The Culture Enthusiast

Because the only thing better than a detective story is a detective story where both detectives are romantically involved.

Unlike most classics, Something New was a laugh-out-loud page turner gem. A real winter-blues antidote for those times where a search for a lost scarab is the only thing that will get you out of your funk.

Have you read any of P. G. Wodehouse's novels? Check out 13 P. G. Wodehouse quotes guaranteed to make your day better

Northanger Abbey is certainly less famous than other Jane Austen novels like Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility. But it is not less fun or charming. It has all that good Austen stuff: despicable villains, exciting balls and, of course, a dashing hero.

To be honest, it took me longer than I expected to finish this book. Probably because the book tries to criticize and make fun of Gothic literature, which was in vogue at the time. I have the feeling that I miss out on a lot when it comes to satires because I don't fully understand what is being criticized. I’m not familiar with Gothic literature and much less with the hype surrounding it in Austen’s time.

Nonetheless, Austen presents the paradox of cute, delicate young girls enjoying horror stories in a very funny way. In a dialogue between Isabella and Catherine, the former says she has prepared a list of Gothic novels for them to read together:

- I have made a list of ten or twelve [novels] of the same kind for you.

- But are they all horrid, are you sure, they are all horrid?

- Yes, quite sure; for a particular friend of mine, a Miss Andrews, a sweet girl, one of the sweetest creatures in the world, has read every one of them.

Apparently, our teenagers that love gory horror movies like Saw are quite similar to 19^th century readers of Gothic literature.

But don't let this stop you from reading Northanger Abbey. Mr. Tilney makes it all worthwhile. 

I liked him a lot, maybe even more than the protagonists from other novels. (Of course I'm referring to you, Mr. Darcy.) 

Northanger’s hero, Mr. Tilney, knows how to play it cool. He is mysterious, smooth, don’t overreact when the heroin is rude or acts crazy. He likes the same things she does, but knows how to joke around as well.

He even warns Catherine of the danger of being obsessed with all things Gothic. I wonder what Jane Austen herself would think of the current obsession with all things Jane Austen.

Have you read/watched Northanger Abbey? 

(I haven't watched the Tv movie where the pictures above come from, but I was stupid enough to go watch Austenland. Word of the wise: just because the movie has a British actor in it, that doesn't  mean it's good.)

Images: 1/2 and 3 (though lame Photoshop was all me) 

The Dead Christ supported by an Angel by Antonello da Messina

Date: 1475 – 76

Location: Museo del Prado, Madrid, Spain

The painting portrays a seated Christ who had just been removed from the Cross after the Crucifixion. On the left we can see the place where He was crucified. On the foreground we see skulls, clear indications we are on a cemetery and evocations of death. 

A little bit of technique

Antonello belongs to the Renaissance period, which was very rich in innovations and artistic developments. He was born in the South of Italy but he has influences from Venetian and Flemish art. According to the Museo del Prado's website, Antonello mixes characteristics of “northern origin —visible in the landscape and in Christ's hair— with a monumental treatment of the anatomy and a concern for volume and perspective that are clearly southern.”

A little bit of enthusiasm

When I first saw this painting I was taken aback by the motionless, wounded Christ, reminding us of all the sufferings He endured during the Passion. 

But what I find most unique about this painting is the crying angel. In other Pietas, it's common to see people in the scene: the Virgin Mary, Saint John, Saint Mary Magdalene. Some even place Joseph of Arimathea, Nicodemus and other disciples on the descent of the Cross.

Deposition by Rogier van der Weyden also in the Museo del Prado.

Antonello chose to paint the angel, which presents some challenges. An angel, a being of pure intellect, might distance us from the scene and take away the human sadness and emotion of it. Could an angel faint or twists his hands like we see it being done in the painting above? Certainly not. 

But Antonello makes up for this in many ways, making the painting just as emotional as other Pietas filled with people.

First off, the angel is not only carrying Christ's body but he's also crying. 

He is reacting to what just happened. He is also staring right at us, as if he couldn't bear to say anything. He has child-like features and a small size, increasing the pathos of the painting. It is as if the painting were saying: it's not just the people, the Virgin Mary, all the Saints and disciples present, that were sad. No, even heavenly creatures have nothing to do, but weep.

Secondly, there's only one angel. In other works, we see two or more angels. 

Pieta e Angeli by Lambert Sustris

The fact that the angel is by himself calls our attention to how desolate the landscape is. It reminds us of Christ's own sense of loneliness and abandonment during His ordeal in the Calvary. There's no one there: the Apostles fled, the centurions ran away in fear, the Pharisees left in desbelief.

The depiction of the angel, aided by details like the drops of blood falling from Christ’s hair, make the painting so moving that we feel like joining the angel and crying too.

  

For a great audio explanation of this painting, check out the museum’s website.

What do you think of Messina's painting? What is your favorite type of Pieta - the ones with angels or with people (or both?!)

*spoilers*

I have a love and hate relationship with Woody Allen.

So much so that I only watched Midnight in Paris because it was being played at my gym. The movie was so interesting that I ended up working out for much longer that I wanted to.

Midnight in Paris is about a young Hollywood writer, Gil, who is inexplicably transported to 1920’s Paris every night. There he gets a chance to enjoy the company of Hemingway, Dali and Bunuel – all extremely creative people unlike the snooze that are his fiancé and friends in the present.

While none of the characters understands Gil’s nostalgia, the movie supposes the audience does.

I, for one, am normally very pessimistic about the present and being in a gym where everybody (including myself) is spending lots of money, time and energy on losing weight through moronic exercises probably enhanced the feeling that we are all in pretty bad shape.

Don’t expect a great conclusion to Gil’s dilemma though.

Between a barren, boring present and an electrifying past he will compromise. The only problem with that is that is a bit conformist and not original.  Conformist because there is a big difference between dreaming of living in the past and looking at your present critically. Not original because how many recent movies end with the message: “be happy in the present, follow your dreams, don’t sell out and find a quirky girl who loves you for who you are”? Of the top of my head I can think of Stranger than Fiction, Little Miss Sunshine and Ruby Sparks.

What’s strange is how Gil came to terms with the present. It's only because he discovers everybody is nostalgic and unhappy with their present - whatever that time that is.

It's what Woody Allen puts in the mouth of one of his characters "The present is unsatisfying because life is”.

I wonder if deep down Allen believes Gil will be happy. 

I'd say, based on his other movies, that he thinks Gil should be happy his life is not totally horrible. But I guess anyone who thinks life is that unsatisfying cannot be happy for long.

What did you think of Midnight in Paris? What time would you like to live in? (I'm highly favorable to the 1920's myself)

It took me forever to watch The Artist. I mean, a modern silent movie, with a plot screaming Singing in the Rain and a trailer that seems to give away the whole movie? 

I had zero expectations when I finally watched it and was utterly amazed. 

The movie is about George Valentin, a silent movie star who gets fired when the studios start producing talking movies. His career is being destroyed while the one of a charming up and comer actress is rising. The so conveniently called Peppy Miller was helped into fame by George and to make matters worse they might be in love with each other.

The Artist is one of those movies that demand something from the viewers and then reward them for it. It wasn’t so difficult to get used to the lack of sound because I actually enjoy watching Buster Keaton’s silent movies. But for some, inferring what’s going on only by gestures and facial expressions might be a challenge. 

However, this work is necessary in order to understand what the movie is expressing. We need to understand George’s facial expressions and gestures, because he won’t talk about his pain, not only because it’s a silent movie but because he is proud.

By the way, how amazing is Jean Dujardin, the actor who plays George? 

He has that old days face, he is vintage handsome. He also has that positive, upbeat attitude that is almost non-existent in today’s Hollywood stars.  There’s a scene where a huge crowd is trying to get to him – photographers, reporters, fans, cops are all around him. And he is truly having fun, he is not faking being happy. Right after posing in a seductive way for a photographer he breaks out laughing.

Also, look out for the rich visual metaphors. You can do a little The Artist drinking game, everybody drinks up every time a mirror appears on screen. They are everywhere. Not only mirrors, but all types of reflection – the spilled water, the shadow in the projection wall, the reflection on a window store.

They are all clues of Valentin’s disintegrated self. Because of this, it reminds me so much of The Fall. People use stories to understand themselves better. They want self-knowledge or at least world knowledge.

The movie is so good that we get George’s struggles, they seem genuine, which is something I did see in My week with Marilyn, for example.

It’s interesting to see that when movie directors want to talk about the passion for cinema they tend to return to silent movies. They are not only paying homages to silent movies but also learning from them. It shows that directors still have a passion and enthusiasm for movies as if movie making had begun only a couple of years ago.

Have you seen the Artist? What did you think of the use of sound?

I watched The Red Shoes a couple of years ago when I was really into ballet. I wonder how many guys who hate ballet watched it only because Martin Scorsese vouches for it.

This 1948 classic follows the career of a promising young ballerina, Victoria Page. She entered the most prestigious company in the world under the direction of the uncompromising Boris Lermontov. She is on her way to the top but she comes to a crossroad: Boris demands total commitment to ballet and she is in love with Julian Craster, the composer of her ballet company.

Which will she choose, ballet or marriage? Who will have her, Boris or Julian?

That's probably what makes the movie so interesting. It's not really ballet. The main character is a ballerina but it could have easily been any type of artist or any person who has to prioritize either their work or their families. As a matter of fact, Julian and Boris also make this choice and I see a lot of suffering in them as well.

While watching, we become as divided as her because we wish she could have it all, but we know she can't.

Though, I have to say, I am incredibly partial towards Boris. He always seemed like a much more interesting character. Sophisticated,  elegant, demanding, uncompromising, and completely dedicated to ballet to the point he arranges his life according to it. 

For example, when Irina announces she is leaving the ballet to get married, Boris simply walks out of the room. She is dead to him. The ballet coreographer Grisha, on the other hand, behaves in a much friendlier and humane way. When Irina asks him if he hates her, he kindly replies: "I could never hate you, but how could I ever forgive you?" For Grisha there is life outside the ballet, for Boris there isn't.

Julian is also a great character, but I liked Boris from the very first scene. I mean, he almost declined a party invitation from a countess. Then, he snubbed the same countess not because he is a snob (well, not just because of that), but because he doesn’t fell like having a ballet audition every party he goes to.

Bottom line: all those who want to achieve greatness, and that probably includes Scorsese, have to make certain sacrifices. Victoria's predicament is only made worse by the fact she is a woman and that she is a dancer.

And for those who do love ballet, rest assured that unlike Black Swan and Benjamin Button, the main character and three other supporting characters are played by real ballerinas, so no fake dancing!

Have you seen The Red Shoes? What do you think about Victoria's fate?

Images via Take Off the Red Shoes (filled with great images from the movie!)