Page 180 - Inside the Film Factory New Approaches to Russian and Soviet Cinema
P. 180

A FICKLE MAN, OR PORTRAIT OF BORIS BARNET AS A SOVIET DIRECTOR 161
            the calm rhythm of a village, with its fisherman and single shop, its drinkers and
            courting couples, the academician who came here on his doctor’s advice finds little
            rest.
              What plot there is is atomised, conveyed by single gestures and images. A girl in
            an office shouts into the telephone that the chairman is in the vicinity. Pan to a
            young girl  who comes into the  office with him.  The chairman  picks  up the
            telephone and starts to shout. The  youngster is being scolded. The chairman
            objects: ‘I am trying to telephone.’ The child denounces the boy who is courting the
            girl: ‘He is going to see the milkmaids!’ She is furious and, after everyone leaves,
            she  kicks  the door shut several times. On the third occasion,  it hits the
            academician-Sunday painter, who enters clad in a paint-splashed shirt. Pan: he sits
            down facing her. The child timidly comes back in. The  girl furiously wields a
            rubber stamp and makes to kick the door shut again, close to tears, while snapping,
            ‘Don’t smoke.’ The academician leaves and the child brings back the telephone,
            whispering confidentially to her father, and obviously telling him the story of the
            kicked door. The kid and her father leave, while the girl stays behind, her hand
            resting on the papers which the wind is rustling.
              Despite the number of  doors  opened and  closed, Barnet remains  far
            from Lubitsch: his ‘touch’ consists precisely in defusing the gag before it becomes
            openly comic. The film’s closing is an appropriately modest testament.
              The academician receives a telephone call from the city. ‘They have found me,’
            he says resignedly. Even as he prepares to leave, he goes on mending things that
            the villagers bring him, repeating, ‘It’s not my speciality.’ He leaves his canvas and
            palette, and a message on the stove for the child who built it without knowing how
            to. First he writes an invitation, which he rubs out, then a farewell message: ‘You
            will do more and better than me. We have given you all that we have been able to
            achieve. Don’t let us down.’ A long shot of the house ends the film.
              This character is tired and still suffers from war wounds, but he cannot help
            tinkering with a sewing machine or a telephone receiver whenever he is asked to
            repair it. His tiredness is probably akin to that of Barnet himself, who must have
            known these emotions so well (cf. The Poet). There is hardly any bitterness in the
            portraits drawn by those who knew him late in life, especially fellow film-makers,
            all of  whom would concur  with  Sadoul’s tribute:  ‘overflowing with life and
            generosity’. Otar Ioseliani (not an arbitrary choice on my behalf to end this essay)
            recalled their meeting:

              I knew  him through his editor,  who  was  also his girlfriend and  in  her
              twenties. She was a very lively girl, and I remember her saying: ‘Watch what
              I’m  going to  do when Barnet  comes.’  She went up to  him and ordered:
              ‘About turn!’ This immense figure turned round smartly and she jumped on
              to his back, calling ‘Gee up!’ That’s how I met him.
                He asked me: ‘Who are you?’ I said: ‘A director’ (this was when I was
              making April [Aprel’, 1962]). ‘Soviet,’ he corrected, ‘you must always say
              “Soviet  director”. It is a very special profession.’ ‘In what way?’ I asked.
   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185