Posts Tagged ‘Eartha Kitt

30
Oct
11

Does anyone care that Ariane Chavasse is a cellist?

Billy Wilder’s 1957 frothy May-December romance Love in the Afternoon was meant to serve as a throwback to Ernst Lubitsch’s elegant comedies of manners. Its Parisian setting and the casting of Maurice Chevalier (Merry Widow) and Gary Cooper (Bluebeard’s Eighth Wife and Design for Living) sought to further associate it with Lubitsch’s body of work. Though unpopular with members of the Catholic church, undersold by American distributor Allied Artists, and regarded by Wilder as a flop, many remain charmed by Love decades later. Some of that might have to do with composer Franz Waxman’s arrangements of “C’est si bon” and “Fascination,” along with Matty Malneck’s three original compositions for the film. The merit of these contributions certainly suggest why Love was the first picture screened in the course I’m taking this semester on Hollywood film scores.

However, I don’t think Audrey Hepburn’s presence can be overlooked. In email correspondence, my film score professor noted that Wilder optioned Claude Anet’s novel Ariane with Hepburn in mind. Indeed, Hepburn was the first actor cast for Love. He also speculates that Wilder cast Hepburn because of narrative parallels he saw between Ariane and Sabrina, which was released in 1954 and also focused on a romance between a young girl and an older American man.

I also think Hepburn’s continentalism is embedded in her screen persona, and informs how her paramour, American business magnate and playboy Frank Flannagan (Cooper), fetishizes the French music conservatory student to whom he’s attracted. Hepburn was Belgian by birth, maintained British citizenship, and survived an adolescence in Nazi-occupied Arnhem. Almie Rose speculates that these childhood traumas resulted in the actress’ life-long struggle with disordered eating and low self-esteem.

But such possible connections and lived experiences with war-time tragedy don’t seem to register for people like Frank Flannagan. He doesn’t know her name for much of the film, learning only her first initial and resorting to calling her “thin girl.” He also projects his stereotypical assumptions about French femininity onto his conquest. According to him, French girls never cry and treat life as little more than a series of erotic (or, during the Hayes Code, “romantic”) misadventures. In his mind, they probably also form cigarette smoke into perfect circles with their lovely mouths and subsist on a diet of champagne and baguettes. And what use would it be to counter that stereotype when Flannagan’s just between planes and hotel suites anyway? Just send him the bill and be done with it.

Flannagan and Chavasse in the afternoon; image courtesy of nytimes.com

Thus, when they rendezvous in his hotel suite one afternoon, he has a traveling quartet play French jazz standard “C’est si bon.” Written in 1947 and originally recorded by German-Belgian artist Angèle Durand, the pop song grew in popularity before 1957 with cover versions from Eartha Kitt and Johnny Desmond. Indeed, the film itself seems to be framing French national identity through the use of “C’est si bon.” Chevalier narrates over a montage about romance in Paris. Waxman’s arrangement of “C’est si bon” is present throughout. Though modifications to tempo and instrumental color are applied as Chevalier considers different tableaux and social groups, the song is clearly identifiable and reaffirms that all French people are obsessed with love. These applications of “C’est si bon” seem to speak directly toward Theodor Adorno and Hans Eisler’s assertions about score’s relationship to geography and history in “Prejudices and Bad Habits,” an essay which outlines and seeks to rectify some of film music’s deplorable qualities. Citing the use of Dutch folk song as an example, Adorno and Eisler argue that when surrendered to the whims of an arranger, the use of music to suggest place is dubious. “Here music is used in much the same way as costumes or sets, but without as strong a characterizing effect” often resulting in compositional sameness.

Chavasse abides Flannagan’s stereotypical reduction of her culture’s attitudes toward femininity by pretending to be a femme fatale, despite her age and romantic inexperience. This seems to link the role of Chavasse to Hepburn’s characterization of Holly Golightly as a bucolic rube play-acting at being a New York party girl Breakfast at Tiffany’s. We seem to buy her cosmopolitanism because it’s delivered with a British accent, even if the whole production is a contrivance that appeals to men’s libidinous assumptions about elfin women of European lineage.

Holly Golightly; image courtesy of nytimes.com

Chavasse learns of Flannagan’s reputation while her detective father Claude (Chevalier) is investigating him for a client who is convinced his wife is having an affair with him. Buying into cultural stereotypes about American males’ rugged individualist spirit, she takes to Flannagan and helps him out of a sticky situation with her father’s client. They meet cute and embark on a brief fling that blooms into something more upon his return to Paris a bit later. Chavasse is quick to discover and file her feelings away with clippings of his international romantic conquests. Flannagan only truly begins to reciprocate when he feels threatened by all of the experience she claims to have with a string of entirely fictional foreign conquests. Again, Hepburn’s precocious performance of Chavasse playing a sexpot must have informed the decision to cast her as Golightly.

When applying “Prejudices and Bad Habits” to Love, I find myself siding with Adorno and Eisler more than I’d expect. While I don’t take as given their belief that moving away from tonality and popular song form necessarily indicates a shift away from mass indoctrination and false consciousness, I think the application of these arrangements can be a bit oppressive. Apart from the gross cultural signification going on with “C’est si bon,” I find the use of the waltz “Fascination” to be extremely obtrusive and overused as a leitmotif signifying Chavasse and Flannagan’s romance. What’s more, I don’t buy it. Perhaps this has to do with my inability to perceive Hepburn and Cooper as having any romantic chemistry. Perhaps it’s because I think these are two people with whom I’d rather not spend 130 minutes in their company. More than that, I don’t buy that their hasty marriage (reported by Chevalier in voice-over at the film’s end, no doubt to appease those agitated Catholics) is a good match or a happy ending for the film. This old dude probably cheats on Ariane as soon as they move into their New York penthouse, if not on the plane ride across the pond.

Yet I think the film offers a few points to critique Hollywood cinema’s reliance on romantic classical music. Chavasse continuously rebuffs the advances of fellow conservatory student Michel, a clumsy and age-appropriate square with too much of a fondness for Richard Wagner for her daring yet refined tastes. Wagner’s music and its emphasis on endless music yet compositional unity was of course hugely influential on Hollywood film composers of this period. After a performance of Wagner’s Tristan und Isolde where Chavasse reunites with Flannagan, she comes home and hums “Fascination.” Her father takes note and inquires about the tune’s origin. Chavasse lies and says it’s from the opera. Her father knows her daughter is lying, as he remembers her humming the tune after a previous interlude with the man he later learns is Flannagan. Yet he smiles knowingly at his daughter and says he must have been mistaken, noting that composers steal from each other all the time. It could be argued that embedded within those moments is a metacommentary on Hollywood film score’s lack of originality.

There may even be a moment within the film’s score that abides by Adorno and Eisler’s preference toward dissonance. Flannagan and Chavasse’s first goodbye is scored by what is believed to be an original composition of Malneck’s ”Ariane,” a melancholic musical figures which lacks any real melody or resolution. This seems to be the moment where Chavasse asserts her unrequited desire, or at least acknowledges it to herself. “Ariane” plays into the next scene, which shows her sulking in her bedroom following Flannagan’s departure. However, once her father returns home from work and discovers the boutonnière Chavasse took from Flannagan in the refrigerator, the score reiterates “Fascination” and thus potentially resolves Chavasse’s existential crisis.

It's one or the other, Ariane; image courtesy of fanpop.com

Film music scholar Claudia Gorbman argues that one of classic Hollywood film music’s organizing principles is invisibility. This means that the technical apparatus of non-diegetic music must not be visible. One simple solution film productions employed to adhere to this principle was to show musicians playing music on-screen, and thus existing within the film’s diegesis. Love adheres to this in a number of ways, including having Flannagan’s hired musical ensemble play for him in his suite, as well as accompany him to a few humorous locales. It also accomplishes musical invisibility with Chavasse, but seems to have an ambivalent relationship with her identification as a cellist. Often, she forgets she’s a cello player, particularly as she gets swept up in her affair with Flannagan. The film ends with her leaving Paris with Flannagan without her cello. The last shot is of her father holding the cello at the train station as he watches his daughter ride off with her rakish paramour. While this is supposed to be a happy ending, I’d be a lot happier if she didn’t have to choose between having a boyfriend and nurturing her own artistic endeavors.

29
Jun
09

“Tell Laura I love her”: Why I love “High Fidelity”

From left; John Cusack as Rob and Iben Hjejle as Laura

From left; John Cusack as Rob and Iben Hjejle as Laura

I kinda got wound down with some respiratory thing late Saturday night (after an awesome GRCA showcase, during a friend’s at-home screening of  another John Cusack movie, The Thin Red Line). I slept a bit yesterday, but still felt wobbly. So I figured what better day than today to trundle out Stephen Frears’s 2000 movie High Fidelity, one of my favorites. And forgive me, but I haven’t had time to revisit Nick Horby’s book yet, so my recollections of the book are a bit foggy.

Back in college when I was developing friend groups in accordance with my feminist beliefs, I would make a mental note of what dudes thought about the end of the movie High Fidelity. If they thought Rob’s girlfriend Laura was a bitch and were sad that they got back together at the story’s end, then I knew we could never really be cool. We could maybe have casual conversation at parties, but that would be the extent of our familiarity. To me, not getting Laura meant that they didn’t understand the purpose of the story (man-child learns how to be good enough for his girlfriend) and didn’t get me. They’d also probably be the kind of dudes who’d get sidelined by women like Laura in ten years time.

That is to say, then, that I don’t think of High Fidelity as a guy’s movie. For one, I don’t really believe in gendering any kind of cultural text, genre, or mode in such broad terms — seems as sure a way to uphold gender binaries and essentialized notions of masculinity and femininity as ever. For another, while I know that it is a movie about guys — music nerds and their fetishes, phobias, class anxieties, sexual insecurities, and the lives they try to live both within and outside these markers — I’ve always related to Rob and his fellow shop-keeps Dick and Barry (played expertly by Todd Louiso and Jack Black, in his break-out role). As Rob says about his customers, I’d feel bad about the male characters in the movie if I wasn’t, you know, kind of one of them.

I’m definitely one of them, and my ability to relate to Rob has only strengthened as I’ve gotten older. I’m definitely neurotic and worried about the future (sometimes to the point of paralysis, though I think much more temporarily than Rob). I compare myself to others. I have big class anxieties that seem to deepen as I age, the more aware I become of some of my peers’ classed origins, and the more I worry about my financial modesty in comparison to some of my friends with “careers” (or at least nicer jobs that afford them time and resources for creative projects). I also think about and discuss records. A lot. Sometimes turning them in to labor-intensive mix CDs or compartmentalizing my thoughts in list form, as this blog evinces.

Rob does have a one-up on me. He owns a record store, something he often takes for granted (even forgetting to include it in a list of dream jobs that Laura is quick to amend). I could totally live in Championship Vinyl. I’d totally have a record store if I had the scratch (if in Chicago, so much the better). My go-to name is “Discourses” and I’d imagine also having a small bookstore, self-defense workshop classes, local benefit showcases, and after-hours, female-only “drop the needle” sessions where ladies could listen to Can’s Tago Mago without having some dude drone on to them about why it’s important and how they couldn’t believe they haven’t heard the album before.

And yet. There are of course limits to my empathy for Rob and Co. For one, in an attempt at closure from his break-up with Laura, Rob decides to catch up with the women in his top-five break-up list, in effect reducing women to items on a chart (a pop chart, if we throw in the Boss as his inspiration).

Also, while I’ve always felt most comfortable gabbing about records, and a lot of times that means gabbing about records with guys, I’ve long been aware of how the conversations can point at the limitations of male-female interactions. I’m a feminist first, so whatever I may know about music will always be filtered through that lens. That can make me a buzzkill to some and a bore to others. Also, I’ve noticed that sometimes guys fear offending me, and sometimes seem to censor their opinions. And sometimes, guys just seem to talk more openly without a woman present. Lots of times, despite my shared interests and peered level of fluency, I’ve been ignored or cut out of conversations for some unknown reason, but I can’t help but wonder if being female is part of it, despite intention. This isn’t a common occurence, but it does happen and I’m sure you know how it makes me feel. I’m sure you know how it’s shaped my politics.

Also, I think Rob cannot buy the rare singles collection off the bitter, wronged divorcée of a record collector (played by Beverly D’Angelo) for gendered reasons. I totally could. I wish this scene had stayed in the movie. It’s one of my favorite parts of the book.

And sometimes, I just reach an impasse. What’s the fucking point about talking about records for hours? Where does it get us? How does it evolve us? Where do we move from it? Do we create? Do we open up another six-pack? What are we doing?

And that’s why I think I love Laura the most. Not necessarily because of who I am, but of who I’d like to be.

Laura, to be blunt, has her shit together. She’s a lawyer, so she’s established her career. I hope to do this one day as an academic. She’s also comfortable with who she is. As Rob himself notes, it’s in “how she walks around — it’s like, she doesn’t care how she looks or what she projects and it’s not that she doesn’t care it’s that she’s not affected, I guess. And that gives her grace.” She also has little interest in upholding traditional norms. While she’s not opposed to being a mother, she doesn’t have any interest in marriage. This provides me with comfort. And while she wants Rob to challenge himself (she pushes him into organizing a CD release party at the end of the story), she won’t wait forever for him to grow up.

Laura’s ultra-supportive friend Liz, played by the inimitable Joan Cusack, also provides me comfort. Liz lets Rob have it when she finds out that Rob cheated on Laura, his infidelity contributed to Laura terminating their unborn child, owes her money, and admits to Laura that he was ready to move on from her. While Rob has his side, I like that Liz doesn’t abide by his immaturity and lets him have it. My dear friend Jamie is cut from similar cloth. This also provides me comfort.

Importantly, as both characterization and the main drive of the narrative, while she has her shit together, she’s not particularly interested in waiting on someone who doesn’t. And I think this professional drive and lack of sentimentality is why some people (including an ex-boyfriend) have cast Laura as a bitch. I, of course, think that this speaks to the potential threat that a smart, capable, ambitious woman may have over some men, particularly men who know (perhaps however much they may deny) that they don’t deserve women like Laura. I think the smart men are the men who get why Rob can’t shake Laura and have to figure out a way to let her in (or accept her back into their lives, as Laura asks Rob to get back together with her).

Curiously, many of the dudes I’ve known who don’t like Laura love themselves some Caroline, the cute, bubbly rock journalist who loves Stereolab and stokes Rob’s ego with an interview for her newspaper column, prompting him to make another mix tape before wondering when he’s going to stop moving on from woman to woman, tape to tape, and commit to the person he really loves.

Now, it’s really easy to pit them against one another, if you’re so inclined to put women in competition (which, ugh, please stop). I, for one, harbor no ill will toward Caroline. I kinda feel like Caroline is on the same track as Laura (professional, if funky, adult lady who’s finding her own place in the world). I even think the movie is making this argument when they are placed in the same shot during the final scene, with Caroline in front of Laura, and Laura in front of Rob. It may be easy to read the composition as evidence that Laura “won,” but I’m more inclined to think of the two women as peers, in continuum with one another. I don’t seem to recall them talking to one another in the book, but I always hope that they got a chance to meet and talk with each other.

Caroline Fortis, played by Natasha Gregson Wagner

Caroline Fortis, played by Natasha Gregson Wagner

There are other women in Rob’s life. There’s Marie de Salle (played by Lisa Bonet), the elusive singer-songwriter with whom Rob has a one-night stand and who totally has his number (she also apparently has a song called “Eartha Kitt x 2″ about her and her ex dividing up her record collection that I wish were real). There’s Penny Hardwick (played by Joelle Carter), the movie critic Rob dated in high school who reveals some upsetting information when reminding him about who rejected who. There are also less nuanced ex-girlfriend characters — the cruel Charlie Nichols (played by Catherine Zeta Jones) and the needy Sarah Kendrew (played by Lili Taylor). And there are frequenters of the record store that I wish we knew better — like Sara Gilbert’s Annaugh Moss or the Asian American woman who asks Rob where the “Soul” section is in the store. And of course there’s Liz, Laura’s best friend, who’s willing to tell off Rob on her lunch break before striding back to the office.

But most importantly, there’s always Laura.





 

May 2012
S M T W T F S
« Mar    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 80 other followers