Wednesday, July 21, 2010

On The Reader

It is very problematic when you watch a film and don't "get it". Especially when it is a film that has won many awards and critical acclaim; it has been coveted by the Oscars and courted by critics. One wonders whose fault it is then. Is it the directors fault, who could not convey his message to me through a text that I found obscure and ambiguous? Or mine, because I failed to grasp what the director was trying to tell me, his audience, through his film? Of course, there is also a slight embarrassment one feels at not having understood the film!

The film I am talking about is The Reader (Stephen Daldry, 2008). And this blog is simply an attempt at parsing the film apart in order to figure out what it is trying to say.

What stood out for me in the film, and what must have been an obvious motif for most in the film, is the number of scenes which show Hanna scrubbing and cleaning, not liesurely, or like a chore. But almost with a vengeance, as if her life depended on it. This is, no doubt, symbolic of her trying to "wash away" her past sins, her past life as a Nazi - a secret that she hides from Michael, and us for most part of the film. In one scene, she is also shown bathing Michael, as if she is worried that she has contaminated him too with her deeds.

This makes it very clear to us that she is aware, at least subconciously, about the fact that her actions were inhumane and on the wrong side of morality. If this is the case, then why does she not admit to her crime later in the court? And why does she justify it by saying: "It was my job" - possibly the flimsiest excuse one can give to exonerate oneself from moral culpability. Of course, she is aware of her involvement in the persecution of the Jews. To me her character seemed one of a woman painfully aware of what she let happen, and desperately trying to supress her guilt by having a frivolous affair with a young boy.

Another thread in the film that didn't quite tie up for me was the fact about Hanna's illiteracy, which is represented as a major hook in the plot of the film. After all, if this secret is revealed by Michael in the court, it would exempt Hanna from a life in prison. But apart from this, what other role does it play in the film? Hanna's inability to read is also a cause for one of the levels at which Michael and Hanna connect in the film. He reads well, and wants to be read to because, well, she can't. This then keeps their affair from becoming purely sexual, which would obviously bring Hanna further down moral ladder. But then I did not see any love in the film at all, especially from Hanna's side. A strong infatuation and some goddess-worship on Michael's side, yes, but love? Nope, not at all.

Agreed that she is illiterate, but does that make her non-intelligent? Certainly not. As Rose Mather (the Jewish lady) Michael informs about Hanna's illiteracy at the end of the film mentions: "Is that an excuse for what she did?" So then why the need to show Hanna as a sympathetic character? And I have no doubt in my mind that the director wanted us to sympathise with her - otherwise he would not have taken lovely Kate Winslet in the lead role, as opposed to the hard-faced German ladies we have come across, or may imagine in such a role. Even her other counterparts who are on trial are nowhere close to pleasant looking.

I have to say, now, that I'm not trying to point out errors in the film. These are only gaps which I could not fill, and not necessarily faults in the telling of the story. Which is why, on the whole, I cannot say that I did not like the film. Perhaps it needs another watch, or some more musing over.These points apart, the film raises some very interesting questions about moral responsibility, and an unfortunate inability to turn back time and erase this ghastly period in History.