This is an entry post to Bechdel con(test).
For more information, please check out the original contest post by @lilyraabe.
Film meets the primary criteria to pass the Bechdel test:
- It only has two main characters in it. Chantal and her mother.
- The only thing they do is talking (writing) to each other.
- They definitely talk about something besides a man.
This is one of my all time favorite films. Extremely experimental, but high quality in terms of artistic approach. You will only see long uncut shots of New York City. People in streets and subway. Time to time a female voice will read some letters written by Chantal’s mother to her. From back home (Belgium i think). That’s it. The whole film!
But let’s get more into details to see what it actually does to viewer. We (via camera) are in NYC, where Chantal lives. But we never see or hear her. It’s more like camera is her point of view. We don’t even know what she writes to her mother. The only information we get is through her mother’s letters. Letters from a person who is physically far away. Content of letters show that even her mother is uncertain about her situation in NYC. Here is a part of one of those letters:
“ Dear Chantal, I sent you some summer clothes, because it must be hot there. I hope I have the right address. I was surprised not to get a letter this week. Last week three letters and this week none. Please do keep writing… I hope you received my letters. But sometimes the envelope says New York 10025, other times 10027. Which one is right?...”
She narrates these letters over images of people in streets and subways of NYC. Any of those women in the image has the potential to be Chantal or in a life situations like Chantal’s. What she looks like? Is she socializing a lot? Or spending most of her time alone in a new environment? Is she happy? Making any progress in her life? How exactly is her relationship with her mother? How often they write about more intimate issues than summer clothes and dad’s recent issues with their business? Was she always receiving emotional support from her mother back at home? Have they had such an intimacy all the time? Does she answer with same amount of details or even passion to her mother’s letters? Does she miss her family?... Gradually, along with her mother’s letters, more and more of these questions start to pop up, and viewers will answer them based on their own background on such a person. A girl who moved to NYC to pursue her filmmaking passion but, based on information provided by letters from her mother, is working in a restaurant yet.
But is that the only factor in answering those questions in viewer’s mind? Lack of information makes viewers to gradually start building the character up in their own mind. Human mind tends to fill any kind of information gap based on previously available data. Stories are no exception. That’s the way comic books work. And you probably have heard of Gestalt principles and related concepts. Most part of the information is more about Chantal and her mother’s relationship than characters themselves. One of critical factors in any kind of relationship is feelings hanging between two ends of relationship. Every feeling is connected to certain thoughts and experiences in people. Since there is no much of story going on in the film, those feelings in relationship between Chantal and her mother provoke deeper and more intimate thoughts and feelings in viewers. This way Chantal Akerman, as a filmmaker, touches most inner feelings of viewers. As Ludwig Wittgenstein said: “In art it is hard to say anything as good as saying nothing!”
There is much more to write and talk about this film, but i believe too much personal commentary on a artwork from one person usually ruins it for others. So my suggestion is to watch it by yourself and take the pleasure out of it.
- If you have any thoughts, insight, corrections or question about this post please feel free to communicate.