and finally...

2003-11-08-12:37 a.m.
Friday, Novembre 8

Belle De Jour (1967)
Luis Bunuel

Belle de Jour(beauty of day, not unlike "soup of the day") is an oh-so-scandalous dime pulp novel sold on a rack near the Police Gazette. You know, a book not unlike those lesbian books from the fifties and sixties where the lesbian gets killed as a moralization at the end.

I can see that this movie had no such moralization, except for in Severine's recurring dream sequences. They're only there because she's trapped in moral convention, you see, not unlike her marriage.

I have to step back a bit. On the pulp novel level, the story is this: Severine is a masochistic woman trapped in a chaste marriage. Her husband is "too" accomindating with her, and allows the marriage to go on this way, as it seems his status is most important in his life. Severine finds her way to a brothel where the madame discovers almost immediately that all she needs is "a firm hand." The wise Johns are also more receptive than her husband. In her new work she meets the dangerous (yet bumbling) young Marcel, with whom she finds fulfillment of her desires. Unfortunately, Marcel falls in love. This leads to a car-chase ending wherein Pierre, her husband, shows the passion and manliness she craved, above his status as a doctor, all along.

Throw in some spy-holes, monotone acting, close-ups of bodyparts, religious imagery and dream sequences, and you've got a great film classic.

I don't have much argument there. It's a classic, sure. A masterpiece with lots of Catherine Deneuve. Man, she has some Barbarella hair, doesn't she?

But what am I here for, if not to deconstruct...a little? I get the feeling, from this film, that Bunuel's raison d'etre is the emptiness of middle-class life. This is a classic theme of many french films, as well as too many others to count. Severine is so immersed in convention, she is willing to sell her body to feel...something. The pursuit of money, and status, be it popular fame or righteousness, causes our societies to be dead inside.

Or so they say.

This idea is the reason behind most moral finger-pointing and tut-tutting in the arts, media, religious society and so on. You need to suffer, they say, in order to have a fulfilling life. Society, they say, is seeking all of its fulfillment with things. The religious say this too, only they add sex, they should be suffering more and giving money to our church. Everyone's seeking fulfillment, they say, but they are obviously doing it wrong. Look at the other, they say, they are obviously empty inside.

Well, I beg your pardon.

Bunuel says he loaths moralizing in his films. I wonder. Is it not a judgement on, say, what he sees as convention? Telling a story of the blandness and emotionlessness of this upper-middle-class, or shall I say, bourgeois couple?

As a person having the attribute of atheist, I am accused of having this empty existence. Atheists must be sad, and angry, it has been said, because they have no god. Ignoring the obvious non-sequitor, my philosophy about this is that we all make our own meaning in our lives. We must, as individuals, seek fulfillment-something in our own best personal interest.

This is not what Severine was doing. (Not that all characters in movies have to always behave the way I want them to. Fiction is fiction.) Her ultimate fulfillment required the actions and feelings of another. What she wanted was something standard of the pulp novels of the day: to feel like a "woman tm" -loved and protected and cherished-sexually. This is pretty much the same as she was in the beginning, only with sex. Before she was a chaste childbride. Now she is a sexy wife. Whoo hoo!

Now, as Bunuel, we are to look at this tableau of their fulfillment and, well, smirk. Look at them. All the little piggies in their starched-white shirts.

I guess I judge princess severina just like he does. She's not doing it right in my book, either. Her life is still empty, I guess, because she isn't an individualist?

Thus ends my deconstruction, I suppose, lest I deconstruct myself!

In the News

Ah, yes. Did I mention that the date is set for the 15th of November? I suppose I did. Anyway, I'm going tomorrow with my future mother-in-law to be outfitted for a wedding outfit. Which she will pay for.

Did I mention she's a size -2, and I'm like a 26?

I don't know sizing here in Canada. Hope I can get to sleep tonight!