Carl
Dreyer’s Ordet occupies a unique, unnervingly singular cinematic space,
acknowledged in a sense by the absence of any credits; if taken at face value, the
film dramatizes the transformative power of Christian faith, and doctrinal
religious matters occupy a large portion of the screen time, and yet Dreyer
seems to reach beyond even that, to an untapped capacity innate in humanity
(and, by extension, in the art of cinema). The film focuses on the prosperous
Borgen family, a patriarch and three sons – the oldest, Mikkel, not a religious
believer; the second, Johannes, mentally unbalanced to the extent of pronouncing
himself to be the second coming of Jesus; the third, Anders, in love with a
girl he can’t have, because she belongs to a different, more rigid sect. When Mikkel’s
beloved wife dies in childbirth, the family is shaken to its core, but then Johannes,
citing the power of faith, brings about a miracle; or if not that, then an
event lying far beyond any rational available explanation. Dreyer ends the film
on an intense observance of this event, showing enough of the reaction to
suggest that local religious differences and their consequences may now be
swept away, but withholding those of the priest (who has earlier discounted the
possibility of nature’s laws being broken in the modern age), the rational
doctor whose efforts failed, or even of Johannes himself, as if nothing that
follows could ever be of comparable significance or interest; as if in contemplating
faith (as perhaps with love, and again, the act of cinematic witnessing) the
anticipation of what follows can only undermine our joyous immersion in the
divine moment. The film is always vividly present, its characters very particularly
conceived and observed, set in a specific time and place (a 1925 on the edge of
modernity, with telephones, but with horses not yet fully displaced by cars), but
almost feeling like a science-fiction-type portal to a paradigm beyond the
grasp of 1925, or 1955, or of any year since.
No comments:
Post a Comment