sign in sign up
<<
Home , Brideshead Revisited, Julian Jarrold

feature

Adaptation and Raised Expectations:

Brian McFarlane reflects on how famous Adaptation and intertextuality Certainly anyone approaching the new antecedent textsRevisited can have an undue – Againfilm of as an influence on film adaptation appraisals – The idea of ‘intertextuality’ – that is, adaptation will need to have in mind both especially in the case of the new film those other texts that may influence how ’s 1945 novel3 and the version of an Evelyn Waugh classic. we receive the new one – seems to me by-now legendary Granada Television Bridesheadone of the most productive ways of version of 1981,4 following which the ny new film adaptation approaching film adaptation. The novel was reprinted six times in the year. of intertextuality that each of us brings to Virtually all the writing about Julian comes to us with two bear on any given film version of a Jarrold’s new film evokes both, to the crucial texts hovering famous work will differ from person to extent that it has become difficult for the over it – and over our person, according to how well we know new film to stake its own claim on our response to it.1 I mean, of those earlier texts and what other texts attention. Almost no films come to us Acourse, Charles Dickens’ novel of 1861 (novels, plays, films) have a special without trailing some allusions to earlier and David Lean’s celebrated film version resonance for us. If you’ve never read works in their wake, but not all have such of 1946. Both of these are now invested Great Expectations or seen Lean’s film, illustrious precursors as Brideshead. with such prestige, and come to us your intertextual references will be More people have probably seen the bearing so much cultural baggage, that different from those who know either or eleven-part miniseries (at 659 minutes ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION any new attempt to adapt the novel into both well. Nevertheless, in coming to running time, ‘mini’ is perhaps an another medium, or indeed to extrapo- serious terms with a film adaptation of a understatement) than have read Waugh’s late from it to create a new novel as famous and/or popular novel or play, we nearly 400-page novel. One account of Peter Carey or Lloyd Jones did,2 will be shall all want to have some sense of its the television version says: likely to evoke critical reference to the antecedents, less from a point of view of earlier texts. evaluating one against the other than of With its heavy air of nostalgia, it caught a understanding what processes of national mood and gained eight million 6 adaptation have taken place. viewers. Few complained that John Waugh’s novel of Catholicism, seductive aristocratic living and so on will be a key factor in our response to the film if we are ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION familiar with it. So, too, it seems is the famous miniseries. above: LADY MARCHMAIN () 7 feature

Mortimer’s slavish adherence to the adaptation might have been substantially asking: Is this a good film? Is it exciting or original text made for long-windedness …5 different. Someone I spoke to after the lively or interesting or stimulating as a screening was haunted by echoes in the film? The answers to such questions are Certainly, most coming to the new film film’s soundtrack of the miniseries’ of course very subjective, but if our will have some knowledge – of the famous score – another kind of intertex- answers are ‘No’, are we likely to value it existence at least – of these two prestig- tual reference that might influence one’s because of mere slavish ‘faithfulness’ to ious forebears. How well you know either viewing, or, to be exact, audio-viewing, the original novel, if that is all it has to or both, and how recently you have read/ of the new film. offer? If the film has not proved intrinsical- seen them, will determine for you their ly interesting, I wonder how far we shall importance as intertextual influences on This brings me to some key questions: be drawn to pursuing its relationship to how you receive the new film. In my own What is the function of adaptation? What the anterior text. And speaking of case, I re-read the novel for the first time do we mean by a good adaptation? At the ‘subjectivity’, the demand for ‘fidelity’ in in twenty years in the week before seeing outset, I’d say that I expect something adaptation often seems to come down to the new film and had the slightly eerie more than a literal-minded attempt to nothing more than a wish for the film to experience of anticipating what the next ‘translate’ words on a page to audio- tally closely with the one we have created line of dialogue might be. If I’d not visual moving images on a screen, even if on the screen of our own mind – and think re-read it, my approach to the film as an this were possible. Surely, over and above how unlikely such a congruence is! every other criterion, we should be How much do we care about the relationship between a film and the novel (I’ll let ‘novel’ stand metonymically for the other kinds of texts that may have been adapted)? Is adapta- tion the only kind of relationship that we can envisage between a novel and a film? In this matter, it is worth considering a film such as Dreamchild (Gavin Millar, 1985) which takes on board a classic novel (Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland) and the lives of those involved in its creation, and, as well, sets us thinking about the nature of narrative ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION

8 to admit to feeling no more than a sense Newspaper of its vague aura of ‘distinction’ staying reviewers are apt with me as I watch the new film. There are other important intertextual to get steamed up elements that may also affect our response to this film. It may be about issues of seen as the latest example of what is somewhat slightingly fidelity, as if the referred to as ‘heritage cinema’, a term applied to a novel had some range of British films (or co-productions that are cre- sort of sacred atively British even if some of the money is coming significance, from elsewhere). ‘Heritage instead of its cinema’ has been used: to describe the seeming being a work that conjunction of period costume films and the grew out of ideas heritage industry … a concern for period fidelity leading to the spectacular or observations display of heritage attrac- tions (landscapes, architec- that had inspired ture, interiors, costumes) and a particular view of the the author. national past.7

To this account, one might add that such films have almost invariably in various media. We may care about the been based on famous novels. Films connection with the precursor text if we such as the Merchant Ivory adapta- know and value the novel, but what tions of E.M. Forster (A Room with a about all those who don’t know and, so, View [James Ivory, 1985]) and Henry don’t care? Perhaps they’re ‘the vast James (The Golden Bowl [James Ivory, majority, and are a happy folk’, as Fowler 2000]), or of film versions of Jane Austen says of those who ‘neither know nor care (Emma [Douglas McGrath, 1996]), Ian what a split infinitive is’.6 McEwan (Atonement [Joe Wright, 2007]) or, indeed, Evelyn Waugh (A Handful of This article, though, is intended for those Dust [, 1988]), all reveal to whom the names of author and text a preoccupation with presenting the resonate with significance and status, so British past in a sympathetic light, even if where do they/we stand in responding to it is also possible to discern elements of a film version of a major literary work critique in their presentation of, say, the such as Waugh’s novel? Is the latter no class system. Overall, though, one tends more than one intertextual element we to remember how ravishing these films should have in mind when we consider look, as their distinguished casts perform the latest film version, its importance before the splendours of man and nature. varying directly as our knowledge of, and It is worth considering to what extent the ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION valuing of the novel? The answer to this new film of Brideshead belongs in such question must, I think, be ‘Yes’. Certainly generic company and how much our Waugh’s novel of Catholicism, seductive knowledge of these films informs our aristocratic living and so on will be a key viewing of the new one. Almost all of left page main: julia () factor in our response to the film if we these films have been adaptations, and and Charles () are familiar with it. So too, it seems, is some have attracted criticism for left page inset: sebastian () and charles the famous miniseries, though not having ‘tampering with’ or not ‘measuring up above: charles (matthew goode) seen it since its original screening, I have to’ their famous precursors. 9 feature

The film in general may be said to represent Catholicism as a life-stifling influence, particularly in its characterization of Lady Marchmain as exercising a too-rigid control over the lives of her children. becomes one of the ideas or observa- Another go at tions that inspire the filmmaker. Or, to put Brideshead Revisited it another way, the filmmakers may have been excited by or interested in one or To get down to the specific case of the more aspects of the novel as a basis for new film of Brideshead Revisited: it making a film, and will bring to bear on it hasn’t fared very well with reviewers and their own insights and capacities and the other commentators, who keep suggest- filmmaking practices in which they are ing that it’s ‘not true’ to Waugh and not steeped. Remember, too, that film is an as classy as the famous miniseries, and industry as well as an art form and that who seem unable to keep these intertex- will make for a different set of pressures tual resonances in their place (they have on the filmmaker, who will need to be a place, inevitably, but should not loom answerable for much vaster sums of so large as to obscure other aspects of money than a novel requires for its the film). One local journalist asks, as a publication. sub-heading to her article: ‘Does the new Brideshead movie refresh a classic or 8 above: lady marchmain and charles There is a lot of pious talk about whether ruin it?’ Allowing that the quoted at brideshead or not a film is faithful to the ‘spirit’ of the question may be a sub-editor’s folly, we ‘Change is not a choice.’ This was a novel it is derived from. I have no idea might still ask how any film version can comment made in Spike Jonze’s brilliant what this means. Does it suggest that the possibly either ‘refresh’ or ‘ruin’ the novel and eccentric film Adaptation (2002), in film somehow gives us an emotional or from which it was adapted. The novel is which a filmmaker is toying with the idea intellectual experience comparable to there as a completed artefact and its of making a film from Susan Orlean’s that which we had in reading the book? quality and qualities are immune (even if book The Orchid Thief (2000). He wants Is this what we really want from a film the author is not dead, as Waugh is) to to focus on orchid cultivation, whereas adaptation? In my view, we are more anything a film version may do to or for his producer wants to foreground people likely to have a compelling film if the it. It is perhaps worth noting at this point and is untroubled by notions of ‘fidelity’ director and their collaborators have had that Waugh himself actually ‘modified’ to the book. Neither, in my view, should their attention caught by a motif or a some of what he called ‘the grosser we be. In fact, Jonze’s film should be character’s situation or the evocation of a passages’ of the original novel when it required viewing for anyone trying to place or, in fact, any particular aspect of was reissued in a revised edition in 1960 come to terms with the concept of the novel, then gone off to make their ‘with many small additions and some adaptation of literature into film. Of own piece of work, with its own nuances substantial cuts’.9 Is there an analogy course changes will be necessary in the and emphases. I don’t mean to suggest here with the ‘Director’s Cut’ of a film, move from a sign system consisting of that we will not have a preference for the usually mastered to restore material that ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION words in straight lines on a page to film or for the novel, but I do suggest that has been cut (often by the studio), or moving images on a screen. Newspaper this is a purely private matter, not crucial occasionally to make cuts.10 Another reviewers are apt to get steamed up to our critical analysis of the film before local account claims that ‘The question about issues of fidelity, as if the novel us. It is very interesting to explore how a that seems to be on everyone’s lips had some sort of sacred significance, filmmaker has gone to work on a famous about the new movie is, “Why did they instead of its being a work that grew out novel, but we shouldn’t use our individual bother?”’ and this same dim piece goes of ideas or observations that had inspired view of that novel as a stick to beat the on to pronounce that the new film ‘to put 10 the author, and that novel, in turn, film version with. it mildly, falsifies Waugh’.11 It would not be worth joining battle with such predict- Loved One (1948) (filmed 1965, Tony bay, as Waugh contemplated a society able knee-jerk responses if they didn’t Richardson), (1934, pushing itself to the limits in the interests somehow so muddy the adaptation filmed 1987, Charles Sturridge, director of having fun when more important waters. If ’s Brideshead isn’t of the Brideshead miniseries) and Vile matters might be demanding attention. In a good film, that isn’t necessarily Bodies (1930) (filmed as Bright Young his Preface to the revised edition of because it ‘falsifies’ Waugh. Things [Stephen Fry, 2003]), and as well Brideshead he announces that the as Brideshead there was a television novel’s theme is ‘the operation of divine Waugh was not an enemy of the cinema. miniseries adapted from the trilogy grace on a group of diverse but closely Snobbish as he was about so many (1952–61, filmed 2001). connected characters’, a theme that things, the cinema was not one of them. There are plenty of reasons why Waugh ‘was perhaps presumptuously large’ but In 1924, when he was twenty-one, he is likely to be attractive to filmmakers: for which he ‘make[s] no apology’.13 The and some friends made an amateur film studies of society at various levels, book proved immensely popular when it called The Scarlet Woman, filmed in his picturesquely varied locations, comic appeared but as one writer has claimed, father’s house and garden. It was never situations and characters. ‘Many critics have baulked at both the shown publicly but Waugh’s biographer, theme and Waugh’s treatment of it,’ Christopher Sykes, writes that ‘It was Some of these ingredients are more in though they allow that it ‘is also more shown several times privately at ’ evidence in Brideshead than Waugh’s considered, more complicated and more and that three copies were made.12 other works. For instance, the levels of ambiguous than its detractors some- Indubitably one of the great novelists of social interaction are as subtly articulated times claim’.14 the twentieth century, much concerned as ever; the locations – Oxford, Brides- with upper-class British life, sometimes head, London and – are a The shape of the novel for satirical, sometimes for nostalgic filmmaker’s gift; but, though there is still purposes, he has been filmed several a ration of comic invention, the underly- There is a purposeful formality about the times (and notice how easy it is to say ing seriousness of the earlier novels has structure of the novel, which is worth ‘he has been filmed’, when I really mean now become this novel’s raison d’être. drawing attention to, since the film his books have provided the starting- There was always lurking beneath the departs somewhat from it, and this point for several films). There were brilliant comedy of, say, departure keys us into a shift of empha- big-screen versions of Decline and Fall or Put Out More Flags (1942) a sugges- sis in the film’s intentions. The novel is (1928) (filmed as Decline and Fall … of a tion that the laughter might have to stop; structured in three main parts or ‘Books’, Birdwatcher [John Krish, 1968]), The there was a touch of sadness just kept at as they are called, containing respective- ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION

above: charles and Julia 11 feature

ly five, three and five chapters, and drawn into the spell of the house and the married, Julia to the crass opportunist flanked by a Prologue and an Epilogue. family, instinctively knowing that he Rex, Charles to Celia, a foolish socialite That is to say, there is something of (Sebastian) will in time have to sever all and sister of the disgusting ‘Boy’ Mulcast- almost classical ordering in the symmetry his connections with it. If there is an er whom Charles has known at Oxford. of the way the novel is put together. element of nostalgia in the novel’s This Book is called ‘A Twitch Upon a The Prologue is set in the early days depiction of Brideshead and indeed of Thread’, and though this title could be of World War II and brings the novel’s Oxford, it is necessary to have in mind seen as a reference to how easily he is protagonist, Charles Ryder, back to that this is a novel in which memory re-attracted by Brideshead and by Julia Brideshead, the great house which has plays a powerful role, that the nostalgia is (‘Here she and I, who were never friends been requisitioned for wartime purposes. part of Charles’ memory of enchanted before, met on terms of long and unbro- Its last line, as part of Charles’ narration, worlds that opened up for him. The third ken intimacy’ [p.272] on the liner), there is is ‘I had been there before. I knew all location that becomes idealized in his the more serious notion of how a twitch about it.’ Hence the title of ‘Prologue: memory is Venice, where he and Sebas- on the thread of Julia’s Catholicism Brideshead Revisited’ – and also tian visit Lord Marchmain, long estranged reasserts itself. Lord Marchmain has ‘Epilogue: Brideshead Revisited’, from his Catholic wife who presides over come back to Brideshead to die, and the and indeed of the whole novel. Brideshead. matter of a priest at his deathbed and Julia’s insistence on this, divorced as she This is a novel about the way the past Book Two, ominously entitled ‘Brides- is, and her father’s final gesture of the sign has shaped Charles’ life, and following head Deserted’, sees Charles off to Paris of the cross are more fundamental to the the Prologue it takes us back to a period to study art; Sebastian has been mislaid novel’s purposes. Even Charles, not a twenty years earlier when middle-class in North Africa by Rex Mottram who Catholic, ‘suddenly felt the longing for a Charles has gone up to Oxford, met confides to Charles his aspirations about sign, if only of courtesy, if only for the Sebastian Flyte, and been seduced by marrying Sebastian’s sister Julia. When sake of the woman I loved’ (p.384). The Sebastian’s glamour and even more by Lady Marchmain is dying, Julia asks ‘thread’ tying one to other people, to the whole aristocratic way of life embod- Charles to try to find Sebastian and bring places, to beliefs, the novel suggests, is ied in Brideshead. Book One is entitled him home, but he is now a hopeless never broken, and a mere ‘twitch’ can ‘Et in Arcadia ego’ and in that Latin tag is alcoholic in a Moroccan hospital and reaffirm its tenacity. When Julia parts from already a foreshadowing of the end of dependent on a dubious German called Charles after her father’s death, she tells the idea/ideal that Brideshead represents Curt, and Charles returns to England him, ‘I’ve always been bad. Probably I for Charles. Roughly translated it means without him. The narrating Charles refers shall be bad again. But the worse I am, ‘Even in Arcadia I exist’ and is attributed to what he ‘learned about Julia, bit by bit, the more I need God. I can’t shut myself to Death: if Brideshead seems in this first as one does learn the former – as it out from his mercy.’ (p.386–7) The part of the novel to evoke for Charles the seems at the time, the preparatory – life Epilogue closes with Charles back at kind of pastoral paradise15 that ‘Arcadia’ of a woman one loves’ (p.211), and I Brideshead, now owned by the absent suggests, it also inevitably carries with it think it must be said that the growth of Julia, and acknowledging a continuity of the inescapable possibility of the ravages Charles’ love for Julia is inadequately faith, ‘a small red flame … burning anew of time and death. Melancholy hangs rendered in the novel. among the old stones’, as he ‘quickened over the novel then from the [his] pace’ (p.395) and moved out. start. For Charles, during that The affair between Charles summer long ago at and Julia develops when, The foregoing paragraphs are Brideshead with Sebas- in Book Three, they essentially an attempt to tian, ‘I … believed myself re-meet on a liner highlight the key events, very near heaven’ (p.96), travelling from New what Roland Barthes calls but Sebastian is already York to England. Both ‘cardinal functions’ or concerned that Charles are now unhappily ‘hinge-points’ of narra- should not find himself too tive,16 the outcomes of ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION

above right: lady marchmain, 12 Sebastian left: charles This emphasis on Charles’s love for Julia, however convincingly this emerges in the film, is certainly one of the ways in which the filmmaker has imposed his vision on the which are not merely sequentialantecedent but wartime Brideshead novel’s as the novel does,plotline. Charles, accompanied by Julia, go to consequential as well. Trying to assemble but in between are four main time visit Lord Marchmain () them in our minds so as to discern sequences. in Venice where he lives with his mis- overall patterns in the narrative is another tress, Cara (Greta Scacchi). Kevin matter. In the case of Brideshead Post the wartime-set Prologue, the film Loader, the film’s producer explains: ‘… Revisited, we should have in mind such opens on a long shot of an ocean liner on what Jeremy did was to put Julia in the motifs, such thematic preoccupations, as which Charles (Matthew Goode), the Venice sequence of the novel … It faith, guilt, memory, family, nostalgia, now-successful artist, and his wife Celia became the pivot of the story for us.’18 dream and reality, all of which are (Anna Madeley) are travelling back to Sebastian sees Charles and Julia kiss important in the texture of the novel. We England from New York, and this and the narrative necessarily takes a need now to consider how Julian sequence ends with Charles pursuing the different turn. On return to Oxford, Jarrold’s film has taken such notions on retreating figure of Julia (Hayley Atwell), Sebastian is under surveillance from ‘sad board and how they are articulated whom he has glimpsed in the crowd his little Catholic’ Samgrass (James Brad- through the film’s narrative. wife has invited to a party in their shaw) on instructions from Lady March- stateroom. main, who later accuses Charles of encouraging Sebastian to drink and The shape of the film ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION The long central section of the film dismisses him from Brideshead on the Screenwriters Andrew Davies (a name to retreats first to ‘Ten years earlier’, with night of the ball given to celebrate Julia’s conjure with in relation to ‘heritage’ Charles leaving his father’s dreary house coming-out and her engagement to Rex adaptations17) and Jeremy Brock have to go up to Oxford, with his meeting Mottram (Jonathan Cake). elected to structure the film in a way Sebastian (Ben Whishaw) and his set, comparable to but not exactly parallel to falling under the spell of Brideshead and Four years later. This period is introduced Waugh’s almost-Palladian classicist the influences of Lady Marchmain (Emma by Charles’ meeting with Celia, whom he symmetry. The film opens and closes at Thompson) and Julia. Sebastian and will subsequently marry, and Lady 13 feature

Marchmain, having expelled Charles from himself of Brideshead, of the past with its of the triangle, the kiss exchanged by Brideshead, now has a favour to ask. tentacles of languorous beauty and its Charles and Sebastian reinforcing this While defending her actions – ‘I took you pervasive intimations of pain. further. Cara is right when she tells into my confidence and you betrayed me’ Charles in Venice that whereas his feeling – she announces that ‘I’m not here to How ‘new’ is the new film? for Sebastian is a ‘phase’, a ‘romantic argue with you’ and that she wants friendship’, for Sebastian it is much Charles to go to Africa to find Sebastian. In terms of the novel’s ‘cardinal func- more: ‘Sebastian loves you very much I He does find his old friend who, in answer tions’, it can be said that the film retains think.’ Christopher Sykes believed that to Charles’ mission to persuade him most of them, as the outlines of their ‘Where sentimentality spoils the book is home, says, ‘I wouldn’t even if I could,’ respective structures above suggests, … in the ill-managed love-scenes and in his state of alcoholic degeneration but it is in the departures from Waugh’s between the narrator, Charles Ryder, and Sebastian is not fit to travel anywhere, narrative line that we are perhaps most the heroine, Julia Flyte.’19 It might be and accepts that it was his ‘fault for likely to locate the main concerns of worth considering whether Jarrold’s bringing [Charles] to Brideshead’. Jarrold’s film. By taking Julia to Venice increased emphasis on this aspect with Sebastian and Charles, the film is strengthens the overall narrative. Now the film’s symmetrical structuring making its case for the centrality of the becomes apparent as it cuts back to the romantic triangle that these three Our being introduced to Julia before ocean liner, where Charles and Julia begin comprise. Sebastian, much more overtly Sebastian in the film is a result of the their affaire. They eventually return to gay in the film than in either Waugh or in deliberate re-structuring of the film so Brideshead, sloughing off their spouses, the miniseries, clearly feels himself that the liner episode precedes Charles’ and are about to leave when Lord betrayed by Charles, not just for kissing going to Oxford. The time sequence in Marchmain returns to die. His death has and falling in love with Julia but also for the film goes something like this: c.1940 the same effect on Julia as it had in the allowing himself to become involved with (war), c.1930 (ocean liner), c.1920–24 novel: ‘I can’t shut myself off from [God’s] the family in ways Sebastian, from the (Oxford, Brideshead, Venice, London, mercy’ and she has to support her first, hasn’t wanted. This emphasis on ), c.1930 (ocean liner again), priggish older brother’s insistence on a Charles’ love for Julia, however convinc- c.1940 (war again). As noted, there’s a priest’s attendance. ‘I have to let you go,’ ingly this emerges in the film, is certainly sort of symmetry there, but, as well, it she tells Charles, her Catholicism having one of the ways in which the filmmaker gives the impression of Charles’ digging asserted its claims again, as they stand has imposed his vision on the anteced- back, and then further back, into the before a picture of Madonna and child, ent novel’s plotline. As a result, and bear memories that assail him when he which is being covered by soldiers as the in mind that, in the film, we meet Julia revisits Brideshead during the war. In film moves back into the wartime Brides- before glimpsing Sebastian, the nature of relation to such ‘structural’ matters, it is head. Charles moves out into the light, Charles’ intense attraction to all that also worth noting other ways in which but we remember from the Prologue Sebastian represents becomes almost of Jarrold and his collaborators focus our voice-over that the emotion that possess- secondary importance. Equally, though, attention on parallel situations, either for es him is ‘guilt’. It may then be simplistic to give comparable presence to each of comparison or for contrast. Twice to interpret the seemingly symbolic exit Sebastian and Julia is a way of adverting Charles is about to leave Brideshead from the interior gloom as his freeing the viewer to the narrative pre-eminence – first, with Sebastian, later with Julia ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION

14 above left: (l–R) Charles, julia, Sebastian above right: cara (greta Scacchi) opp. page: bridey (ed stoppard) and lady Marchmain The new film ofBrideshead Revisited hasn’t fared very well with reviewers and other commentators, who keep suggesting that it’s ‘not true’ to Waugh and not as classy as the famous miniseries, and who seem unable to keep these intertextual resonances in their place.

– when departure is threatened by (Castle Howard, Yorkshire, doing of the place that is so compelling, but as arrivals. As he and Sebastian are about to fabulous duty here) and Venice are the Nigel Nicholson has written of it: return to Oxford, Lady Marchmain and object of ravishing long-shots, but I’d Julia arrive, thus bringing the existence of want to contest a claim of mere pictorial As you approach the area of Castle Howard Julia to Charles’ attention; as he and Julia splendour. That first glorious view of … you notice that something is happening are about to leave, following Rex’s vulgar Oxford’s ‘dreaming spires’ is how to the countryside. A sense of expectation is bartering of Julia for art works, Lord Charles, released from his stifling being created, as by the tuning of the Marchmain, with Cara and nurse, arrives suburban home, first sees it; it has orchestra before the curtain rises.22 to die, and Julia knows she must stay, dramatic importance as it ushers in his aching with guilt for her life, her lapsed seduction by places and people of kinds Jarrold and cinematographer Jess Hall Catholicism ‘like an invisible thread he has never before known. As to the have achieved a cinematic equivalent of drawing you back’. Another parallel, this university colleges, a contrast is made Charles’ first glimpse of the surrounding time for purposes of contrast, is that between the spacious quarters occupied countryside and then of the house itself between the two fathers: Charles’ by Sebastian, shot in Christchurch, ‘one that is cleverly enough done not to widowed, always-preoccupied father of the grandest and richest Colleges in deserve one reviewer’s easy put-down: (Patrick Malahide) hunched over his chess Oxford’, and Charles’ ‘at Lincoln [which] ‘Aided by Jess Hall’s luminous cinema- set, in his gloomy suburban house, barely is much more intimate and domestic’.21 tography, his [Jarrold’s] film is extremely aware of his son’s comings and goings, In other words, it’s not just a matter of beautiful, but all this stylistic verve is and Lord Marchmain, expansive and getting us to respond to the architectural distracting [i.e., from important issues].’23 hospitable in his Venetian palazzo. These beauties of Oxford, but of rendering it in Another point to be made about the two sets of parallels, achieved in cinemat- such a way as to make it meaningful in film’s use of Castle Howard is that it ic terms of imagery and editing, accentu- dramatic terms. resists tendencies to ‘distract’ us with ate respectively how Charles is ‘caught’ the merely pictorial but instead, in the by the allure of Brideshead, and the social Similarly with Brideshead. Charles has to dinner scene, underscores the drama’s and emotional gap between Sebastian’s be bowled over by the sheer magnifi- tensions through a series of medium and Charles’ background. cence on display. If the film simply close-ups of the various speakers. lingered over its façade and its land- One of the recurring criticisms directed at scaped grounds and its art-laden As for Venice, the opening shot of this ‘heritage cinema’ is that it is prone to interiors, one might cavil, but again we ravishing city just misses the clichéd indulge in a sort of pictorialism that have to be persuaded that there is vista that takes in St Mark’s Square and ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION Andrew Higson and others would reason enough in what it stands for to its familiar landmarks. It again impresses associate with ‘a cinema of attractions’.20 account for Charles’ falling for its as a literal and metaphoric expansion of The implication is that there is an effortless seductiveness. Castle Howard Charles’ horizons, before quickly cutting excessive presentation of, say, land- had been used for Brideshead in the to a shot of the three – Charles, Sebas- scape or beautiful buildings, and very television version and this may be the tian and Julia – making their way to Lord often there is truth in such criticism. In most insistent intertextual echo it Marchmain’s palazzo, by boat, having the new Brideshead Revisited, it is bequeaths to the new version. And resisted the cliché of a gondola. Venice, certainly true that Oxford, Brideshead perhaps it was not just the magnificence as noted, marks a turning point in the 15 feature

above: SEBASTIAN, LORD MARCHMAIN (MICHAEL GAMBON), JULIA right: LADY MARCHMAIN

narrative when Charles realizes he is in merely on class grounds but because he love with Julia. The Venetian carnival is an atheist. Nevertheless, it is hard to setting has been used before to usher in a agree with the reviewer who claimed that new stage in the drama as in Iain Softley’s ‘Thompson plays all her scenes in the key fine film version of Henry James’s The of high comedy’;24 such a comment Wings of the Dove (novel 1902, film 1997), unpersuasively reduces the importance of and Venice at large has been used as the the issue of religious conviction as it is site for a reappraisal of relationships in dramatized in the film. In relation to the Paul Schrader’s adaptation of Ian film’s attitude to religious faith, and McEwan’s The Comfort of Strangers specifically to Catholicism, one should (novel 1981, film 1990). Jarrold’s touch consider what Charles’ final moment may be less sure in its deployment of in the Brideshead chapel means, Venice as a key influence in the film’s when he dips his fingers in holy narrative, but it does evoke a sense of water, then goes to extinguish a release from the pressures of English life. candle – and draws back at the last. It would take a peculiarly And a remark passed by Cara, Lord obtuse viewer to come up with the Marchmain’s mistress, is useful for turning judgement that the film makes our attention to how Catholicism is Catholicism ‘seem like a weirdo cult.’25 presented in the film. After Charles has politely rebuffed her comments about The last point I want to draw attention Lady Marchmain’s strict religious observ- to in considering the film as an ances, Cara says, ‘It’s different in . We adaptation is in how it responds to the do what the heart tells us and then we go idea of Charles as a first-person to confession.’ The film in general may be narrator. One might also query how said to represent Catholicism as a Waugh manages this strategy. It is at life-stifling influence, particularly in its least arguable that Charles’ narra- characterization of Lady Marchmain as tional voice is more sophisticated, exercising a too-rigid control over the lives more convoluted, than we might of her children. However, if we choose to easily attribute to the ‘character’ of examine carefully how the matter of faith Charles whose life is wrenched out is interrogated in the film, can we accept of its expected course by his ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION Cara’s comment as anything other than infatuation with the world of an easy, hedonistic approach to it? Brideshead. Film generally has Certainly, in Lady Marchmain, played with difficulty with rendering a first-per- silvery aplomb by Emma Thompson, faith son narrator: in this case, we begin seems not to lead to affection but to with Charles reflecting on his own censoriousness and to the sort of identity: ‘If you asked me who I exclusivity that would cause her to am, I would only say my name is 16 dismiss Charles’ wish to marry Julia, not Charles Ryder’, adding that, ‘among the borrowed and the second- Endnotes London, 1975, pp.55, 56. Elsa hand’, only ‘guilt’ is real to him. But the 1 Incidentally, Julian Jarrold, the director Lanchester, later a famous and film quickly discards the voice-over of the new film version of Brideshead eccentric actress of film and stage, technique, returning to it at the end with Revisited, also directed a notably appeared in it. ‘Was it fate or some divine power that I thoughtful BBC television adaptation 13 Waugh, op. cit., p.9. find myself once more returned to of Great Expectations (1999), starring 14 Anon, in Peter Parker (ed.), A Reader’s Brideshead? ... Did I want too much?’ Charlotte Rampling as Miss Havisham. Guide to the Twentieth Century Novel, 2 Peter Carey, Jack Maggs, Faber and Oxford University Press, Oxford and In conclusion, I’d suggest it might be Faber, London, 1997; Lloyd Jones, Mr New York, 1995, p.258. instructive to consider the other – cine- Pip, Text Publishing Company, 15 There is in Le Louvre, Paris, a famous matic – strategies by which Charles is Melbourne, 2006. painting by Nicholas Poussin with the kept at the centre of the film. For 3 Evelyn Waugh, Brideshead Revisited, title ‘Et in Arcadia ego’ (1637–8), and a instance, are there any important scenes Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1981 rural setting in which the human from which he is absent? How frequently (1945, revised edition 1960). All future figures are inspecting a tomb. does the film ask us to share point-of- page references are to this edition. 16 Roland Barthes, ‘Introduction to the view shots with him? My other final 4 Brideshead Revisited, Granada Structural Analysis of Narratives’ remark is that it might be much more Television, 1981. Directed by Charles (1966) in Image-Music-Text, trans. valuable to consider how Jarrold has Sturridge and Michael Lindsay-Hogg; Stephen Heath, Fontana/Collins, responded to the novel, what seems to screenplay by ; starring Glasgow, 1977, p.73. have caught his attention and how he and . 17 Author of screenplays for such has rendered this on film. What, for 5 Jon E. Lewis and Penny Stempel, The television adaptations as Middlemarch instance, is his film’s attitude to the class Ultimate TV Guide, Orion Books, (1994), Pride and Prejudice (1995) and snobberies so much a part of the novel’s London, 1999, p.57. Vanity Fair (1998). texture? It has been suggested that 6 H.W. Fowler, A Dictionary of Modern 18 Kevin Loader, quoted in Production Waugh was himself half in love with the English Usage, Second Edition, Oxford Notes for the film, p.5. idea of an ancestral Catholic aristocracy University Press, Oxford, 1965, p.579. 19 Sykes, op. cit., p.250. and that this led him to a semi-nostalgic 7 Andrew Higson, ‘Heritage Cinema’ in 20 Andrew Higson, Waving the Flag: view of it. Does Jarrold seem more The Encyclopedia of British Film, Third Constructing a National Cinema in critical of this than Waugh? Exploring edition, Methuen, London, 2008, Britain, Clarendon Press, Oxford questions such as this could be more p.339. University Press, Oxford, 1995, p.93. productive than slipping at once into 8 Stephanie Bunbury, ‘Waugh Stories’, 21 Loader, op. cit, p.13. evaluative mode and finding the new film The Sunday Age, M magazine, 12 22 Nigel Nicholson, Great Houses of immeasurably inferior to either of its October 2008, p.7. Britain, National Trust and Weidenfeld illustrious predecessors. 9 Waugh, op. cit., pp.9–10. and Nicolson, London, 1978, p.154. 10 Examples of the former include Blade 23 Lisa Mullen, ‘Brideshead Revisited’, Brian McFarlane is an Honorary Associate Runner (Ridley Scott, 1982, director’s Sight & Sound, October 2008, p.57. Professor at Monash University, and cut 1992, final cut 2007) and Heaven’s 24 Jake Wilson, ‘Miscast Miscreants Visiting Professor at the University of Hull. Gate (Michael Cimino, 1980, director’s Excel at Self-importance’, The Age, 23 His most recent book is Screen Adapta- cut 2004), and of the latter Picnic at October 2008, p.19. tions: Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations Hanging Rock (Peter Weir, 1975, 25 Richardson, op. cit. (A&C Black, London, 2008) and his director’s cut 1998). Encyclopedia of British Film (Methuen) has 11 Owen Richardson, ‘A Tale of Waugh’, recently appeared in its third edition. • The Age, A2, 18 October 2008, p.19. 12 Christopher Sykes, Evelyn Waugh: A Biography, William Collins & Sons,

By taking Julia to Venice with Sebastian and Charles, ISS UE 52 SCREEN EDUCATION the film is making its case for the centrality of the romantic triangle that these three comprise. Sebastian, much more overtly gay in the film than in either Waugh or in the 17 miniseries, clearly feels himself betrayed by Charles.