I can’t say I’ve seen such a deep and disturbing film since the early works of John Malkovitch. First Todd Field’s writing explores the old world meaning of ‘success and status’. There’s the class of classics with the order and profundity of century old Bach with the whimsical new composer. All is played out with Tar teaching an arrogant young man her idea of art, not just technique but the ‘channeling’ so to speak of the original composer’s meaning. What is the ‘cover’?
The young music student whose obvious sensitivity and disability is portrayed by his physical anxiety arrogantly argues for his own « identity politics » as ‘non binary’ discounting Bach as cis gender and irrelevant. He could be discounting another artist for being left handed or Cuban, the issue again, appears to be about sexuality, but is much more and Lydia Tar’s response goes to the essence of the artist in community versus the artist as masturbator.
I confess I heard the ominous toppling John A. Macdonald, Canada’s founding father’s, statue one of hundred of great works of art subsumed in recent years by the pride and hubris of ‘cancell culture’ ,the radical aetheists equivalent of the art destroying radical Muslim, Taliban., the present’s ‘Bonfire of the Vanities’ in the repeat performance of Mao’s disastrous ‘cultural’ revolution, Lydia Tar’s response to this arrogance is resounding. Meanwhile it is all filmed illegally and deceitfully on iPhone only to be edited and uploaded as a modern propaganda art on behalf of the ‘victim’ the young narcissist ‘villain’ or ‘savior’ of the film. A life time of hard work and discipline and dreams that began in America is smashed in the modern Blitzkrieg of the new Nazi smugness.
Tar’s on sexuality which in the past might well have been of matter is now however lost in her ‘personhood’ .The failure of ‘love’ for her partner and her child reflects her self centereness and behaviour, all the same as the Mad Men leadership of the ‘shakers and makers’, isn’t the issue, but rather her ‘lack of communication’. Her own pride and hubris and narcissism are exposed in the centre of her own great love, this microcosm within the microcosm.
And of course the question arises, does she love or does she just ‘use’ people? Indeed the movies challenges the whole interpretation of the stark contrasting Marxist reductionist models of the glib narrative production and destruction. Todd Field and Cate Blanchett along with the extraordinary acting of all the cast literally visually reflect on the harmony and dis chord of great composition. This is so beyond politics and foot ball fields and war and deep in the world of counterpoint and colour.
Reality and art are challenged in the contrast of the audience of tuxedos and gowns, glitter and ref carpet, with the audience of cosplay, animals characters and costume. There’s a seriousness and self centered ness which is now exposed in the ‘channeling’ of the audience as ‘masked’. Profound doesn’t do justice to the depth of this genius of a movie, writing,direction and cast. It is all about us seeing the dircctor’s face rather than just their back as they mirror lead and follow the musicians,
I love Lydia as she struggles within the personal transformation of love and lust, judged not for sexuality but rather for her ‘abuse of power’ and lack of ‘kindness’. Unlike any movie I’ve seen in recent years the simple failure of main character is to ‘love thy neighbour’, ‘be kind’. Blanchett does the amazing job by expression and tone to convey the subtleties of appearance and reality.
Is Lydia Tar a ‘villain’? Personally I see her as on the ‘Hero’s » path that Campbell and Jung discussed. She’s becoming human and greatness has just brgun. It begins in the Third world where the fertility of the young is manifesting as the decay of European young is exposed.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment