![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The Red Shoes: On War and its Representations
https://berkeleywarreps.wordpress.com/2013/05/03/total-art-in-the-time-of-total-war-powell-and-pressburgers-the-red-shoes-1948/
Well, that's an interesting interpretation... even if, like most such critical conceits, it becomes intolerably strained in its attempts to make reality fit its thesis :p
http://www.silverwhistle.co.uk/cinema/redshoes.html
This fangirl (she even uses the email address mlle_lermontova) sees Boris Lermontov as the misunderstood hero, "a profoundly good and wise character of a kind one rarely meets in films" who "places Art above heterosexual 'romance'" (and those scare quotes tell us a lot).
Wise he most certainly is not (his attitude towards his fellow mortals varies from the arrogant to the disastrous), and 'good' is a concept for which he has no time at all, save in the context of artistic greatness -- the idea of Lermontov of all people as a beacon of benevolence is jaw-dropping. (And the reason why Julian flings back that cut about ballet being "a second-rate form of expression" during his quarrel with Lermontov is that his employer is not only sacking him but busy attempting to suppress his music, with the added threat that there are very few other 'first-class ballet companies' for whom he will be able to write in future -- so Julian not unnaturally retorts that maybe he doesn't want to write ballet after all! Compare her take on Julian to the equally convoluted 'Total War' argument that he represents the 'authentically transformative and regenerative Wagnerian dream of total art' as opposed to Lermontov's misguided 'military' approach...)
But Lermontov *is* a very compelling character, both in terms of the effect he has on the people he deals with and in terms of his role in the story. He isn't the villain; I personally think the term 'sacred monster' describes him pretty well (and have given that line to an irreverent Julian in my fic!) Like Norma Desmond, he manipulates people and they escape him when human feelings override what is to their worldly advantage -- unlike Norma Desmond, his domineering ego is genuinely dedicated to art for art's sake, and not to perceptions of his own greatness. But ultimately, like Norma (and the Phantom in "Love Never Dies"!) he is a tragically destructive and self-destructive figure who is incapable of letting go... and it's a tremendous performance.
Well, that's an interesting interpretation... even if, like most such critical conceits, it becomes intolerably strained in its attempts to make reality fit its thesis :p
http://www.silverwhistle.co.uk/cinema/redshoes.html
This fangirl (she even uses the email address mlle_lermontova) sees Boris Lermontov as the misunderstood hero, "a profoundly good and wise character of a kind one rarely meets in films" who "places Art above heterosexual 'romance'" (and those scare quotes tell us a lot).
Wise he most certainly is not (his attitude towards his fellow mortals varies from the arrogant to the disastrous), and 'good' is a concept for which he has no time at all, save in the context of artistic greatness -- the idea of Lermontov of all people as a beacon of benevolence is jaw-dropping. (And the reason why Julian flings back that cut about ballet being "a second-rate form of expression" during his quarrel with Lermontov is that his employer is not only sacking him but busy attempting to suppress his music, with the added threat that there are very few other 'first-class ballet companies' for whom he will be able to write in future -- so Julian not unnaturally retorts that maybe he doesn't want to write ballet after all! Compare her take on Julian to the equally convoluted 'Total War' argument that he represents the 'authentically transformative and regenerative Wagnerian dream of total art' as opposed to Lermontov's misguided 'military' approach...)
But Lermontov *is* a very compelling character, both in terms of the effect he has on the people he deals with and in terms of his role in the story. He isn't the villain; I personally think the term 'sacred monster' describes him pretty well (and have given that line to an irreverent Julian in my fic!) Like Norma Desmond, he manipulates people and they escape him when human feelings override what is to their worldly advantage -- unlike Norma Desmond, his domineering ego is genuinely dedicated to art for art's sake, and not to perceptions of his own greatness. But ultimately, like Norma (and the Phantom in "Love Never Dies"!) he is a tragically destructive and self-destructive figure who is incapable of letting go... and it's a tremendous performance.