Characters and themes in "The Banshees of Inisherin" from an existential perspective

 

Reflections on characters and themes in “The Banshees of Inisherin”,

 from an existential perspective

Written and directed by Martin McDonagh

Starring Colin Farrell, Brendan Gleeson, Kerry Condon and Barry Keoghan

Set on a small island off the coast of Ireland toward the end of the Irish civil war, “The Banshees of Inisherin” recounts the tale of musician Colm’s attempts to terminate his life-long friendship with unsophisticated dairy farmer Padraic. Heartbroken and unable to understand or accept Colm’s sudden change of heart, Padraic persists in trying to rekindle their friendship with dramatic and life-changing consequences.

In my opinion, “Banshees” is first and foremost an existential drama about the conflict between personal freedom and coexistence. It may be playful and comical in places but fundamentally it explores existential themes such as the lack of moral imperative, the effect of the inevitability of death, the desire to do something worthwhile despite (or perhaps because of) the apparent pointlessness of life, the impact our actions and very existence have on others, and the responsibility we may feel for that impact which conflicts with our right to exercise freedom, in this case the freedom to break off a long-term relationship.

Colm has arrived at the outlook-shifting conclusion that his days are numbered and he wishes to do something worthwhile with his remaining time, so he decides to focus on composing music. What he does not want to do is spend any more time with Padraic who, he has concluded, is dull and offers no stimulation or help in his new-found preoccupation with doing something rewarding rather than indulge in idle and wasteful (as he sees it) chatter.

While Colm is intelligent, reflective and has turned his mind to thoughts of achievement and legacy, Padraic is a simple soul content to live out his time in emotional security and unthinking happiness. However, Colm is direct to the point of brutality in informing Padraic of his decision to no longer speak to him or have anything more to do with him, and this causes Padraic considerable pain and heartache.

Colm is exercising his personal freedom to do and act as he wishes, as he is entirely entitled to do, but he fails to take into account the impact of his actions on his one-time friend. He clearly feels that Padraic should simply accept his change of mind and move on but Colm’s influence is so embedded in Padraic’s life that Padraic cannot fathom life without his friend and this rejection causes him profound emotional and perhaps psychological distress as this social and emotional anchor is weighed from his life.

According to the precepts of existentialism, Colm should not harm another to achieve his goal but there is nothing to say he can’t harm himself in the pursuance of that aim, in the hope that Padraic will concede for fear of indirectly causing harm to Colm. This ingenious existential ploy does somewhat suggest hypocrisy and manipulation on Colm’s part as he casually abandons any feelings he might have had for Padraic but depends on Padraic’s continued feelings for him to achieve his goal of ridding himself of Padraic.

In a tragic way, Padraic grows and develops. He learns to think beyond the immediate as a result of encountering pain, negativity and distrust. As a result of Colm’s attitude and actions, Padraic goes from innocent and happy-go-lucky to bitter and vengeful. He is overwhelmed by hurt, disappointment, insecurity and a newly-felt sense of nothingness.

Colm rejected the innocent and shallow Padraic as unworthy of his friendship and esteem but, at the end of the film, Colm appears to have gained a degree of respect and perhaps even fear for the new unforgiving Padraic created, ironically, by Colm’s own actions. Thus, Colm comes to see and feel the consequences of his actions and ambition on others.

Death is frequently referred to in the course of the film as regretful and final. There is no real question of spiritual survival or even satisfaction at a life well spent. Colm has suffered bouts of despair or depression, perhaps as a result of contemplation of his life and a lack of a sense of achievement which leads, of course, to his fateful decision regarding Padraic. Colm even tells Siobhan he fears he is only entertaining himself until the inevitable and asks if she doesn’t feel the same. Clearly, he has questions about the point of his life and has broadened his concerns to incorporate everyone.

When faced with Colm’s aspirations to achievement and worth, compared to the dullness and mediocrity of Padraic and his like, Siobhan points out they are all boring little men even if they try to convince themselves they are doing something worthwhile. Perhaps Siobhan has shared these existential thoughts but opts not to dwell on them. She will put the past behind her, leave the island to start afresh and make an effort to make the most of her life.

I suspect the action and themes may also be viewed as an allegory for the causes and divisions in the Irish civil war, with some happy to accept the status quo while others wished to develop and evolve, and our film shows how such differences of opinion can evolve into deep-felt matters of principle and grudge.

Officer Kearney enforces “law and order” by force and bullying rather than reason and understanding and that is how he has brought up his son Dominic, an apparently simple soul who is remarkably insightful if socially inept but is deprived of love, affection and respect. Kearney’s parenting skills, or lack of them, impact Dominic, in this case quite literally, and it is only when it is too late that Kearney realises his feelings for his son and perhaps the responsibility he bears for his development and fate. Time is of the essence in terms of achieving clarity of vision and understanding regarding relationships and responsibility, and ensuring the avoidance of regret and guilt.

I wonder if Kearney may also be viewed as representative of historical authority in Ireland, resorting to force and violence to ensure compliance, while his offspring may be viewed as something of a misfit, denied affection and acceptance by society at large.

Although most of the characters are seen attending church and Colm even confesses his sins, religion does not appear to hold any sway over events. Indeed, when Colm and the priest disagree, ending in a bad-tempered argument, this may suggest that the influence of religion amounts to no more than an exchange of views between two people.

Martin McDonagh tells this sorry and thought-provoking tale with emotional engagement, clear characterisation and development and, amazingly, with no small amount of humour to lighten the dramatic intensity and make the whole more involving and palatable.

In terms of acting, I thought all involved acquitted themselves admirably with varied, engaging and intelligent performances.

It may not be everyone’s cup of tea but I found this film stimulating, beguiling and thoroughly entertaining.

 

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

 

Reflections on characters and themes in "Full Metal Jacket", focusing on the "duality of man"

 

Reflections on characters and themes in “Full Metal Jacket”,

focusing on the “duality of man”

Directed by Stanley Kubrick

Written by Stanley Kubrick, Michael Herr and Gustav Hasford

Starring Matthew Modine, Vincent D’Onofrio and R. Lee Ermey

This is the powerful, memorable and thought-provoking story of a number of recruits into the American army during the Vietnam War. The film divides fairly evenly into two halves; the first half deals with the training they undergo, and in the second half we follow the exploits and experiences of a couple of these recruits in the conflict itself.

The reasons behind war are not explored, merely how we respond to the path of conflict which is more or less chosen for most of us.

In the opening scene, the recruits are shorn of their locks and, it might be suggested, their individuality, pasts and personal ambitions. They now belong to Gunnery Sergeant Hartman who will use abuse, bullying and degradation in his efforts to transform his charges into weapons and killers. This process is quite deliberately dehumanising as Hartman sets out to demean his recruits and divest them of the niceties of society, focusing on developing a killer instinct and conditioning them for survival in a threatening, violent and potentially fatal environment where consideration, hesitation and doubt are weaknesses that may well lead to death and defeat.

The key to understanding the importance and value of this training process, and indeed what I view as the underpinning premise of the film, lies in the “duality of man” referred to at one point in the film by Joker, more or less the principal character, and reinforced by his wearing of a peace badge and a helmet on which he has written “born to kill”.

These contradictory emblems suggest that man has a conflicted nature in that while he possesses fundamental humanity and sociability which allow him to help his fellow man, develop laws and build civilisations, he is equally capable of animalistic, almost feral savagery as he hurts and kills his fellow man when conflicts of interest or principle erupt.

Clearly, in times of war it is necessary to put to one side sentiments of humanity and its incumbent qualities of sympathy, compassion and understanding, and that is exactly what Hartman tries to inculcate in his recruits. He seeks to help them set aside any and all social niceties and considerations that may cost them their lives in a war zone, but whose loss may cost them their sanity in the meantime…

The recruits take part in this process whereby they abandon their individuality in favour of service and loyalty to the Marine Corps, and an essential part of this process involves the use of nicknames rather than family names. Their nicknames may denote a predominant characteristic or communicate quickly and easily a particular skillset or trait that may be useful in the field while also encouraging familiarity, informality and trust between comrades. They may also reinforce the leaving behind of the “reality” of their previous lives to adopt a survival persona.

I have to say I haven’t always found Stanley Kubrick’s films warm or emotionally engaging. For me, there is nearly always a calculated detachment and his characters seem to be tools to impart an intellectual message rather than have rounded personalities offering insight into their nature and development. In the case of “Full Metal Jacket”, with the exception of Joker and Pyle, the recruits offer no real discussion, reaction or challenge to Hartman and the regime and mindset he imposes. Even Hartman himself never flinches or varies as he represents a particular ethos and attitude.

Most of the recruits appear to accept this process and compartmentalise it as a short-term experience intended to prepare them for the realities of war and for survival. However, Leonard Lawrence is an innocent who is nicknamed “Gomer Pyle” after a gentle and naïve comic character from 1960s American television. He is a simple soul endowed with a purity of spirit and mind and he doesn’t cope well with Hartman’s training or tactics. He may even be viewed as the embodiment of the element of humanity and innocence in the duality of man, taken to the extreme.

He makes some progress under Joker’s tutelage (about which more later), perhaps because Joker is gentle, sympathetic and patient toward him, but ultimately this progress is insufficient for Hartman who pressurises Pyle’s fellow recruits to victimise and bully Pyle into effort and conformity, including his trusted mentor Joker who displays hesitation but eventually concedes and participates in Pyle’s beating.

Effectively, their actions, and probably those of Joker in particular, destroy Pyle’s belief and trust in others and lead to a loss of hope and self. His entire belief system is gone and he starts to respond to training, even becoming a skilled marksman.

Of course, Hartman assumes the retention of certain fundamental societal values in this process. He simply works hard to ensure these values don’t get in the way of his recruits’ survival in a war zone, but in the case of the simple Pyle, his humanity has been severely dented and all but conditioned out of him and he becomes exactly what Hartman has trained him to be – a killer.

Pyle’s conditioning clearly conflicts with the vestiges of humanity and self that remain to him and he kills Hartman, perhaps in a desperate and defiant act of protest at his loss of direction, and ironically exercising his reconditioned impulses, though as a result of internal conflict he also opts to take his own life rather than live in what he calls a “world of shit”.

And so we have a demonstration, taken to extremes, of the duality of man and the internal conflict it may entail, and it is principally through the eyes of John “Joker” Davis that we see Pyle’s deterioration and its consequences.

Joker is the most interesting recruit as he demonstrates discipline and a strong survival instinct combined with an independent mind and a streak of humanity he is not afraid to indulge. He goes along with the training process but, unlike poor Pyle, he does not take it to heart. He exercises what control he can in a situation over which he has little overall power. He completes Hartman’s tasks admirably and he recognises the benefit of succumbing to Hartman’s discipline yet he passes comical comment during one of Hartman’s rants and incurs his wrath but also gains his respect. He does what he must to comply and survive but retains his own character and point of view. This allows him to show kindness to Pyle who makes distinct progress in Joker’s sympathetic, understanding and considerate care, though personal survival and the need to comply mean that ultimately, Joker has to be cruel to him.

Joker may also be viewed, in his slightly detached and superior manner, as vaguely similar to and perhaps even representative of Kubrick as an objective outsider looking in and investigating the horrors and consequences of war.

In Vietnam, Joker is a journalist and as an objective observer he sees the truth behind the policies, commands and the game of media interaction and influence which lead to dangerous and deadly consequences for those on the front line. In keeping with his finely honed instinct for survival, Joker protects himself and avoids direct participation in the conflict as far as possible, but his insight, intelligence and ready wit get him in trouble once too often and he is dispatched to cover an offensive which will take him directly into the midst of battle for the first time. We have seen him fire on the enemy, but at a distance, whereas this time it will be up close and personal…

During the journey to the battle zone by helicopter, Joker and his companion Rafterman encounter a door gunner who has been so consumed by his experiences and by the killer element of his dual composition that he fires upon and kills random civilians and farmers going about their business. In a scene which recalls the abandonment of civilisation and its limits in “Apocalypse Now”, the gunner has shed moral restraint to focus on survival and to ensure victory. Joker and Rafterman are appalled at what they see but they are about to become involved in some direct action which will challenge their perception of what it means to be civilised in war.

They meet Cowboy, Joker’s fellow recruit at boot camp, and several of his friends and fellow soldiers with whom there is a degree of friction initially, due to their battle-hardened and somewhat blasé attitude toward death, but Joker and Rafterman come to appreciate these men’s courage, determination and loyalty to comrades under fire.

The scenes involving the sniper incorporate more tension, danger and engagement than anywhere else in the film as we and Joker finally taste what it means to be in a war. Kubrick’s vague detachment is replaced with genuine threat and emotional involvement as American soldiers are targeted and brutally wounded by a sniper to the distress of their comrades who stage rescue attempts only to also fall victim to the sniper’s skills.

We recoil in horror as we see, hear and share the devastation, both human and environmental, of war. This is truly a matter of survival and kill or be killed, the very situation for which Hartman tried to prepare his recruits.

Eventually, our comrades manage to badly wound the female sniper and there is a debate as to whether or not to put her out of her misery. Animal Mother, spurred by the pain and suffering the sniper has inflicted on his comrades, is in favour of letting her suffer a lingering and painful death but Joker takes the decision to end her life – and her suffering – and shoots her close-up. And in so doing, he provides perhaps the ultimate demonstration of the duality of man – he kills, but kills out of humanity.

As he leaves the scene, Joker expresses relief and satisfaction at the fact he is alive and he feels he is no longer afraid. It appears that in war the greatest victory is just to survive. His intellectual and moral superiority are obliterated – life is the ultimate reward, and all other experiences he might previously have considered fearful are now put in perspective.

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