|
The
Passion of St. Joan of Arc
by Ryan McMaken
by Ryan McMaken
This
week, Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ is released on DVD.
The DVD release will likely be as financially successful as the
original release, although the film’s detractors certainly did their
best to prevent any theatrical release at all.
As
most anyone with a functioning long-term memory can recall, The
Passion of the Christ generated a significant amount of
controversy when it was first released earlier this year. In many
cases, the release spawned numerous comparisons to films featuring
the entire life of Jesus, and often these comparisons were intended
to highlight Gibson’s great crime of focusing solely on the crucifixion
of Jesus. As one might guess from an exhaustive examination of the
title, The Passion of the Christ is in fact, about the Passion
of the Christ, and is at its core a film about persecution, suffering,
and death. Given the divergent subject matter, though, the comparisons
between The Passion and other Jesus movies are not really
appropriate. It would make more sense to compare Gibson’s film to
other films that are themselves passion tales, and while reviewing
the recent smear campaign against Gibson’s film I am reminded of
another passion film that has become available on DVD in recent
years: Carl Dreyer’s 1928 masterpiece The
Passion of Joan of Arc.
Accused
of spreading hate and being too focused on death and suffering,
La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc was also surrounded by controversy
when it was first released. It was censored by governments, denounced
as propaganda, and almost lost to history forever. In many ways,
Dreyer’s The Passion was the victim of the same revulsion
to supernatural virtue that would be directed at Gibson’s The
Passion almost eight decades later.
Carl Dreyer’s film is regarded as one of the greatest films ever
produced, and in its treatment of Jeanne’s
agony (expertly acted by Renee Falconetti), there has rarely been
a film made that has so starkly exposes the suffering and heroic
courage of a human being. In its depiction of the heroine of the
Hundred
Years’ War, La Passion was denounced as "Anti-English
propaganda," censored by the British government, criticized
for not focusing enough on the happier moments of Jeanne’s life,
and eventually deemed a "harrowing and crushing" experience
not suitable for viewing by ordinary people. Unfortunately, unlike
The Passion of the Christ, relatively few people have seen
Dreyer’s film, but it is a film constructed with such devotion to
human drama, historical accuracy, and artful imagery, that it is
an experience not to be missed.
One
of the most remarkable aspects of Dreyer’s film is the careful treatment
it gives the historical realities of the time. Apart from the central
story of Jeanne’s ordeal leading up to her execution, La Passion
is also an interesting look at the dynamics between Church and State
authorities during the late Middle Ages. A lesser filmmaker would
have simply presented Church and State authorities as corrupt and
evil elites, motivated by an identical lust for power, yet Dreyer
is not satisfied with such simplifications. The dynamic presented
by Dreyer is a political one. Most notable of the political hacks
in Dreyer’s film and in reality is Bishop Pierre Cauchon
who, seeking influence with the English, is most enthusiastic about
prosecuting Jeanne. At the same time, the English invaders were
eager to accept his help, and to gain retribution from Jeanne who
had so often humiliated them in battle over the course of her military
career.
Since
men had not yet invented the canard of war crimes tribunals in the
15th century, the English, concluding that it would be
in bad form to execute Jeanne simply for besting them in battle,
sought to have her executed as a witch and a heretic instead. Dreyer
alludes to this plan in a variety of ways, and most especially when
the English commanding officer tells the Inquisitor that "not
for anything do I want her to die a natural death." At one
point in the film, Jeanne recants and the Inquisitors commute her
death sentence, enraging the English occupiers.
Historically,
the complicity between the local Church officials and the secular
authorities during Jeanne’s trial were numerous. Against Church
law, Jeanne was held in a secular prison while being tried for non-secular
crimes, was denied female attendants, and was refused access to
the sacraments. Dreyer shows English soldiers frequently whispering
in the ears of churchmen and demanding ever harsher treatment and
punishment. Joan requested an appeal to the Pope, but this was illegally
refused, and at Jeanne’s re-trial twenty-four years later, her original
trial and her execution were declared in defiance of a myriad of
ecclesiastical laws, and her sentence was annulled.
As
revealed through Dreyer’s dramatic photography, it becomes clear
that the trial of Jeanne d’Arc is an excellent example of the type
of show trials that governments manufacture under a guise of moral
legitimacy in order to take revenge upon their enemies. Unfortunately,
the local religious authorities, smelling political power, are often
all too eager to ingratiate themselves with those who live by the
sword. At the conclusion of Dreyer’s film, the people of Rouen riot
in response to the obvious injustice of Jeanne’s execution, and
the rioters are brutally crushed by the English soldiers as Jeanne’s
corpse burns.
It
is not terribly surprising then, that the British censor attempted
to prevent the release of Dreyer’s film in the United Kingdom, but
when confronted with history, their objections had very little ground
to stand on. (Interestingly, many French authorities would seek
to censor The Passion of the Christ decades later, only to
be foiled by heroic Muslim businessmen.) Yet, in spite of the censorship,
the appalled reviewers, and the fact that most of the original prints
were lost to fire, the film survives as an example of cinema at
its best. Today, this assessment of the film persists not because
Dreyer gives such a nuanced and detailed treatment to a complex
political subject (something virtually never seen in modern American
films), but because the essence of the film is the human drama between
Jeanne and her judges.
The
entirety of Jeanne’s trial in 1431 was recorded by Church scribes,
and Dreyer was committed to remaining faithful to this transcript,
taking most of the screenplay’s dialogue verbatim from the Latin
text. Thus Dreyer, looking to give the viewer the impression that
he was "viewing reality through a keyhole," wanted to
focus on the recorded facts of the trial. He had no interest in
showing Jeanne’s military exploits or her pastoral life before she
began to have religious visions. Instead he chose to focus on her
simple wisdom, her religious piety (the stories about her "fairy
trees" and sorcery have no factual basis), and her devotion
to the truth in the face of corrupt and prevaricating officials
looking to manufacture an excuse – any excuse to put her
to death.
In
the end, Dreyer’s film must be seen as the greater effort if compared
with The Passion of the Christ (but this hardly makes Gibson’s
effort insignificant). The realism, the acting, and most especially
the exploration of the emotional and mental desolation experienced
by the condemned are developed by Dreyer in a way that is not easily
copied. The chief weakness of Gibson’s film was what seemed to be
its emphasis on physical suffering with limited attention to emotional
anguish. La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc provides a suffering
that can be universally understood. Yet, the events portrayed in
these films cannot be understood apart from their historical context,
and if we’re lucky, both of these films may help us appreciate the
human frailty and pride that leads to injustice, for such things
are no less real today then they were 500 or 2000 years ago.
September
3, 2004
Ryan
McMaken [send him mail]
is a former lobbyist, an occasional college instructor, and a regular
columnist for LewRockwell.com.
Copyright
© 2004 LewRockwell.com
Ryan
McMaken Archives
|