Page 57 - Cinematic Thinking Philosophical Approaches to the New Cinema

Michelangelo Antonioni 47

actor, from the profession of the reporter to that of the gunrunner (an
interpretation partly suggested by the European release title: Professione:
17
Reporter), she does so apparently because she views identity as a choice
between aesthetic styles. It is hard, however, to carry this perspective to
any of the other episodes than the scene in which she states it, especially
in view of the structure and elements of the film, which systematically
undermine any attempt at narrative integration in terms of a redemptive
conversion.

LOCKE: I've run out on everything: my wife, the house, an adopted child, a
successful job—everything except a few bad habits I couldn't get rid of.
GIRL: HOW did you get away with it?
LOCKE: It was an accident. Everyone thought I was dead, I let them think so.
GIRL {in aflat, unquestioning tone): There's no way to explain it, is there?
LOCKE: Now I think m going to be a waiter in Gibraltar.
I
GIRL: That's too obvious.
LOCKE: A novelist in Paris.
GIRL: TOO romantic.
LOCKE: How about a gunrunner?
GIRL: TOO unlikely.
LOCKE: As a matter of fact I think I am one.
GIRL: Then it depends which side you're on.
Her approval of Locke's account of the gunrunning for the guerrilla war
"in an unknown part of Africa" ("I like it," she says) and later her insis-
tence that Locke continue to make Robertsons appointments and play
this role, a strategy that will end in his death, is rationalized by her because
"he [Robertson] believed in something and that's what you wanted." The
shift in her interpretation of Locke's situation is worth noting: whereas she
saw his relation to the role of Robertson as an "accident" that she accepts
to be without adequate explanation, she now attempts to suffuse this situ-
ation with the significance of an intention. Her desire is that this role be
meaningful. But the film presents this as an impotent wish, particularly
when she identifies his body to the police at the end of the film as "Robert-
son." This identification, which contrasts with Rachel Locke's ambiguous
statement of refusal—"I never knew him"—cannot provide the context of
his death with any meaning because even when he is dead, his death is not
the death of the person the girl wishes him to be.