home | search | poll | current columns
Parts V & VI | Parts VII & VIII | Parts IV & X
Long Summer's Journey Through
"Decalogue"
[July 21: Parts III and IV]
By Matthew Prins
I am reminded again while watching segments three and four
of "Decalogue" how inanely most American cinema treats
romance and sex [1]. One of two problems usually happens:
there is a romance that is patently unrealistic, or there
is sexuality shown to titilate the audience rather than
further the movie. In these two episodes in "Decalogue,"
the latter concern is never an issue; there's already such
a naked emotionality between the characters that explicitly
showing sex would simply be redundant.
In "Decalogue, Four," the romantic pair is a father and
daughter. The daughter is in college, and she has harbored
sexual feelings toward her father for as long as she has
had sexual feelings. She has reason to believe that her
father is not her biological father, and those beliefs are
verified by a letter that is supposed to be opened upon her
father's death. She now feels that she can act on those
feelings, and she approaches her father.
In "Decalogue, Three," the pair is a man and a woman he had
an affair with a few years ago. On Christmas Eve, the
woman comes to the man's house, worried because her husband
is missing. The ex-lover goes with the woman to help her
find her husband. Romantic tension builds through the
excitement of the search.
Midway through both episodes, I expected the sins focused
on to be a sexual sin. I was wrong. Both episodes use sex
as a backdrop to the underlying sin in most unGodly sexual
relationships: lying. Characters in both episodes are
constantly telling untruths. Early on in episode four, in
fact, the daughter goes even one step further: she lies
that she told her father a lie when she actually didn't.
The way these two episodes are staged has a lot in common
with David Mamet's masterpiece from the previous year,
"House of Games." The audience is given information it
has no reason to disbelieve because it has given its trust
to the film the same way one character gives its trust to
another [2]. When the trust is broken between the two
characters through a confession of a lie, the confidence
the audience has on where the film is going breaks, too.
But that actually endears me to those films more: I enjoy
it when films take me off guard, even if where the film
goes afterwards doesn't quite make sense. These two
episodes broke the expectations I had for them, and I love
them for it.
Without slowing down for a smooth transition, let's talk
for a moment about the a comment Nick Guam posted a while
ago [3] about a "silent witness." Yes, there's this
character who reappears in various episodes, seemingly just
watching over the proceedings. I'm not keen on this
character. He's superfluous. It's obvious that Kieslowski
has invite us to be voyeurs in these people's lives --
episodes three and four are especially voyeuristic -- and by
showing an on-screen character also watching these things
happen makes explicit what should be subtext. He's my
least favorite part of the series so far.
(Coming July 28: episodes five and six of "Decalogue."
Those who are watching along with me [4], feel free to
comment in the "Decalogue" forum.)
[1] Steve Lansingh's article in Christianity Today this week
talked about this topic at some length. I suggest you read it.
[2] I'm being a little vague here to keep from giving away
spoilers. Sorry.
[3] Yes, It has been a while since my last column. That's
because a) I was gone most of the 4th of July weekend and
b) the fact that I was so sick last week that I missed two
days of work even though I had to use vacation time to
cover it (since I don't have sick leave at my current job).
Baring any further problems, the rest of the series should
be more on time.
[4] Um, not to pry, but are there any of you
watching along with me? I'd like to know if at least one
person -- other than my wife, kind of -- is traveling this
journey with me. E-mail me at mdprins@yahoo.com if
you are.