understands the consequences of his actions, but finds himself incapable of altering his nature.

Baudelaire makes much of the fact that death is the end. If God does not exist, then there is no afterlife. This also brings home the fact that life is relatively short and should not be wasted. Each moment is precious and should be filled with something worthwhile, yet life is also boring and repetitive, and perhaps ultimately pointless. All the more reason, then, to seek moments of pleasure to relieve the boredom and pressing feeling that time is running out.

Baudelaire frequently emphasises the temporary nature of moments of pleasure. These are fleeting moments which make life more bearable, but the pleasure he takes from them is double-edged. He is left with the feeling that physical experience is lacking in some way – he is happy to indulge in his freedom, but regrets the lack of spirituality and the depth that would lend the experience, and a sense of control over these events.

I think this is essential to understanding the torment, despair, and spirituality which underpin Baudelaire’s "Fleurs du Mal". The key to understanding Baudelaire’s poetry is in understanding his ambivalence toward moral freedom – his overwhelming desire to indulge in the moral and sexual freedom implied by the Enlightenment Movement (indeed his inability to resist it!), but countered by his recognition of negative aspects, and his longing for something of spiritual value, accentuating his awareness of the emptiness and fleeting nature of mere physical being. This is reflected in the very title of the collection, where he finds himself attracted to something, yet recognises its harmful effect.

 

My thanks for taking the time to read this article. I hope you found it of some value.

Stuart Fernie

BLOG

YouTube

 

Short Fiction - Reflections of a teacher of French as he is about to deliver his retirement speech to his family, friends and colleagues.

 

The Retirement Dinner

 

His name was William Thomson, known as Bill. He was a teacher of French in a small secondary school in the Highlands of Scotland. This was a job which, over the course of some thirty-five years, had gradually but quite relentlessly taken over his life (in common with most teachers) as he devoted his time to organising lessons, events and trips, produced materials, reports and test papers, considered and developed teaching strategies and techniques, even performed at charity concerts, and of course lost countless hours of sleep due to anxiety and an obsessive desire to do right by his pupils.

Now, somewhat to his astonishment, he was about to stand up before his colleagues to deliver his retirement speech.

He had looked forward to “escaping” for the last couple of years as the constant flow of dubious changes, questionable initiatives, pressure to justify just about every action he took, and the general daily grind seemed ever more intense, while the prospect of retirement offered a chink of light at the end of the tunnel and the thought of just saying “no more” was ever more appealing.

He had, of course, joked about the prospect of retirement for many years – if a pupil took an inordinate length of time to answer a question, he would remind them that he was due to retire in nineteen, then fifteen, then ten years and so on.

Now, at his own retiral “do”, as he was about to say his farewells to his colleagues, it was all of a sudden real, imminent and somewhat disconcerting.

Naturally, in the run-up to “the end”, many people had asked him about his plans for the future and he always jokingly answered that he was so preoccupied by thoughts of all the things he wanted to see come to a halt that he had never actually considered what he would do with his time and energy in the (now very near) future.

Joking though he was, it was actually the truth – immediate issues such as finding strategies to deal with that potentially difficult third year class, coaxing some senior pupils through their dreaded speaking assessments, adapting an exercise to make French grammar amusing and engaging at least to some extent, and dealing with a few poor wee souls whose difficult home circumstances were affecting their school work – all these things had indeed diverted his attention from the more personal and increasingly pressing matter of just what he was going to do with the rest of his life.

Discussion of this issue consisted largely of inane platitudes such as vague talk of travel, increased correspondence with friends and family, and regular trips to the cinema. The truth was he had given scant consideration to his future as he was too preoccupied dealing with issues in his present.

Then there was the small matter of his speech.

He had attended numerous retiral events and, in search of inspiration, he recalled the variety of tones and content of the speeches he heard at them. One or two were virtually scathing in their indictment of the direction in which they thought education was going (goodness only knows what they’d make of the present system!). Another colleague was remarkable in his brevity and conciseness - after hearing a couple of speeches in which his praises were loudly sung, and in the presence of many admiring colleagues, the retiree stood, said “Thank you”, and promptly sat down again! Then there was the colleague who stood, announced his year of birth and went on to provide a year-by-year account of his personal development and career. He took twenty minutes to arrive at the end of the Second World War!

So, these approaches had been done and Bill didn’t want to repeat others’ style – he wanted something that suited him, and then he remembered a quote from actor James Stewart who reportedly said that the best films were made up of “moments”. Bill thought that this notion applied equally to careers and indeed life itself, so he decided to recount some of his most memorable and cherished memories of his time at the school before simply thanking his colleagues for their support, camaraderie and friendship over the years.

Preparing the speech brought back many memories that had been buried in time and the process lent a focus and clarity to events, feelings and reflections. Bill had always been so immersed in the moment and his immediate concerns that he failed to perceive the bigger picture, but now, on reflection, he perceived patterns which perhaps only existed in his own mind, but which it pleased him to think might attest to some kind of overall purpose and even a modicum of success.

Bill’s working life for the last thirty-five years had been dominated by routine, duty, preparation, caring, supporting pupils and colleagues, but also camaraderie, mutual support and ceaseless humour in the face of adversity (on the part of both staff and pupils), all of which helped Bill get through some difficult times both professionally and personally. But all of this was within the context of his working environment, and within the next few days that entire framework would be gone. If the truth be told, Bill was somewhat unsure of the future largely because he was shortly going to gain that for which he had so long pined – his freedom, and he was none too sure of how he was going to handle it.

At one point, Bill even wondered if he was doing the right thing in retiring. However, he quickly disabused himself of that notion by recalling a few of the negative features of his working life:

Waking up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat.

Anxiety over the content and delivery of lessons.

Further (and perhaps more profound) anxiety over exam results.

The unpredictability of behaviour (pupils and staff!).

The feeling that whatever you do is not enough or good enough.

The constant accountability, justification, analysis and demands.

Actually, however daunting the prospect might have been, freedom suddenly looked mighty attractive!

Applause from his colleagues upon his introduction stirred Bill from his reflection and he stood up to embark on the speech that was to sum up the last thirty-five years of his life.

 

The Speech

 

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is difficult to sum up in a few words the thoughts, feelings and experiences of some 35 years. The obvious thing is to discuss the changes I’ve seen in the education system in that time, but don’t worry – I’ll spare you that rant. However, I will tell you about my first observation.

Bear in mind what is involved in an observation today – a double-sided evaluation sheet incorporating at least 20 if not 30 elements. At the end of my first observed lesson the Assistant Head Ken Carlisle (who was responsible for probationers) approached and gave me his purely verbal feedback – “That was fine, Bill, but you might want to move the tables away from the wall”, and that was it. How things have changed ….. .

When starting out in teaching, it is essential to find your own style – you have to work out what works for you and your pupils, and you have to learn from your mistakes.

I would like to think I did learn from my mistakes, but sadly I have to confess I continue to make mistakes from which to learn.

For example, I learned that it is best to prepare in advance and not have to leave a class to collect some photocopying you’ve forgotten, giving the class time to set up a waste-paper bin filled with water above the classroom door which has been left ajar. This is particularly true if the depute rector decides to pop in to your room just ahead of you.

OR

It’s best not to assume that parents will be able (or willing) to exercise control over their offspring. At one parents’ evening, a pupil and his father sat in front of me and the pupil held a polystyrene cup filled with tea. While I was speaking to this pupil, he bit a chunk out of the lip of the cup and proceeded to eat it. A little taken aback, I pointed out to the pupil, quite slowly and deliberately, and with something of an air of disbelief, “You’re eating the cup”, whereupon he took another bite. I looked at the father and again pointed out quite slowly and deliberately, still with an air of disbelief, “He’s eating the cup”, at which he looked at me and smiled, making a bizarre high-pitched sound while shrugging his shoulders which indicated agreement, amusement and a recognition of his complete inability to influence events.

OR

When organising a theatre trip to London, it is probably best not to set off for the theatre at rush hour, use the already crowded underground system and invite a claustrophobic pupil (a condition of which I was unaware!) to descend to a station in a packed lift which opened onto a teeming platform…

There are many, many happy memories from the classroom, charity concerts, school trips and the staffroom, car sharing to get to work, even meetings – far too many to be able to share with you here tonight, but memories which I will cherish and may well go on to write about in my memoirs. Be afraid!

Although there are many happy memories, I have to say it hasn’t always been great.

There have been difficult and frustrating times both professionally and personally, and I think in teaching it is often difficult to separate the two, and it is during the more difficult times that I learned to appreciate and value the wisdom and camaraderie of my colleagues. At the risk of sounding like the theme song to “Neighbours”, it’s at those times you discover that good colleagues become good friends. Clearly, I worked most closely with my fellow languages teachers Liz and Clive over the years, but I would like to thank you ALL for your camaraderie, friendship and support.

I have frequently said that I have no luck – I rarely win anything, have no luck in cards and the only time I put a bet on the Grand National, my horse actually ran away before the start of the race.

However, I have come to rethink my position concerning luck. I met my wife Alison (aside to Alison - “that is what you wrote, isn’t it?”), and I was lucky enough to find a job at Shiel Academy and have some of the best colleagues and pupils I could hope for, and I am now lucky enough to have been made redundant!

It has frequently been said there is something special about Shiel, and actually I don’t think it’s hard to define – it’s just not that common.

It’s about caring. Putting pupils first and wanting what’s best for them, but extending that attitude to colleagues. It’s about professionalism with humanity and I know that I have benefited greatly from that environment and I thank you most sincerely, past and present colleagues.

My experiences have not been restricted to the school itself - I have also participated in several trips and I’ve been to France, Switzerland, Holland, Germany, Belgium, Italy, London and Edinburgh.

I’ve met many interesting people along the way – not just colleagues and pupils, but people like Alastair Burnett (news journalist), Tom Weir (TV presenter), Rudi Oppenheimer (Belsen survivor), Jon Lee (former member of S-Club 7), John Owen-Jones (Valjean in Les Misérables), and I scared the living daylights out of Gareth Gates!

I have sung, danced and presented events.

I did a year-long exchange with a teacher from France and taught English in Rennes.

I was a union rep for many years and delivered milk, tea and coffee for 17 years.

As a result of one trip, I developed an interest in “Les Misérables”, and wrote a study guide which led to the creation of a website, which in turn led to making several hundred acquaintances on the internet.

The point is that working in a school is a two-way process and if it is felt that I have made a contribution to the life of the school, it is equally true that my life has been a product of Shiel Academy, and I thank you all for the contributions you have made to my life.

I wish you all the best for the future, but whatever that holds, good or bad, please remember all that you are already getting right.

Thank you again and goodbye.

Reflections on characters and themes in "Soylent Green"

 

Reflections on characters and themes in “Soylent Green”

Directed by Richard Fleischer

Screenplay by Stanley R Greenberg, based on a novel by Harry Harrison

Starring Charlton Heston, Edward G Robinson, Leigh Taylor-Young,

Chuck Connors and Joseph Cotten

Using the premise of an investigation into the murder of a wealthy businessman, “Soylent Green” presents a series of warnings concerning the future consequences of the deterioration of Earth’s environment and ecosystem, especially on human society and the direction it may take in trying to cope with these consequences.

Virtual exhaustion of natural resources combined with climate change and overpopulation have produced extreme pressure on living space, water and food supplies, issues concerning both employment and unemployment (where jobs are lost after just two days’ absence), the introduction of voluntary euthanasia and generalised poverty. With little chance of change or betterment, hope for the future is all but been extinguished, leading to a lack of self-esteem, degradation and dehumanisation as all battle to survive.

There is something of a gulf between the lifestyle of the wealthy few and the penury and misery of the masses. Private companies control power and the provision of food and water, with executives colluding with politicians to enjoy luxuries such as spacious apartments (complete with concubine), hot water, soap, traditional foodstuffs as opposed to tasteless nutrition bars and even alcoholic beverages, as they put profit and personal advancement above humanity and principle.

However, one executive named Simonson has discovered the drastic and morally repugnant lengths to which his food-producing company, Soylent, will go to maintain its share of this profitable market and, unhappy with the situation, is making waves.

Simonson has discovered that as the ecosystems of the seas are failing, the farming of plankton used to produce Soylent Green is also failing and so Soylent has turned to a more readily available but socially unacceptable source for its food supply. They treat and process dead bodies to provide their nutrition bars and, fearing public revulsion and rejection, they go to considerable lengths to ensure secrecy and security are maintained.

Simonson, however, finds this disrespect and degradation hard to live with. He becomes introverted, shies away from sexual contact with his concubine Shirl, goes to church and confides in a priest (on whom the news has an equally shocking effect) and he is even willing to accept his own assassination as he understands the company’s motives and priorities but he may also be so disgusted with himself and the decaying and hopeless society to which he has contributed that he welcomes death as an escape.

Considered a threat to the continued success and survival of the company, the board orders his assassination and a policeman named Thorn is assigned to investigate.

Thorn is a product of his time and can usefully be compared to his academic professional partner, the elderly Sol Roth.

Thorn displays acceptance, apathy and a willingness to profit from his position, though his limited form of looting appears to be accepted as the norm in a time and place where each must do what he or she has to do to make life easier and survive. Yet there is a limit to Thorn’s apparent apathy and cynicism. Simonson’s murder evokes or rekindles his professionalism as he detects signs of conspiracy and indications this is more than just an opportunist murder. He displays a determination to uncover truth and does not concede to threats.

He is willing to use Shirl sexually but he develops some sympathy and compassion when he is drawn to see Shirl and her fellow concubines (whose treatment may be viewed as embodying the exploitation of the many by the powerful few) as victims of abuse and this leads to something of an awakening and a deepening of feelings.

Sol Roth is an old man who is able to recall when times were better in his past and he makes negative comparisons with his present, also inviting the audience to appreciate its present as opposed to this potential future.

He is a man of education, taste and principle and he is a warning to us all not to take social standards, humanity and the environment for granted as things can slip very quickly in a time of change and given the right circumstances. This is emphasised at his funeral when Thorn views images and hears sounds that inform him and remind us of the beauty and abundance of the Earth’s resources and how easily that might change.

The storyline links environmental issues with social structures and outcomes dependent on corporate management and profit margins. It presents a clear warning not just about the consequences for society of plundering natural resources, but also of the plundering of the vast majority for the financial and social benefits of the tiny minority.

All told, I find this an engaging and thought-provoking thriller which is flawed and lacks variety of tone. I felt that by and large characters were perhaps underdeveloped or underwritten with the possible exception of Sol Roth whose scenes are among the best in the film as they convey drama, humour and tragedy.

Essentially, this is a concept film in which the ideas to be conveyed are the true stars and these ideas are certainly driven home, but at the expense of the potential alienation of the audience. The abject misery and dystopian lack of hope throughout and especially at the end may have been perceived as a wake-up call and warning by those involved in the production of this intriguing and provocative film, but they risk inducing in their audience the very apathy and sense of hopelessness portrayed in the film, especially when the film is populated by largely unsympathetic characters.

Charlton Heston is engaging and provides a powerful presence though, as suggested earlier, Thorn’s evolution should have been better drawn if we are to have much sympathy for this often unpleasant character.

Edward G Robinson plays his relatively small but essential role to maximum effect and produces a well-rounded performance in what was to be his final role.

My thanks for taking the time to read this article. I hope you found it of some value.

 

Stuart Fernie (stuartfernie@yahoo.co.uk)

BLOG

YouTube