 |
 |
|
The
Book of Linus
Michael Koresky on
It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown
“Oh, Great Pumpkin,
where are you?” Linus Van Pelt.
One of pop art’s great emblematic figures of human spirituality
stands only three inches high, sucks his thumb like
a lollipop, and perpetually carries a blue blanket wherever
he goes, clutching it close to him for security from
a hostile world. By choosing to keep his feet firmly
planted in a forbidding pumpkin patch on Halloween night,
rather than partake in his peers’ holiday festivities,
Linus proves that his clear-eyed conviction, his single-minded
religious philosophical questing, separates him from
the crowd. This 1966 CBS television special presentation
and 25-minute ostensible children’s film, It’s the
Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown, directed by Bill Melendez
and written by Peanuts creator Charles M. Schulz, provides
us with one of American filmmaking’s most lucid depictions
of the struggle between existentialism and religious
determinism. It is a film that skirts the line between
the secular and the sacrosanct, a children’s work that
finds the spiritual in the mundane, and specifically
attempts to locate the divine in the pagan. The Great
Pumpkin himself, defined at once by his presence and
non-presence, looms large over cartoonist Schulz’s world,
witnessing as we do the interactions of these little
people way down below, all of them stuck in a deceptively
benign universe, beset by ironic turnabouts, lacking
any sort of parental authority, trapped within the same
clothes day in and day out, never aging. There must
be a greater, controlling being to whisk them from this
stasis.
For Linus Van Pelt, as well as the rest of the Peanuts
gang, it is an inhospitable world that Charles M. Schulz
has sketched for them, regardless of its atmospheric
gentility; its casual grace often gives way to sarcastic
epiphanies, punchlines that further its moral inquiries
rather than resolve them. Charlie Brown himself sees
the world as a cruel place, yet his disillusionment
has no philosophical outlet; his unending misery begets
misery, he falls into the same patterns daily— attempting
to kick Lucy’s football and always falling flat on his
back, continually flying his kite into the same carnivorous
oak tree. Linus, on the other hand, seeks religion and
philosophy as the key to understanding his universe.
Free of Charlie Brown’s suffocating self-pity, Linus
realizes that there must be a divine purpose, an order
to everything that extends beyond the boundaries of
his daily world of four blocks, cut into strips, often
black-and-white, sometimes color.
|
| |
|
Perhaps that’s why Linus
remains second fiddle to the bald little boy wearing
a yellow shirt with zig-zag stripes: his utter conviction
and unwavering beliefs are alienating for most of us,
while Charlie Brown’s penchant for making the same mistakes,
for replaying the defining awful moments of his life
over and over, remind us of ourselves. Linus is less
willing to decry a troubling world from which no one
sees any discernible moral order—and let’s not forget
that Linus knows his New Testament. One year prior to
the airing of the Halloween special, A Charlie Brown
Christmas (1965) appeared, climaxing with Linus
quoting from the Book of Luke, standing on the stage
of the school auditorium, a single spotlight shone on
him, reminding his schoolmates about the true origins
and meaning of Christmas. “For unto you this day is
born a savior, which is Christ the Lord,” Linus proclaims,
and it truly is a transcendent scene, reinstating spiritual
awareness in a godless commercialzed world of pink and
blue aluminum Christmas trees. Like that one brilliant
star that shines over Charlie Brown’s backyard at the
closing moments, Linus presides over his peers: not
because of any sort of moral superiority (each of the
Peanuts gang is given due respect, although perhaps
not equal humility), but as a spirit of unification.
In a sense, even before the start of It’s the Great
Pumpkin, Linus has already been waiting for a sign,
something that will literally drop from the sky and
make itself known as a messenger of good tidings.
To locate Linus’s remarkable belief in the unknown within
a narrative set during Halloween rather than Christmas
is a good deal trickier, and Charles M. Schulz throws
a wrench in the works. While his closing biblical monologue
during the Christmas pageant rehearsal bestowed grace
upon a troupe of kids literally and figuratively without
guidance, this time around, and during this widely secular
holiday, Linus’s religious prognostications are greeted
with nonstop ridicule. Convinced that the Great Pumpkin,
a being of great benevolence and command, will rise
out of the most “sincere” pumpkin patch and bestow gifts
upon the good boys and girls of the world, Linus forgoes
a night of trick-or-treating and Violet’s annual Halloween
party so as to await the divine appearance of the heretofore
unseen spirit. The more directly stated connections
between the Great Pumpkin and Santa Claus make a more
proper correlation for the younger targeted viewers
(Linus declares that he will bring toys, that he knows
who has been good and bad, and that there are such things
as “pumpkin carols”), yet in his script, Schulz decisively
disconnects the two. In a letter to the Great Pumpkin,
Linus writes “You must get discouraged because more
people believe in Santa Claus than in you.” Thus, even
before the punchline is dropped (“Well, let’s face it,
Santa Claus gets more publicity”), Schulz establishes
that the Great Pumpkin represents something far greater
than childish want; the Pumpkin is the messiah of Linus’s
Halloween, the holiday itself, defined by longstanding
religious objection and centuries-old attempts to Christianize
it, becoming conflated with Christmas. Linus’s attempts
to reconfigure Halloween in terms of Christ’s providence
is met with Snoopy’s jeers and his sister Lucy’s fist-shaking
threats. But it is Charlie Brown’s incredulousness of
Linus’s beliefs, defined in a casual retort, that is
the film’s thematic lightning rod: “We are obviously
separated by denominational differences.”
|
 |
|
The existent gap between
religious observance and festival celebration defines
both of the Schulz/Melendez holiday specials. The annual
efforts of orthodox and fundamentalist sects to persuade
American children from participating in Halloween’s
revelries is hardly a recent phenomenon; widespread
19th and 20th century Western fear of Paganism has always
reached its apotheosis on October 31, originally the
closing date on the pre-Christian Celtic calendar, and
marked by customs that reflect Druid harvest practices.
As the Roman Catholic Church found the persistence of
this harvest festival to be distastefully secular, All
Saints Day was introduced by the pope in the 7th century,
in part to counter the effects of the pagan festival.
Ever since, the holiday has been marked by traditions
both religious and non: the November 1 observance of
all the saints in heaven remains prevalent, especially
in Latin countries, while trick-or-treating itself is
founded on the ancient customs of Irish peasants. It’s
safe to assume that Halloween, brought to the United
States with Irish immigrants in the mid-19th century,
is now observed by most as completely separate from
the church, and with even its historical significance
lost on most, the holiday becomes little more than a
mere social gathering. And certainly it is widely regarded
as a holiday for children, an odd confluence of a youthful
exuberance celebrating an ominous restless afterlife.
Halloween’s contradictions are certainly not lost on
Schulz and Melendez, whose sharp irony and stark autumnal
visual palette create a dynamic moving strip of American
customs, rites, and hypocrisies. The first image, post-credits,
of a leaf drifting down from above accompanied by composer
Vince Guaraldi’s simple lovely oboe, connects the Peanuts
gang with something richly ethereal and disembodied.
In fact, the entire Peanuts tableaux, from Schulz’s
very first comic strip in 1950, suggests that there
is something outside of the characters, watching with
an omniscience that cannot be easily described as authoritative
or judgmental; there is a compassionate presence here,
an unseen force that guides these children, each weighed
down by oversized, over-contemplative candy-apple heads,
as they treat each other with alternating calumny and
sympathy. Linus’s connection with all of Earth’s gifts
(“You didn’t tell me you were gonna kill it!” he wails
when Lucy plunges a carving knife into a pumpkin) separates
him from his more narrow-minded, gullible (Charlie Brown
tries to kick the football again and lands on his back),
self-regarding (Lucy sits watching TV, and in a brillantly
self-reflexive move from Schulz, clutches a TV Guide
with her own picture on the cover) friends. Only Charlie
Brown’s little sister, Sally, remains uncorrupted at
the start of the film, letting her puppy-love crush
on Linus dissuade her from trick-or-treating. His inviting
her, converting her if you will, to join him in awaiting
the Great Pumpkin’s arrival alarms her older brother,
who drags her off, blaring, “What are you trying to
do to my little sister?” Yet ultimately she will forgo
Linus’s observance, wailing that she missed out on tricks-or-treats,
and “candy, apples, and gum, and cookies and money
and all sorts of things.” Sally succumbs to the tempations;
the only thing that seems to have come between her and
her beau is the difference between their fundamental
belief systems.
For many generations, It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie
Brown is our “Little Golden Book” introduction to
the spiritual dilemmas of the earthbound believer. Linus
never receives a sign; all that arrives is a beagle
(Snoopy, dressed in his Halloween WWI Flying Ace scarf
and goggles, ominously and inexplicably arises in silhouette
from the pumpkin patch, then shrinks back down into
stultifying dog-dom). Linus’s attempts to bestow spiritual
guidance to the mundane, to imbue secular tradition
with faith, receives nothing but a terrifying silence.
A hush falls over the midnight garden of orange pumpkins
and green vines, and Linus, calling after Sally (who
faithlessly abandons him to join the howling pack of
nonbelievers), exclaims that if the Great Pumpkin comes,
he will put in a good word for her. “Good grief, I said
if,” he stops himself, his hair literally raised
on end, and as Melendez zooms out slowly, he shouts
to the nonresponsive sky: “I meant when he comes.
I’m doomed.” Fearing an all-powerful, even vengeful
omnipresence, Linus remains stranded in the pumpkin
patch until the wee hours of the morning, freezing,
teeth chattering, desolate, his faith in something outside
of what he can literally perceive acknowledged with
nothing more than the wind blowing through the trees.
|
 |
|
A conservative Protestant
and member of the Church of God, Minnesota-bred Charles
M. Schulz became one of the preeminent American pop
artists of the Fifties, his simple, inquisitive line
drawings spoke to many struggling with the contradictions
of living in Eisenhower’s America. A reluctant existentialist,
Schulz created characters that broke from strict parameters
or denominations, yet reflected the beliefs ingrained
from his upbringing. When the strips, reflective of
Schulz’s lifelong sense of alienation, segued into moving
pictures made for television in the mid-Sixties, its
stark tableaux became a mise-en-scene of dislocation.
It’s not too much of a stretch to remark how Schulz’s
depressive, Scandanavian-heritage outlook became of
a piece of a New Wave pop renaissance, the war within
him between religious devotion and philosophical rumination
(he watched his mother die of colon cancer when he was
20) not too far from that of Ingmar Bergman, the use
of dire negative space within the frame and the consistent
lack of resolution not too distanced from Antonioni.
While Linus represents the ideal of the purified soul
that Schulz never attained, his questing reaches an
existential dead-end—yet his spiritual resilience finds
its zenith in the closing credits. As Charlie Brown
and Linus sit together, behind that no-man’s-land brick
wall, fists perched under their chins like Rodin’s “Thinker,”
Charlie tries to console Linus, disappointed at the
Great Pumpkin’s non-appearance, by saying he’s done
similarly stupid things himself. Outraged, Linus raises
his hands angrily, “Stupid? What do you mean, stupid?
Just wait till next year at this time. I’ll be waiting
for him!” As we pull back and the credits roll, Linus’s
outburst becomes nearly evangelical, a tendency which
is reprised and perfected in 1972’s You’re Not Elected,
Charlie Brown, in which Linus throws his entire
class-president campaign into turmoil and public ridicule
by—in a decidedly Joe Lieberman-esque moment—invoking
the existence of the Great Pumpkin. Here, the connection
between the Great Pumpkin and the ecclesiastical is
clarified. In Schulz’s world, there may be no literal
guidance, no physical certainty, no answers, but Linus
will go on attending his midnight mass in the pumpkin
patch, waiting for Him to appear.
Schulz once said: “I think life is full of anxieties
and fears and tears. It has a lot of grief in it, and
can be very grim. And I do not want to be the one who
tries to tell somebody else what life is all about.
To me it’s a complete mystery.” Yet still he taught
Sunday School and, through his Peanut gallery, searched
for some sort of meaning. What Schulz was able to portray
above all was that, for those who keep on searching,
the world can be an unforgiving place. Linus’s piety,
his belief in an imminent transcendence, ultimately
allows him to be perceived as what else, but a “blockhead.” |
|