Andrei Rublev, The Stalker & Social Realism: Part I

Bircan UNVER

Andrei Rublev:

Especially from 1928 to the end of l980's, Soviet filmmakers were under the permanent control of various party bodies and of Goskino. The Soviet state also used filmmakers to supervise each other, making sure that official policy was implemented fully. With Stalin's death in 1953, the pressure on filmmakers declined, although the control of the film industry remained basically intact. (1)

In this essay, 1 will examine two films by the most prominent Russian director, Andrei Tarkovsky, his second film Andrei Rublev, and his fifth and last film in Russia, The Stalker. 1 will try to relate the films to Tarkovsky's relationships with the state. 1 will also analyze the films under various conditions and look at how Tarkovsky struggled with the sanctions of "social realism", its power and the abuse of this power, and his difficulties, in terms of making film and being an artist in the former Soviet Union. I would like to associate some of his concepts with his other films such as Nostalgia, The Mirror and The Sacrifice.

I will try to higlight the suppression of Tarkovsky by the former Soviet regime and how this impacted his films, such as Andrei Rublev and The Stalker. It might be logical to frame Tarkovsky's epoch and political conditions in the former Soviet Union where making a film required it to be done within a monopoly system - a situation which began with Lenin and continued under Stalin's scrunity onwards until Glasnost.

Andrei Rublev, the painter monk, (Anatoliy Solonitsyn) gazes at one of the most
celebrated of Russian icons, Chudo o Georgiy Pobedonostse (Miracle of the Triumphant
St. Gorge).

Andrei Rublev, set in 1400 AD, opens with a sequence showing a peasant preparing to inflate and fly a homemade hot-air balloon; after inflation, he flies the balloon around the city for a while then over a river and mountain before falling back to earth. These scenes associate the human desire to fly and overcome nature's rules, with the desire to overcome the rules of the regime and poess greater individual freedom.

Andrel Zagdansky (3) compared this sequence with the, opening sequence in another of (4) Tarkovsky's films, The Mirror (1974) which is set during World War II and 1974. In this film a teenage boy who suffers from a speech stutter is being hypnotized by a woman doctor to help his recovery. At the end of this sequence the boy says "l can talk The director's deepest desires arid concepts are associated with each other eternally in these filins, no matter which time period they are portrayed within.

In the episode of "The Passion According to Andrei, 1406, while Rublev who is a monk and icon painter (Anatoly Solonitsyn) and Theophanes the Greek who is also a master icon painter (Nikolal Sergeyev) are in the forest, next to a stream, Theoplianes says to Rublev, "l have served God, not man. As regards praise, what is praised today is abused tomorrow. ...All is vanity and decay. Hurnanity has achieved every stupidity and baseness ... and now it only repeats them. Everything is an etemal circle if Jesus returned to earth. They would crucify him again." Rublev responds that, "...of course people do evil. Judas sold Christ but who bought him? The people?... They had studied to gain power. Take advantage of the people's ignorance. We must remind people more often that they are people. ...Evil is everywhere. Someone will aIways sell you for thirty pieces of silver. " While the discussion is going on, from the forest and (close-ups Rublev and Theophanes), the scene cuts to a snowy day with people, and to the scene of the crucifixion of Christ, then to Forna's face and tilts down while Rublev continues his discourse that, "You only talk Jesus. Perhaps, he was bom and crucified to reconcile God and man. ... and if he died on the cross, it was predetermined... and his crucifixion and death were God's will. That would have aroused hate in those who loved him." Theophanes responds with, "What are you saying? They'll exile you to the north, brother. "

I think this sequence illustrates one of the most essential ideological and theological aspects of the film. When Rublev indicates to the rulers that, "They had studied to gain power. Take advantage the people's ignorance", it is an obvious and powerful critique of the power which exists for all time.

This approach precisely applies to the story's epoch as weIl as Tarkovsky's time period in the film. In this respect, Theophanes reacts with a warning. Some of the themes in the film have a constant meaning which also works without any time boundaries. When either viewers or critics decoded them, each episode or sequence might be a critical point of the director for the "social realism", or the regime. Dimitry and Vladimir Shlapentokh state, particularly about Tarkovsky's skill for encoding and decoding messages that:

In "The Raid, 1408" episode, the Grand prince's brother, Vassily (Yuri Nazarov), betrays and collaborates with the Tatars for his own power struggle. Rublev is a creative artist, an observer; he believes in the supremacy of humankind beyond the others. His silence and loosing his desire to paint is a reaction to the wildness of human nature and to the torture he sees. Rublev saved and later adopted a mute girl after the Tatars' raid and massacre in the ruined church. When later the Tatars came to Rublev's monastery and one asked the girl to go with him as a Russian wife, Rublev attempted to stop her in spite of her delight at the proposal. Rublev's thinking was, of course, based on the fact that he had killed a Tatar during the raid to save her from the Tatars and here she was prepared to go off with one of her attackers. At the end of The Raid' episode, Theophanes' phantom appears to Rublev. Rublev confesses to him that, he lost his ability to paint and that he had killed a Tatar, explaining his condition by saying, 'You know I'll never paint again". Theophanes disagrees with him by saying that, "You're committing a grave sin. Through our sins evil has assumed a human form, fighting evil means fighting humanity. " Rublev in lament informs him that, "l shall offer the Lord a vow of silence. I have nothing more to say to people." And thus Rublev's silence begins as a consequence of the Tatars' atrocities during the raid, amongst other things.

Rublev's vow lasts until he observes the young boy Boris who is making a bell with which he hopes to lead the peasants. Although only 12 or 13 years old, Boris is umnerciful in his work. At the beginning of "The Bell" episode Boris tells the great Duke's men that his master father, who died during the raid, passed on to him the secret of how to make the great bell. By the end of this episode, Boris has made a great bell, finding the best clay for it, and he leads all the peasants to great success. Boris believed in himself and followed his inner instructions, despite the fact that there were some dissident peasants who worked for him. Actually, it was the only way to leave his ruined town and his hopelessly lonely life. At the same time, it was a grave risk if he failed.

In the last sequences, Tarkovsky dissolves from Rublev's icons from the Trinity Cathedral in the 15th century, to the present day. This transition starts when Rublev speaks to Boris, in 'The Bell' episode, after ringing the bell and while people are celebrating it, he said to him: "Let's travel you and I together, you will cast bells, I'll paint icons. We'll go the Trinity Monastery together." Thus, Rublev's silence is ended with Boris's success and influcing by him, which means he has regained his belief and he is now able to start his next great period. Following this scene, the film cuts to an 'ember' scene, changing to the color red which then dissolves to Rublevs icons. Within color, the film exhibits various details from the Trinity Cathedral. This episode also evolves to a documentary form of Rublev's masterpieces, showing this to be his greatest period.

At the end of it there is a storm on the sound track and on the screen showing rain on the Trinity Cathedral's wall. The scene dissolves to a pastoral scene with three horses at the stream which indicates the current time period, supposedly 1965, in Russia. The storm and rain play an essential role to link two different time periods. In general, the storm and rain are also one of the Tarkovsky's leitmotifs in his films, and in each film they function as different concepts and transitions.

To be continue...

This essay was written for the "Artist & Power" course in the Media Studies program at the New School University, Spring 1998.

* * *
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) Dmitry Shlapentokh and VIadimir Shlapentokh, "Soviet Cinematography, 1918-1991), Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1993, p.33

2) Albert Icong, "Socialist Realism in Tarkovsky's Andrei Rublev", Studies in Comparative Communism, Vol. XVH, Nos. 3-4, Fall/Winter, 1984, p.228, (Quoted from 'Tirst A11-Union Congress of Soviet Writers, 1934, transcript", p.716)

3) Andrei Zagdansky, "Artist & Power" course, New School for Social Research, Spring 1998.

4) Dmitry Shlapentokh and VIadimir Shlapentokh, "Soviet Cinematography, 1918-1991), Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1993, p. 130

ARE WE REFLECTION OF BLACK HOLES?
HUMAN SOUL HASN'T CHANGE SINCE PLATO...
FREEDOM OF HUMAN SPIRIT
FICTIONAL BIO

HOME PAGE

TURKISH