I watched again the Shoes of the Fisherman, my second most favourite film to Casablanca. I watch every time it is shown on television, and I have a second printing in 1965 of the 1963 Australian edition of the Morris West novel. He is also the author of the more book also made into a commercially popular film, the Devils Advocate. There are several reasons why I can watch the shoes of the Fisherman time and time again and find new profundity.
Kiril, recently created Cardinal Lakota, spent twenty years in Russian Labour Camps in Siberia, before being released in a deal between the new Russian Leader, Kiril's former chief interrogator, and the Vatican, in the belief that he could act as a bridge in a world increasingly at the brink of catastrophe as the capitalist nations are unwilling to allow a China facing starvation to buy grain in their market. The reluctant Arch Bishop is first made a Cardinal to fulfil his allotted role and then is pressed into being the Pope when the incumbent suddenly dies. He quickly finds himself called upon to act as a bridge between China and Russia, and between China and Russia and Capitalism. At his inauguration ceremony as Pope he announces that the church will divest of its wealth to help feed the starving and he calls up everyone else to do likewise. So a romantic and idealist swipe at the way the Catholic Church has become corrupted by power and the money lenders? It is that and so much more.
It is a film which also explores the nature of Christianity and Catholic faith in the contemporary material and scientific world and achieving a balance between the forces of reaction and revolution, and between change and stability at a time of great threat and crisis. Today the environmental threat and the terrorist threat has replaced the communist threat as the means by which states can hold power over their people. Although this is not imply that the threats do not exist and require states to take action in defence of the prevailing values and power structures as the Roman Emperors once did against Christians and the against the Jews, Christian then fighting against Muslim, Non Conformist against Conformist, Muslim against Jew and on and on and on and on.
It is a film about so much more, the loneliness of hold office, the imprisonment by systems with their innate and healthy conservatism, the relationships between men and women and the nature of love and marriage, and the complexity of having principles and sticking to them whatever the circumstances.
Had I not noticed the showing of the film later into the evening I would have given first priority to Hadrian, a comprehensive consideration of his role and lasting influence in an excellent BBC documentary to mark the holding of a British Museum exhibition about the Roman Emperor. Like most people, I suspect, if I had learnt more about his life than he was responsible for the seventy odd miles of wall between Wallsend on the north bank of the Tyne a little way up river across from where I live at South Shields, and which continued on towards the Solway firth on the West Coast in what is now Cumbria. I had forgotten if I ever knew that this wall, stretches of which survive and are conserved along with the remains of the forts used to guard the British boundary to the Roman Empire, was the second shorter length of a wall which marked the northern limits of the empire across the rest of Europe, and that through North Africa and the middle east there were the southern stretches, shorter because of the natural boundaries of nature, desert and mountain, Nor had I known that he spent the greater part of his time in office touring the empire, not just improving the defences but development the 400 or so cities not just as places of power but also of recreation and culture. However his public works were designed to strengthen his own power and regard during his lifetime and in the belief that he was not just divine but a great one. Although he has come to be regarded as one of a group of five overall good Emperors, such an opinion is only held by non Jews because of the way he put down their rebellion against his determination to turn Jerusalem into a Pagan city, killing over half a million people, destroying their towns and villages by the hundreds. Despite his standing today he would have rightly been condemned and convicted of racist war crimes,
Kiril, recently created Cardinal Lakota, spent twenty years in Russian Labour Camps in Siberia, before being released in a deal between the new Russian Leader, Kiril's former chief interrogator, and the Vatican, in the belief that he could act as a bridge in a world increasingly at the brink of catastrophe as the capitalist nations are unwilling to allow a China facing starvation to buy grain in their market. The reluctant Arch Bishop is first made a Cardinal to fulfil his allotted role and then is pressed into being the Pope when the incumbent suddenly dies. He quickly finds himself called upon to act as a bridge between China and Russia, and between China and Russia and Capitalism. At his inauguration ceremony as Pope he announces that the church will divest of its wealth to help feed the starving and he calls up everyone else to do likewise. So a romantic and idealist swipe at the way the Catholic Church has become corrupted by power and the money lenders? It is that and so much more.
It is a film which also explores the nature of Christianity and Catholic faith in the contemporary material and scientific world and achieving a balance between the forces of reaction and revolution, and between change and stability at a time of great threat and crisis. Today the environmental threat and the terrorist threat has replaced the communist threat as the means by which states can hold power over their people. Although this is not imply that the threats do not exist and require states to take action in defence of the prevailing values and power structures as the Roman Emperors once did against Christians and the against the Jews, Christian then fighting against Muslim, Non Conformist against Conformist, Muslim against Jew and on and on and on and on.
It is a film about so much more, the loneliness of hold office, the imprisonment by systems with their innate and healthy conservatism, the relationships between men and women and the nature of love and marriage, and the complexity of having principles and sticking to them whatever the circumstances.
Had I not noticed the showing of the film later into the evening I would have given first priority to Hadrian, a comprehensive consideration of his role and lasting influence in an excellent BBC documentary to mark the holding of a British Museum exhibition about the Roman Emperor. Like most people, I suspect, if I had learnt more about his life than he was responsible for the seventy odd miles of wall between Wallsend on the north bank of the Tyne a little way up river across from where I live at South Shields, and which continued on towards the Solway firth on the West Coast in what is now Cumbria. I had forgotten if I ever knew that this wall, stretches of which survive and are conserved along with the remains of the forts used to guard the British boundary to the Roman Empire, was the second shorter length of a wall which marked the northern limits of the empire across the rest of Europe, and that through North Africa and the middle east there were the southern stretches, shorter because of the natural boundaries of nature, desert and mountain, Nor had I known that he spent the greater part of his time in office touring the empire, not just improving the defences but development the 400 or so cities not just as places of power but also of recreation and culture. However his public works were designed to strengthen his own power and regard during his lifetime and in the belief that he was not just divine but a great one. Although he has come to be regarded as one of a group of five overall good Emperors, such an opinion is only held by non Jews because of the way he put down their rebellion against his determination to turn Jerusalem into a Pagan city, killing over half a million people, destroying their towns and villages by the hundreds. Despite his standing today he would have rightly been condemned and convicted of racist war crimes,
No comments:
Post a Comment