Re: Pan's Labyrinth
- I don't know that I've really got a good handle on this child's
behavior; I recognize that my assessment is personal and visceral, so
plenty of YMMV warnings.
I think that was her explanation to Pan, her excuse - not an
intentional lie so much as trying to explain an act of selfish
stupidity. See, I think you are expecting more rational thought from
children than is generally seen. Please don't misunderstand; I can
already hear you saying how you remember your thought processes at the
age of 8 or 10, but David, you're remarkable. You were then, you are
now - not typical, not representative.
I suspect she didn't have a reason other than, "oooh, grapes look
good! there's lots of them, who's going to know if I eat one or two?"
and then not really thinking through the whole warning - that kind of
mental dismissal of inconvenient facts/instructions seems very typical
of childhood to me - a place where willful disobedience is a common
occurance, but usually not with such terrifying consequences.
At least I wouldn't go expecting a "reason" beyond that.
-- Lynn --
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, David Bratman <dbratman@...> wrote:
> At 09:34 PM 8/30/2007 +0000, Lynn Maudlin wrote:
> >Yes, she's hungry - BUT she went for grapes, she didn't ravenously dig
> >into more substantial fare. I felt it was willful, childish
> >disobedience and *if she believed nothing bad was going to happen* she
> >was not representative of children in that era or, I think, of fairy
> >tales in general.
> She _said_ that she believed nothing bad was going to happen. Do
> she was lying to Pan when she said it?
> Do you agree with the idea that she knew perfectly well that
> would happen, and that she did it to spice up the adventure?
> >In any case, her disobedience didn't read as "real" to me, it seemed
> >too quick and the fairies were warning her and she waved them off - it
> >was a character point that confused me.
> Oh yes, I forgot about the fairies trying to warn her off. It was
> wilful disobedience on her part; the question is why she did it. She
> didn't disobey on the previous quest, the one with the frog, and she's
> otherwise not depicted as a wilful child: if she disobeys it's for a
> (even if the adults don't know what it is), not to disobey for
- In the cool light of day the morning after viewing this, Jo and I
discovered that, while the movie was certainly wonderfully done, it was
a bit off-putting for the reasons Pat and Carl noted below-though, as
noted before, the girl's fate was something I would much rather not have
known in advance.
As Jo said, "It's fine that good finally overcame evil, but did there
have to be so much evil?" The ending, where the girl's death amounts to
the saving of her brother and her final glimpse of a beatific heavenly
vision with a God the Father (as well as David Crosby) lookalike seems
to be an obvious Christian parallel.
In reviewing this thread, especially the business with the grapes, it
seems fitting to cite Chesterton's "The Ethics Of Elfland" and his
Doctrine of Conditional Joy, where all good and evil hang on a random
choice to do or not to do a simple deed: Eve's apple, Pandora's box.
Tolkien mentions this in "On Fairy Stories." It certainly looms in the
amplification of the power of the Ring from -The Hobbit- to -The Lord of
the Rings-, where what had been a handy little talisman for Bilbo
becomes life or death for Frodo. That's why Jackson's plot change from
Faramir refusing to take the Ring from Frodo to the muddled digression
to Osgiliath is one of the more egregious offenses in the screenplay.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf
Of Carl F. Hostetter
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: [mythsoc] Pan's Labyrinth
On Aug 22, 2007, at 8:22 AM, Patrick H. Wynne wrote:
> watching a helpless adolescent girl (probably delusional)
> being physically and psychologically abused for two hours, then shot
> dead, is NOT my idea of a good time!
> Am I the only one who absolutely loathed this film?
No, you are not.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]