Three days before the ancien
regime’s fall, Sidonie Laborde (Léa Seydoux) acts as the personal reader of
Marie-Antoinette (Diane Kruger). Although a servant, her life at Versailles is
comfortable, and offers her intimacy with her beloved Queen. In the following
days she witnesses Versailles’ foundations devoured by the Revolution.
This is a story of the French Revolution, but it does not
focus on violence. It foreshadows death and destruction, of course. The
aristocrats know the populace want their heads, and they fear the Third Estate
may well get their desire. But this death and destruction lays in the future,
beyond the three day scope of this film. At most, violence erupts off-screen.
This is the French Revolution as seen from the Ivory Tower,
an intimate portrait of its inhabitants. We, the audience, experience these
revolutionary days through a relative few characters, Laborde the most
prominent. Only for a few scenes does the film leave Versailles. For most of
its run-time we occupy the vast rooms and corridors of the Palace. Intimate
close-ups comprise nearly every scene, and the film is intimate in nature. The
Revolution’s political and moral ramifications often seem less important than Laborde’s
relationship with Marie-Antoinette, and her unrequited love for her.
Had this film depicted a different revolution/political
upheaval, this micro-view, focussed on love, would likely have seemed
reductive, very ‘Hollywood’. The copious dramatizations of the French
Revolution, however, lead me to conclude this film doesn’t ignore the big
picture. We, the audience, more or less know the big picture, the oppression of
the Third Estate, the Bastille, and the Terror. This film, while never
forgetting the big picture, isolates a story in the details, one just as much
worth telling as the guillotine’s.
This is Laborde’s story. And, through her eyes, it is
Marie-Antoinette and duchesse de Polignac’s. She loves the Queen in a perhaps
Sapphic way. Marie-Antoinette loves Polignac in an almost certainly Sapphic way.
But this isn’t the story of a love triangle. For most of the film Polignac goes
unseen, and, when first seen, unheard. Like Laborde, we are lured into
believing Polignac is a minor presence. Laborde loves Marie-Antoinette, and
believes Marie-Antoinette loves her. She doesn’t presume the Queen holds any romantic
feelings for her (but who could not hope), but she does believe the Queen has
some special affection towards her. And she’s right, almost. The Queen loves
her personal reader as she loves all things that bring her pleasure. A love
born from self-centredness that reduces its objects to things for her use. I
shan’t spoil anymore, but I shall say the ending provides the perfect capstone
for the film’s exploration of love.
I shall comment on the theatrical poster, however. Should
you glance at the poster and then watch the film, you may accuse it of
dishonesty. ‘It is nothing so sweet or romantic as the cover implies,’ you
might say, ‘and Polignac is at most an important side character.’ But look at
the poster again, and do more than glance, and you’ll see, between the Queen
and the duchesse, shadowed and excluded, our protagonist. Suddenly the poster
seems an excellent companion to the film.
One complaint I have is regards Léa Seydoux’s acting. For
most of the film she occupies her role well, but in her first scene with
Marie-Antoinette I could not tell she loved her. Only in a later scene, when
her love is exposited, did I realise this central aspect of the film. Admittedly,
in that first scene the audience can read
Seydoux’s face as affectionate. But they can equally well read it as a servant’s
grin-and-bare-it expression. In such a foundational scene the audience should
have no doubt about Laborde’s feelings for her Queen.
Familiarity with the Revolution aids a viewer’s appreciation
of the film, but not because ignorance will obscure the plot. In case you’ve
forgotten your French history, expositional dialogue will fill you in. This is
justified, as the characters are learning about the Revolution as it
progresses. No, it helps to know the big picture for thematic rather than plot
reasons. Versailles borders on a fairy-tale kingdom, untouched by the world’s
pain, separate and complete. Outside, Parisians storm the Bastille. The
characters know this is momentous – the audience should know this is momentous – but Versailles seems untouched. So
far from the world is Versailles that the storming of the Bastille can be kept
secret for a time. We do not see the Revolution unveiled. We see, along with
the characters, the dreadful omens of coming carnage, like the retracting tide
just before a tsunami.
To this end, the music excels. The ominous music compounds
the foreboding atmosphere of scenes. It manipulates the audience, but not
clumsily so, occasionally playing at an almost subliminal softness.
Visually, the film is stunning. Vibrant colours and shot
construction create some truly beautiful images. Soft, red candlelight within
the Palace, coupled with the many close-up shots of characters’ faces, warm the
viewer with the characters’ intimacy. When the film wishes to convey dread, it
does so in equally picturesque fashion. One night-time scene, on the eve of the
Revolution, depicts a corridor so crowded and redly lit it resembles a
purgatorial assembly. Occasionally, the film employs shaky-cam, perhaps to
bring the viewer closer to the film’s world. So many constructed shots of
characters wearing centuries-old dress could have pushed the audience too far
from the film. A little shaky-cam subliminally guides viewers to see the film
as transpiring events.
Farewell, My Queen
is a moving film both thematically and visually. Its servant’s eye view of
Versailles grants us an intimate look at the ancien regime’s final days. A limited view, but one that forebodes
everything it does not show.
I did not watch the film, but there is much to explore about fictional historical drama. ‘History’ in academic sense is a reconstruction of the past (but it is not exactly the past), so it is to some extend fictional as well based on the evidence survived and the methods for critical analysis and the biases of the interpreter. Because of this, history textbook gives the impression that woman, LGBTQI and other ethnicity do not exist or at least do not contribute to the welfare of society… Even if they do admit in rare occasion, it has the effect of tokenism, which suggests such case is singular than universal. Visibility thus is an important issue for the minority. That is why Hidden Figures (upcoming 2017), where they focuses on African-American female scientists is so important to change such narrative. History is thus altered with different lenses (same with focalisation/perspective/point of view in fictions).
ReplyDeleteOn one hand, there is no need to have a fictional framing character to tell the story, but again, even if such people do not exist, we can imagine the possibility if they do (like nearly all the novel…), therefore, historical accuracy can alter our feeling towards historical drama about real existed historical figure, and we thus ask: is it accurate? Is it true? Then like we ask an adaptation from a book, is it faithful? Towards the book? Or towards the reality? Or… You may pick a page from the book and scream: That is not true at all! Women are not like that! Black People are not like that! Slavery is not like that! Therefore, paratext knowledge can alter your perception towards the book. That is why Miss Austen Regrets is so much better than Becoming Jane: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdQKIm6jRgs
Depending on the individual, we can forgive the alteration for dramatic effect to various degree. Period Drama A Little Chaos (2014) is a beautiful film… but I would like them to spend time and money on an actual existed historical women instead. Farewell, My Queen (2012) can tell a good story without our fictional protagonist. Louise Élisabeth Vigée Le Brun (a important female artist) was the royal portrait painter for Marie Antoinette. The portrait of Yolande de Polastron is actually painted by her (on the Wikipedia page). Then there is Rose Bertin who is Queen’s personal fashion designer who revolutionized the French fashion industry (that gradually women’s cloth began to become more colourful and luxury), and whose final mission for the Queen was the black morning garment that Marie worn when she died. There are other women who has drawn an extra paint in the history but only to be covered. Charlotte Corday is a brave assassinate who killed the Jacobin leader Jean-Paul Marat, and Olympe de Gouges was the feminist and very active during the revolution but was killed by the Jacobins (but of course, their story happens during the revolution).
Charlotte Corday died at 17th July 1793 (aged 24), Marie Antoinette died at 16th October 1793 (aged 37), and Olympe de Gouges died at 3rd November 1793 (aged 45).
ReplyDeleteI have a sympathy for the Queen and I have the pity for the populace (but I guess I have both feelings for both of them). The Queen is a greenhouse flower that she is a beautiful one, innocent one, and an artificial lily, that is, she is an aristocracy. But it is precise that the Palace of Versailles is so elegant and glorious that becomes the symbol that divides people and monarchy. They are protected too well by the system to know the consequence of luxury, that they are taught to spend, to do this and that, but never properly (especially for women) to rule a country. I pity any women who are killed for political changes. Mary, Queen of Scots… Lady Jane Grey… It is at these moments you would wish the existence of Heaven to receive their tortured soul (though I pity Mary less).
There are also another good depiction from period drama about historical figure. Belle (2013) is about a unique African-British aristocracy, with good music and emotion (but the political aspect is not as strong as emotional aspect between two sisters). Then there is The Secret Diaries of Miss Anne Lister (2010) which is about Miss Lister’s life (who loves woman). Then I have not seen Mozart’s Sister (2010) which to some extend fictionalises Nannerl Mozart and Princess Louise of France (but their fate as women is to be pitied and their frustration, emotion and talent are explored).
All in all, women’s stories are brilliant!
I think you romanticise Marie-Antionette too much.
Delete