Adventures in Auditing #4 – Antichrist

7 April 2010 at 17:00 (Uncategorized) (, , , , , , )

“The crying woman is a scheming woman.”
-She (Charlotte Gainsbourg), Antichrist

Since hearing about Antichrist last spring, I’ve been eager to see the film and gauge the hype in relation to the content. This week, my “Gender and Horror Films” class was charged with watching the film after a failed attempt (technical difficulties) to watch it as a group. Tired from travel, I watched it in a daze which resulted in a very disturbing first viewing (note for future reference: slipping in and out of consciousness during scenes of genital violence burns these images into your brain). To be sure I’d grasped it in all its complexity, I rewatched the film a second time in the light of day. It proved less traumatizing and more easily digestible this time around, but still troubling for its ideologically problematic content. Find the film’s trailer below:

First things first, a brief run-down: the film opens with a highly stylized, melodramatic sequence in which a toddler falls from an open apartment window while his parents (Charlotte Gainsbourg, unnamed and credited as “She,” and Willem Defoe, likewise listed as “He”) have sex. Burdened with grief and guilt over her child’s death, She receives psychiatric treatment including powerful meds. He, who happens to be a therapist, disagrees with this regimen, insisting that She cut out the pills and focus on confronting her emotions. This inspires the couple to take a trip to their cabin out in the woods, a space that He identifies as one that She greatly fears. After several attempts to get her to face her fears, She seems to respond positively to the exercises claiming to be no longer afraid. Soon thereafter, however, He discovers some disturbing notes and pictures when looking over her research materials and She attacks him. After some grueling scenes of genital mutilation and torture, He strangles her before hiking up the mountain and away from the cabin. Following closely behind him: a swarm of women with pixelated faces, presumably out to finish what She started.

The question for me: can Antichrist possibly be interpreted as a feminist film in any sense? On the surface, I would say no. The film clearly aligns women with nature and its indifferent (scratch that, evil) power, suggesting that women compulsively harm men. The primary female character even recognizes this essential female evil after researching witchcraft for her master’s thesis (thank god I didn’t take my thesis topic so literally). Can a feminist reader work around these problems to develop a coherent progressive reading?

The misogyny is self-evident from the plot trajectory, but the narrative structure also lends itself to this interpretation with flashbacks that suggest She watched her son approach the window before plumetting to his death. He also discovers multiple pictures taken by his wife in which She put her son’s shoes on backwards (an accompanying flashback indicates this caused her son pain, as does a medical examiner’s report that notes foot deformities in the child). This newly-aquired knowledge on the viewer’s part puts earlier scenes in which She expresses regret for her son’s death in a different light.

A still from Antichrist. Image courtesy of http://www.linternaute.com.

Still, I’m willing to entertain the possibility that Antichrist contains the seeds of an alternate reading. One of my fellow classmates suggested that Antichrist could be read as a “reimagining” of the Charlotte Perkins Stetson short story, “The Yellow Wallpaper.” That tale also features a wife treated for depression by her husband. His insistence that she remain confined against her wishes leads to her madness, despite her protests. Re-reading “The Yellow Wallpaper,” I can see my classmate’s point: like the husband in the short story, He regularly dismisses his wife’s concerns as irrational, calling upon his authority as a therapist and as a husband (He in Antichrist: “No one knows you better than I do”; the narrator in “The Yellow Wallpaper”: “It is so hard to talk with John about my case, because he is so wise, and because he loves me so.”) to disempower his wife. For these reasons, the husbands cause their wives’ psychoses more so than the initial depression.

An illustration from the original publication of "The Yellow Wallpaper." Image courtesy of Bucknell.edu

But while “The Yellow Wallpaper” generates sympathy for its female protagonist by showing how her madness results from her treatment for post-partum depression due to its cruelty, Antichrist seems to suggest that by forcing her to confront her fears and embrace nature, He awakens a dormant evil inherent in all women. As a result, the film tranfers blame from the husband specifically to womankind as a whole. Few films have depicted a hatred for women so blatantly.

The only means of salvaging the film for a progressive reading would be to suggest that either a) the violent expressions of She consitute an act of resistence on the wife’s part or b) the events that unfold late in the film represent a kind of projection on the part of the husband. In both cases, the film might be seen as a critique of the very thing it portrays. The interpretative acrobatics required to make these readings work, however, weaken their plausibility.

Of course, I would welcome others to see the film and tell me what they think about it. Please post any of your ideas in the comments section below!

Advertisements

5 Comments

  1. k said,

    C,

    Thanks for watching this film and blogging about it. I haven’t seen Antichrist and honestly I’ve been scared to see this film. I’ve seen several of von Trier’s films – including Breaking the Waves, Dancer in the Dark, and Dogville – and actually thought they were provocative and complex, particularly in terms of their gender politics. I’m wondering, how do you think Antichrist compares to von Trier’s other films?

  2. c8ic8 said,

    I’ve seen all the titles you mention as well, and I agree that those films do present issues related to gender and sexuality thoughtfully. I especially appreciate that in all three of these films, the female protagonist really stears the story and generally ends up being the most sympathetic character in the film (though that sympathy is often illicited by subjecting the heroine to violence).

    Antichrist differs dramatically from these films in part because it shifts the focus (I would argue) to the male protagonist’s perspective. What’s more, while you might be able to sympathize with Gainsbourg’s character on some level, she subjects her husband and child to awful torture. She herself even concludes that women are evil! While you could argue that von Trier’s previous films lavish punishment on women, Antichrist takes it to a whole other level, demonizing the female protagonist in the process.

  3. Rick Bentley said,

    It’s just a mistake to spent your time trying to interpret a Von Trier movie in a coherent way. More than anything, he is a prankster who constructs movies to confound people and keep them talking.

    However, if you ignore the supernatural ending, the movie is coherent. She’s nuts; she’s evil and that evil is different from male evil which we see exhibited on screen so often.

    The ending, exactly like his ending to “Breaking the Waves” years ago, is IMO a deliberate undercut of what could be a coherent movie, done for the sheer joy of watching people invest the film with “spiritual meanings” and try to figure out “what the artist is trying to tell us”.

  4. wellthen said,

    What is wrong with being aligned with nature?

    Which is the more natural response to a death? I found Gainsbourg miles more sympathetic, more realistic, more honest. Humans are animals, animals are nature. It is only Dafoe who sticks out in his arrogance and his inability to empathize and understand.

  5. wellthen said,

    The woman is the antichrist, necessarily, because the Christ was built up in fear and response to the woman.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: