|
February
16th, 2001- Cathy Soussloff reviews House of Mirth
The House of Mirth, Directed by Terence
Davies
The
House of Mirth, directed by Terence Davies, is the most recent film adaptation
of Edith Whartonís so-called ìnovels of manners.î Her novels portray
the lives of the American upper class in their fin-de-siecle opulence and
hypocrisies. Like most of Whartonís heroines, the beautiful
Lily Bart, in The House of Mirth, is trapped by her obligation to wed a
man of wealth and status. Possessing adequate means at the beginning
of the story, Lily toys with the eligible men of society. Her heart
belongs to Laurence Seldon, and his to her, yet they cannot admit it to
each other. The binding conventions of their class exert powerful
controls over Lily and Laurence.
As
Lily becomes ever more entrapped by a network of upper class infidelities
she comes to see that each statement signifies a collage of hidden meaning
and immorality. In the oppressive chambers and manners of the house
of mirth, Lily is disgraced over a bad debt and shunned by Society.
The culture that thrives on deceit and exploitation manifests in the strictures
of containment found in corsets, gloves, and overly heavy jewels.
Lilyís body pays the price for her rectitude through a slow physical deterioration
brought about by addiction to morphine. The final tragic outcome
illustrates most poignantly the complete abjection brought upon women through a situation
in which to be the object of unspoken love is to exist.
Gillian
Anderson plays Lily Bart with a surprising talent for providing a window
into the subtext of emotions that lie beneath the opaque surface of costume
and custom. The feelings and strengths of Lily and the other women
in the film are hidden behind veils of hats, the feathers of headdresses,
and the brims of boaters. The film consists mainly of close-ups of
Lily, with an occasional silhouette shot against a dusky background.
The motif of the clock predominates because, as Seldon says to Lily: ìYou
always do the wrong thing at the right time, or vice versa.î Such
is the view that ethical behavior gives to those concentrating on the niceties
of superficial behavior.
In contrast to the women, the men in the
film, with the exception of Seldon, reveal passions, often in ways made
more abrupt by the suppressions of female desire. Davies enhances
the tale of manners by bringing into visual focus gender demarcations.
Every element of ornate dress and decoration serves as an allegory for
the pains inflicted upon women by the roles they must play. The strengths
of the film belong with this delineation of symbolism and the acting by
Anderson, Eric Stoltz who plays Seldon, Dan Aykroyd, and the rest of the
supporting cast.
Yet,
in the end, The House of Mirth, like Martin Scorseseís adaptation of Edith
Whartonís Age of Innocence, remains far too textual a vehicle for the cinematic
movement of film. The constraints brought to bear upon the visual
medium by the complexity of these stories, results, like the corsets worn
over the opulent flesh of the women, in an awkwardness. Abrupt edits,
unmotivated lingerings of the camera on water and flowers, detract from
any sense of visual grace. In these days, costume drama fares
much better as Gladiator than it does in the intricate social mores of
a society closer to our own times chronologically, but much farther away
in terms of real life than even a movie can imagine successfully. The House
of Mirth plays at the Nichelodeon in Santa Cruz.
For KUSP and the Film Gang this is Cathy
Soussloff, having fun at the movies.
Copyright Cathy Soussloff 2001 |