26 December 2023

The Sound of Mucus

 I expect there are readers who could enumerate exactly the matters upon which H E Bishop Richard Williamson, a Wykehamist, agrees with me. Two, in particular, occur to my mind:

(1) Despite, er, everything, Bergoglio is lawfully and canonically, Bishop of Rome; and

(2) The Sound of Music is corrupting mush.

This film is a most fascinating combination of genres. As I watched it on Christmas Eve, the opening minutes reminded me of nothing so much as Leni Riefenstahl's work in the '30s ... that long sequence of landscapes, as the late-comers to the cinema stumble their way to their seats. But Mills and Boon soon take over. Or rather, SOM turns out to be the grandest conceivable apotheosis of Mills and Boon. M&B offers us Humble Nurse Winning the Heart of Consultant ('Carbolic Soap Opera'). In SOM the last expiring sighs of Whiggery's Pamela, are metamorphosed into magnificence almost beyond belief by being transposed into the key of Novice Nun gaining the affections of Naval Hero Owner of Vast Swathes of Unmarred Mountain Scenery and Rococo Architecture. But, whereas Richardson's Pamela bore the message that the girl who makes deft use of her chastity wins through, SOM appears to teach that witlessness... ('femininity to the point of imbecillity', as Lord Feverstone described it) ... will always and rightfully displace the 'artificial' sophistication of a Viennese baronin

And, of course, Spontaneity is all. Children can spend their days shouting in trees and then turn out a perfectly produced musical performanance. Falling out of trees will never damage them; capsising their boat in the lake can never be more than a jape.

And, above all, Discipline and Duty must lack all and any emphasis. 

And as for Vocation ... we mustn't mention that.

The film of SOM emerged in 1965 (stage Musical in 1959). What a decade! The smooth elegance of The Great Escape (1963) had come two years earlier; by the end of the decade, the deification of revolutionary violence in If ... (1968) and the acid anti-war malevolence of Oh What a Lovely War (1969) had swept all  before them. Perhaps most significantly, Doctor No, introducing decades of strongly preached amorality, had in 1962 come from the pen of an Ian Fleming who, we are told, loved whipping a wife who (of course) loved being whipped. And that was the very same year as Lawrence of Arabia, which raised its own questions about homophobia and Masochism.

So Mills and Boon, the Thirties 'Tuppenny Library' of escapist fiction for women, and the military 1950s moral simplicities of The Dam Busters and Ice Cold in Alex and The Cruel Sea, both gave way to a culture which had not the faintest idea what it wanted, but wanted it good and stong.

As early as 1946, Waugh had described "the war" as "a sweaty tug-of-war between teams of indistinguishable louts". I suspect, indeed, that most years seen as the beginnings or ends of eras, must involve major oversimplifications, from 410 and 1066 onwards.

But I feel that 1965, Year of The Sound of Music, can stake a valid claim to have been quite pivotal.


8 comments:

  1. This brought back memories of my time as a student at the University of Nijmegen in the Netherlands. I watched the "Sound of Music" in a rural Catholic area at a makeshift theatre supplied with benches instead of seats. Families with children came and brought lunches for the occasion.

    The visitors bureau in Salzburg estimates that about 300,000 guests (twice the local population) visit “Sound of Music” locations annually.

    https://www.latimes.com/travel/la-tr-salzburg-20180708-story.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. I first saw SOM in the year of its release,  at the age of eight. Watching it again recently,  I could understand Plummer's dislike of the movie, but could also see why he reluctantly conceded that it delivered the goods. There are moments of eye-rolling corn,  but somehow it gets away with it. Wonderful scenery, wonderful architecture,  wonderful music. 


    So I'm prepared to give the movie the benefit of the doubt, as I do for the work of another Salzburger: The Magic Flute, where I overlook the Masonic allegory for the sake of the glorious music.


    So, Maria is a postulant, and the Captain is not yet engaged- both are merely testing the waters, and no solemn vows are broken.  


    Spontaneity? Of course, by the conventions of a musical, everyone sings spontaneously. But when it comes to the children's diegetic performances before an audience, I always understood that this was  the result of hard work. If you've ever sung in a choir you know the hard yards that have to be done to turn in a seemingly effortless performance. The movie compresses long summer months into a few minutes,  but then movies often have to telescope like this, "turning the accomplishment of many years into an hour-glass."


    And it takes courage to evade a commission from the Third Reich.


    Rewatching the movie I now tend to notice the "traditional" things about it: enclosed nuns in full habit singing in Latin, and content with their vocation. The scene where Maria and the Captain dance the Laendler can be seen on YouTube and is regarded in the combox as the epitome of old-fashioned elegance, courtesy and restraint..


    So, on the whole, I'll side with Greydanus rather than Williamson on this one.


    https://decentfilms.com/reviews/soundofmusic


     

    ReplyDelete
  3. It’s interesting to compare the film with the book on which it’s based (The Story of the Trapp Family Singers) where there is little romance: Maria von Trapp makes it clear that she was not in love with the Captain and married him for the sake of the children and out of religious obedience.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am not a fan of ‘The Sound of Music,” but I can’t help but read your mention of ‘duty’ here as an endorsement of Captain von Trapp taking his position in the Nazi navy. Was his ‘duty’ to the Anschluss government?

    Also, what exactly is wrong with ‘Humble Nurse Wins Heart Of Specialist?’

    ReplyDelete
  5. Georg von Trapp lost his fortune opposing the Anschluss, but he was still tempted to accept a commission in the German navy. So, the movie tells a very simplified story. I suspect that the Ritter, later Freiherr, von Trapp was a fascinating man. You do not get that from the movie.
    But it was great entertainment.
    Once, when going into a major negotiation with the Soviets, Ronald Reagan was given a huge briefing book to study before the meeting. He watched the Sound of Music and went to bed early instead.
    The negotiation was a major American success.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The true history of the Von Trapp family is told here: https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2005/winter/von-trapps-html

    ReplyDelete
  7. Apologia pro Sono Musicæ.

    Cinematography: Good.
    Music: Good.
    Drama: OK.
    History: Unreliable.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I first saw TSOM when it was televised in the US--perhaps for the first time--around 1976 or so. The next day, at my boys' Catholic school, it was all we talked about.
    I was late to pubesce, mentally at least, but was absolutely smitten with Julie Andrews. And through I couldn't articulate it at that time, that opening scene, with the lovely Miss Andrews scampering over those lush green mammiform hills--it absolutely exuded fecundity. In a chaste, Catholic, pure way.
    Is it a coincidence that I married an English rose?

    ReplyDelete