Richard Eyre’s The Ploughman’s Lunch, written by Ian
McEwan, is a much under-appreciated temperature-taking of Britain at a very
specific time – the early years of Thatcherism marking an end to some
long-established certainties, but the shape of their replacements not yet
clear, national self-examination temporarily largely suspended under the patriotic
boost of the Falklands war. Jonathan Pryce’s James Penfield, a BBC radio news
producer, should perhaps in theory be perfectly placed to analyze and draw on the national evolution, but is strangely stunted, unable to see his job as
much more than a matter of making the hourly bulletins smoothly fill the allotted
time; he fixes on an idea of building his reputation by writing a book on the
1956 Suez crisis, his views on which appear much more superficial than those of
the historians he interviews. The challenges of navigating class structures run
throughout the film – Penfield has absorbed an elitist mindset to the extent
that he can laugh out loud at the pointless questions raised by the audience at a
poetry reading, but then finds himself on the other end when trying to keep up
at a privilege-soaked (albeit that some of the attendees profess themselves to be fervent socialists) dinner party. His evolution is such that he’s effectively
no longer capable of communicating with his unpretentious working-class
parents, but he lacks the unquestioning facility of those who were born into it
(his treatment at the hands of the woman he imagines he’s in love with is often
excruciatingly uncomfortable to watch). The title refers to the contention that
the term “ploughman’s lunch,” supposedly a reference to a traditionally rustic
meal built around bread and cheese, was actually a marketing construct from the
1960’s, and as such evokes the uncertain nature of our understanding of social
and cultural change and its impact on the present, as well as the way in
which capitalist interests are often pulling the strings. The film’s primary
virtues may be literary and intellectual rather than visceral and cinematic,
but it’s endlessly and subtly fascinating as such.
No comments:
Post a Comment