latarnia presents
|
GRABINSKI
ON FILM: “SZAMOTA’S MISTRESS” AND OTHER EXCURSIONS
Paul Kesler Film
adaptations of the work of Polish fantasist Stefan Grabinski, sometimes
denigrated as “the Polish Poe,” are as few as they are obscure. Eight of the
nine films inspired by the writer’s work appeared after 1966, while none were
released in the forty-year interim between 1927 and 1967. Of all these films,
however, it may be significant that three were based on a single story, usually
translated in English under the title, “Szamota’s Mistress.” Unlike
Poe’s, Grabinski’s stories typically portray isolated individuals within the
context of vitalistic philosophy or depth psychology, though rarely in
conjunction. The latter realm, in which alienated protagonists seem immersed in
deeply subjective points of view which often lead them into bizarre sexual
liaisons, is a world brought graphically into focus by “Szamota’s
Mistress”; it is, perhaps, the tale best exemplifying Grabinski’s work in a
psychological vein. The
earliest of the three “Szamota” adaptations, appearing in 1927 “Unlike
in the West, where cinema was discussed by people associated with the
cinematographic industry and involved in actual film-making (i.e. people
interested in technical problems), in Many authors active at that time [i.e., first two decades of the twentieth century], such as Leon Trystan, Anatol Stern, Tadeusz Peiper published their views in periodicals; however, they never attempted at creating foundations of cinema theory in the strict sense. Although
Trystan’s “Szamota” film appears lost, we know that it was a black and
white dramatization, 1000 meters in length, and starred Igo Sym and Helena
Makowska in the lead roles. It was initially screened during Grabinski’s
lifetime; the author himself may have attended the premier. Perhaps this is one of those rarities still languishing in an attic or
studio vault, like the print of Carl Dreyer’s “La
Passion de Jeanne d'Arc,” rescued, over 50 years after initial release,
from a janitor’s closet in an As
mentioned, Grabinski’s work seemed to disappear -- at least from the
standpoint of film directors -- for four entire decades, until 1967, when an
adaptation of the story “Slepy Tor” (“The Siding”) appeared in Several
other Grabinski-based films were aired in the “Opowiesci” series. One
particularly brilliant adaptation was reissued by the American company, European
Video Distributors, as “Sarah’s House” (based on the short story, “Dom
Sary”) in 1984. This
film, a superbly moody and artistically superior production, was another in the
subjective psychological vein, though it drew equally on mythic sources, in this
case the story of Tobias and Sarah found in the biblical Apocrypha as part of
the Book of Tobit. The story fused psychological and mythic themes in a way
which paralleled Freudian psychic-mythological affinities (though Freud
concentrated on Greek rather than Biblical avatars). Following
the four Grabinski films in the “Opowiesci” series (from ’67 through
’85), and a single
film, “Nikt Nie Jest Winien” (“No One is at Fault”), another decade
passed before a German
director, Holger Mandel, took up Grabinski’s work in a serious way. It is this
film that is probably the most compelling and artistically adroit of the three
“Szamota” films (lacking the silent Trystan version, it’s impossible to
make a thorough judgment). Mandel,
known as a devotee of Grabinki’s fiction, apparently has a penchant for the
short film; at any rate, his two Grabinski adaptations (which include, besides
“Szamota,” an adaptation of Grabinski’s “Ultima Thule”) are both under
20 minutes long. Alternatively, Mandel may simply believe short stories require
brief cinematic treatments, and that films of standard length would result in
gratuitous padding. His version of “Szamota’s Mistress,” in any case,
seems a bit more condensed than the story itself requires, so a more likely
explanation is that budget constraints compelled him to strive for a more
elliptical approach. The
Mandel film is a brilliantly-executed short, and,
with the exception of the opening sequence and its concession to modern-day
trappings, is faithful to period atmosphere. Luckily, the art design during the
main body of the film is kept spare so that in the interior scenes we seem to be
occupying a more or less timeless realm. The score is also well done, and while
the music near the middle section comes rather dangerously close to a
conventional “rock” beat, it doesn’t seem excessive in this respect.
Mandel may have believed -- correctly -- that the ideas in the story were
fantastic enough without a gratuitous overlay of musical distraction. A
brief synopsis of Grabinski’s original story may be in order here. A lonely
bachelor informs the reader that he has received a letter from his young
mistress, “Jadwiga,” a woman he has long fantasized about, but has never had
the courage to meet. The letter invites Szamota to her elegant home, and he
rapturously complies. In a series of diary-like entries, he tells us of his
visits to her mansion, during which he luxuriously indulges his pent-up sexual
fantasies. At one point in the story, however, he becomes suspicious of
Jadwiga’s identity; just who is this mysterious woman whose obscure desires
have unaccountably turned in his favor? Szamota must find out, and, like the
proverbial dreamer who tries to wake from a nightmare, stabs a pin into the
young woman’s thigh. Immediately he recoils in horror: he has stabbed himself.
Are Szamota and Jadwiga one and the same? Whatever the explanation, he continues
his visits, determined to pursue matters to their ultimate end. Jadwiga,
meanwhile, strikes Szamota as somehow “incomplete,” like the outline of a
portrait that has never been filled in. Only at the end of the story does
Szamota discover that the woman with whom he has had these strange liaisons has
been dead for two years. Mandel
casts himself well in the title role, showing admirable restraint in scenes that
might have degenerated into sensationalism, especially at the critical
moment where the protagonist stabs a pin into his “mistress’s” thigh -- the oblique camera angle, combined with a quick
cut to Mandel nursing his wound in a bathtub afterward, supplies the proper
panache. Katrin
Horshig, meanwhile, is perfect as “Jadwiga” -- innocent, yet statuesque and
sensual, moving in almost dreamlike slow-motion at key moments. One brief
sequence, which shows her gliding toward the camera in a straight line, not
walking, but almost as if perched on an invisible treadmill, is unforgettable. Overall,
the film seems most effective through what appears to be a deliberate
alternation of older and more avant-garde film techniques. On the retro side is
a continual use of “curtain sweeps” on Mandel’s part, analogous to the
“wipe” effects used during the thirties (e.g., “White Zombie”), or the
iris-effects employed in the silent era. These help accelerate the action and
serve to telescope time effectively. There is also the paradox of truncated
continuities to hasten action still further
-- two or three scenes where Szamota is approaching Jadwiga’s castle wearing
a black bowler (the action is sporadic rather than continuous, similar to what
Godard used in films like “Breathless”). Of course, many would say there is
nothing particularly new in this use of discontinuity, but Mandel handles it
effectively. Mandel’s
mingling of color and black & white is also interesting, and works well in
segueing from the “present” world at the beginning of the film to the less
localized world of Szamota’s fantasies. Less certain is whether the lack of
consistency in this area is justified -- Mandel moves from color to a
black & white “dreamscape,” then back to color again during the
remainder of the film. The black and white scenes are intended, not as
flashbacks, but as flash-forwards -- they appear at the point where Szamota is
anticipating a liaison with his mistress, and result in a distant, almost
surreal succession of images. But perhaps we could question whether differentiating present scenes from anticipated encounters is adequately served
by this method. Mandel edits the scenes well, but viewers may differ as to their
rational justification. Mandel’s
film is not without slight flaws. For example, along with the techniques
mentioned, he uses changes in Szamota’s wardrobe as another way of telescoping
time. But in editing these changes so they appear as successive phases in his advance
to his mistress's bedside --that is, combining multiple visits into two or
three visits -- it often seems that the character is changing hats and ties
several times on a single occasion. Whether this works for the viewer is
debatable, but it can be disorienting on first viewing. Perhaps
the only genuinely sub-par element, however, is the ending -- Mandel’s character faints too soon after being informed that Jadwiga
had passed away long before his experience with her. Again, this may have been a
budgetary concession; nonetheless, a better ending might have had the camera cut
to a close-up of Mandel’s face and linger a few seconds as we see the news
sink in -- as it is, the faint comes too quickly and seems almost
unintentionally comic. Overall,
Mandel’s film is a fine adaptation of the Grabinski tale, though it must be
said that viewers who have not first read the story may find certain elements
confusing. At one point in the story, for example, Szamota notes that a portion
of cloth missing from a curtain in Jadwiga’s bedroom exactly matches a cut-out
section of her gown. While the story offers no conclusive explanation of the
discovery, we nevertheless recognize it as an integral aspect of the
identity-problem which runs through the tale at varying levels. In the film,
however, the discovery seems disconnected to the rest of the film, and
uninitiated viewers may find nothing to relate it to. Despite this, the general
power of the film is such that we can overlook such details, reveling in the
imagery and the superb camera work. This
brings us to the most recent adaptation of “Szamota’s Mistress,” directed
by Joseph F. Parda as one segment of the anthology film, “Evil Streets”
(1998). With due respect to Parda, the “Szamota” segment is a curiously
uneven mixture of sophisticated (even sporadically brilliant) cinematography and
amateurish acting. The photography in both interior and exterior sequences is
highly atmospheric, even reminiscent of German expressionist techniques in
places -- one scene, for instance, shows Szamota inside Jadwiga’s castle,
following a mysterious fragment of cloth around a twisting staircase. The black
cloth trailing over the white marble stairs lures us effectively into the
subjective mental state of the protagonist in the best Expressionist tradition.
And there are various other instances where the use of lighting and the stark
contrast between light and shadow leave us almost gasping. Unfortunately, the
technical adroitness of the film is marred by some very poor acting, especially
in the case of Joe Zaso as “Szamota.” Perhaps the worst instance occurs near
the beginning of the film, where Zaso’s overdubbed monologue tells us of the
letter he’s received. He is “overcome with joy,” he claims, but as he
makes this declaration we see him standing in a darkened room, facing the camera
and holding the letter before him, all the while with a simpering smile on his
face. The expression conveys, not joy, but a sort of vacuous knowingness and
what looks like a puerile attempt at “diablerie.” Thus the effect
backfires and we find it difficult to take the character (or his psychological
plight) seriously. Another
problem with the Parda film is the incongruity between the late-Victorian syntax
Zaso utters in voice-over, and the quality and intonation of his voice. Acting
out a Grabinski story requires a certain dignity of bearing, if only in
deference to the cultural ambience in which Grabinski wrote. If we modernize his
language to conform to a late-twentieth century setting, that is one thing; if we do so the
incongruity between the author’s language and that of a contemporary actor
disappears (even at some cost to atmosphere). But if we retain the language we
also need to retain self-detachment. It’s clear that Zaso, as an actor, is
unschooled in delivering Grabinski’s language with a suitable inflection. No
doubt a trained British actor would have done the job better (or a European
actor like Mandel). As it is, we may be reminded of another adaptation of a
classic Victorian tale where the same problem occurred: the 1980 version of
“Rappaccini’s Daughter” in which Kathleen Beller, as the title character,
was forced to utter language with which she was clearly unfamiliar. This, like
the scene already mentioned, undermines the credibility of the protagonist -- in Zaso’s case, watching him wander through the dark rooms of his mistress is
like seeing a fool in a Victor Hugo novel -- the opulent surroundings only
heighten his absurdity, but without a saving grace. Ultimately we’re left
regretting that the beautifully dark photography hangs obliviously over the main
character, like armor on a dwarf. Tina
Krause, as “Jadwiga,” is ravishing, with a decidedly European look. Here,
too, however, the effect is ruined when she must utter a line in an attempt to
lure Szamota to her bedside. Like Zaso, she seems at a loss when it comes to
empathizing with the cadence of the author’s text. Let
us, at any rate, be grateful that Grabinski’s work seems to finally be getting
the attention it deserves in the film world. After all, we cannot expect that an
author so little known outside his native Poland
should be rivaling Poe in cinematic homages. Eight films in slightly less than
forty years may not seem impressive on the surface, but it does seem to indicate
momentum in the right direction. Perhaps over time this momentum will build
outside of |