Daily Archives: 08 Jan 2012

Falstaff Dies a Broken Man

Posted on by
Reply

Over at Shakespeare Geek, the question is asked if Falstaff dies a broken man. I respond with my usual love of That Bard:

Beware Welles’ Shakespeare for it is more Welles than That Bard! Welles’ take on Falstaff is quite different from any other I have seen or from what one would take from the text. There is really no buffoon in the character here. Falstaff seems quite intelligent, using what gifts he has to make his way in life.

To answer your question: Falstaff dies a broken man. It is because he is broken that he dies. “I shall be sent for in private,” is said only to save face. But I think it must be remembered that that is all Falstaff has done from the beginning of the film. When last we see him from the rear in long shot, he is hunched over walking awkwardly with a cane. He is tiny as he passes under the arch, but his shadow is enormous. (Very similar to The Third Man.)

Shakespeare was not big on writing pleasant characters. Falstaff, with all his faults, is as close as we get. And even that depends upon the performer. No writer in the history of the English theater has had more and better editors and directors and actors to fix his oh so many problems.

I too consider myself something of a Shakespeare geek, but that doesn’t mean I hold him in that high a regard. In many ways, he is like Orson Welles (although without the excuses—I think Welles did very well given his obstacles). Neither man created a perfect piece of narrative art. Both have loads of brilliant moments, but nothing works completely.

Shakespeare never wrote a decent comedy. The histories are dreadful. He was best at tragedy. Still, Hamlet is a mess: hands down the most over-rated play of all time. Despite the amazing amount of creativity that actors and directors have put into it, it is always un-watchable. I’m kind of fond of Richard III, but I have a real problem with Shakespeare’s constant use of villains who make Sweeney Todd seem realistic. “Since I cannot prove a lover, to entertain these fair well-spoken days, I am determined to prove a villain and hate the idle pleasures of these days”! How many times in his plays do we hear similar speeches by his villains? Richard’s a villain because he’s lame? Don John is a villain because he’s a bastard? Iago is a villain because he was fired? Please!

The most fulfilling play is Macbeth. And I believe it is not over-performed the way others of his plays are because modern artists don’t feel the need to fix it. Everyone is so determined to make Shakespeare into the greatest writer ever (an amazing, but preposterous claim), that they can’t help but try to fix the train wrecks that define his catalog.

As for Welles, at least we do have one perfect and unique film, even if it is a documentary: F for Fake. Most of his other films are quite watchable. In fact, most are quite good. And the scenes that have been released of The Other Side of the Wind are some of the most exciting film I have ever seen.

Prince Hal is a villain. Falstaff is a complex and troubled man who dies broken. And Orson Welles, once again, gives Shakespeare better than he gets.

If the Shakespeare Geek notices the comment, I suspect he will not agree!

The Good Christian

Posted on by
2

Jesus Wanted PosterI don’t hate Christians. I have little tolerance for stupid Christians. In fact, my spiritual beliefs[1] fit in rather well with New Testament dogma. Unfortunately, David Byrne[2] was far more profound than almost any Christian I’ve met when he wrote, “Heaven is a place where nothing happens.” One Christian I like is Bruce Cockburn, who you may remember from his hit in the late 1970s, Wondering Where the Lions Are. That’s a take on the Roman’s feeding the Christians to the lions. Every time I’ve seen him do the song (well over a dozen times live), he shows such joy in doing it. I think the idea is about sacrificing. I don’t know if he really believes he is going to heaven, that place that doesn’t actually exist, or if he is of the Terry Eagleton school of Christianity, which has everything to do with politics and almost nothing to do with God. I tend to think the latter, because Cockburn is a smart guy. Certainly it is the case that he has spent his whole life working to make the world more just, forgiving, and above all, humane.

Here is Pacing the Cage, which he told me, “It’s about feeling trapped.” As I often say, artists should never explain their work because they usually don’t get it. Sure, it is about being trapped. But it’s about a lot more than that. I could go on about learned helplessness and things like that, but it’s better to listen to a master:

[1] As Denys Turner speaks about beautifully, there is only one question: why existence? It is a profound question and one that gives me great pleasure because I like mystery. It is a thrill and a gift to be alive and to wonder about the universe and eternity. But it is hubris to think that you matter in a cosmological sense. We do not exist, then we exist, and then we do not exist. That’s it. I’m with Carl Jung when asked, “Do you believe in God?” He responded, “I don’t need to believe; I know.” But “God” is a very bad word for what I know, because of the way almost all religious people define the term, which is utterly at odds with my own.

[2] When I was young, I loved Talking Heads. Their first album was good and the next three were great. And then there was Speaking in Tongues which was okay, the way a sunny day is on the edge of a hurricane. Bad things were coming. Stop Making Sense was a live album — not bad, but it’s hard for me to be objective since I saw them on that tour twice. Then the ax fell: Little Creatures was released and I knew (to quote Beckett) beyond all doubt that David Byrne was a sham. The great music of Talking Heads was due a lot to Byrne, of course; but it was also due to Tina Weymouth, Chris Frantz, Jerry Harrison (pity the man who had to put up with the delightful but crazy Jojo), and especially Brian Eno. And given that all indications are that Byrne was and most likely still is a complete jerk, I can’t listen to any of those three great albums without some sadness. Here’s Heaven from Stop Making Sense:

Notice a little trick here. Only two people on stage. Weymouth doesn’t have a mic. Who is singing backup on the chorus? It sounds like Byrne (I don’t think they had the autotune software for doing background singing live back then), but it could be someone off stage. Regardless, it strikes me as a little disingenuous. If you’re going to slowly build up your band, then really do it. Otherwise, you’re nothing more than The The or Howard Jones.