Reflections
on “Suite Française”
Directed
by Saul Dibb
Screenplay
by Saul Dibb and Matt Charman
Based
on the book by Irène Némirovsky
Starring
Michelle Williams, Kristin Scott Thomas, Matthias Schoenaerts, Ruth Wilson, Sam
Riley et al.
In wartime, we see people
at their best but also at their worst.
Set during the German
occupation of France in WW2, “Suite Française” is a study of some of the
consequences of the occupation, political, social and moral, for the residents
of the small town of Bussy.
In places, our film is
vaguely similar in tone to “Le Corbeau” and “La Rafle” as it reveals some
uncomfortable truths regarding reaction to the occupation in this small
community. There are clashes between politics and humanity, social position and
compassion, and spiritual rapport and duty, with some characters prioritising position
and survival while others eventually make a stand for freedom and principle.
Mme Angellier, proud
local landowner and mother-in-law to Lucile, shows scant regard or compassion
for those fleeing Paris and the occupation, is hard-hearted toward her tenants
who are in financial difficulty, and is rather authoritarian, condescending and
insensitive toward Lucile (whose soldier husband, Gaston, is eventually
reported to have been taken prisoner by the Germans). When forced to accept the
presence of a polite and respectful German officer in her home, she is
determined to show her displeasure by offering a minimum of co-operation or
even recognition of his presence. She is clearly immensely proud of her social
status, appears self-centred and unbending, and is critical of just about
everyone.
The young and thoughtful
Lucile, who loves music but is discouraged from playing her piano by her
mother-in-law, is drawn to Bruno von Falk, the well-mannered German officer
billeted in her home, as he plays her piano and composes his own music. After
initial resistance, Lucile is able to see beyond Bruno’s official status and
sees him as something of a kindred spirit. Bruno reveals a sensitivity at odds
with his official duties and he and Lucile establish a rapport, to the
disapproval of Mme Angellier and several local residents.
Bruno receives numerous
letters of denunciation from the locals (in return for German favours or
leniency), indicating blatant self-interest and immediate gratification on their
part, and a failure to grasp the broader perspective of fighting for French freedom
and values. This practice was indeed encouraged by the Germans who gained
information on criminals, Jews and resistance fighters as well as engendering
disunity among the local population.
Bruno clearly disapproves
of the practice but he does learn that Lucile’s husband has been consistently
unfaithful to her, though he keeps it to himself. When Lucile does finally learn
of her husband’s infidelity, she feels utterly betrayed and this revelation
drastically alters her worldview, including her view of her mother-in-law’s
haughty moral position, her marriage, her relationship with her judgemental and
only-too-well-informed neighbours, and especially her stance with regard to the
occupying forces. She decides to abandon her role of dutiful wife and obedient daughter-in-law
to follow her instincts and defy the occupation forces’ control, even
reluctantly and with regret sacrificing her nascent but deeply-felt
relationship with Bruno out of indignation and integrity.
She has seen that not all
the German forces are as principled and considerate as Bruno and she sees that
several neighbours are effectively collaborating, redoubling her resolve to
make a stance against the invaders and help a neighbouring tenant who is in
trouble.
Tenants Benoît and
Madeleine are in trouble on two counts; firstly, unprincipled German officer
Kurt wishes to sleep with Madeleine, Benoît’s wife, and he belittles Benoît
while pressurising Madeleine; secondly, and perhaps more crucially, out of
desperation Benoît has been stealing chickens from the local aristocrat’s farm
and when he is caught by the Viscountess, who shows no compassion or
understanding, he treats her with disdain and contempt. Offended, she lies
about his conduct and sees to it that the German forces hunt him down.
This episode highlights a
social system dependent on the view that the aristocratic class was superior to
the working class. The Viscountess is more concerned with position and insult
than with helping a fellow human being and is willing to turn to her country’s
enemies to help her fulfil her goal of maintaining pride and social position,
displaying little evidence of character, worth or principle.
However, the whole affair
backfires as, in the course of his escape from justice, Benoît kills German
officer Kurt and, because the Germans do not follow the same code of conduct
and responsibility as the French, when Benoît manages to avoid capture the
Viscount is held responsible for Kurt’s murder and is executed. The Viscountess
has ample opportunity to tell the truth but she places pride and
self-preservation above consequence, especially when it is a matter of
consequences for others…
Lucile and even Mme
Angellier both abandon the roles they have been playing in society and
recognise they must make a stand against oppression and the Germans’ dismissive
overturning of French freedom, society and rules. Their eyes are opened and
they see the bigger picture beyond the petty vicissitudes of their village life
and the places they hold within it, and they fight for the freedom and values
they have previously taken for granted by helping Benoît make his escape and,
in Lucile’s case, going on to Paris to help resist the occupation.
Bruno is assigned the
task of executing the Viscount, counter to every fibre in his being, but he
does his duty. He sacrifices his genuine feelings to conformity and survival
though, perhaps as a result of this act, he goes on to help Lucile escape as she
aids Benoît evade German authorities. Thus, he makes a stand for values and
principle, putting his own safety and life at risk.
Ultimately, it would appear that if we are to achieve inner peace and feel at ease with ourselves, we may have to act according to our conscience and oppose subjugation or coercion, though first we may have to reflect on and recognise the values that are truly important to us.
This relatively obscure film
is, on the face of it, deceptively “small” but it deals with themes of
considerable depth and value as it offers a highly perceptive and searingly
honest account of the occupation and its challenging consequences and choices,
political, social and moral, as experienced by the inhabitants of this small
town, a town that may well be symbolic of the experience of the whole of
France. Often billed as a romance, it offers much more than that and is a
fitting tribute to the unfinished work of the tragic author of the piece.
My thanks for taking the
time to read this article. I hope you found it of some value.
Stuart Fernie (stuartfernie@yahoo.co.uk)
No comments:
Post a Comment