 |
 |
|
The
Weight of Being
Andrew Tracy on L’Humanité
Bruno Dumont’s L’Humanité
(1999) opens on a sight bereft of humanity, a picturesque
sprawl of French countryside that would be lush if not
for the grey northern sky above, and the almost clinical
detachment with which Dumont’s camera paints it. Almost
imperceptibly at first, a speck moves along the distant
ridge; a man runs, falls, smears his face across the
wet grass, wide eyes staring out of a pudgy countenance.
Smoothly, calmly, Dumont moves us in the space of a
few shots from a meditative consideration of landscape
to an intense confrontation with the human visage. While
we could relegate the man’s plunge earthwards solely
to some dramatic reason (shock, despair?) Dumont intimates
a deeper bond. The earth may not just be passively receiving
the man’s body, but returning his embrace.
The source of the man’s distress is soon made clear.
The cool beauty of nature reveals a horror: the bloodied
vagina of a young girl, pale white limbs smoothly splayed
over the crest of a grassy hillock. We have been watching
the beginning of a murder mystery; the man is Pharaon
de Winter (Emmanuel Schotté), a police superintendent
who will shortly begin aiding the police in their search
for the girl’s killer. The strangeness of the opening
is mitigated somewhat; we appear to be safely in genre
territory, albeit slightly skewed. Yet once again the
sober elegance of Dumont’s images seems to be pushing
us beyond our expectations. Entwined with the dewy sensuality
of nature, the girl’s ravaged body is almost part of
the landscape, sharing its contemplative beauty. Welcoming
a monstrous act into the fold of its serenity, the earth
which offers comfort one moment casually accepts horror
the next.
Though the framework of the police procedural is intrinsic
to Dumont’s design, he seems to take a perverse pleasure
in adopting such a schematic only to disintegrate it
in the sea of his images. L’Humanité is a mystery,
but its solution is to be found less in narrative time
than in imagistic texture. Dumont is a filmmaker of
surfaces, a painter and vivisectionist, crafting dead
fictions in order to dissect the living matter of which
they are made. “Cinema is not reality. Reality does
not interest me. What interests me is its unveiling,”
he has said. Rejecting the sterile intellectualism he
perceives in French cinema (no mean feat, considering
his background in philosophy) Dumont’s plain, uninflected
images, both studiedly distant and almost stiflingly
carnal, utilize the sensual contact between man and
world as the conduit to the immensities which he seeks.
|
| |
|
As the Dardennes anchor
The Son to the body of Olivier Gourmet, Dumont
sees his world through the eyes and flesh of Schotté’s
Pharaon, a slow, shambling, awkward man whose odd demeanor
cannot be wholly attributed to the loss of his wife
and son a year previously. When not bicycling through
the countryside, working in his meticulously tended
garden, or playing keyboards in the house he shares
with his mother, Pharaon is apt to spend his time tagging
after his neighbour Domino (Severine Caneele) a sulky,
blocky factory worker with whom Pharaon is transparently
infatuated and her loutish boyfriend Joseph (Philippe
Tullier). Silent and lumpish, Pharaon seems to live
chiefly through the random fixations of his senses.
Dumont will often let Pharaon’s gaze become that of
the camera’s, minutely examining seemingly inconsequential
details (the hands of Pharaon’s mother as she slices
vegetables, the back of the police chief’s neck as he
stares out the window), staring out across expanses
of quietly rolling fields, observing the distant sight
of England across the Channel. Singularly ineffective
as a cop, one of Pharaon’s few instances of police work
turns bizarre as Pharaon gently grasps the Algerian
smuggler he’s interrogating on either side of his face,
leans over, and methodically sniffs his head.
Such inscrutable moments, ostensibly unrelated to the
half-hearted murder investigation, seem to direct the
film towards psychological case study (another mystery
story). But sticking a label on Pharaon is meaningless
in the world which Dumont postulates, a mere appendage
of the narrative logic which he spurns. If Pharaon is
mad, it is a madness moving outward instead of burrowing
inward. For he is afflicted with an unbearable burden:
a preternatural awareness of the world’s terrible unity,
whether in solace or destruction. “He’s suffered,” Domino
says of Pharaon, referring to the deaths of his woman
and child. It is more appropriate to say that he is
always suffering, for Pharaon is incapable of separating
his vast love from his vast pain. Everything that brings
him joy: his garden, his music, an embrace from Domino
hinges irreversibly upon the abomination of the girl’s
death, the malevolence which it reveals. As Pharaon’s
every interaction with the world dictates the film’s
rhythm, the onus of the mystery shifts—no longer “who
did this?” but Pharaon’s numbed question to his chief:
“How can someone do that?” The killer’s identity is
not as important as the cold, monstrous fact of the
evil he has brought into the world or that the world
has brought into being through him.
For this is Dumont’s conjecture in L’Humanité,
the crux of his belief in the primacy of the body: evil
as tactile substance, as physical reality. “All is grace,”
intones Laydu in Bresson’s Diary of a Country Priest,
a cinematic touchstone for Dumont; in L’Humanité,
the limitless possibility of salvation is countered
by the limitless proliferation of evil. A recklessly
driven truck, the casual, “innocent” cruelty of a group
of revellers at a restaurant, a scuffle in a parking
lot, the rape and murder of a young girl whether inconsequential
or fatal, all testify to a motiveless malignity embedded
in the very weave of the world, vicious ruptures integrated
into the placid whole. When Pharaon visits the site
of the murder, its warm, supremely indifferent beauty
unmarred by the violation performed upon it, he runs
away screaming, the roar of a passing train swallowing
his anguish. If God’s hand is forever manifest in the
world, that world eternally bears the traces of the
horrors He permits.
|
   |
|
Yet Dumont is not interested
in speculating on the will of an incorporeal deity,
or rather the idea of same. His concern is evoked in
his title. Pharaon, Domino, Joseph—it is these samples
of humanity, fleshy puppets whose strings have been
cut, who obliquely point out the possibilities for transcending
the conditions of their existence. If Pharaon embodies
radical sensitivity, radical empathy, the agonizing
extremes of pain and love he feels are only the keener
pangs of a common burden. The animalistic couplings
of Domino and Joseph, frequent, explicit and dispassionate,
are moving by their very lack of emotion; there’s a
desperation, a hunger beyond simple lust (or simple
love). “In the sexuality of man and woman there is something
profoundly tragic,” says Dumont. “When one makes love,
there is pleasure in this sexual release, but one makes
the same face as when one is in pain. Someone who enjoys
this release is also someone who suffers.” Or someone
who inflicts suffering. It is no coincidence that Pharaon
witnesses Domino and Joseph having sex soon after discovering
the girl’s body. In the inescapable reflexivity of L’Humanité,
the act of love is analogous with the act of violation;
the physicality which allows for a moment of transport
is the very thing which weighs inexorably down. When
Domino spitefully offers her body to Pharaon who refuses,
Dumont crystallizes his vision in a mirror of the film’s
opening: Domino’s vagina in close-up, her face out of
frame, her stomach contracting with sobs.
At once eloquent and vulgar, this shot is Dumont’s aesthetic
at its keenest, at the chill but bracing peaks of clarity.
The almost scientific detachment of Dumont’s camera,
the pointed deliberation with which he isolates and
probes his specimens, is knowingly in the service of
something which defies categorization. Built upon a
relentless pattern of contradictions—Pharaon’s boundless
empathy which renders him incapable of helping anyone,
the flesh which liberates and entraps, the world which
consoles and tortures— L’Humanité is not merely the
sum of its negations. The mystery persists beyond the
boundaries of the investigation; explanations wither
in the cold light of recognition, the whispered hints
of a truth we all know yet cannot express. “The world
is sacred because it gives an inkling of a meaning that
escapes us,” says Sartre, “and man, an enigma that requires
a solution, is himself sacred in a sacred world.” In
the strange gestures, the unknowable selves, the base,
unwieldy bodies of these cruelly animated natures, Dumont
etches the cryptic rites of a secret ceremony, a silent
protest against the intolerable weight of being. When
Pharaon is finally confronted with the girl’s murderer—a
solution which provides no answers—he responds by placing
a long, full kiss upon the killer’s lips. In the irreconcilable
duality of Dumont’s blighted and beautiful world, this
gesture carries the force of a sacrament: ultimate acceptance
and ultimate rejection, a damned benediction upon a
brute humanity cursed with the burden of grace.
All Dumont quotes taken from interview on the World
Socialist Web Site, www.wsws.org/arts/1997/sep1997/freddy.shtml
|
|